Category: Wisdom, Living & General

The Cold Hard Facts About the US Cancer Program: Misguided and Ineffective

Townsend Letter, the Examiner of Alternative Medicine, is a magazine published in Washington, USA. It is written by researchers, health practitioners and patients. Its editorial staff is headed by Jonathan Collin, a medical doctor. The aim of this magazine is to provide a forum for discussion on the pros and cons of alternative medicine.

In October 2010 and August /September 2011 issues of The Townsend Letter are two interesting articles, The US Cancer Program and Specific Types of Cancer, 1975–2007: A Failure (Part 1 and 2) by Anthony D. Apostolides, PhD, and Ipatia K. Apostolides, BA.

Dr. Anthony D. Apostolides is a researcher and teacher of health-care economics. He received a doctoral degree in economics from the University of Oxford, UK, and a master’s degree from the University of Pittsburgh.

Ipatia K. Apostolides has more than 15 years of experience in the cancer field (Cleveland Clinic Foundation, and Children’s Hospital, Cincinnati). She has a bachelor’s degree in biology from Case Western Reserve University.

You can read their papers by clicking this link:  Part 2:  http://www.townsendletter.com/Oct2010/cancerprogram1010.html

and Part 1:  http://www.townsendletter.com/AugSept2011/uscancer0811.html#.Tmh2rd1WYAs.email

  1. The authors examined cancer statistics over a span of 32 years, from 1975 to 2007. Studying data over a long-term period like this provides a more accurate and reliable evaluation. The authors wrote:  “Public announcements are typically made by government agencies and presented in the news media, by using cancer statistics that cover only a short period – for example, 2 to 3 years. In such cases, the public can easily be misled, since a short time period conceals the more comprehensive, long-term picture of the disease.”
  2. The data they used for their studies are from SEER-9 (Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results). Cancer statistics review 1975–2007 [online document]. Available at: www.seer.cancer.gov/statistics.
  3. With regard to assessing the treatment … the criteria used were the mortality rate and the numbers of Americans who died from a cancer.
  • A constant or increasing mortality rate of a cancer over time, along with increased number of deaths, indicates a failure … in the treatment of that cancer.
  • If the mortality rate declines over time but the number of deaths increases, then the program for the treatment side is shown to be a failure.
  • If the mortality rate declines over time and the number of deaths decline, this indicates success in the treatment of a cancer.

Here are some of the cold, hard facts about cancer today.

  1. Lifetime Probability of Americans Getting Cancer
  • During 1975 to 1977 – probably of male was 33%, i.e., 1 in 3 males would get cancer.
  • During 1990 to 1992, the probably for male climbed to a shocking 46% to 50%, almost 1 out of 2.
  • During 1975 to 1977 – probably of a woman was 34%.
  • During 1990 to 1992, the probably for a woman climbed to 42%, very close to 1 out of 2.

          2. Mortality or Death due to Cancer

  • From 1975 to 2000 – more Americans per 100,000 died from cancer than in 1975.
  • More died from cancer in 2006 than in 1975.
  • The number of Americans who died of cancer in the 1990s and 2000s translates into 63 deaths every hour of the day, or 1 every minute of each hour.

           3.       The US Cancer Program: Misguided and Ineffective

Cancer death or mortality relates to the effectiveness or ineffectiveness of treatments. An increasing mortality rate shows lack of effectiveness of the cancer treatment.

  • Death rate increased from 1975to 2000. It did not decrease nor did it even stay the same as in 1975.
  • From 2000 to 2006 death rate was virtually zero decrease.
  • For every year following 1975, the number of Americans dying from cancer rose annually until 2000. If the cancer treatment program of the US had been successful, there would have been declines in the cancer mortality rate after 1975 instead of increases. This indicates an inefficiency in the treatment of cancer patients.
  • From 2000 to 2006 death rate may well have been affected by the increasing use of alternative or integrative treatments for cancer. People have increasingly become discouraged with and weary of traditional cancer treatments (chemotherapy, etc.), and more would have chosen to use either an integrative approach (combining an alternative approach with conventional treatment) or solely alternative treatments.

The authors wrote:

  • The American people have been paying too high a price – with their lives – for a misguided and ineffective cancer program.
  • In a proper framework of providing treatment, cancer patients would be given the choice of approach to pursue – based on currently available information. They could then choose and accept their preferred method of treatment. There could be at least three choices: (1) conventional approaches (surgery, etc.); (2) integrative approaches; and (3) alternative approaches.
  • It is a sad and incredible fact that presently Americans do not have such a freedom of choice in cancer treatment.
  • The NCI (National Cancer Institute) should be radically revamped, to include much more work on alternative treatments for cancer. This is unlikely to happen with the current structure of the NCI. There are many vested interests there in maintaining the status quo, and a substantial change in its program would indicate acceptance of the fact that its treatment programs did not work.
  •  It seems unthinkable that the US, which professes to champion freedom around the world, does not offer that same freedom to its people in their choice of cancer treatment. That is the mark of a totalitarian regime.
  • Consequently, the last hope of a change in cancer prevention and treatment remains on the shoulders of the American people. They need to be informed and convinced of the need for change. Then, they need to organize and act, at the political level, to transform the cancer program.

The authors, Dr Anthony  and Ipatia Apostolides are not alone in calling for a radical change in the way we handle cancer today. Over the past years, many other brave souls have spoken up but unfortunately nothing had changed or are going to change!

Other Experts Echoed A Similar Message

  1. In the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine (8 May 1986; 314:1226-1232) Harvard professors, John Bailar III and Elaine Smith, wrote an article, Progress against cancer? The authors assessed the overall progress against cancer during the years 1950 to 1982 and concluded that there is “no evidence that some 35 years of intense and growing efforts to improve the treatment of cancer have had much overall effect on the most fundamental measure of clinical outcome—death… We are losing the war against cancer”.
  2. In Fortune Magazine, 22 March 2004, Clifton Leaf, the Executive Editor of the magazine and also a survivor of Hodgkin’s disease, wrote an article, Why We’re Losing The War On Cancer [And How To Win It] [Avastin, Erbitux, Gleevec … The new wonder drugs might make you think we’re finally beating this dreaded scourge. We’re not. Here’s how to turn the fight around.] http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2004/03/22/365076/index.htm The author asked, “Why have we made so little progress in the War on Cancer? The question may come as a shock to anyone … we are far from winning the war. So far away, in fact, that it looks like losing… Just count the bodies on the battlefield. In 2004, cancer will claim some 563,700 of your family, friends, co-workers, and countrymen. More Americans will die of cancer in the next 14 months than have perished in every war the nation has ever fought … combined. Even as research and treatment efforts have intensified over the past three decades and funding has soared dramatically, the annual death toll has risen 73%”.
  3. Dr. Guy Faguet received his M.D. degree in Bogota, Colombia. He pursued postgraduate studies in Internal Medicine at the University of Texas, and in Hematology/Oncology at Ohio State University, leading to an academic career at the Medical College of Georgia. He has published more than 140 peer-reviewed articles. In his book, The War on Cancer – an anatomy of failure and a blueprint for the future, Dr. Faquet wrote, “The message of this book is that, contrary to recurrent announcements of breakthroughs in the War on Cancer designated to influence policy makers and impress the public, little progress has been made in the treatment of cancer since the enactment of the National Cancer Act of 1971.  An objective analysis of cancer chemotherapy outcomes over the last three decades reveals that, despite vast human and financial expenditures, the cell-killing paradigm has failed to achieve its objective … and the conquest of cancer remains a distant and elusive goal … the three crucial measures of progress in the War on Cancer, cure rates, prolongation of survival, and quality of life, remain stagnant despite enactment of the National Cancer Act of 1971″.

Toxic Responses to New Ideas: The nails that stick their heads out get hammered down

Once upon a time some of us (me included!) were perhaps naïve. We thought that if we do something new and beneficial, many people around us would support us full heartedly. Why not? But history has taught us this is not the way how the world operates. Haig & Kay wrote, “a new idea has to fight its way to acceptance. The path may be long and conflicted. The opposition may be intense and torturous.”  It appears that opposition to new ideas is an expected normal, human behavior. In my younger days, I used to visit my scientist friends in Japan. There was one thing that I learned from them, The nails that stick their heads out get hammered down.  So, stick out your neck at your own perils!

Here are some quotes for you to ponder on.

  • New opinions are always suspected, and usually opposed, without any other reason but because they are not already common ~ John Locke.
  • The man with a new idea is a crank—until the idea succeeds ~ Mark Twain.
  • There is a natural opposition among men to anything they have not thought of themselves ~ Barnes Wallis.
  • New ideas are not only the enemies of old ones, they also appear often in an extremely unacceptable form ~ Carl Jung.
  • An age is called dark, not because the light fails to shine, but because people refuse to see it ~ James Michener.
  • Every great advance in natural knowledge has involved the absolute rejection of authority ~ Thomas Huxley.
  • Great spirits have often encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds ~ Albert Einstein.

History is replete with examples of how brave souls have to endure and suffer the abuse from the Power-that-Be because they stood up and spoke up. Before Galileo many were burnt at the stakes for believing that the world was round! Even Einstein, the Scientist of the 20th Century was not spared. Initially he could not even get into a university as a student. Then after he graduated, he could not find a suitable job – except being a clerk at a patent office. His ideas were very much against the established academic elite.

Let’s look at history again and let me give you three examples in a greater detail. Be reminded, and make no mistake, even today such “battles of the mind” do happen – anywhere.

Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis (1818-65) – Austria / Hungary

Ignaz Philipp Semmelweis was born in 1818 in Taban (Budapest) Hungary. He finished schooling at the University of Pest. In 1837 and went on to study law at the University of Vienna. But he switched to medicine due to personal inclination. He received his master’s (Magister) degree in medicine in 1844 with specialization in midwifery. After graduation he took a position in the Vienna General Hospital.

During his job at the hospital, Semmelweis concerned himself with the study of puerperal fever that caused high maternal and neonatal deaths at that time. The Vienna (Austria) General Hospital operated two maternity clinics – the first clinic was where treatment was given by the medical students while the second clinic by midwives. He observed that the death rate in the first clinic was 13.10% –  much higher than the 2.03% death rate in the second clinic.

In Vienna during the 1840’s it was common practice for doctors to go straight from autopsies each morning on women who had died the previous day to delivering babies (and doing pelvic exams) without washing their hands. The doctors and the medical students were infecting their own patients.  Based on his observation, Semmelweiss declared that medical students carried infectious substances on their hands from dissected cadavers to the laboring mothers. A lower death rate in the second clinic, which was operated by midwives, was because they were not involved with autopsies or surgery.

Based on his analysis, Semmelweis  established a simple but revolutionary protocol  in 1847. He insisted that medical students and doctors wash their hands first with chlorinated lime solutions before they treated obstetrical patients.

The application of his method instantly reduced the cases of fatal puerperal fever from 12.24% to 2.38%, while in some months there were no deaths from childbed fever at all. Besides the hands, he initiated using preventive washing for all instruments making contact with the patients which literally removed puerperal fever from the hospital. This was the beginning of an antiseptic era.

Although hugely successful,  Semmelweis’ discovery directly confronted with the beliefs of science and medicine in his time. His colleagues and other medical professionals refused to accept his findings. He was dismissed from the hospital and harassed by the medical community in Vienna, which eventually forced him to move to Budapest. Despite this success, Semmelweis  was rejected and ridiculed by his peers.  Outraged at his rejection by the medical community, he began writing angry open letters to European obstetricians, calling them irresponsible murderers. In 1865 Semmelweise was committed to a mental institution where only 14 days later he died, possibly after being severely beaten by guards.

Unfortunately indeed Semmelweis had to “go mad” in trying to promote something right while many patients died unnecessarily – just because ego and arrogance stood in the way of truth. The outstanding German scientist, Max Planck said, “A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it.” Max Planck went on to say, “Science progresses funeral by funeral.”

Today, aseptic procedures are a routine, essential protocol in modern medicine. Semmelweis had to pay with his life to fight for this change.

Read more: http://www.experiment-resources.com/semmelweis-germ-theory.html#ixzz1XwTTDrAu

Dr. Barry Marshall – Australia

Dr. Barry Marshall completed his medical studies in Perth, Australia in 1974. He worked as a resident physician. He and Dr Robin Warren found mysterious bacteria in the stomachs of many patients who suffered from stomach ulcers. This observation led Drs Marshall and Warren to believe that bacteria were the cause of stomach ulcer. This is a direct contradiction of long standing medical dogma – bacteria cannot survive in a strong acidic environment of the human stomach.

Marshall submitted his paper to a gastroenterology conference in his own country, Australia. It was rejected! “Well, they said, “Dear Dr. Marshall, we’re so sorry that we couldn’t accept your abstract. It was such a high standard this year, we had 67 applications and we could only accept 64.” So mine was in the bottom 10 percent. Looking back at it I can say I was pushing it a bit to try and get it accepted, but it’s fun to have the rejection letter after all these years. My boss knew about the conference in Brussels, so he said, “Don’t be down hearted, I still think it’s good. You go to Belgium.” The hospital paid my airfare, and I connected up with some researchers in Belgium, and made phone calls and whatever, and presented it in Belgium.

In September 1983, Marshall presented his findings at an international conference in Brussels, Belgium.  Everyone laughed at his idea. One prominent gastroenterologist dismissed him as a “crazy guy saying crazy things.” Marshall’s idea threatened the status quo.

In an interview, Dr. Marshall said:  It was a campaign, everyone was against me. But I knew I was right, because I actually had done a couple of years’ work at that point. I had a few backers. And when I was criticized by gastroenterologists, I knew that they were mostly making their living doing endoscopies on ulcer patients. So I’m going to show you guys. A few years from now you’ll be saying, “Hey! Where did all those endoscopies go to?” And it will be because I was treating ulcers with antibiotics. 

Do you think there was an economic motive that made some people unwilling to consider this?  Barry Marshall: That’s true. The livelihood of gastroenterologists and many of the drug companies depended on these drugs that were worth billions of dollars, treating millions of people with ulcers.

What did you do at that point? There was I. I had treated a few patients with antibiotics successfully at that point, so I thought I could probably cure it. I was a bit overconfident in retrospect. I wanted to make sure that it did take, because I didn’t know whether I’d have the guts to do this every week. We mixed up a complete flourishing growth of bacteria from a petri dish — we calculated out later that it was a thousand million bacteria — and mixed it up, and I said, “Well, here it goes, down the hatch.” And my lab technician, who was fairly conventional, he was horrified. He was waiting for me to drop dead, but I said, “Well, I’m feeling all right. Okay, let’s press on.” You know, go and do ward rounds. The plan was, a week or so later I was going to have an endoscopy. I already had one at baseline to show I didn’t have any bacteria and I was normal, and a week later I planned to have another endoscopy.  About the fifth or the sixth day I’d wake up at the crack of dawn and say, “I’m going to be sick.” I’d run into the bathroom and I would vomit.  The BBC reported, Barry Marshall turned medical science upside down when he swallowed a dish of dangerous bacteria to prove it caused stomach ulcers. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-11686825. In 2005, Marshall and Robin Warren were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine.

Read more: http://www.achievement.org/autodoc/printmember/mar1int-1

Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski – Texas, USA

Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski  was born in the early 1940’s in Poland,  and was trained as both a biochemist and a physician. He’s spent the last 35 years developing and successfully treating cancer patients suffering with some of the most lethal forms of cancer at his clinic in Houston, Texas. Dr. Burzynski discovered the gene-targeted non-toxic peptides and amino acids known as antineoplastons. Antineoplastons are responsible for curing some of the most incurable forms of terminal cancer.

The following account is extracted from Dr. Mercola’s website. http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2011/06/11/burzynski-the-movie.aspx

Success Rates of Chemo and Radiation versus Antineoplastons

The film features several remarkable case stories of people who were successfully cured of cancer, but it’s when the clinical trial data of conventional therapies versus antineoplastons are stacked against each other that the benefits of antineoplastons become really obvious:

Radiation or Chemotherapy Only Antineoplastons Only
5 of 54 patients (9 percent)
were cancer free at the end of treatment		 5 of 20 (25 percent)
were cancer free at the end of treatment
Toxic side effects No toxic side effects

Dr. Burzynski was so confident in his antineoplastons that he even accepted the most difficult and “hopeless” cases, such as childhood brain tumors. Conventional medicine has little or nothing to offer in these cases, and the side effects can be as horrific as the disease itself, if not more. Furthermore, the best outcome conventional treatment can offer is to slow down the growth of the tumor.

Using antineoplastons, however, Dr. Burzynski has been able to successfully cure many of these otherwise hopeless cases. When comparing FDA-supervised studies of treatments for lethal childhood brainstem gliomas, antineoplastons again comes out as a clear winner:

Chemotherapy Only

Antineoplastons Only

1 of 107 patients (0.9 percent)
were cancer free at end of treatment

11 of 40 patients (27.5 percent)
were cancer free at end of treatment

0 of 107 patients (0 percent)
survived past five years

11 of 40 patients (27.5 percent)
survived past five years

Even more interesting, while some of Dr. Burzynski’s patients did eventually die after the five-year mark, most who did NOT undergo chemotherapy prior to getting antineoplastons have gone on to live normal, healthy lives—yet another indication that in many cases, the conventional treatments are more lethal than the disease itself.

Burzynski’s Troubles Begins…

Word spread, and patients started traveling to his office from out of state.

Suddenly, in 1984, he found out that agents from the Texas board of medical examiners were visiting  patients across the country trying to convince them to file charges against him.

What followed next truly challenges the rational mind.

In 1988, despite not breaking any laws, and having produced more evidence than was required to show that his treatment was effective and that no harm was coming to his patients from the treatment, the Texas medical board charged him with breaking a law that didn’t exist, claiming it was grounds for revoking his medical license.

They didn’t have a case, but kept the charges going by continuing to file slightly amended complaints, until finally, in 1993, the case went to trial. By then, 60 of Dr. Burzynski’s patients had filed a petition for the medical board to stop harassing their doctor—a petition that the board successfully eliminated from the trial by filing a motion to strike it from the record.

The judge ruled in Dr. Burzynski’s favor, confirming that no laws had been broken.

You’d think that would be the end of it. But not so in this case.  Instead of accepting defeat, the Texas medical board filed charges against Dr. Burzynski with the Texas Supreme Court.

The FDA’s Madness

It eventually came to light that the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had pressured the Texas medical board to revoke Dr. Burzynski’s medical license—despite the fact that no laws were broken, and his treatment was proven safe and effective.

But WHY?

It’s been stated many times that a crime can be solved simply by following the money, and this case is no exception. The FDA and the pharmaceutical industry had realized that if Dr. Burzynski’s discovery—which he owned the patent for—received a fair review, chemotherapy and radiation would rapidly dwindle into obscurity, effectively crippling the industry. Not only that, but if antineoplastons were approved, billions of dollars of cancer research funds would get funneled over to one single scientist who had exclusive patent rights…

Dr. Richard Crout, Director of the FDA Bureau of Drugs, once wrote in a 1982 newsletter: “I never have and never will approve a new drug to an individual, but only to a large pharmaceutical firm with unlimited finances.”

The Harassment Continues Unabated

The FDA, under the direction of Commissioner Dr. David Kessler, called no fewer than FOUR different grand jury investigations into Dr. Burzynski’s practice, despite the fact that none of the grand juries ever found him to be at fault, and no indictment ever came from any of the investigations.

But the FDA did not let up.

Finally, in 1995, just days after the final grand jury investigation, which also had found no fault, Dr. Burzynski was inexplicably indicted on charges of fraud, and 75 counts of violating federal law. If found guilty, he now faced 290 years in federal prison, and $18.5 million in fines.

Federal Government Spent $60 Million Trying to Bury Dr. Burzynski

This second trial cost American tax payers a whopping $60 million just in legal fees alone—that’s not counting the cost of continually harassing him (including several raids on his office) and his patients over the preceding 11 years. Dr. Burzynski spent $2.2 million on his own defense, $700,000 of which was raised by Dr. Julian Whitaker through requests for donations in his newsletter Health & Healing.

On March 4, 1997, the judge declared it a mistrial, due to a deadlocked jury. However, after stating the government had not presented sufficient evidence in its case, he ordered that Dr. Burzynski be acquitted of 42 of the 75 counts.

But the FDA wasn’t done yet. They took him to court AGAIN!

On May 28, 1997, after three hours of deliberation, the jury came back with their final verdict: Not Guilty.

By now you’re probably thinking that this victory surely must mark the end of the wrongful harassment of Dr. Burzynski.  But no. It got worse.

Theft and Patent Infringement

In October 1991—while the Texas medical board kept filing amended complaints against him in an effort to revoke his license, due to pressure from the FDA—the National Cancer Institute (NCI) had conducted a site visit to Dr. Burzynski’s clinic, and verified that “anti-tumor activity was documented by the use of antineoplastons.”

As it turns out, a mere 17 days after this visit, the United States of America as represented by “The Department of Health and Human Services,” filed a patent for antineoplastons AS2-1… one of the two antineoplastons Dr. Burzynski had already patented.

The inventor listed?

“Dr. Dvorit Samid,” Dr. Burzynski’s former research consultant. The patent states:

“The invention described herein may be manufactured, used and licensed by or for the government, for governmental purposes, without the payment to us of any royalties thereon.”

Over the next four years, while the witch hunt to put Dr. Burzynski behind bars was in full swing, the US Government filed 10 more patents antineoplastons.

In November of 1995, a month into Dr. Burzynski’s trial, where he faced 290 years in prison, the US Patent office approved the first US Government patent for antineoplastons.  Between 1995 and 2000, the US Patent office approved all 11 copycat patents on antineoplastons AS2-1….

By now your head is probably spinning, so let’s recap.

Dr. Burzynski developed a cancer treatment that surpassed all other treatments on the market, and the FDA, the pharmaceutical industry, and the National Cancer Institute all knew it. They also knew he was the sole owner of the patents for this therapy, and these two facts combined, threatened the entire paradigm of the cancer industry.

So they tried to copy his invention using a single non-patented ingredient. It failed. The next step was to steal the whole thing right from under him. There was just one problem. They knew they couldn’t use the stolen patents as long as Dr. Burzynski walked free and had the ability to defend his rights to them… So they concocted 75 fraudulent charges to tuck him away in jail for the rest of his life.

Fortunately for us, they failed in that too.

Dr. Whitaker sums it up nicely when he says: “How can the US Patent office be corrupted to the point they issue patents for a medical treatment that’s already been patented and issue them to someone who had nothing to do with their discovery or use?  And how can the Patent office then assign these fraudulent patents to some of the most powerful institutions in the American government?  And, imagine, all of this was done while these same agencies were spending millions of taxpayer dollars trying to put Dr. Burzynski in jail, so he could not fight the criminal theft of his discovery!”

This whole sordid story is retold in a movie – click here,  http://vimeo.com/24821365

Read more: http://www.burzynskimovie.com/

Note: My wife and I had a wonderful opportunity to meet Dr. Burzynski and his wife (also a doctor) when we visited Houston, Texas, some years ago.

Why the Violent Opposition to New Ideas?

Do the above stories make sense?  Let there be no illusions, this “battle of the mind” is going on anywhere – even at CA Care. And it is going to go on for as long as the Homo sapiens are human beings. Why? The following could be one of the reasons.

1.       It is a human nature

This webpage http://mises.org/resources.aspx?Id=ea881007-5be3-40cd-a55c-0279a415ab60 reads as follow,

“Every new theory encounters opposition and rejection at first. The adherents of the old, accepted doctrine object to the new theory, refuse it recognition, and declare it to be mistaken. Years, even decades, must pass before it succeeds in supplanting the old one. A new generation must grow up before its victory is decisive. To understand this one must remember that most men are accessible to new ideas only in their youth. With the progress of age the ability to welcome them diminishes, and the knowledge acquired earlier turns into dogma. In addition to this inner resistance, there is also the opposition that develops out of regard for external considerations. A man’s prestige suffers when he sees himself obliged to admit that for a long time he has supported a theory that is now recognized as mistaken. His vanity is affected when he must concede that others have found the better theory that he himself was unable to find. And in the course of time the authority of the public institutions of compulsion and coercion, i.e., of state, church, and political parties, has somehow become very much involved with the old theory. These powers, by their very nature unfriendly to every change, now oppose the new theory precisely because it is new.”

2.       There is such thing as a day light robbery by the Power-That-Be

Dr. Julian Whitaker (in The Introduction to Politics of Healing) wrote, “Virtually every scientific discovery over the ages has met a wall of resistance. The authority figures first recognize and acknowledge that value of the discovery. Next, they try to separate the innovator from his discovery, to essentially steal it … with a profit motive in mind. Finally, without fail, they pursue a no-holds-barred course to destroy the discoverer.  A good example of this is what they did to Dr. Burzynski.

Cancer: What It Takes To Be A Winner

Anne (not real name) is from Indonesia. She was diagnosed with lymphoma and underwent eight cycles of chemotherapy. She suffered severe side effects. The treatment did not cure her. About five months after the completion of her chemotherapy, the cancer recurred. There was a 2x2x3 cm mass in her left cheek and a swelling in her left neck. The doctor asked her to undergo radiotherapy and chemotherapy again. She refused.

She came to CA Care for herbs and changed her diet. After two months, Anne came back to Penang and reported that her health had improved tremendously. We then put Anne on the e-Therapy for a week. Her health improved further. A detail account of her healing is reported in another write-up, Lymphoma: Herbs and e-Therapy Brought Her Back to Good Life Again After Eight Chemos.

At the end of her stay in Penang, we pointed out to Anne that her improvement is all about herself. It was her attitude and her choice that made her well! We and people around her can only help but ultimately her success or failure depends entirely on herself – the patient.  Listen to our conversation that day.

There are three important lessons we can learn from this case.

1. Enough is enough. Eight cycles of chemos did not cure her cancer. She was asked to go for more chemos plus radiation. Anne took a step back and re-evaluated her path. What could more chemo do for her given that eight cycles did not help? Do you want to say enough is enough, or do you want to allow yourself to be led like a lamb to the slaughter? Of course, you and you alone will have to make THAT CHOICE  and bear the consequences of  your decisioin.

After the chemos Anne suffered pains. The only thing the doctor could do was to prescribe her painkillers and gastric medication for her bad stomach. She started to read the websites. She heard horror stories from friends about how patients died after the chemos, and she reflected on her own experiences. To Anne, chemotherapy had adverse side effects. It did not cure her. So she decided not to go through it again. She was afraid. Her husband said, She decided to go for Dr. Chris’ herbal therapy.

2. Get your priority right. Help yourself first before others can help you. Anne came to seek our help. She benefited tremendously from the herbs and change of diet. We did not expect Anne’s healing to happen so soon. But it did. We thank God for this blessing. On the night of her second visit here, we asked Anne if she would stay a few days longer in Penang so that she could do the e-Therapy. Anne readily agreed – I would stay here for as long as you want me to do so. It was indeed a positive attitude that brought more healing to her.

Many patients come to Penang. They would go shopping or go elsewhere first. On the last day of their stay, they would drop by CA Care. The next day they are booked to go home. Given such a situation, there is nothing much we could do to help them. Where and what is their priority? We told Anne, That night when you came, we did not plan to put you on the e-Therapy at all. If you had decided to go home the next day you would have missed your healing! But you made the right choice of wanting to stay back. And you benefited from the e-Therapy.

3. Read and gather information for yourself.  A friend gave Anne our book. She read it. Then she went into our websites. She read the healing stories. She was inspired by the story of a lawyer who had lymphoma like herself. Anne said, I read her story and I prayed and ask God if this was the way to go. Then I decided to go for herbs. I don’t want more chemo.

Unfortunately not many people are like Anne.  We receive many e-mails every day from almost every corner of the globe. Most of them expect information to be dished out to them on a silver platter. It becomes obvious to us that they don’t read. All that they wanted to know are already written in our websites – www.cacare.com or www.CancerCareMalaysia.com . They just need to read them.

Of course, there are those who just like to sit in front of the computer in the comfort of their home and expect us to send them herbs. And then want to know answers for every problem that might crop up. They seem to throw their problems at us and expect us to do the chores for them.  Go to our website: www.ADayWithChristeo.wordpress.com and these are examples of such e-mails.

This e-mail just came in while I was writing this article:

Dokter  Chris, kenapa dada pak sakit sampai kepunggung. Sudah beberapa hari tidak bisa tidur. Miring ke kanan sakit, miring ke kiri juga sakit. Saya R, anaknya di Jakarta (Doctor Chris, why is that my father has been having pains in the back for the past few days until he was not able to sleep. Could not turn to the right or left).

My reply: Before this no pain? What did he do wrong? Bad diet? Before this he was doing fine. The question you need to ask is: What did he do wrong just before the pains occurred?

Iya dokter, makan makan papa sedikit salah. Karena sebelumnya kondisi tubuhnya lemah tidak ada tenaga. Jadi dia ada makan sedikit pantangan untuk memulihkan kondisi tubuhnya. Apa yang harus kami lakukan dokter? (Yes doctor, a bit of wrong diet. He felt he did have energy. So he ate foods that were “forbidden”. What do we do now?)

I did not want to be cruel by telling him to go and jump into the sea. So my answer was, Take it easy. Let us hope that the pain will go away with time. Try the Pain Tea. Hope it helps. I did not remind him to stop taking the bad food, believing that he has learned it the hard way.

Let us remind you this. Cancer is not just about a tumour in your breast, lung or liver. It is about you, as a human being. There is this quotation, There is no incurable disease, only incurable people.

Unfortunately our experience tells that only 30 percent of patients who come to us benefit from our therapy, the remaining 70 percent cannot. We emphasize the word again, CANNOT. You may wish to ask us why cannot. We hope patients know that one of the most important criteria for success is the person himself. It is not just about the herbs. Many patients come to us with a very high expectation for finding a magic bullet. There is none here.

We have refrained from giving advice or prescribing herbs through the net. It is just a futile effort. If your problem is serious enough, or if your loved one is precious enough, come and see us face to face. Bring along your medical reports and we shall try to help you out. By doing this, we would be able to assess the patient (or those taking care of the patient) as a person.

After knowing the medical history, we would then prescribe the herbs. Prescribing herbs is a very simple thing to do. We often tell patients, After talking to you for five minutes, we would probably know if we can help you or not. Perhaps, most patients don’t even understand what we meant by this. Patients come looking for a magic bullet. They want to find a cure on their own terms. They carry so much baggage and they don’t realize that.

Our experience tells us that if you want to heal yourself, one most important thing you must do is CHANGE – change your attitude, your lifestyle and your diet. There is no two ways about it.

We can only guide you, but patients must take care to heal themselves!

CANCER: How to Make Decisions to Increase Your Odd of Winning

We make decisions every day. Some decisions are just over trivial matters. For some people, their decisions can be a “mother” of all decisions – especially if you or your loved one is being diagnosed with dreadful diseases like cancer.  The consequence of your decisions can be a matter of living or dying.  I always say this to cancer patients, Listen to whatever comments or advices others give you, but remember that at the end of it all, you and you alone are going to bear the consequences of that decision. YOU suffer or you die, NOT them. 

Out of curiosity, before setting out to write this article I “googled”, How to make decisions to increase your odd of winning. The returns obtained were about roulette, blackjack, poker, betting, slot machine and investment, nothing about cancer!

The reality is that obtaining a cure for cancer is just like “striking the jackpot” (quoting a well known oncologist in Singapore).  His statement implies that undergoing cancer treatment is not much different from going to a casino.  The outcome is as uncertain as rolling the die. There would be losers and winners. And we know the odd of winning is very low indeed.  In fact, any honest and seasoned oncologist would not even use the word “cure” for cancer treatment – they only talk about remission.

Researchers, scientists, doctors, etc. follow different protocols when making decisions. But the essential element is the same – it must be based on research data. By studying the data we hope to be able to increase our odds to win.

Theorist Versus Frequentist

Professor Stephen Schneider (in The Patient from Hell) explained this very well.

“In every course I teach I like to demonstrate the difference between two ways of thinking by using the example of a coin toss. I flip a coin onto the back of my hand and cover it. “What is the probability of the coin under my hand is heads?” “One-half”, someone always shouts out. “How do you know?” “Well, the coin has two sides”. You’re a theorist!

“Suppose you didn’t understand the coin toss theory and didn’t realize that there was an equal chance of flipping heads or tails? You just keep flipping it and count the number of heads and tails. You’re a frequentist! You want to put together a frequency chart … make a table with a column for heads and a column for tails and them you want to flip the coin multiple times. If you flip it often enough and the coin is unloaded, you’ll end up with frequency statistics showing an approximately 50 percent chance of flipping heads or flipping tails.”

“This is how scientists like to work: They like to have masses of data they can use to create probability distributions that depict the likelihood of potential outcomes… then scientists can make estimates that have high confidence levels. It’s the same in medicine. Doctors like looking at data from clinical trials performed on hundreds of patients over many years, which can provide clear evidence as to whether certain treatments are effective, on average.”

“Unfortunately, the questions … can’t be solved using … frequency data, because they involve many components of deep uncertainty.”

Professor Schneider concluded:

“Some scientists, including many medical doctors, still seem to be living in the nineteenth century in this respect, thinking that for any question, infinite sets of replicable experiments should be performed, providing them with data from which they can calculate probabilities … and “scientifically” tackle the problem at hand. Unfortunately, in the real world, as topics of inquiry become increasingly complex and involve questions about the future, scientists do not always enjoy the luxury of extensive, comprehensive and reliable frequency data when they need them.”

Intuition and Commonsense

At CA Care, I have a different view about how to solve problems.  While data based on clinical trial is a good way to indicate our chances of obtaining certain benefits or survival, etc., the data need NOT apply to you as a patient. For example, if you undergo chemo, the 5-year survival rate is 30%. You may belong to that 30% who survived or you may belong to the 70% who don’t survive. Nobody can tell for sure which group you belong to. So research data like that only provides you with a confidence level, saying that what you are going to do has a certain degree of probability that you are right.

So at CA Care I tell cancer patients to make decisions based on intuition and common sense.  Experiences show that at times certain thing happens beyond the understanding of science, yet the “heart” seems to “sense” it. Patients come to me asking if they should undergo chemotherapy or not. My answer is: What does your heart say? I do not ask, What did your doctor say or what did your relatives or friends say. My advice is, Follow your heart or the Inner Voice within you.

This does not mean that I ask you to ignore scientific data. Bear in mind that I was once a researcher and a scientist. But I also know that science deals only with the physical realm. You and I and life are made up of the sum total of the physical and spiritual realms.  The spiritual realm is superior to the physical realm. The spiritual realm impacts the physical realm. Science believes the opposite – the physical is everything and the spiritual does not exist and is totally ignored.

So for any life and death decision, I believe you cannot ignore your spiritual self. Also, I urge you to use your commonsense. There is a saying, Educated men need not be wise, and wise men need not be educated. Each of us is capable of making wise decision – you don’t need to be a scientist to make wise decisions. In order to guide you to make decisions, I say you need to consider the pros and cons –  a more scholarly term is to carry out a Cost-Benefit Analysis. Count your costs and weigh them against the benefits. Decide for yourself what you really want out of this life. Doctors have their own perspectives of what is good for you. Their value judgment may differ greatly from yours or may be even opposite of yours.  Following totally the doctors’ advice means you totally agree with their value judgment. Is this what you really want?

The function of CA Care is to provide you with honest, unbiased information of the various options available to you. Having done that, it is up to you to make your own decision based on what you think is right for you. We do NOT talk the language of doctors. We don’t think like them too. But this does make us anti-doctors. CA Care is not anti-doctors.  Everyone who comes to see us is advised to consult his/her doctor first.  If you want to do chemo, radiotherapy, etc.  and etc., go ahead and do it. The only thing we tell you is, You are responsible for the consequences of your decisions. Don’t use our herbs your scapegoat. If is most unfair to come back and blame us when things go wrong. Unfortunately some patients do that.

I am not alone in advocating such practice.  Let me quote Professor Schneider again:

“What is “dangerous” is a value judgment …  It is the policymakers  who need to decide whether risks are acceptable … or should be ignored …. We scientists can provide policymakers with information on which they can better make these decisions. In a medical setting, the science comes from medical research studies and doctors’ opinion based on their experience with data on, and knowledge of the subject. The “policymakers” are the patients, who, working together with their doctors, must make value judgment about what health risks to take.”

Experience of a Near-Missed Flight

Let me relate what happened to us a few days ago while wanting to fly home from the US. Our flights involved Delta 1097 from Raleigh-Durham (RDU) to Los Angeles (LAX) – Taipei – Penang. It does not take a scientist to know that if Delta 1097 is delayed, we would have missed the other connecting flights. I knew where the “weakness” was. And we must be well prepared for it.

From the Airline’s website, we studied the history of Delta 1097. For the past eight days (Table below) DL 1097 had always left RDU at about 8 pm and arrived LAX by about 10 pm.  Since we have to be at the check-in counter of China Airlines by about 12 midnight for the connecting flight to Taipei, I figured out I have ample time. So our risk of missing the connection is very slim. There would be no problem!   So my daughter bought the Delta ticket with full confidence that everything would be alright.

27-June
Raleigh-Durham (KRDU)
Los Angeles
09:56PM EDT
11:35PM PDT
4:39
26-June
Raleigh-Durham  (KRDU)
Los Angeles
08:15PM EDT
09:59PM PDT
4:44
24-June
Raleigh-Durham  (KRDU)
Los Angeles
07:51PM EDT
09:54PM PDT
5:03
23-June
Raleigh-Durham  (KRDU)
Los Angeles
08:39PM EDT
10:31PM PDT
4:52
22-June
Raleigh-Durham (KRDU)
Los Angeles
08:48PM EDT
10:38PM PDT
4:50
20-June
Raleigh-Durham  (KRDU)
Los Angeles
08:12PM EDT
10:22PM PDT
5:10
19-June
Raleigh-Durham (KRDU)
Los Angeles
08:07PM EDT
10:04PM PDT
4:57
17-June
Raleigh-Durham (KRDU)
Los Angeles
07:52PM EDT
10:07PM PDT
5:15
16-June
Raleigh-Durham (KRDU)
Los Angeles
08:12PM EDT
10:12PM PDT
5:00
15-June
Raleigh-Durham (KRDU)
Los Angeles
08:10PM EDT
10:04PM PDT
4:54

Somehow on the evening of 25 June, I did not feel good about our flight home on 27 June. Something in me – my intuition – was saying that something was going to go wrong.  I requested our daughter to find an alternative flight – probably taking the flight a day before or a flight in the morning on the same day. This would mean we could be in Los Angeles well ahead of time. I was fully aware that my request made my daughter “go crazy.” Daddy must be mad to cook up something like this. Why push the panic button unnecessarily? This is what they call “borrowing worry.” But anyway, we tried to “fix” my concern the next day. Unfortunately we could not find any slot in spite of the many possible flights out of RDU.

Looking at the flight data above, the worse delay that had ever occurred so far was on 22 June. The flight was delayed by about an hour due to poor weather in Atlanta – thus causing a chain reaction. My son (in training to be a scientist too, doing Ph.D. in Cancer Biology at M.D. Anderson!) assured me that based on the above data, there should NOT be any reason why I should lose my sleep. He predicted the flight would go as schedule. The previous delay was due to weather condition. But in my case, the weather was fine.  Disruption by weather condition in summer is rare.  So in theory the odd against serious flight delay is minimal in my case.  So, we made a “scientific decision” just like oncologists do when they give patients chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

Before going to the airport, I was tracking the flight schedule at home. Everything seemed to be okay. With confidence, on 27 June, we drove to the airport to catch our DL 1097. It was about 5 pm then and we were about to arrive at the airport. My daughter’s mobile phone rang. She picked it up. Then there was a sober silence.  I asked,  Delta called? Flight delay?   Irene (a Clinical Psychology Ph.D. intern at Duke University), being a very gentle lady that she always is, said, Papa, please don’t panic. Yes, the flight was delayed until 9.15 pm! In actual fact, it was not really 9.15 pm. The flight only took off at 10 pm.  This was the worst delay ever recorded. I told my daughter, My intuition turned out correct. We will take it easy. This thing happened for a reason. But it  not as critical as those cancer patients whose lives have been turned upside down and inside out after being told they have cancer. Take it positively.

In theory this delay put the probability of us missing our connecting flight as extremely high. I remember thinking what would happen to all those cancer patients who wanted to see me on Friday, I July afternoon. They had bought their tickets to fly in from Indonesia and Singapore hoping to see me.  They would be disappointed.

Our “fighting” instinct took over.  We were supposed to go for our dinner first before arriving at the airport. We had already checked in on-line. Because of what had happened we drove straight to the airport. We talked to the Delta people and asked for possible alternative routing or airline. Unfortunately, there was no other option left. We still have to take Delta 1097 and bet on our luck.

Imagine the predicament I would face – what was I to do after landing in Los Angeles in the middle of the night? Where to go? How to find another flight to come home?

To cut the story short, we did not miss our connection! On Wednesday 27 June we landed home safely in Penang as scheduled. How did we pull this off?

These are the reasons why.

  1. We did not panic and kept our cool. Instead of cursing Delta, we accepted the situation.
  2. We started to take positive actions to solve the problem – taking the bull by the horn! We drove to the airport right away instead of going to dinner first. We had to find the solution to our problem and did not allow the problem to revolve by itself or taking it “lying down.”
  3. We talked to the Delta staff. David, the gentleman who handled our case, was very helpful but he could not offer any alternative flight. They were either all full or not suitable.  But one thing David did right, which I believe helped increased our odd at “winning”. David offered to transfer our baggage from Delta to China Airlines without us having to wait at the baggage area and collect it personally. This is something the airline does not normally do because we have separate tickets for both flights from different airlines. No doubt about it, if we have to wait to collect our baggage, we would definitely miss our connecting flight.
  4. Then, we worked out a back-up plan, should we miss the connecting flight. This provided us with peace of mind. We knew exactly that we would have to do. The fear of being left stranded in the big Los Angeles airport in the middle of the night evaporated. After this was sorted out, we went for our dinner. I ordered an extra-large bowl of Vietnamese noodle – and there were no butterflies in my stomach!
  5. Looking at my watch before the plane was about to land in Los Angeles, I felt we would miss the connecting flight. I made another move.  I relayed our problem to the flight attendants and asked for help.  I requested to pick up my hand-on and let us be the first ones to get out of the plane. The male steward listened to my request and shrugged his shoulders. Either he did not understand me or he was dumb or was not the helpful type. I then talked to the female attendant in charge and she understood me.  She made an announcement requesting other passengers to hold on to allow us to leave first.  I looked at my watch again. We only had 10 minutes to get out of the plane and rushed from Terminal 5 to Terminal 3 where China Airlines is. That was a big deal.
  6. My daughter took another positive step. She informed the China Airline counter about our problem. So when we arrived at the check-in counter at 12 midnight, we were attended to right away.
  7. Three weeks earlier, when my wife and I arrived at the Los Angeles airport, I did my homework. In preparation for such anticipated problem, I took time and walked around to study the layout of the airport. I made sure I know how to get to the International terminal from the Delta terminal.  I had to turn left not right! So I have done my homework well ahead of time.

What a relief after being given the boarding pass by China Airlines. There was no more fear that we would miss our flight!  My wife and I went through the security check.

Feeling relieved, I became complacent. I blindly followed other passengers to the boarding gate and couldn’t careless to check what our depart gate was, as printed on our boarding pass. After all the planning and rushing, you believe that Chris Teo would do such a silly thing? We ended going to the wrong end of the terminal. The China Airline boarding gate was on the opposite end of the terminal.  I should have checked first and turned right instead of left. I did not do that and was complacent. I should not have followed other passengers blindly! Again, it was a mad rush. The plane took off about 30 minutes late, not because of my fault though – it was a full-load and that took time to get everyone on board.

Lessons We Can Learn

I have never been in such a predicament before. But I must say, my predicament was not anywhere near what cancer patients experience after being told that they have cancer. I am also not saying that the way I solve my problem is the best way. You may have your own way – so be it. Nevertheless, I believe there are some basic ingredients in every successful endeavor – whether missing a plane flight or having cancer.  These are some important points to remember.

  1. Don’t panic when confronted with a problem.
  2. Everything in life happens for a reason. Later on you may want to find that reason but for the moment, it is not the time to find that reason. No need to ask why. No need to find a scapegoat.
  3. Take positive actions to resolve the problem. Give your best shot. This is your problem. If you do not show much interest to help yourself, don’t expect others to help you.

I receive e-mails from patients every day. Indeed I felt disappointed reading some of them. Many like to throw their problems at me and expect me to solve their problems while they sit in front of their computers at home! My answer has always been: If I can help you, please come and see me. If you cannot come and see me, how do you expect me to give you my full attention?

Please read the e-mails below.

  • Hi Dr Teo, Thank you for your prompt response. I am from Singapore. In fact, I had placed an order for Rodent Tuber capsules from one supplier in Malaysia as my mother had problem taking the grinded fresh rodent tuber plant since she complaint of biting on the tongue and throat. Besides this plant, she is constantly seeking TCM treatment.

Reply: That stuff cannot possibly be from CA Care. We don’t do things like that. Patients need to come and see me with all the medical reports before we give out our herbs.

  • Thanks for your reply. I had gone into your homepage. In my mom’s case, there was no biopsy done. It’s merely from the X-ray done that the doctor concluded that it’s advanced stage lung cancer (both sides). If I can get hold of the X-ray results and emailed to you, is it possible for you to give some recommendation?

My reaction: How serious or valuable is her mother’s life? Sitting in front of a computer is not going to help much.

 4.    Formulate a back-up plan in case the first plan fails. This is the reason why I often tell patients, If you do not get any better or benefit after two weeks of taking the herbs and changing your diet, please go to someone else for help.  

Goh is a 58-year male with multiple myeloma. He received 22 cycles of chemo and suffered a relapse. He was asked to undergo 32 cycles more of chemo. After 6 cycles of the second round of chemo, he gave up due to severe side effects. What does commonsense tell you about such a case?

5.    Share your problems with others. There may be opportunities that you may not know about.  If presented courteously, those in the position to help may offer extraordinary help to solve your problem. In my near-miss flight, David at the RDU airport and the female flight attendant had contributed positively. Without their help I am sure we would have missed the connecting flight.

6.    Do your homework. This again is one thing that upset me after reading e-mails from patients. People who wrote me did not read our website carefully enough. Most of the things you need to know about cancer and how to go about it, can be found in our website. What you need to DO is just read them – and I know most of them don’t read. They want me to serve them the information on a silver platter. Remember that knowledge is power. There is a Chinese saying: Dig your well before you become thirsty. Do that if you are wise.

7.    Don’t be complacent. I almost had to pay for my own foolishness. Many cancer patients become complacent after they get well – they think they have already solved their problem. Such people would then go back to their old ways and fall into the same hole again. Cancer can recur. To me, there is no such thing as a permanent cure for cancer.  So don’t be misled.

Let me give you one example. There was this elderly lady with colon cancer. She refused chemotherapy and was with us for more than three years now. She was doing very well. Lately, she told her family that she was fed up taking the herbs besides having to take care of her diet. She and her family came to see us. I gave her a big smile and laughed. And I said, It is fine with me. It is your life and if you wish to “go home early” that is okay too.  After all many of us believe that living in this world is nothing else but suffering. But if you want me to agree to what you want to do, I must say you are foolish. Why do you want to change something that has made you well in the first place? Anyway, if the cancer comes back, you can always go for chemo. You have not done that yet!  The problem with cancer is that we do not know when it will strike back again. There is no room for complacency.

 

Awakening the Healer Within You

The oncologist asked Melisa, who had cervical cancer that had spread to the liver and lungs, to have her liver surgically removed. There were about thirty spots of varying sizes in her liver. Melisa asked the oncologist how such surgery could possibly save her. The oncologist was irritated and replied: “Who is the doctor, you or me?”

Melisa was right. By declining the surgery she saved herself from unnecessary sufferings and also her life! Medical tradition regards patients as passive elements in the technological battle between the doctors and the cancer. The ideal patient therefore is one who is under anaesthesia!

Now, there is a new awakening that patients who participate in their healing succeed while those who take their fate ‘lying down’ fail. We have been taught that when we are ill it is the medicine that cures. Modern medicine has long ignored the self-healing ability of our body. We take healing for granted. We never realise that our body heals by itself. Let me remind you of the following:

1) The healing power of the body is within us. There is healer within us and this power heals us absolutely.

2) Many of us are ignorant or are unaware of our own body’s healing potential.

3) Many of us block ourselves off from this potential, preferring to trust others whom we think can ‘cure’ us rather than trust our own ‘Infinite Intelligence’ within.

4) Many of us create unhealthy circumstances with negative and self-denying thoughts and these eventually make us sick. We fail to recognise that these are the root causes of our many illnesses.

5) We are unaware that from the day we are born, we have been bombarded with negative suggestions. Negativity begets illness.

Joseph Murphy in The Power of Your Subconscious Mind wrote: “Think good and good will follow;  think evil, evil follows. Change your thought and you change your destiny.”

The very first step in healing is for every cancer patient to recognise the influence of his own mind on his illness and recovery process. A negative mindset leads to more trouble and possibly unnecessary death, while a positive mindset gears you towards recovery. Many a time I asked patients if they carry any emotional ‘baggage’ or harbour any ‘unresolved’ emotional conflicts within them. Invariably the answer would be: “No, no, I have no emotional problems at all”. They simply do not want to admit or discuss them; perhaps for fear that people know their ‘secrets’ or they do not see the relevance or relationship between unresolved personal ’emotions’ and their cancers. After all, in schools we are taught that illness is caused by some kind of a ‘bug’, virus or germ and that it has nothing to do with the head.

Most patients would tell me that whatever ‘problems’ they have are all ‘old issues’ and have ‘long been forgotten’. Such comments and attitudes only go to show sheer ignorance or ‘arrogance’. Think again I say; do you carry any ‘baggage’? Remember that you are not just a machine — without any mind or soul. You are sick because ‘something inside is eating you up’.

Let me, however, clarify myself. I am not against anyone taking medicine for his/her illness. By all means, go and see a doctor and take the medicine prescribed. When an illness has reached an advanced stage, the use of medicine becomes inevitable. By taking medicine, be it chemical, drug or herb, what we are doing is to help in the healing process.

Let me suggest a list of some active steps that you can take to heal your mind, your soul and lastly, your body.

1) Think positively; as you think, so you become! Cultivate positive attitudes of love, joy, happiness, sharing, caring, promotion of self-esteem and self-confidence.

2) Free yourself of negative thoughts. Many negative thoughts are ingrained into our subconscious mind and they become part of us. You and I have similar problems. And more often than not, we do not even know that these negative thoughts ever exist or are causing us all these problems. We are the products of our environment and experiences of our lives. To be able to free ourselves from these negative thoughts we must, first and foremost, be aware and recognise that these negative thoughts are in us. If we keep denying that they are non-existent, there will be no reason for change.

3) Be the active participant in your healing. You cannot remain neutral in your healing. You can either be passive or active. The golden rule of psychosomatic medicine is that patients must actively take charge of their illness. Get rid of the psychological or emotional cancer in you. Doctors cannot help you with emotional cancer. Indeed, no one can help you deal with that, except yourself. On the other hand, if you decide to be passive, then by default, you are encouraging the cancer to take over you. So, the choice is yours. Again, remember that a positive mindset promotes healing.

4) Accept the diagnosis, NOT the prognosis. When diagnosed with cancer, it seems the most popular question asked of the doctor is: “How much longer do I have?” Patients then get answers like: “At most three to six months,” or “Go home and get your papers in order.” If we understand voodoo, then know that such answers are indeed a voodoo curse. They are like hypnotic instructions. The patients’ mind will bring that prognosis to pass. Doctors give the death sentence and the patients keep the bone pointing at themselves.

Norman Cousins (Head First: The Biology of Hope) advised: “Don’t deny the diagnosis, just defy the verdict that is supposed to accompany it.” It short, accept the diagnosis but do not believe the prognosis. Know that the prerogative of living and dying rests with the Almighty God, not men.

 

Do You Find Any Meaning In Your Cancer Experience?

Any moment of hating, Any moment of lying,

Any moment of resentment, Is a moment of dying.

  Any moment of loving, Any moment of giving,

Any moment of thankfulness, Is a moment of living.

When we are young, fit and healthy — how many of us would ever believe that perhaps … yes, perhaps … that the next few minutes, hours, or days, that “this good fortune” may just reverse?

We all see many people dying or seriously ill, but how many ever “believe” that this may happen to us too?

Most people think that it happened to “them” but it will not happen to me. But suppose that this happens to us, would we ask: Why me? What bad things have I committed to deserve this? And say: God is not fair!

Today, there is a concept in psychology that says there may be something good in something bad that had happened. To know the good, we just need to search for it or experience it. How can this be? I believe that as we are lying on our back in the hospital bed staring at the empty ceiling, that is the time when we begin to realize that we are vulnerable, when life is severely at stake, and perhaps when our money or wealth that we had been accumulating may not mean much anymore. Perhaps this is also the time we begin to ask: where am I going from here?

Though I have not suffered serious illness before, my association with thousands of cancer patients have taught me to empathize with their plight. At times it is heart breaking. I often ask: why must cancer strike this young and innocent child? Why must it happen to a mother and then now, her daughter? Why is life so cruel? I find no answer except to accept that that is the way life is.

In early 2006, we asked cancer patients to write down their answers to this question: Have you experienced any other significant changes in your life as a result of your cancer experience?

Here are some of their answers:

Patient 1: Yes, unlike before, now I only do short term planning. I started to wind up risky business to regain peace of mind and reduce stress. My aim is to enjoy the remaining part of my life — to relax and stay happy. I now concentrate on getting more knowledge on alternative medicine, nutrition and health which I believe to be the missing link to my healing journey.

With the knowledge that I have gained I discovered that other people knew so little about taking care of their health and when they are very sick or told that they have cancer, they thought that their doctors can tell them what to do. This is what that leads them to their downfall.

With the knowledge that I gained I also give help and advice to other sick people — to encourage them, give them hope and teach them to decide what to do. I felt very pleased when I have given them hope. I wish I could give help and hope to more people.

Patient 2: I experienced significant changes in my life as a result of my cancer experience. Positively, my cancer has caused me to stop and think, to pray and know God better. During the period when I was recovering from the painful effects of radiation to my mouth and neck areas, I was unable to talk very much; even a sip of water was painful. The only person I can talk to then was God who provided all the consolation and blessings. On the negative side, the permanent damage caused by radiation to my physical self, has caused me to be socially less active significantly affecting relationships with friends and relatives. The change in my diet to one of only vegetables, fruits and fish is a tall order and my discipline in doing so has made me more reclusive and domesticated. Although I believe that it has helped me in my overall health, I do not quite like the present lifestyle that I have been compelled to live by. I would have preferred my previous lifestyle where I am socially more active and very flexible.

Patient 3: I am a Christian, believing that everything that God has allowed to happen in my life has a purpose. Since I was diagnosed with cancer, I was at first very confused and sad as of why it should happen to me. But I can only do what I can control and surrender the rest to God. Since then I really experience the real meaning of knowing how much He loves me and make me worthy in His eyes. Ephesians 3:17-19. What things happened, it is our reaction that matters the most: either I can cry, question and blame God or any other reason for the situation. Or I still can cry but ask God to help me and direct me the best way to handle the situation. I chose to do the latter. It has been a real soul searching, tremendous learning journey on health aspects and resetting my priority in life.

Patient 4: My cancer has helped me to focus on living rather than dying. It has also helped me change and cope with stress as well as my relationship with others. It has also helped me learn to be thankful for the daily blessings.

Patient 5: I have become very negative emotionally and am not receptive to people who try to help me. I always think that I am going to surely die of cancer and nothing can help me. I do not want to exercise or try anything that other people recommend, e.g. meditation. I always feel scared that the ‘end’ will come very soon.

Patient 6: Life has given me a new dimension and life gives hope in every sense. Many things have a greater clarity and I feel a sense of purpose for the years ahead as they impact on our children and grandchildren — they need us, so the target is to stay alive! We are in God’s hands.

My wife and I have found our Christian faith to be a huge comfort. I have become even more positive in my outlook and take matters as they come.

Understanding cancer, particularly your own, is important. Research is a key factor to obtain more knowledge and understanding of the disease and all the options open for complementary / natural / herbal remedies; to help those less fortunate as a member of a cancer support group in France.

Patient 7: Cancer may have brought me to the lowest and scariest. I know I have climbed out of the pit and am way beyond that. Having beaten / managed cancer, I feel that I can handle much more difficult issues.

Patient 8: Definitely yes. You treasure life more, is more attentive to other people’s view, sensitivities and mood. One tends to show loving feelings towards one’s close relative, children and of course, wife. Negative meanings to life would be the disease which is the top gun for your cause of death but one has time to prepare for it, spiritually, emotionally, physically and estate-wise.

Patient 9: I feel very lonely because my husband had neglected me after I had my mastectomy. He never asked about the treatment that I had or if I was feeling any better — he never did. The feeling of worthlessness made me feel so restless.

Before my cancer he loved me very much. I don’t understand this sudden change in my husband. I hate my illness and the attitude of my husband makes me hate him too.

At present, when I am working, I do not think much of my cancer. I put it in God’s hand.

The only thing is my relationship has changed. After I had cancer, I feel very lonely. I work from 7 a.m. till 6 p.m. — eat, go to sleep and take my medication. I do the thinking and do what is required. My family does not discuss much about my cancer.

I always pray to God to guide me. I pray in silence and I take each day at a time. Dear Chris, I feel better after writing my heart out! Thanks.

Patient 10: It has basically taught me to treat the disease as a ‘gift’ or a blessing from The Almighty. My cancer has made me appreciate the value of a simple smile from my youngest daughter, not to ignore her constant invitation to have fun and play games with her. It has taught me to appreciate how important ‘little’ things are to her — like talking to her Polly dolls, and make believe games.

I cry more over the beauty of the sunset, the countless blue hue of the morning sky, the smell of freshly cut grass, and the sound of rain hitting the roof. I have wasted so much time over ‘big’ projects in the office and at work. I now realize there are so much in life that God wants me to have the opportunity to appreciate in order to glorify His creation – this is an opportunity I intend not to miss.

My cancer has also helped me discover a ‘new’ mindset — that is to make positive thinking a habit until it becomes second nature to me. I now realize that God has given me so many gifts that I have yet to unwrap, and with this new mindset, I am discovering things that I never knew before existed or I was capable of – like how to be happy when everyone else seem gloomy and miserable.

I also learn how to control anger by forgiving others who hurt me. My cancer has been a huge blessing to me.

The responses above clearly show that many people have found the “good” in the “bad”. We encourage cancer patients to look inwards and discover these “gift” within them.

Hold the world tightly yet lightly, Embrace life with all our hearts and might

Excerpts from the book: Why Me? by Pesach Kraus

This lovely, small book was given to us by someone (we don’t know who, signed as D.R.) with a handwritten note: Mr. and Mrs. Teo: I would like to share with you of what I have benefited from this book. My niece and a friend were your patients. This book is out of print for more than ten years. It was brought by a friend from Canada. Thanks D.R. My wife and I got to read this book. Let’s share it with others too.

The Author: Pesach Krauss is a Jewish rabbi and is a chaplain at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Centre in New York – one the most prestigious cancer hospitals in the world. He devoted his time caring for the sick and the dying. Indeed, Rabbi Krauss had great strength and compassion in spite of the fact that life had been very cruel to him since his childhood days. His father migrated from Russia to the US. They lived in poverty. At the age three a streetcar rolled over his leg and as a result he had to have an artificial limb. His first wife died of cancer.

In Chapter 7: Life: A Precious Gift to Hold with Open Hands, Rabbi Krauss wrote:

When Muriel, my first wife, became ill with cancer and took a turn for the worse, we all knew that her days were numbered. Suddenly time became very precious … What do you tell someone who is fatally ill … Do you hide the facts? Some people do … but not with Muriel. We faced it together, bore the heavy burden together, as one family. Every step of the terrible journey was revealed. She wanted it that way.

At the outset Muriel made it very clear – she would not trade pain for time. Every moment was precious because so little time was left. Since drug would rob her of time and of her senses, she wouldn’t take drugs – until the pain became unbearable. Petty and useless talk disappeared. Each conversation became precious. Time, each moment, each hour, each day, became precious and was savored. Each sunrise was a glorious surprise.

I learned so much from those last days we spent together. How priceless are those simple things – sunlight, a moment, a touch, family, friends, love. And how careless we are of our most valued treasures. We take them for granted.

After my wife’s funeral I was approached by a member of my congregation, who said: Rabbi, my son was very upset at the injustice of your wife’s death. He wants to know, “How can you believe in God?”

Some people ask why this tragedy happened to me. Why does God allow people who are so much worse, even evil, to go around hurting others and yet enjoying life while my wife, who was filled with the love of her people, so gracious and so wise, was taken away?

I never asked such questions. Actually, these are not good questions because they don’t make the right assumptions about life.

What then are the right assumptions?

Life isn’t a matter of comparisons – my life in terms of someone else’s life, the number of my years versus the number of somebody else’s years, my joy against another’s, one way of death against another way of death. The judgment of God’s justice and mercy is not in the mathematics of the years, nor in the sum of birthdays and anniversaries.

If we died, the next moment of our life would be complete in itself. So was Muriel’s life. So is each person’s life – unique, complete in itself. So Muriel’s life was not short because the life of another person may have had more years. Nor was her life less blessed because her passing was through the gates of pain.

Where then is God? Where was He in Muriel’s life? Where is He in anyone’s life? These are the questions to ask: Was her life rich? How many lives did she touch? Was she a blessing to her family, friends and people with whom she had contact? Did she take her joys humbly and gratefully? Did she meet sorrows courageously? Was God present?

She was grateful for joys and never took them for granted. Each day, to her very last, she said the blessings: Thank you God for keeping me in life. Thank you God for another day. She saw life as a gift from God. A gift of which we are not deserving and which we could never repay and which someday is returned.

From my own experience, I learned the great truth of human existence: One must not hold life too precious; one must always be prepared to let it go. Muriel understood this and taught me. She held on to life, hands tight, because she treasured the moments as a gift – yet hands open to release because she know that life, though precious, was a gift to be relinquished and returned.

Could I have held on to my beloved even one moment longer – and put time in a deep freezer? Could I have enjoyed sunlight even one day longer with her, no matter how hard I tried? Could I have prevented night from falling? That moment had to pass. No power on earth could have retained it. Had I tried to hold back the irresistible force, it would have been a losing battle. At the end, I would still be left empty-handed and BITTER about my loss.

Sooner or later we must bid farewell to the persons and things we love. Sometimes the separation is slow and peaceful and sometimes it is swift and violent. But the inevitable LETTING-GO is something we must learn to accept and comes to terms with. As I see it, nothing can be more undignified than a futile attempt to retain what must be released … Many men and women cling so hard to a youthful image that they can’t grow older gracefully… parents can’t let go of their children, interfering with their lives, inflicting scars …….

This is a hard lesson to learn. I think of those who have suffered loss of a dear one or a loss of health who are NEVER RECONCILED and who corrode their years and the lives of those around them with deep mourning, depression and bitter complaints. Withdrawing from the sunlight into the dark shadows of despair, they forget that they are depriving loved ones who need them and that they have so much to add to life.

How do we let go of someone dear to us who has died?

 …Our focus must shift from a direct relationship to the departed to an identification with values formerly shared. In that way, we free ourselves from the cold grip of the past to embrace warm and tender memories and action for the present.

A year following my wife’s death, I delivered a sermon: … I want to say to the husbands and wives who love one another, never accept your good fortune casually. In your breakneck pace through life, stop for a few moments and say a prayer in gratitude. Thank God for each day; don’t take it for granted, while yet His sunlight shines on you.

To parents, I want to remind you how precious is the gift of your children. Thank God each day for children; be aware of their little aggravations, but see the good and joy as well.

I want to urge myself and all others, to hold the world tightly yet lightly – to embrace life with all our hearts and all our souls and all our might. For it is a precious gift.

In Chapter 14 Rabbi Krauss wrote:

When my wife died, I felt I had been robbed of a precious treasure. However, the prayer that I recited each day gradually began to change my bleak mood: God, you created the soul … that you breathed into me. You return it to me each day after my night of sleep. Someday you will take it back from me. As long as I have breath, I shall thank and praise you.

My mind and heart are locked into that prayer. I meditated long and hard and recalled many memories, good and happy. The insight, simple but yet profound, came to me that life is indeed a gift to which I am not entitled and for which I should be profoundly grateful, and I should respond by making every moment an opportunity for achievement, for paying back as a partner with God and creation.