Does chemo work?

Posted: 17/05/2012 by zandtao in Big Pharma
Tags: ,

People fear cancer, the Big C. Whilst they are mostly afraid because they will die, the other that they fear is the treatment. Working on the usual practise that what happens in the US happens elsewhere in the western world at some stage, we have the FDA regs which say that there are three treatments for cancer – operation, radiation therapy and chemotherapy (as described in Forbidden Cures). When we hear in the movie that alternative “natural” treatments, all of which have testimony of healing success, are rejected, there is a natural assumption that the accepted treatments have a proven track record. This is not true so the hell that cancer sufferers go through, such as Farrah Fawcett and these kids in this heartrending clip has no sound basis.

Here Natural News discusses how the scientific evidence for the use of radiation and chemo doesn’t stand up to scientific scrutiny. Even with the evidence chemo is frightening, without it should people go through this?

The movie “Healing Cancer from the Inside Out” discusses the absurdity of the position that chemo heals, in this short clip from the movie statistics of the failures are included:-

Throughout my repeated discussions on cancer I make no claims to be an expert. Whilst I believe in the alternative natural nutritional treatments I promote I cannot say they work – both because I don’t know for sure and because if I did it would leave me open to legal redress. But what is undoubtedly true is that there needs to be scientific testing on these traditional approaches. Based on my research and personal experience of natural healing I would have no hesitation in recommending such approaches, approaches that do not entail the suffering of Farrah and others.

  1. innerquests says:

    It would take a very brave person to go against medical advice if they have cancer. The medical profession provides the only support structure available to most people in these circumstances and the logical assumption is that since doctors have the training they must know better than people who don’t have that training. However if it is correct that the success of conventional treatment is as limited as you suggest then it makes sense to look seriously at alternative therapies. Have any studies been done that compare the success rates of conventional and alternative therapies?

    • zandtao says:

      If you checkout the cancer stuff that is on my blog, watch the films etc., you will see a US bias but they support what I am saying – that is all I can speak of. The FDA refuses to get involved with testing the alternative treatments although all the different treatments have testimony and keep evidence. Spokespeople for the different treatments say the FDA refuses to sanction research, and say that the big bucks of the cancer industry are behind the suppression. The GERD I had could have become cancerous but good nutrition healed it, that is evidence for me. Eating healthily is like meditation, you cannot see the benefits unless you try it – and then you don’t understand why others die from degenerative diseases or continue to live in the misery of their own degenerative disease.

      Did you read the lament in the previous blog?

      I have no idea why intelligent people are not eating healthily. In my own case I was ready to make the change but needed wake-up call by visiting a nutritionist.

      If you are serious pick any of the videos that I have uploaded on the posts and movies page and watch them. The Zandtao healing plan on my health pagecould be a roadmap, but find out for yourself. There is so much truth out there about nutritional healing, you just have to want to look.

      In the end you need the information to tell the doctors, who are only trained in pills, that nutrition is enough. Conviction comes with the research.

  2. billzant says:

    “However if it is correct that the success of conventional treatment is as limited as you suggest then it makes sense to look seriously at alternative therapies. Have any studies been done that compare the success rates of conventional and alternative therapies?”

    Gavin, inherent in the above sentences is the paradigmatic error concerning health that BigFood and BigPharma have fostered. Because people can never be convinced about the problems with our exploitative health system unless they investigate for themselves, I think it is better you research for yourself although of course I would help where I can. But please excuse a prod in the direction of this paradigm. Historically healing has been considered from two positions. Initially we healed ourselves with the help of food and herbs – homeopathic treatment, and more recently, maybe 200 years, allopathic treatment; this can be rephrased as helping the body heal itself or chucking pills and operations at the problem. Last century allopathic treatment took over and there is direct evidence of the 1% involvement in this process (taken from Forbidden Cures – download here). What you are calling alternative therapies are actually these earlier forms of healing, and these forms of healing were sidelined by BigPharma.

    Integral to the body healing itself is the belief in Nature religions that Nature looks after itself and provides the answers. With our bodies I have found this is particularly true. Our bodies regenerate every 7 years, and what builds that regeneration is the food we eat. So when they say you are what you eat, it is literal. If we eat a natural diet (no processed foods), we allow Nature to do its work. If we eat processed foods then we are putting toxins in our systems that then exhibit as disease such as cancer, diabetes, heart disease and other degenerative diseases. If we accept the Nature Health paradigm then it is not treatment we are following but just living in harmony with Nature.

    As I said in my last comment I was lucky to have recognised this Nature Health paradigm in curing GERD – just an uncomfortable condition that need not get serious. But because I have followed this Natural eating for nearly 6 years I would now have the confidence to flee any system doctor promoting radiation or chemo if I was diagnosed with cancer – something I think very unlikely because of my diet; 6 years ago I might not. I therefore recommend to anyone – very strongly, make the change before it is life or death ie diagnosed cancer.

  3. zandtao says:

    Some more info on chemo.

    First I got this from Natural News, and here is Dean Ornish at TED, scientifcally respectable.

  4. zandtao says:

    Previously I have offered evidence as to how effective natural cures might be. Here is a Mercola article about how unreliable (falsified) established medical evidence is:-

  5. naivelysageg says:

    Mercola’s article is interesting. As I was reading:

    Data falsification or fabrication
    Questionable veracity
    Unethical author conduct

    I was thinking about how Blair and Bush had lied us into the Iraq war and how unscrupulous people who present themselves as professional in politics, medicine, journalism, banking have been shown to be time after time and still the get the consent of the majority of people.

    The comments on the article are also interesting.

    • zandtao says:

      Yes, there are a lot of people who reject the medical establishment. As with all such things we never get to hear about it unless an acquaintance does it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.