Study accidentally exposes chemotherapy as fraud - tumors grow faster after chemo!

reply to post by happykat39


First I'm sorry about you're loss, second I wholeheartedly agree with you're opinion of Dr. Burzynski.

I've watched many documentaries and read the countless recommendations and praises of current/former patients of Dr. Burzynski. I without a doubt know he's found a way to cure cancer. The way the FDA has come after Dr. Burzynski and repeatedly tried to sabotage his work, tells us something. I can tell you if myself or one of my family members is ever diagnosed with any form of cancer, I will go straight to The Burzynski Clinic.

Regarding Chemo, I realize that when a situation of cancer arises in a family, they are devastated, sometimes to the point of not thinking clearly. Of course most solely rely on the Doctor they are referred too and believe everything they say about Chemotherapy and Radiation treatment without researching other options. So I can understand why so many are using this poison, because they TRUST their doctor. very very sad!

reply to post by NeoVain

Study accidentally exposes chemotherapy as fraud - tumors grow faster after chemo!

Only in some cases.

Perhaps you should read the paper before making such spurious claims?

reply to post by Chadwickus

Spurious? I think not...

Crump, who died of pancreatic cancer last September at age 55, was one of thousands of health care workers who were chronically exposed to chemotherapy agents on the job for years before there were any safety guidelines in place. Now, some of those workers, like Crump, are being diagnosed with cancers that occupational health specialists say could be linked to that exposure.

Source: MSBN

And yes they are careful to use the word "might" instead of "does" but hey, who knows? Those who do aren't saying but I'll tale my chances without a derivative of Mustard Gas thanks.

reply to post by LightSpeedDriver


Uhhh...

She was chronically exposed for years.

Absolutely nothing to do with regular chemotherapy.

reply to post by Chadwickus

OK, try this. My Dad with lung cancer developed a second (albeit non life-threatening and slower growing than the one in his lung) tumour immediately after beginning chemo treatment. The Doctors had no idea where it came from, but I did.

ETA: No idea how long after starting the treatment but he lasted less than 2 years after initial diagnosis and treatments.

I always figured radiation caused cancer, I always thought it was counter-intuitive to use cancer causing radiation to treat cancer.

But what do I know.

reply to post by yorkshirelad

So as they tune chemo ever more year after year and the cancer survival rates increase year after year its just down to what exactly? Global warming? Number of naturalnews posts on ATS ?

Come on please tell us why cancer survival has gone up if chemo makes it worse.

If you want to place your faith in the statistics being meted out to the public regarding chemo and mortality/survival rates among cancer victims, that is of course, your choice. However, don't expect everyone to place the same faith in those figures you do. I, for one, do not not buy into what I consider to be shear propaganda, and outright lies.

reply to post by Klassified


Instead, you'd rather believe what the BS artist known as Mike Adams tells you?

Did you read the paper to make your own mind up?

lol what the hell chemotherapy is not a fraud.

Its actual science, learn how it works first before bashing on it.

Man, its like hate on medical science = hero on ATS.

Chemotherapy is neither good or bad, it simply destroys reproducing cells(good and the bad ones), the goal of the chemotherapy is to find a balance where the damage to bad cells are higher than good cells.

Some people fail because of their immunity, age and overall health.

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Klassified

 

Instead, you'd rather believe what the BS artist known as Mike Adams tells you?

Did you read the paper to make your own mind up?

Star and for the best, and most important question you could have asked imo.

I've watched many folks I know die of cancer. From very close family members, to friends and aquaintances. Because of that, I've read more than I care to ever read again on the subject. But yes, I read it, and I don't put any more stock in what he says than I do the Medical mainstream, and big pharma. I might lean more toward his conclusions from my own observations, but I can't trust his data any more than anyone elses.

I made my own mind up long ago on this subject. The medical industry won't be putting me through the hell they put my dad through. They can keep their poisons, and their "treatments" to themselves.

Natural News...?! This site is always printing crap like this. Ill believe it more if a real science journal picks it up.

My fiance had chemo and radiation as a teenager. Oh look, she's still here, and the only medical problem she's had because of it is that her teeth have slowly been destroyed, because the tumor was in her neck. Chemo saved her life, and I'm glad she went through it.

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Natural News...?! This site is always printing crap like this. Ill believe it more if a real science journal picks it up.

Why would a "real" medical science journal pick something like this up, even if they knew it was true? Especially considering one of the biggest funding sources in the medical industry is big pharma. Best not to bite the hand that feeds you. IMHO.

Originally posted by NeoVain

Study accidentally exposes chemotherapy as fraud - tumors grow faster after chemo!

www.naturalnews.com

(NaturalNews) A team of researchers from Washington state had a giant "Oops!" moment recently when it accidentally uncovered the deadly truth about chemotherapy while investigating why prostate cancer cells are so difficult to eradicate using conventional treatment methods. As it turns out, chemotherapy does not actually treat or cure cancer at all, according to the study's findings, but rather fuels the growth and spread of cancer cells, making them much harder to stamp out once chemotherapy has already been initiated.

(visit the link for the full news article)

I've had personal experience with the questionable mainstream treatments to cancer, including chemo.

My ex-girlfriend had a grandmother whom she really loved. We'd visit her often, and though she was old she was lively and her mind was agile. You would never be under the impression that she was in any way afflicted with some sort of disease.

Then one day she announced that she went to the doctor and they told her she had some sort of cancer (can't remember the precise one). It had been present in her body for a long time, and so they were going to have to take drastic measures.

Within the space of ONE MONTH, she went from being a robust and lively person to totally feeble and incoherent person who could barely walk and would hallucinate. I couldn't help but think that only a week before this announcement had been made we were at her house for a BBQ and she was totally normal. Now she was unable to even walk to the bathroom by herself.

Only about 5 weeks after this treatment, she was dead.

What is even more bizarre is that NO ONE in her family thought this was odd. The doctors had announced that the cancer had been present for a long time, which was the justification for the advanced measures they took to combat it, and yet she had shown NO symptoms whatsoever of being sick before the "treatment" was administered.

Then immediately after the treatment is administered, she becomes extremely sick.

Please someone else out there tell me you have a brain and can put 2 and 2 together on this.

reply to post by Klassified


Honestly the idea that all doctors and medical journals are secretly trying to kill us all for money is slightly paranoid thinking. I think if there is a real breakthrough in understanding then it will get reported on and studied. Lets hope im not wrong on that.

reply to post by PhoenixOD

Ill believe it more if a real science journal picks it up.

Well that's the thing here, it is a peer reviewed article published in Nature Medicine.

It's morons like Mike Adams who take an article like this and twist it into something completely different.

Anyway, I'll do what he didn't and provide a link to the paper:

www.ayurvedicpoint.it...

It's difficult to read and understand for us Layman's but we have a nice summary written by one of the principal authors, Peter S. Nelson:

www.eurekalert.org...

Cancer therapies are increasingly evolving to be very specific, targeting key molecular engines that drive the cancer rather than more generic vulnerabilities, such as damaging DNA. Our findings indicate that the tumor microenvironment also can influence the success or failure of these more precise therapies." In other words, the same cancer cell, when exposed to different "neighborhoods," may have very different responses to treatment.

reply to post by Chadwickus


Thanks for the links

Ok ive read a bit more into this and it seems its not chemo as a whole that is bad its the dosage!! They are reporting very large doses may be bad. So the title of the OP is wrong and misleading,.

The extremely aggressive therapy, which kills both cancerous and healthy cells indiscriminately, can cause healthy cells to secrete a protein that sustains tumor growth and resistance to further treatment.

and

"Alternatively, it may be possible to use smaller, less toxic doses of therapy."

So not all Chemo just "extremely aggressive" types. Already i see people in this thread saying they are thinking twice about doing chemo. This is very dangerous.

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
reply to post by Klassified

 

Honestly the idea that all doctors and medical journals are secretly trying to kill us all for money is slightly paranoid thinking. I think if there is a real breakthrough in understanding then it will get reported on and studied. Lets hope im not wrong on that.

Please try not to make strawman arguments, NO ONE here is arguing that "all doctors and medical journals are secretly trying to kill us all for money".

There is no reason whatsoever to assume a massive doctor conspiracy, that is clearly unreasonable. Doctors are just doing their job, following orders and getting their paychecks, just like everyone else.

The people at fault are generally people at the top of corporations and their lawyers, and those people aren't even "secretly conspiring to kill everyone". They are simply making money, and they do not have to personally experience the effects of their actions so the consequences do not concern them.

reply to post by PhoenixOD

Honestly the idea that all doctors and medical journals are secretly trying to kill us all for money is slightly paranoid thinking.

I would agree with this statement the way it is phrased. Which is why I didn't say that. If they want to kill us all, they can do that whenever they want. Of course, their money wouldn't have much value then, would it?

Maybe this is why Willson didn't beat his cancer in the TV series House. He gave himself massive amounts of chemotherapy.