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

page: 5
89
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 

Hypothetically, if cancer is caused by a common fungus invading damaged cells...
...and the biological.response to this.infection...
...then surgery would make some sense but Chemo would just be damaging more cells for the fungus to invade.




posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:10 PM
link   
reply to post by Klassified
 


There was a doctor in our town that got cancer of the liver and rather than go through the trauma that he himself witnessed many of his patients go through, rejected any treatment and went home to his family to live out the remainder of his days. I don't know how much longer he lived but it eventually took him I was told. I am not saying that Chemo would have saved him or not, but that he chose to die on his own terms rather than what he witnessed around him.

I also have a close friend that has liver cancer and is pretty miserable as I speak.
He is on Chemo treatment and other pain killers.
Half of his liver is gone. I give him pep talks and talk about the good memories we share.
I wish I could help him but it is what it is.
edit on 25-1-2013 by jacobe001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse
The biggest thing is to find why cancer is increasing so much. When I was young there wasn't that much cancer. People died of heart attacks a lot and food poisoning of many kinds killed people. Now the chemicals they put into food to stop food poisoning and the new chemical methods of preservation of food are weakening people. This is giving the cancers a chance to grow. We are also eating foods that we are not accustomed to eat and this confuses the immune system.


Not to mention, all the nuclear testing they did in the past that we could be paying for now.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by NeoVain

Originally posted by Night Star
I had two kinds of breast cancer, one was agressive. I had a tiny hard lump and a much bigger mass. Had chemo before and after surgery which shrunk the mass down to nothing or almost nothing, and then radiation.

I am now cancer free.


How long ago was this? less than 4 years ago?

From what i understand, the problem with Chemo is that the cancer, even if "cured" by it, will resurface a few years later only this time, it will be more resistant to further treatments as well as be more agressive/faster spreading.

Thats basically what the article in my OP says, anyway. That is the the purpose of the entire thread.


Shows how much you understand then


Jeez do you enjoy just scaring people or something??

The article in the OP is inaccurate its taken from a more accurate article that says if you use extremely aggressive chemo in some cases it can cause cancer to produce a hormone that with make it harder to get rid of. Try to read beyond the original claims and look into the facts before commenting.




edit on 25-1-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Labrat3162
It doesn't matter whether you belive it or not. What I said above is *FACT*

Survival rates have increased because we diagnose more and more cellular dysfunctions as cancer and treat whether treatment is necessary or not.

96% of all cases of all cancers are self limiting. We just don't tell YOU guys that. We want your business.



I have also heard of cases of people being diagnosed with cancer and refusing treatment, and resigning themselves to death. They went traveling around the country and going to places they had never been.
A year later, the cancer was gone.

The biggest change in that scenario is their lifestyle, eating habits and attitude changed.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:35 PM
link   
Natural News has a habit of posting nonsense, as long as the nonsense vindicates thier position. That being, that they do not like science, medicine, or the use of intelligence to solve the problems of man.

Regarding the chemotherapy issue, my friends mother was very seriously unwell with bowel cancer for some time. The treatment plan included chemotherapy, and she was clearer than a freshly buffed window, all inside of a year. From numerous growths, to zero evidence of thier presence, inside a twelve month period. Now, its a few years on, and regular check ups, I am told, are made to ensure the continued lack of cause for concern.

Now, prostate cancer may be bloody tricky, but that is likely because of the unique problems of dealing with that particular illness.

Also, the report in the OP does not seem to take into account the enormous improvements made, and being made, in the field of radiation treatments. The machinery is being made even more accurate all the time, reducing risk, and increasing the saftey of all proceedures.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by happykat39

Originally posted by RandyBragg

Originally posted by NeoVain

Originally posted by Night Star
I had two kinds of breast cancer, one was agressive. I had a tiny hard lump and a much bigger mass. Had chemo before and after surgery which shrunk the mass down to nothing or almost nothing, and then radiation.

I am now cancer free.


How long ago was this? less than 4 years ago?

From what i understand, the problem with Chemo is that the cancer, even if "cured" by it, will resurface a few years later only this time, it will be more resistant to further treatments as well as be more agressive/faster spreading.

Thats basically what the article in my OP says, anyway. That is the the purpose of the entire thread.


Not really, to be "cured" you have to be cancer free for an extended period of time.


That is how it was with my second wife. She was cancer free for almost four years after surgery, chemo and radiation before it came back with a vengeance. When that happens it is almost always worse the second time around as the surviving cancer cells, like germs that survived antibiotics, are more able to resist treatment.


That is how it works, that is why they say you are not "cured" until you have been cancer free for 5 years.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:37 PM
link   
Oh God. People, please don't get your medical recommendations from ATS. PLEEZE.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
reply to post by RandyBragg
 


It took my father cancer to come back 13 year later. He was never told that he was cured after treatment just that his cancer was in recession.



Im not even going to say what is wrong with what you just said...



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:45 PM
link   
tell me something I didn't already know... there's a lot of natural remedies that people don't know such as the sour sop.. it more effective then chemo by 10000 times and it s fruit that is grown in the mid tropics of the Americas and the famous THC that works up to 5000 times better curing cancer and it does not damage any of the good living tissues. people its 2013 time to do your own research into things like this there's so much information out there that people can find for free and cure things such as cancer.. if I had more posts I would show some very interesting articles..



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 04:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by BellaSabre
Oh God. People, please don't get your medical recommendations from ATS. PLEEZE.


Agreed. Getting it from many sources would be best. Getting opinions from the Medical Establishment alone would not be wise either. Everyone has an axe to grind. Big Pharma and the Medical Establishment are business that exist on profits and the money they bring to their shareholders, and not on goodwill alone.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:06 PM
link   
Something I've always suspected and my mom knew. She died a few years ago from cancer, after going into remission once from it. She was cancer free after her first bout for more than 4 years, and no chemo of any kind. She used homeopathic therapy. Around 4-5 years later after her remission, it came back, and the doctors practically insisted that it was because she had done homeopathic therapy that her remission didn't last. She finally gave in and had chemo treatments. Shortly after, she died, but before she did she told me she regretted ever doing chemo, insisted that it had shortened her life and chances to beat it. She believed it a 100%, and I believe the same.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:32 PM
link   
I am old enough to have known a few people who have fought the cancer battle. I have never seen anyone beat cancer without aggressive medical treatment.

I have seen a close friend refuse all treatment and choose to roll over and die, we buried him 6 months after the diagnosis. I also know somebody diagnosed with inoperable brain cancer 10 years ago who is cancer free today. He listened to his oncologist recommendations and even though the chemo sucked he wouldn't be alive had he refused it.

Steve Jobs certainly wished he had listened to his doctors sooner and openly regretted entertaining holistic and alternative treatments until it was too late for real medicine to have a chance.

I wonder how much life experience many of you blathering on about nonsense claims of quack medicine honestly have with this deadly serious disease?

Please think twice before offering "alternative" medical advice concerning life or death matters to strangers on an internet forum, especially discouraging MD ordered treatment regimes.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by BellaSabre
Oh God. People, please don't get your medical recommendations from ATS. PLEEZE.


Why not? Masks get torn off professional liars here, corruption and lies are highlighted and exposed for what they are, false compassion becomes unwoven to reveal the guile it was intended with, and people measure objectively here to uncover the truth instead of measuring by the measure of their own yardstick.

Hundreds of cures, preventatives, and advices on healthy living can be found here, but it all takes research and a willingness to forego the "current new issue" to dig up the info you need. Backed by supplementary material, you can also give yourself the equivelant of a quality university eduction on here if you are a dedicated individual
. Many doctors and officially qualified individuals also post here.

So why are you dissuading people from learning here again?

Onto the exposure; some people here really need a hard look back at the scope of the corporate interests, and their guiding intents/motivations. They should not still be trusted with any power over our health, aka Food or Drugs, but since they retain their power and people support them through a con game they can't see through or haven't the time or inclination to research objectively, they thrive with huge backing.

... allopathy inc (medical mafia)


Allopathy Inc is a covert Church. Allopathic Medicine is mostly based around patentable drugs (pharmaceutical medicine), with radiation and surgery. Administered by the 'Medical Profession' who are all medical doctors. These medical doctors that will only use the drug company products are called Allopaths, as opposed to the ones who use alternative medicine (non-Allopathic), such as nutrients. It is run by the Medical Mafia. One of the best kept secrets is the Allopathic medical monopoly. The merger of State with Corporate power is called Fascism, so this is medical Fascism.


www.whale.to...

... on chemotherapy genocide


Most cancer patients die of chemotherapy. Even when they know it does absolutely nothing except kill you quicker (see), they still dish it out (or send you to die in a hospice), and wouldn't dream of pointing you towards non-Allopathic medicine that could cure you, and without any side effects, like cancer, which you also can get also from their other drugs (1, 2, 3, 4), or from their racket called Mammography.


www.whale.to...

... on mammography (radiology treatment)


The only reason for this (Satanic Psychopathic) racket is to increase cancer levels through radiation (mammography and radiation therapy), increase cancer cases they can then treat (10 times what it should be,1 which also helps greatly with their 'cure' stats) by the perpetual cash machine called Cancer Inc, along with its seen to be doing something propaganda value, while they have suppressed dozens of cheap, non-toxic, fear removing real cures such as Hamer, Kelley, Gerson, Nichols, Zapper etc. and real, harmless, diagnostic tools such as Breast thermography and Electronic testing. They will continue poisoning, burning, mutilating and terrorising women (along with their families), while earning themselves a huge amount of (blood) money, forever, if they can get away with it. See: Depleted Uranium to see the Beast behind mammograms.


www.whale.to...




edit on 25-1-2013 by Northwarden because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by Drunkenparrot
I am old enough to have known a few people who have fought the cancer battle. I have never seen anyone beat cancer without aggressive medical treatment.

I have seen a close friend refuse all treatment and choose to roll over and die, we buried him 6 months after the diagnosis. I also know somebody diagnosed with inoperable brain cancer 10 years ago who is cancer free today. He listened to his oncologist recommendations and even though the chemo sucked he wouldn't be alive had he refused it.

Steve Jobs certainly wished he had listened to his doctors sooner and openly regretted entertaining holistic and alternative treatments until it was too late for real medicine to have a chance.

I wonder how much life experience many of you blathering on about nonsense claims of quack medicine honestly have with this deadly serious disease?

Please think twice before offering "alternative" medical advice concerning life or death matters to strangers on an internet forum, especially discouraging MD ordered treatment regimes.



A simple internet search reveals many people that went into remission without medical help.
I know a few people that died also after having been on chemo for a year as well.
Steve Jobs could have died anyways with the conventional therapy as well. We do not know. There are no guarantees either way.

When they throw a concoction of chemicals at you and you go into remission, do they take into account the success rate of the people that would have went into remission anyways? Do they know what chemical, lifestyle and attitude could have been responsible? Nope. Its all a crap shoot.
edit on 25-1-2013 by jacobe001 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:52 PM
link   
reply to post by Drunkenparrot
 


After seeing every single person i know that has had Chemo deteriorate rapidly and die an extremely painful, miserable death...and visiting the Cancer center at hospitals to watch people be experimented on and seeing the dark cloud around all the doctors working there, I really wonder if you know what you are talking about.

Cancer survivors are not up at all, those cancer centers are overflowing and the deaths more rapid than ever.

A one size-fits-all approach is taken , and no wonder everyone does not react the same.

Currently my co-worker is being treated again for cancer , they claimed it was gone last time but now say they missed it, it would seem they are incompetent to say the least. The treatment was surgery and radiation, now they gonna try Chemo, i wonder if she will be the first survivor I will have witnessed out of more than 50 people...
edit on 25-1-2013 by ParasuvO because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 05:54 PM
link   
The Amazing Randy is still in business debunking all types of conspiracy. Even chemotherapy. He has his own interesting take on the subject and he is a survivor. He has a few youtube videos out for a voice of reason regarding homeopathy verses chemotherapy. Mostly about the merits of chemotherapy and the stupidity of homeopathy.

Don't kill the messenger, I'm just trying to be enlightening. Chemotherapy isn't what it used to be. Check him out. I trust him more than most.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 06:07 PM
link   
reply to post by jacobe001
 



When they throw a concoction of chemicals at you and you go into remission, do they take into account the success rate of the people that would have went into remission anyways? Do they know what chemical, lifestyle and attitude could have been responsible? Nope. Its all a crap shoot.


You're speculating on their potential failure rate if nothing had been done via mainstream medicine. I think the actuality is, people who are ill, and realize it, will seek a viable alternative, not just accept it. Where's your speculation towards the likely outcome which is use of alternative cures and preventatives. Among them : nutrition and balanced diets, removal from cancerous influences, positive and supportive friend and family networks, naturopathy, faith healing, and anti-cancer recipes.

I don't have to speculate with what happens after chemo or radiation treatment, and I can decide from the 'fine print' alone which discusses the dangers involved.

(The laws of) Compensation
www.emersoncentral.com...


The same dualism underlies the nature and condition of man. Every excess causes a defect; every defect an excess. Every sweet hath its sour; every evil its good. Every faculty which is a receiver of pleasure has an equal penalty put on its abuse. It is to answer for its moderation with its life. For every grain of wit there is a grain of folly. For every thing you have missed, you have gained something else; and for every thing you gain, you lose something. If riches increase, they are increased that use them. If the gatherer gathers too much, nature takes out of the man what she puts into his chest; swells the estate, but kills the owner. Nature hates monopolies and exceptions. The waves of the sea do not more speedily seek a level from their loftiest tossing, than the varieties of condition tend to equalize themselves. There is always some levelling circumstance that puts down the overbearing, the strong, the rich, the fortunate, substantially on the same ground with all others.
edit on 25-1-2013 by Northwarden because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 06:22 PM
link   
Doesn't surprise me one bit. My sister in-law died of ovarian cancer. Her doctor even warned her that chemotherapy could kill her. She elected to have the chemotherapy and ended up going into a rapid decline. She became bedridden, was on a ventilator and was fed intravenously for 5 months. She eventually succumbed to the cancer.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 06:34 PM
link   
reply to post by Northwarden
 


Thanks for sharing that.
Yes, most people will seek any alternative that allows them to survive, especially when the mainstream solution is bleak as most people have personally witnessed.





new topics

top topics



 
89
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join