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

page: 7
89
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   
I have mixed emotion's about chemo.........

A few weeks before my daughter's 7th birthday she became unwell...it persisted and I insisted my doctor's did something as they were useless ( that's another story)

She deteriorated quickly that same day and It was discovered that her bone marrow contained 95% blast cells...so only 5% healthy cells. It was so far advanced that they were spilling out into her bloodstream and it was likely they would spread to other part's of her body.
She was in a bad way and they wanted to commence chemo the next day after they had stabilized her. I didn't have time to research it and thinking about it wasn't a consideration....without the induction chemo she would have died in a matter of day's or couple of weeks tops!

In the 1960's the diagnosis of Acute Lymphoblastic Leukaemia would have been almost a death sentence for her with less than 10% of children surviving past 5 year's.....now with better treatment it's 80% +

It is coming upto 5 year's in May since she was diagnosed and I have no doubt the chemo gave her a fighting chance.

The only gripe I have is that when doctor's relayed the side effects of treatment to me they only quoted the obvious like hair loss...nausea... greater risk of infection etc.
As it turned out she had several rarer reaction's including methatrexate induced neurotoxicity ( which is a chemo drug injected into the spine and basically the toxin flooded her brain ) The first we heard of the more rarer or serious complication's was when she actually presented with them

It's been a little over 2 year's since her cancer treatment finished...her treatment lasted for 2 and half year's and she is now 11 year's. For the last couple of year's life as been nothing short of hell for her...she suffers from panic attack's and generalized anxiety disorder and other mental illness and it affect's her life 24/7.

While I accept some of this is probably down to the experience she went through and thus is psychological, I really am convinced that some of it is physiological. But considering that not enough studies have been done about it it's hard to pin down.Although doing my own research there does seem to be some information showing a possible link.
So my daughter is left coping with this every day and it feel's almost like okay yes we have saved your daughters life, treatment's finished, we aren't even sure ourselves what all of the long term side effects for all children may be...so just get on with it!

I am very very grateful my precious daughter is here, more so than I could convey on here in word's.......but I feel let down.

I was once told by somebody that I was very selfish for not just being happy she was alive, that that should be enough....But I am like every other loving parent...it's not enough, I want my child to be healthy and happy! And I think I deserve answers...but more to the point I think SHE does's! As a small child she put her faith in me and the doctor's and endured everything that was asked of her....and now I feel they have just left her high and dry!

Incase anyone wonders...yes she does get "supposed" help from CAMHS ( children and adolescent mental health services) but they are useless and agin that is another story.

I want to end by saying...to those who have lost loved one's to cancer I am sorry if this sound's selfish....and very importantly I would never dissuade anyone from getting the treatment they were advised to take...the bottom line is it saved my daughters life and I would never have any argument about that...my gripe is with after care and studies on side effect's and support for cancer survivor's.




posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful
Interesting read.

My father had prostrate cancer. He was not getting himself check out, so by the time the symptoms were present, he was on the scale of a 7 (1 to 3 they treat with drugs, 4 to 6 drugs and therapy, 7 to 10 requires removal of the prostrate followed by radiation and kemo).

Prior to the surgery, he was very robust, energetic and just full of life at 67. The surgery was tramatic enough, but after the radiation and kemo was done (and they declared him cancer free because his PSA was less than 0.33), it was like they had aged him by 20 years.
He was a shell of the man I knew, and this happened in less than 6 months.

Then 4 years later, he developed stomach cancer. By the time they knew that is what it was, they had to go in and remove 2/3 of his stomach and put him back on the treatments.

Ten months later he was dead at 72.


My father had prostate cancer too and we are pretty sure the treatment caused him to get lymphoma five years later. He got chemo for the lymphoma and is now 100% free of any cancer.

I'm pretty sure there are studies that although chemo can kill cancers, it can also cause other cancers. IMO, it is a hit or miss treatment, some are luckier than others.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 09:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Chai_An
 


No one denies that chemo is bad for you and is high risk.

And no one forces anyone to undergo chemotherapy, so what's the problem?

Fact is, you stick any sort of cancer in a petri dish and hit it with chemo, it will be destroyed.

Can your alternative methods do this?


You're not being truthful about people not being forced into chemo. I know of an individual who was literally forced and this young man has been battling cancer (or should I say the treatments) for a decade. People are forced into chemo, radiation, and surgery because their doctors tell them these are effective (and the only) treatments, so where's choice? Battery acid will destroy cancer too but do I want it in me? NO. Don't get me wrong anyone who want chemo I say to them have chemo. I'm about choice something traditional medicine tend to discourage.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 09:14 PM
link   
reply to post by tide88
 




IMO, it is a hit or miss treatment, some are luckier than others.


That's the whole point of this study.

They've identified a protein that can accelerate cancer regrowth after chemo, it's only in certain areas in the body though, see more detailed explanation HERE.

Armed with this knowledge, chemotherapy can be less hit and miss.

It's a shame that the majority here can't see the forest from the trees.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 09:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by eXia7
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.


Well, it sounds like you know what your instincts are telling you. It's what many of us know, which is that "burning" and ruining our immune system should really never be the an option.

More and more we're finding examples and proof of what our instincts have been telling us all along. The answers are available, if people can simply look outside the box and give their body a fighting chance to do what it has always been designed to do. Bring us back into balance, naturally



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 10:05 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


High doses of "Lipo C" + D, in a vitamin-mineral nutrient "potion" including anything to fire up the glands and kick the endocrine system into super high gear, combined with exercise, vibrantly colored foods, a positive outlook and lots of laughter - if anything that, not CHEMO is going to cure or overcome cancer. The body itself is miraculous healing machine and the spirit even more powerful.

It's nuts the way these kinds of things are approached and centuries from now people will be astonished at what the cancer patient of the 20th and early 21st century was subjected to..



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 10:27 PM
link   
This seems like it could be promising


Quadruple helix DNA find key to cancer cure?



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:24 PM
link   
I've pretty much decided 3 things regarding health/nutrition posts on ATS:

1. Naturalnews should be all but outlawed as a source.

2. Sources should only be directly from medical journals.

3. A subject matter expert who a) actively contributes and b) can moderate actual discussion from anecdotes and c) understands medical terminology at its basis should oversee the B.S. that plagues this forum.

Back on topic: Does chemo accelerate cancer/tumor growth? Depends on the dosage. It also depends on the tyoe of cancer and where it occurs. For the most part, chemo os destructive, not anabolic. Certain cancers in certain spots can elicit a gowth response. But it doesn't necessarily mean cancerous and it certainly doesn't mean chemo causes cancer.

Natural news is absolute horse manure. And sensationalism shouldn't be tolerated on ATS.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Chadwickus
reply to post by Chai_An
 


No one denies that chemo is bad for you and is high risk.

And no one forces anyone to undergo chemotherapy, so what's the problem?

Fact is, you stick any sort of cancer in a petri dish and hit it with chemo, it will be destroyed.

Can your alternative methods do this?


You can put just about anything into a petri dish and kill it just about any way. This proves nothing about a drug you stick in someone's veins that they then seem to react to less than benignly. If someone wants to give me nausea, hair loss, extreme weakness, neurological damage, full body cell damage, etc., they have to have some pretty good reasons rising above, 'It works in a petri dish'.

As someone who is now waiting on a biopsy result for possible breast cancer, this all hits too close to home. I'll be willing to listen to the allopathic docs when they're willing to listen to the possible cures with marijuana, etc.

In the meantime, I'm thinking massive doses of Vitamin C, D and E along with vegetable juice feasts and a ketogenic diet. Oh, and as much hash oil as I can grow. # the feds, this is war.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   
reply to post by NeoVain
 


Makes sense to me! I never understood how people could think that lowering the body's ability to fight off disease was supposed to be a good thing. Plus, since they can't state what causes the cancers in the first place, pumping people full of chemicals doesn't seem logical, or even prudent. I wonder how long before the medical profession admits to this.



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Thank you for this! I've read ATS for a few years but this thread encouraged me to join!

My mother was diagnosed with cervical cancer in mid 2004. "One of the most treatable cancers" we were told. Radiation every day for weeks on end, and chemo (1st cycle). By Christmas that year she was almost herself again. All that remained were the ostomy tubes/drainage bags that they placed (temporarily stitched in...basically open x in skin and tube, gauze & tape to hold in place) in to her kidneys because radiation could "perforate her bladder."

March 2005 rolled around and she went for a check up. Cancer the lymph nodes (neck) and cervical cancer raging. Aggressive chemo followed, and by the end of April she was a walking skeleton and the the skin where her drainage tubes were inserted was falling off in huge chunks.

Her doctor refused to even see her anymore after April, and instead sent hospice out without warning, and we were advised not to take her to the hospital for any reason. She passed away 2 agonizing months later. She was 49lbs the day before when hospice came and weighed her.

Just wanted to share my story. Maybe it wasn't the chemo that did her in, but you'll never convince me otherwise!



posted on Jan, 25 2013 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by woogleuk

Originally posted by marg6043

One of the worst side effects from chemo is when the body starts to waste away, after treatment is over and the cancer is "cure or go into recession" the body can not recover from the radiation and starts to waste away.


Chemotherapy is not radioactive, that is radiotherapy.

I know lots of people who have been cleared after chemo, either on its own or with radiotherapy.

Yes, it takes its toll on the body, but the alternative is gonna be much worse.



cure cancer through nature...
many ways to cure cancer naturally...
only nature can heal the Human body.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:05 AM
link   
reply to post by signalfire
 


You missed my point.

If these alternative methods are so efficient, where are the petri dish tests to prove their effectiveness?



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Chadwickus
 


Because there's no money in marijuana or Vitamin C or other nonpoisonous forms of treatment. They can't be patented and are called 'orphan drugs' if they are acknowledged at all. Our entire culture depends on profit to determine 'worth' as if money were the determining factor of utility.

The way that the US government is doing everything in its power to demonize simple god-given plants is more than enough proof for me that they don't want us to think for ourselves, or experiment outside of the boxes we are put in; god forbid you should get high once in your life on something besides their approved alcohol and cigarette poisons and find out that there is a totally different way of looking at things, outside of their suits, ties and poisonous florescent lights. (Yes, those lights they had us all under for 7 hours a day, 5 days a week at school were poisonous too, neurotoxic...).

As to why marijuana, etc. hasn't been tried on petri dish cancers, I believe it has. Even better, there is far more than anecdotal evidence now that it has even cured people who have already gone the chemo/rad route and were considered terminal. There are Harvard-educated docs now siding with the marijuana cures; take a look around the web, there's a lot of info out there but the MSM as a wholly-owned lackey of the government won't tell you about it.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by yorkshirelad

Originally posted by marg6043
One of the worst side effects from chemo is when the body starts to waste away, after treatment is over and the cancer is "cure or go into recession" the body can not recover from the radiation and starts to waste away.

Eh? What are you talking about. Chemotherapy is the use of a cocktail of drugs which target fast growing cells (hence hair loss). Radiotherapy is the use of radiation. Chemo has side effects like the suppression of the immune system so you must avoid situations where you come into contact with even mild illness. You can be guaranteed some chemo patients are just too stubborn to avoid the grandkids!


Gee. toxic poisons? Or grandkids?
Wait let me think about it....LOL



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by CX
 


I had a very similar experience to your girlfriend's. Tumor the size of a grapefruit in my chest (in an inoperable area, so they couldn't remove it), and a couple more the size of lemons and things like that. Six months of chemotherapy and a month of radiation. Its seven years of remission for me at the start of March.

Chemo and radiation are not for everyone, and they have vastly different success rates depending on the type/severity of the cancer. Prostate cancers have always been tricky, but something like Hodgkin's Lymphoma responds very well, but the treatment is brutal. Actually brutal is an understatement. It was one of the most awful things I've ever been through in my life. I was in a drugged haze the entire time. I couldn't drink water during the week I was undergoing treatment so I was always thirsty (a side effect would be that I'd throw up even drinking the smallest amount). The shots they gave me to make my blood cells stay at a consistent (really livable) level made every part of my body hurt that wasn't already hurting. I missed an entire year of school (diagnosed at 14). Even seven years out I still have to see my oncologist every six months. I'm quickly approaching the point to where I have to worry about secondary cancers (primarily breast and leukemia).

But would I do it again? I honestly don't know. On one hand it was beyond brutal, but on the other hand I'm alive today (I wouldn't have been a year after diagnosis). Regardless, its not a decision to make lightly. Actually research what you are doing and get a second (or even third or fourth) opinion before you start treatments (whatever they may be). Its only in very rare situations that waiting a week will make a huge difference. I live with the effects of my treatments every day, but treatment for what I had has also changed drastically. Radiation is now not commonly used in situations similar to mine because it hasn't proven to be effective when used after chemo. Treatments are constantly changing, which is why its important to visit multiple doctors. At the end of the day, though, the decision is really yours and yours alone (unless you're a minor like I was, which a whole other topic), so don't waste it or make it on a whim.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 12:56 AM
link   

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)



This shouldn't surprise anyone. Confoosius say, "If you want to live, don't see a doctor." Unless, of course, the doctor happens to be the Great Physician.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:06 AM
link   
Such blanket misinformation. No science is so black and white. Chemo certainly does work for many people. I should know.. my mother with breast cancer, had chemo.. and it kept her alive. But when my abusive step father took her after 2 years of chemo (and improvement), running towards Canada as he was wanted in the U.S., she died from lack of chemo within a few months. If she had been able to continue treatment, she might have lived.

Stuff your ignorant theories.. I get so sick of the know-it-all attitudes around here, because you read it on an obviously biased website. Chemo have been proven to work time and again. Right for everyone? Perhaps not. But there are tons of success stories from people with chemo. Had my mom been able to continue, she'd probably have been alive today. The lack of chemo is what killed her.



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:08 AM
link   
It would amaze you how many times your own body gets rid of cancer..cant remember where i read it but just about everyone gets some type of cancer that their body kills, before we actually die you could have had cancer several times throughout your lifetime



posted on Jan, 26 2013 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by vkey08
Now they tell me..


Well I'm kinda glad I decided to forgo it this round.. and I do feel better.. so maybe..


My mother chose a chemo alternative called Rituxan and she's had terrific results. No hair loss, so vomiting, she's was a bit tired the day following her treatments, which I took her too and monitored every session, something you might want to consider. (My Mom chose Rituxan due to her age if you are wondering why she chose an alternative)





new topics
top topics
 
89
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join