We often hear about all sorts of promising treatments being found by the cancer researchers.  There always seems to be a new one right around the corner.  There is a constant parade of them, many touted as new breakthroughs in treatment.  This could be considered progress.  It is their job to find new treatments for cancer.  This is how things should work.

But there is something that does not seem right about the way that things are working.  Although there is a lot of research being conducted on cancer, there seems to be some problems with the way that it is being done.  There may be numerous projects being researched, but there are some things about the direction and focus of the research that disturbs me.  In some ways, it is understandable and logical.  But from a more expansive perspective, it would appear to be misguided.

The bulk of research being conducted on cancer is related to chemotherapy drugs and radiation. There is virtually no “official” research being done on any other methods of treatment outside of chemotherapy drugs and radiation.  Unfortunately, chemotherapy drugs are already known to be extremely toxic to the body.  In fact, chemotherapy drugs and radiation are proven to have cancer as side-effects!  There is a strangely ironic that an effective treatment for cancer would be known to cause cancer.  I am very curious about how the details of this work.  But on its face, it just doesn’t make sense to me.

In my research, I found that the theory behind chemotherapy drugs came from chemical warfare weapons.  The prototype chemotherapy drug, mustine, is a chemical from the nitrogen mustard chemical family.   The way that mustard gas type chemicals were discovered is very illuminating.  During World War 2, during a military operation,  some people were accidentally poisoned by mustard gas.  Later on, they were found to have extremely low white blood cell levels.  Researchers reasoned that if these chemicals could stop the growth of rapidly-growing white blood cells, they may have an effect on rapidly-growing cancer cells.  Some experiments using these chemicals were conducted in the 1940′s and they were found to have limited, temporary beneficial effects.  On this basis, the entire chemotherapy industry was founded. It turned out to become a multi-billion dollar industry.

Another very interesting tidbit of information that I found is that in numerous surveys, oncologists have reported that they would not recommend chemotherapy for their family members, nor undergo chemotherapy treatments themselves if they were diagnosed with cancer.  What does it say about the efficacy and safety of chemotherapy when the people administering it would not take it if they were faced with a cancer diagnosis?  I don’t find that to be a glowing endorsement.