Alternative Cancer Treatment | Cancer Cure | Cancer Remedies

A study published this week in the medical journal Carcinogenesis shows that grape seed extract kills head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cells, while leaving healthy cells unharmed.  The grape seed extract (also known as proanthocyanidins and/or flavinoids)has been demonstrated to damage cancer cell DNA (by way of increasing reactive oxygen), as well as inhibiting the cancer cell’s ability to repair the damage. The best part is that the grape seed extract is not harmful to normal cells.  This is probably due to the fact that cancer cells are known to have a lot of deficient metabolic pathways that can be vulnerable to attack. Normal cells do not have most of these vulnerabilities.

Another study that was published in the January 1, 2009 issue of Clinical Cancer Research by researchers from the University of Kentucky found that an extract from grape seeds caused in vitro leukemia cells to commit suicide. continue reading…

Dr Samuel S. Epstein, a world-renowned professor emeritus of Environmental and Occupational Medicine from the University of Illinois School of Public Health, wrote a scathing indictment of the orthodox cancer establishment.  He has written over 250 peer-reviewed journal articles and 20 books on medical topics.  He is one of the world’s leading critics of the cancer establishment with his insightful, highly documented analysis of the cancer industry.

In short, Epstein’s book (entitled NATIONAL CANCER INSTITUTE and AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: Criminal Indifference to Cancer Prevention and Conflicts of Interest) states that the National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the American Cancer Society (ACS), as well as the cancer industry in general, are more focused on profits and maintaining the status quo of orthodox cancer treatments.  There has been no organizational focus on cancer prevention. This is one reason why cancer incidence rates have increased at an astronomical rate. continue reading…

I found an interesting article about how misleading cancer screening accuracy and statistics can be. The old saying is that there are lies, damned lies, and statistics.

The article says that Rudy Giuliani cited data comparing prostate cancer statistics from Britain versus those from the United States. The report said that in Britain, 44% of men diagnosed with prostate cancer were alive 5 years, and that in the US, about 81% of these men were alive 5 years later. He then concluded that the 5 year survival rate for prostate cancer in the US was about twice as high as that in England. continue reading…

The British Medical Journal, one of the most prestigious and recognized medical journals in the world, released a 20-year longitudinal study to assess the value of prostate cancer screening.  To make a long story short, the result of the study was the finding that the rate of death from prostate cancer was virtually identical for men whether or not they were screened for cancer.  The bottom line is that all of the hoopla over PSA testing, digital rectal exams, and the like, are all a bunch of hooey.  These tests are ineffective, and is likely being used to railroad a bunch of scared men into having dangerous, unnecessary prostate cancer treatments.

We already wrote about the questionable efficacy of conventional prostate cancer treatments.  We also wrote about how ‘watchful waiting’ was said to usually be a much better strategy for most men who are having prostate problems.  This is not to belittle the danger of rapidly metastasizing prostate cancers. But in most cases of benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH), the conventional treatments being bandied about have little benefit, but have a lot of very catastrophic side effects.

For whatever reason, most doctors are myopic when it comes to cancer treatment.  The patient should be as knowledgeable as possible about his health situation, and about the disease in question.  A physician can only give as much information as the patient is able to understand.  So if you do not know much about prostate cancer, the doctor will only be able to go as far as the limit on how much the patient can comprehend.  The more knowledge the patient has, the more that him and the doctor can discuss and craft a logical treatment strategy.

We must understand that many doctors resent the iron grip control over medical treatment that is exerted by the American Medical Association (AMA) and other regulatory agencies like the EPA, NIH, etc.  And we must not forget the powerful pharmaceutical drug companies interest in maintaining their dominance over medical treatment and medical education. Big Pharma companies finance a large portion of most accredited medical schools in the United States.  In this way, they determine the medical school curriculum for budding physicians.

This determines how they think and approach medical treatment.  The immense power of this position can not be overemphasized.  It amounts to turning physicians into Big Pharma drug peddlers.  It is Big Pharma’s way to insure that physicians seek to prescribe their drugs to the majority of patients they encounter.  Even if a doctor wakes up and begins to understand that drugs do not cure diseases or solve nutritional imbalances, the medical authorities who control licensing of physicians can take away any medical heretic’s license to practice if they become too vocal, or use non-standard treatments, regardless of their effectiveness.  In fact, many safe, effective treatments for cancer have been suppressed by the medical pharmaceutical cartel.  It is a matter of record.

Patients should be acutely aware of their health condition.  They should find a physician who is open-minded enough to venture outside of the boundaries of medical orthodoxy if a better, safer treatment for cancer is available.  Chemotherapy, radiation and surgery are not the best, most effective treatments for cancer, regardless of how loudly and proudly the medical authorities proclaim it.  Shouting louder than everybody else, and having a favored status with the mass media does not turn untruths into truths.  Open your mind and study this topic, and see where it takes you.

The topic of GM foods is a very controversial topic.  The companies that produce them claim that they are necessary to feed the world.  They also say that GMO foods are safe for human consumption, as well as for use in other products, such as vaccines, pharmaceutical drugs, animal feed, and other myriad uses.

Proponents in favor of GM products say that they are safe, and are not substantially different from food products derived from normal cultivation methods.  Those who are wary of their use say that they have unknown effects at best, and that they are extremely dangerous at worse. continue reading…

Dr. McLaughlin summarizes the clinical results of the cancer research performed with the use of Paw Paw substances.

The clinical studies were done on breast cancer, prostate cancer, lymphoma non-Hodgkin’s, stage 4 lung cancer and melanoma. The results were very good, very promising.  It appeared that most cancer patients were using Paw Paw in conjunction with conventional cancer treatments. continue reading…

The main thing that any cancer patient MUST do is to get educated about the disease, and study about all of the possible side effects of any proposed procedures.  Oftentimes, a medical professional is going to be preoccupied with treatment, strategy, and other technical details so that they might not fully discuss the probably side effects and possible complications of any treatments or therapies that they may suggest.

You really owe it to yourself to learn as much as you can about your condition. continue reading…

These statistics don’t look good.  It appears that the incidence of prostate cancer, along with the mortality rate, have both increased over the years.  This seems to suggests that the current approaches to treating and understanding cancer are not working.  If you can think of another cause for this, please let me know about it.

Although early-stage prostate cancer tends to be asymptomatic, there are a few symptoms that occur when it is more advanced.  The best thing to do is to properly care for yourself.  Prevention is much cheaper, and much easier than having to get rid of an entrenched cancer.

You should continue to learn as much as possible about cancer if you want to beat it.

I found an article that referenced a study that claims to have found that “watchful waiting” may be appropriate for some men who have been diagnosed with prostate cancer.  It was found that men who choose not to have treatment for prostate cancer have an average delay of treatment of 7.7 years with no increased level of mortality when compared to men who choose immediate treatment.

The routine treatment for prostate cancer is radiation and/or surgery.  We discussed the dire side-effects of prostate cancer treatments previously, which include erectile dysfunction and incontinence.  There is really no definitive proof that early treatment prolongs life.  This makes it tough to justify early treatments.  It should be an individual choice, as circumstances for each patient vary.  But it seems to be a serious choice to make, considering that a man’s life and/or sex life may be at risk.  The alternatives should be closely evaluated, and an informed choice can then be made.  But it is crucial that all elements of the treatment options be considered along with the probable side-effects.