2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

beccasnow19952005 — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 15:28:22 GMT

These companies and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration are part of the cancer establishment who won't tell you the truth because in part CANCER IS BIG BUSINESS. And the FDA are allies working together to create a strong economy in the United States of America which depends upon making and keeping people sick and on pharmaceuticals.

There are ways you can reduce your risks of certain cancers. A way to start is by purchasing the Breast Cancer Prevention Program by Samuel S. Epstein, M.D. and David Steinman. The book is available at Amazon.com for a song --less than normal shipping charges. The causes and increased risks for breast cancers, apply to other cancers as well.

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

gods4me2 — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 06:19:56 GMT

We had a family member go to a clinic in acuna mexico, it is to bad My family did not find this website first!

www.geocities.com/mexicancancerclinic

Bad Dr. s and methods are not just in the States!

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

gods4me2 — Sun, 05 Apr 2009 06:12:03 GMT

hey

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

libbyejansen — Thu, 05 Feb 2009 21:51:01 GMT

just a uestion in response to your statement see3d, since there is now talk about population actually dwindling or at least stagnating, to the point where some countries are encouraging people to have children; in developed countries, not the third world; you don't find this statistically significant?

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

Chimonger — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 05:11:45 GMT

Our world has changed so profoundly in the last 50 years, there is simply NO way any organism can mutate fast enough to accommodate all those changes:

--decimation of forests worldwide;

--restrictions of variety of produce and animals;

--decreased oxygen content in ambient air, from about 30% in 1950 to about 17% now, worldwide;

--inundation with man made chemical compounds--some so stable they refuse to break down while percolating through geological strata;

--stripping of topsoil and massive losses of all minerals in the dirt produce is grown in;

--broad scale destruction off of probiotics in soils, in our diets, everywhere;

--genetically engineered foods, picking them too green, over-processing foods, irradiating foods, etc.;

--exposures to thousands of chemicals on a daily basis;

--etc.

I recently learned that evidently, cancer rates are closer to one in four people--everywhere.

One no longer hears about "cancer clusters", since those afflicted are everywhere.

Professionals who go digging after information on incidences of spongiform encephalitis, cancer, chemical contaminated water and food, are frequently threatened to shut up, or lose their licenses.

We see huge changes in behavior patterns, gender affiliations, reproductive issues....

Nature telling us it is past-time to decrease populations??

Gotta wonder...animal and bug populations generally adjust reproduction to their living conditions--humans seem to be the only ones that seem to breed themselves to oblivion, regardless of conditions.

[No flame intended here, just food for thought]

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

MARITJ — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 20:54:51 GMT

Just wondering if a 'bone scan' is a safe procedure for researching a protruding Xiphoid Process that has a Lytic Irregular Defect in an area of 1.5cm? The Dr./radiologist think that I need this procedure to rule out Cancer among other deseases. I researched the procedure and I'm thinking that they are crazy and even if I had Cancer I wouldn't do Chemo anyway. Any thoughts on this topic would be greatly appreciated, thanks!

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

Z-Flame — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 22:03:45 GMT

Don't you love their new commercial "I don't need a lot of answers just one good one" and for webmd that's "see a doctor." Dumbing down society is the lazy sheeple way. Anyone with a brain knows it's a useless site cause there are no real answers available. Two thumbs for Google...and Dr. Mercola!

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

tigator — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 03:54:50 GMT

If I'm supposed to limit grains, then I can't even have brown rice?! What about a sandwich; I can't have whole wheat bread?

Am I supposed to eat nothing but vegetables? I know something must be bad about beef, chicken, pork, and fish.

Why is everything always like, "The sky is falling, The sky is falling!!!" ???????

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

wenrl — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:04:21 GMT

My mom was diagnosed with stage 2 breast cancer in April or May of 2008. Her fourth chemo treatment destroyed her digestive system and all attempts at inserting feeding tubes and providing her nutrition failed. After 3 months of hanging on and waiting for the effects of chemotherapy to subside so she could try to treat the cancer differently, she died. She had not a single indication of getting breast cancer or being killed by her treatment. She was healthy. She ate well, got lots of exercise and never smoked or drank. We had no history of breast cancer in our family before this. Her doctor said she could have lived several years never knowing she even had cancer. Instead she died within months of her diagnosis, because she trusted her oncologist to know the best course of action.

I could not be more opposed to chemotherapy as a cancer treatment and I have been looking for legitimate organizations researching alternative treatments to donate to, but it's hard to find one I feel comfortable with.

Any ideas?

Chemotherapy has been around too long for cancer to still be so prevalent. Clearly, this is not and never will be a cure.

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

Conjeanneal — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 02:10:10 GMT

I too am disgusted by the outrageous claims made by an industry that is a complete sham when it comes to ridding us of cancer!

I am also most disgusted every time I see an ad on TV for St Judes Children's Hospital with all the mutilated, bald headed children where the celebrity spokespeople claim that they are receiving the best in help! What a pitiful disgrace! Danny Thomas had a good thought to have a hospital for very sick children, but they sure don't have a clue out there when it comes to "first do no harm"! This is one place indeed where I feel that good, nutritional and SAFE therapies should be the PRIME treatment, not the cut, burn and poison that appears to be the accepted therapy. What better lives these unfortunate children could be living if only there were TRUE innovators there! Shame on you Marlo Thomas for perpetuating the myth that "innovative" treatments are at work there....your bald headed patients show otherwise!

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

zimboindy — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:04:00 GMT

My son just passed away 10 weeks ago from brain cancer(medulloblastoma). The Dr's he had wanted to know nothing about the supplements we gave him and stopped us from giving him vitamins and supplements during chemo and radiation etc. They just kept offering more chemo. Yes they get paid to offer us the chemo. The Drug companies and the Dr's win so much but we need to fight that every day.

diet- preferably raw foods and a little cooked, supplements and good clean fun - helped him live a little longer than they gave him at least 6 months more.

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

PARice — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 01:02:43 GMT

The cancer statistics seem to be a bit off. In the 3rd paragraph, the story states, "In 2008, an estimated 1.4 million Americans learned they had cancer." It's more like 12 million people that were diagnosed.

In Dr. Mercola's answer, he says that, "In 2008, about 12.4 million people were diagnosed with some form of cancer and 7.6 million people died from the disease." The Centers for Disease Control, in its yearly report, states a little more than half a million deaths a year die from cancer.

For interesting cancer statistics, go to the Connecticut Cancer Registry. Connecticut had the first cancer registry in the country and has statistics back to 1935. There are several reports at the site. The report for cancer rates between 1935 and 1991, shows that incidence rates rose from 213.7 in 1935 to 470.1 per 100,000 in 1991, an increase of about 120 percent. (Those rates are for people diagnosed in a particular year.) The Connecticut survey even looks at smoking v. non-smoking rates.

For U.S. statistics, see the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) Survey. Statistics go back to 1975. I don't have the latest statistics, but between 1975 and 2004, the cancer incidence rate increased from 400.4 in 1975 to 457.8 per 100,000 in 2004, an increase of about 15 percent. Apparently rates for last year show a downward trend.

The question remains: What has caused the increase?

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

Davey Bee — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 20:18:08 GMT

This is my first comment on Mercola.com, I'm curious as to no 11. Why is a looming shortage of oncologists an advancement in the treatment of cancer? Is it because they will be able to charge more and thus those that treat cancer will be able to live better and get some winter sun and top up their vitamin D levels? Maybe I'm missing something. Surely Dr Simoncini's research should have made the list with his apparent success. I can't help but think prophylactics are not the cure.........

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

RocMon — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:51:57 GMT

seems to me we spend a lot of time focusing on the 'glass half empty' perspective... especially considering most people aren't going to die of cancer - enjoy and LIVE life until you die and then you've lived a full life! worrying about cancer (and other nonsense terms) for 90 years and then dieing in an earthquake is anything but a full life!

re: 2008 Cancer Advances That Actually Make Cancer Worse

hariom128 — Sun, 11 Jan 2009 16:22:40 GMT

As if the word cancer doesn't frighten and stampede people in the wrong direction for help, now the buzzword at the doctor's office is "this could be precancerous." Amazing example of brainwashing.