The Great Cancer Hoax Part II: The Brilliant Cure the FDA Tried Their Best to Shut Down...

Story at-a-glance

  • For years, the FDA tried to shut down Dr. Burzynski's alternative cancer practice, using non-toxic antineoplastons to treat highly lethal cancers with a success rate of 50-60 percent.
  • The conventional medical approach is to "search and destroy" cancer cells using surgery, extremely potent toxins and dangerous radiation.
  • Most of the conventional treatments still considered 'standard care' were created during a time when knowledge of cancer was minimal.

WARNING!

This is an older article that may not reflect Dr. Mercola’s current view on this topic. Use our search engine to find Dr. Mercola’s latest position on any health topic.

By Dr. Mercola

In 1971, US President Richard Nixon declared war on cancer; the National Cancer Act was enacted and the national cancer program was born. An impressive $1.6 billion dollars were allocated to the program for the first three years alone, and its director even reported directly to the President.

So, after 40 years, how has the war on cancer fared?

One would think that after four decades of fervent research and countless billions of dollars spent, we would have this dreadful disease under control. Just think of the rapid explosion of ideas and innovations within other technology areas. Your cell phone is now more powerful than the largest supercomputers of that time, for example.

Alas, the war on cancer has been a MASSIVE failure, and the reasons for this failure are clearly explained in the featured documentary Cut, Poison, Burn.

Greed bordering on the grotesque has been allowed to rule the game here, and the primary beneficiaries of this 40-year long "war" are pharmaceutical companies and the tremendously profitable cancer industry as a whole, including so-called "non-profit" organizations like the American Cancer Society.

Rather than decreasing, cancer rates have increased during the last 40 years, and now surpass heart disease as the number one killer of Americans between the ages of 45 to 74. According to statistics detailed in the film, one in three women, and one in two men will now get some form of cancer in their lifetime!

Health Freedom is Severely Restricted when You have Cancer

The film follows the struggles of Jim and Donna Navarro, whose young son was diagnosed with medulloblastoma, a malignant brain tumor. The conventional treatment methods, which included potent chemotherapy drugs and radiation, offered virtually no hope. Even if their son survived the treatment, side effects could include hearing loss, brain damage, cumulative reduction in IQ and other cancers, just to name a few.

The couple decided to refuse conventional treatment for their son and to seek alternatives, but like so many others, they soon realized that under the current medical paradigm, they were not free to seek whatever treatment they saw fit for their child… Yes indeed, the hard fought for freedoms that America's forefathers sacrificed their life for seem to have gradually eroded to this sad state of affairs.

Their doctor filed charges of child abuse and child neglect against them. Still, they fought for their right to choose; to opt to not have their son suffer needlessly from a treatment that was just as likely to kill their child as the disease itself, while making him suffer terribly in the process. They had discovered Dr. Burzynski's treatment facility in Texas, but the FDA blocked them from getting his as of yet unapproved treatment…

The Navarro's story is a heartbreaking but important one, so I hope you will take the time to watch the film in its entirety, to understand what could happen to you, should you ever be placed in a similar circumstance. If you want to help the Navarro's pay off Thomas' medical bills, I urge you to purchase a copy of the film. It's being sold on a 'value-priced' basis, meaning you can download a copy of the film for $1.99 and up, depending on how much you're willing to pay. You can also purchase a DVD copy for $10. A percentage of the proceeds from the film will go to cancer organizations that donate 100 percent of their proceeds to families fighting cancer—not the American Cancer Society.

It's important to realize that the cancer industry today is based on wealth, not health. And the federal government and the American Cancer Society are actually making matters worse, not better.

 

I'm also making the DVD available on my site. Of these proceeds, 80 percent will go to the producers and Jim Navarro's family. I'm giving the remaining 20 percent to Grassroots Health's Breast Cancer Prevention Project. All monies donated to them from the sale of Cut Poison Burn will be used to enroll women 60 and over in a project aimed to demonstrate the effectiveness of vitamin D in breast cancer prevention. More information about this project can be found at here.  If you want to save on shipping, I encourage you to purchase a digital copy of the film here.

Killing the Cancer Before the Patient Dies from Treatment = Success…

People who face a lethal disease will usually try just about anything to survive. The brutal combination of fear and bullying by the medical establishment to submit to 'standard care' is part of the foundation that keeps the cancer industry going, because standard approved care is not cheap. The average cost per patient, from diagnosis to death, is $350,000, but can run as high as $1 million.

Since the war on cancer began in 1971, more than 14.8 million Americans have died from some form of cancer. Fifteen hundred people die every day from cancer, and 565,000 people died in 2009 alone.

This amounts to Big Business.

And although there have been some advances in the treatment of certain types of cancer, we've made virtually no progress at all over the last century in the treatment of the most common forms of cancer, despite spending billions of dollars in research each year.

Cancer can basically be viewed as cell growth that is out of bioregulatory control. The conventional medical approach is to "search and destroy" cancer cells using surgery, extremely potent toxins and dangerous radiation. And for all the boasting about new and improved drugs, current cancer treatments are actually rather archaic, and are nothing more than the treatment of symptoms using extremely expensive and toxic means.

As stated in the film, as long as the cancer is killed before the patient dies, the treatment is largely heralded as a success…

Most of the conventional treatments still considered standard care were created during a time when knowledge of cancer was minimal.

For example, chemotherapy was invented in 1960, when poison gas was found to kill cancerous tumors in one mouse. As it turns out, they were not quite able to replicate the success on other mice, but for some reason, for that initial one, it seemed to work quite well. This 'fluke' of an experiment was the original foundation of chemotherapy. When it became clear that chemo wasn't all that effective on its own, radiation was added, and now chemotherapy in conjunction with radiation therapy is the norm for many types of cancer.

Cancer Drugs Can Also Cause Cancer

Another problem is that many of the chemotherapy drugs have been found to cause cancer. Such is the case with the blockbuster breast cancer drug Tamoxifen. It does reduce breast cancer, but it more than doubles your risk of uterine cancer. And if you take it for more than five years, you again increase your risk of recurring breast cancer. But rather than remove it from the market, patients are simply told that uterine cancer can be successfully treated by performing a hysterectomy…

The entire cancer industry built on purging cancer cells from your body by toxic means, and they will not remove a drug simply because it's dangerous, because there really isn't such a thing as "too dangerous" when you're dealing with cancer drugs.

As Dr. Whitaker says:

"We started on the wrong foot, and stayed on the wrong foot, and now we are paying the price."

The price is your health, even if you survive the treatment, which many do not. By and large, people who get chemo die around the same time as those who do nothing. The main difference is that those who get the standard care suffer far more than those who get no treatment at all.

The question is: Does it really have to be like this?

No, it doesn't.

What Your Oncologist Won't Tell You…

In the film, Jim Navarro makes a statement that really highlights the sheer ludicrousness of the current model of cancer care. Although the doctor admitted that chemotherapy "would not work" for their son's particular cancer, and the package insert stated that the drug has not been proven safe or effective for pediatric use, he still insisted that chemotherapy had to be used, and if the Navarro's refused to submit their son to this 'standard care,' they could go to jail and their son could be legally taken from them.

Meanwhile, they were blocked from using an alternative treatment created by Dr. Burzynski—a completely non-toxic treatment with an average success rate of 50-60 percent—because it was not part of the approved standard of care.

This is a dementedly inhuman game; where a child's quality of life and entire future is tossed aside in order to maintain a highly profitable status quo.

The truth of the matter is that safe and effective alternatives to this toxic and deadly paradigm do exist.

I've already written two articles about Dr. Burzynski's gene-specific treatment using antineoplastons, peptides and derivatives of amino acids that act as molecular and genetic switches. They turn off oncogenes, the genes that cause cancer, and activate chemo suppressor genes; the genes that fight cancer. Furthermore, it's completely non-toxic, and patients suffer virtually no side effects at all. Best of all, once the cancer is gone, the rate of recurrence is slim to none.

As a testament to the safety and effectiveness of antineoplastons, Dr. Burzynski has patients who have survived with "incurable" cancers for over 20 years, and are still cancer free after going through his program. Some of these cases are highlighted in his film Burzynski: The Movie, which you can still view for free here.

A major part of the problem is that—while the drug industry initially opposed being regulated by the FDA—they soon discovered that it's an excellent way to eliminate unwanted competition.

The price per drug approval is about $1.6 billion, which effectively eliminates innovative drugs by individuals and small pharmaceutical companies. In short, the drug industry is a playground that only the largest monopolies on Earth can afford to play in. Dr. Burzynski's story is a perfect example of how the FDA effectively curtails medical innovation in order to protect the profits of these industry giants.

Instead of supporting the development of a cure for cancer, the US federal government spent $8 million of Americans' tax dollars to persecute and prosecute Dr. Burzynski over a period of 13 years, in order to prevent his remarkably successful treatment from being used…

In the end, Dr. Burzynski prevailed, but he still has not been able to get his antineoplastons approved by the FDA. And, despite overwhelming evidence that the drug is both safe and effective, the American Cancer Society placed antineoplastons on its unapproved drugs list, warning patients away from it.

Do they or don't they want cancer cured in America?

Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez was not interviewed in this film but he is another prominent alternative cancer physician who shared his run-ins with the conventional cancer model in my interview with him earlier this year.

The Irony that is the American Cancer Society…

It's important to realize that non-profits like the American Cancer Society (ACS) are defined by their financial support, and the ACS funding comes from the deep pockets of giant corporations and industries—all of which therefore have a vested financial interest in the cancer business.

As Dr. Whitaker says in the film, when you graciously donate to the American Cancer Society, you are perpetuating a failure. The ACS is in fact an impediment to advances in cancer therapy, and have no interest in really finding a cure—especially not a cure that doesn't cost an absolute fortune. Besides, as soon as a cure for cancer is found, the society is supposed to disband.

But you cannot disband an entire industry, and that is what it has become. It is now a cancer industry.

Did you know that even the simple PAP smear was opposed and left largely unused for some 25 years, as this inexpensive test would infringe on profits? Once the PAP smear finally did come into widespread use, mortality rates from cervical cancer dropped dramatically.

And so, the battle to suppress innovation rages on.

Today, there are a number of alternative cancer treatments that are vehemently suppressed and opposed, while bobble-heads talk about 'doing everything we can to find a cure for cancer.'

For example, dichloroacetic acid, known as DCA also appears to have remarkable potential as a cancer treatment. The reason it's not available as an approved treatment for cancer is because it costs merely pennies a day, so no drug company wants to touch it. You probably couldn't even break even after paying the $1 billion or so to get the approval… and this is the primary problem with the current cancer paradigm: Only patents make money, and if you can't patent it because it's a natural product, or if the treatment is not going to be exceedingly profitable, it will never see the light of day as an FDA approved cancer treatment. Nor will it be part of the standard of care.

This paradigm blocks those who can really help from doing so; it blocks progress, hinders innovation; limits personal choice; and sacrifices those who need not necessarily die—such as Jim and Donna Navarro's son. His death certificate reads:

Cause of Death: Respiratory failure due to chronic toxicity of chemotherapy

After 40 years of war on cancer, that is where we are today…

"The National Cancer Program is a bunch of sh*t."
Dr. James Watson, 1975
Discoverer of DNA, Nobel Laureate

"Everyone should know that cancer research is largely fraud."
Dr. Linus Pauling, 1986
Nobel Laureate

Top

By continuing to browse our site you agree to our use of cookies, revised Privacy Policy and Terms of Service.