Jump to content

Cancers: how to cure them


Im Your Man
 Share

Recommended Posts

Preview for this documentary film : The Beautiful Truth

 

Synopsis

A teen embarks on a cross-country trip to investigate the merits of a natural therapy for cancer based upon diet. He learns that this cure, which boldly contradicts the treatments promoted by the medical establishment, has existed for over half a century.

 

I like especially the ad with the doctors smoking Camels !

 

I don't know much about the Gerson thing, if it works or not (besides enemas and fruit/vegetable juices, it involves eating raw livers or even liver extracts injectiond - which caused some deadly bacteria contagions) but anyway there's hundreds of "alternative" methods to cure cancers, all supposed to be effective, while perhaps none really are. Modern and conventional methods aren't much safe either.

 

In fact, cancers don't kill. All doctors and specialists will admit that we don't know what causes the death of people who have cancer. It's sometimes fear, extreme fatigue and exhaustion due to treatments supposed to be good and proven as efficient.

 

In my opinion, cancers have a cause (often diet, but there are many other factors : stress, the many types of pollution, etc). Remove the cause, and all the secondary causes, tumor will regress. Many examples of cancers in "terminal phase" that vanished on a natural hygiene cure (fastings, rest, raw fruits and greens). A positive mind is primary too.

 

Who can expect to heal from cancer just with extreme treatments and by continuing to smoke, or eat meat, drinking coffee, living in an acidic body and a stressful environment ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In fact, cancers don't kill. All doctors and specialists will admit that we don't know what causes the death of people who have cancer. It's sometimes fear, extreme fatigue and exhaustion due to treatments supposed to be good and proven as efficient.

 

I find this hard to believe. From what little I understand, cancer is basically mutated cells (which everyone gets) that for whatever reason are multiplying out of control. If cancerous tumours get too big and/or are a sensitive location they will limit or halt the normal functioning of critical bodily systems, thereby eventually leading to death.

 

I'm not saying that factors such as fear, pessimism, fatigue and toxic treatments like chemotherapy and radiotherapy don't also affect prognosis but the cancer alone does kill fit, healthy, young, positive, happy and good people too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't mean any hostility to anyone, but I have close friends with cancer, both of whom are bigger health nuts then anyone here. Sometimes the best lifestyle factors in the world are not enough. It isn't rational, but when I read about bogus alternative cancer "cures: while my friends live with the possibility of an early death I feel hostility.

 

One of my friends worked her ass all of her life and almost all of her money is gone because she went to some alternative medicine quack out of desperation. Now, she will likely die early, sick and poor. This isn't a game for some people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, I didn't mean to offend anybody with this topic. I don't know much about cancer, but I'm curious about it, so I posted that to say my opinion, which is of course just the vision of someone who never had to deal with cancer or never lived with someone who had it... so I'd be glad to hear what people think about it, or their experience with cancers.

 

Maybe the way I said things make it look as if it's easy to avoid cancers and simple to get rid of it. Of course it ain't that simple, unfortunately. For some people it's more complicated and mysterious than that. But there's always a cause. Even when we can't find it. Cancers, or any other diseases, are not magic. Nothing is created, nothing is lost; everything transforms. With the hundreds of thousands of chemicals now in circulation in society and in the environment, we are no longer in control of all the factors that can influence our health. A private society make a product, its tested on rats by this same company and this substance is approved as "safe" by the FDA. But over the years, man has put thousands and thousands of these chemicals; in food, in materials, etc. We touch, breathe, eat, drink those things. And each of these toxic substances have been tested individually, but never tested together. Who knows what are the effects of those products when they are mixed together after they've been released into the wild and in consumption. There is an almost infinite number of possible combinations, and many of them are fatal, while those same products taken separately can be innofensive. Nobody thought about that, until some researchers wondered why the belugas of St-Laurent river were dying, with a very high rate of cancers. Samething with other species. Scientists analyzed their flesh and they found a mixture of hundreds and hundreds of toxic products, the same ones we dump into the water everyday and then drink in tap water, or ingest by other ways. We tought it was safer to live outside big cities because there's less pollution in the air. Wrong. A scientist tried to find out why the sperm of new-yorkers was better than the sperm from the population in the countryside. She found out it was because of the water: huge farms in rural areas, polluting the water, people drinking toxic tap water. After that they changed the number of what is considered a "safe" level of chlorine in water destined to human consumption.

 

 

What I said, that people don't die of cancers... well of course we can die of a cancer, but most of the time people die of others reasons that stems from the cancer. It depends in which organ the tumor is located. If the cancer is now at the point that the tumor have completely invaded the brain, of course I guess the person will die, but most of the time the doctors will have killed that person long before that with shock treatments, or by saying: "sorry we've tried everything, you only have about 2 weeks to live now". Not very encouraging for the patient who has already not a lot of strenght and energy left.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find this hard to believe. From what little I understand, cancer is basically mutated cells (which everyone gets) that for whatever reason are multiplying out of control. If cancerous tumours get too big and/or are a sensitive location they will limit or halt the normal functioning of critical bodily systems, thereby eventually leading to death.

 

Yep, you're right there. Pretty much hit the nail on the head.

 

The reason that treating cancer is so tricky is that it really depends on what type of cell mutated into a cancerous state. A squamous cell carcinoma and a plasma cell myeloma will grow at different rates, have different risks of metastasis (shooting off satellite tumours into different parts of the body), and respond differently to different treatments. And how a cancer kills you is equally variable. Whether it's because you've stopped producing white blood cells (as can happen when the bone marrow is primarily affected), you might die from complications of a suppressed immune system. If it's in the brain, the tumour could end up pressing on your hypothalamus and shut off your breathing. Really, there is a terrifying number of ways it can happen.

 

Because the cell that gave rise to the cancer can be pretty much any cell in the body, no treatment is ever a catch-all. Colchicine can be effective against certain types of cancer because certain cell types are particularly sensitive to its main mechanism of action (disrupting microtubules). There are other types of cancer that won't respond to it at all. Same for pretty much any chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

 

It's such a multifactorial disease - the number of things contributing to its development is massive - so anyone who asserts that they have found 'the' way to prevent or 'the' cure for it is full of crap. There are certain things you can do to help prevent certain types of cancer, and certain treatments that work to varying degrees for certain types of cancer.

 

Also - you said you believe that if you remove the cause(s) of the cancer, the tumour will regress. That isn't the way the biology works. Once you have those cancerous cells multiplying, the cause that triggered the change from normal to cancerous state in the cell has done its damage. Whether a tumour grows or recedes depends on other factors, but for example, quitting smoking doesn't cause regression of lung cancers. The exposure to smoke may have led to the change to a cancerous state, but removing the initial cause can't trigger those cells to go back to a normal mitotic state. Nothing can. The only way for the tumour to recede is for the cancerous cells to be killed (by your immune system and/or any treatment you're receiving) at a rate that is faster than they are multiplying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also - you said you believe that if you remove the cause(s) of the cancer, the tumour will regress. That isn't the way the biology works.
Ok but let's say someone eating mostly junk food and living in an acidic body, then whatever the cause of the cancer is, may it be toxemia (which is, after all, the cause of almost any illness) or cigarettes, etc; could we say that making changes in the whole lifestyle (not only quit smoking but a job/place too stressful and changing the diet), turning the acidified organism into an alkaline environment, may have huge effects on the progression of a cancer (at least some or most of them)? As far as I know tumours are malignant cells which are proliferating in an acidic environment and don't need oxygen to breathe because they're like dead cells. So I guess in an alkaline body, with low stress, and eating living foods which contain water and oxygen, tumours are not in their ideal environment anymore and the immune system can take advantage.

Anyway I'm just doing hypothesis, I never read a full book or even an article on the subject, just some lines here and there. But I've learned some stuff in your post and now I'm reading some articles on the web.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say firstly that 'toxemia' is not recognized as the cause of the vast majority of illnesses. Your personal beliefs may vary, and that's your right, but there aren't that many conditions for which presence of toxins in the blood is a direct cause (and your definition of toxin probably varies from what is accepted in the medical community).

 

Certainly, the overall health of an individual will have an impact on the rate of a cancer's progression. However, I'm afraid you're mistaken in your impression that malignant cells are 'like dead cells' and that they don't require oxygen. In fact, quite the opposite. Because they're dividing so actively, they have a higher metabolism (and greater need for oxygen) than the surrounding cells. That's actually why chemotherapy works: the basic principle is that you give the patient a toxin that kills cells, and the cells that die the fastest are those that have the highest metabolism (the malignant ones). And that's also why so much cancer research is being focused on angiogenesis - the process of forming new blood vessels. The tumour basically signals the body to make new blood vessels to feed it, because it needs so much oxygen (from the blood). So if we can figure out a way to 'turn off' that blood vessel formation, the tumour will starve and die.

 

I will have to scratch my head over the remark about eating living foods that contain water and oxygen, though. Every food contains water to some degree (even bread is 30% water or something like that) and oxygen is something that you absorb through the lungs, not the gut, though even if you did, it would be in such tiny amounts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Medman, it is nice to have you around making posts based on facts instead of alternative health product marketing speak.

 

One of my friends battling cancer is very careful about the amount of simple carbohydrates she takes in. She told me that cancer cells don't burn fat as well as healthy cells and depend more on simple carbs for energy. Is this true?

 

If so, it seems like a better supposition for why some people claim that fasting and raw vegetable based diets help with cancer. Those things may be reducing the amount of calories cancer cells can get.

 

Who knows?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Beforewisdom,

 

I'm always glad to drop by here and share when I have the time. The metabolism of cancer cells varies quite a bit because the cells they arise from vary quite a bit! There are some cells in the body that are real 'pros' at burning fats. A tumour inherits a lot of its properties (like metabolic enzymes) from the cell type it descended from. So it's theoretically possible that a given tumour might handle simple sugars better than fats, though I haven't heard of that specifically. One of the reasons it's a good idea to avoid simple carbs has to do with the fast insulin spikes they induce - insulin and IGF can have an impact on the rate of growth of a tumour. Again, the degree to which this can occur depends on what cell type gave rise to the tumour (a cell type that normally expresses lots of IGF receptors will produce a tumour that responds to IGF).

 

That's pretty well established. The bit about the cell type preferring simple sugars - I'd be a little surprised if that was the case. You maintain a baseline level of glucose in your blood at all times, and unless you're diabetic, the transient increases after a meal (which are a bit bigger when you eat simple vs complex carbs) wouldn't seem like a make-it-or-break-it factor in tumour growth. I haven't read anywhere that glucose acts as a limiting factor in tumour growth (i.e. that giving the tumour more glucose would mean faster growth). I will keep an eye out for information on that subject, though.

 

Of course, there are other reasons you could argue why a vegetable based diet could help cancer patients, like spending less energy on digestion (it does take more effort for the body to break down meat), and in particular, the large amount of vitamins, minerals and antioxidants contained in a well-balanced veggie diet. I remember reading a prostate cancer study that looked at vegan diets, and their conclusion was that the vegan diet increased the intake of every nutrient they considered 'cancer-fighting' and decreased the intake of every nutrient they considered 'cancer-promoting'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Medman, it is nice to have you around making posts based on facts instead of alternative health product marketing speak.
That's good, but if I may just offer a recommendation to your friends batting cancer, I'd tell them to just take a look at a less conservative view of medecine. Books studied in Universities show a certain perception of life, but everybody can read and some other books present a different vision.

Modern medecine try to cure with drugs, poisons, radiations and other things that harm health and kill life.

 

Here's some interesting articles that your friends might want to read.

 

I've put the titles of each articles, and some excerpts.

 

http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/0201hyglibcat/hygienic.review.articles.htm

 

By Herbert Shelton, Ph.d.,D.C.

 

Eating and Cancer

Now the answer was out in the open: It is scientific to poison the sick; it is quackery to attempt to feed them correctly. So long as this is the accepted view of the profession, there is no hope that they will ever give any intelligent attention to the subject of food and feeding. They will continue to overfeed their patients, their families and themselves on "wrong food."

 

 

Suffering In Cancer

The most terrible pains are induced by drugs to "relieve" suffering.

(...)

These three patients chose death rather than life without their favorite indulgences. The first of them wanted pie and coffee, the second wanted salt and bread, the third wanted flesh foods. None of them wanted to live without these things, which they valued higher than life itself. Old Mother Nature has a way of accommodating those who choose death.

The ancient admonition: "Choose life that ye may live," is as unintelligible to men and women of today as it was to those to whom it was given. Today we choose suffering and premature death.

 

 

 

What is a Poison?

What is a poison? (...)What is a medicine?(...) How do drugs act on the living organism?(...)

Who does not know that for over 200 years physicians, chemists, pharmacologists, etc., have sought to prove that alcohol (a protoplasmic poison) is both poison and food, or either, according to circumstance? (...)

Eat a pound of tobacco--it will kill you. The natural appetite rejects it. It is not digested by the stomach, nor assimilated, nor changed in the system. It is a poison.

If you drink a pound of alcohol--it will kill you or at least seriously injure you.(...)

A pound of tea, cooked and eaten as food would kill any person.

 

We may now answer our question: what is a poison? Everything is poison that cannot be assimilated by the living organism and used by it to sustain life. Every substance that can have no place in the normal metabolic processes of the body wastes the body's energies in resisting and expelling it, thus inevitably inducing debility and premature death. In other words, poisons are those substances which the living organism cannot use, but must resist and expel.

 

That which cannot be appropriated to the growth and strength of tissue is neither food nor drink, but poison.

 

 

Enervation- Toxemia

Our concept of toxemia is fundamentally different from that held by the medical profession. To us toxemia is the result of the accumulation in the blood, lymph, and tissues of retained metabolin—metabolic waste. It is an autogenerated state, the toxin arising as a normal by-product of the regular and necessary activities of life. Toxin accumulates as a result of inhibited excretion (checked elimination). Basically, we hold that any influence, whether physical or mental, that results in an excessive expenditure of nerve energy leads to toxemia. This means that the chief causes of enervation are found in the voluntary habits of the individual.

 

Vital Action vs. Drug Action

"What difference does it make," asks some reader, "whether the drugs act on the body or the body acts on the drugs, so long as actions and effects result?"

It makes all the difference in the world. When we understand that the action is vital action and that it is accomplished by a waste of vital power and, as is frequently the case, by a determination of power to one organ when it is urgently needed elsewhere, we can see that the drug must inevitably produce harm. Using drugs to provoke action — the action of violent resistance — not only disturbs the whole vital machinery and takes its attention off the task in hand, but it inevitably expends the funds of life. It draws fearfully upon the capital stock of energy and, even if it does not result fatally, it prolongs the disease or prevents complete recovery, leaving the patient with chronic disease.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

There's a similar discussion going on in the thread "why I haven't seen the results" or something like that, which went off-topic (not caused by me), so thought I would continue it where it deserves.

I will say firstly that 'toxemia' is not recognized as the cause of the vast majority of illnesses. Your personal beliefs may vary, and that's your right, but there aren't that many conditions for which presence of toxins in the blood is a direct cause (and your definition of toxin probably varies from what is accepted in the medical community).
what is the most common cause of diseases then, please tell me. You're dreaming if you think that toxins are only in the blood and get out from the body as soon as it gets in. It can be stored in bodyfat, organs, all tissues. We find PCB in every individual, even if this product is not being produced anymore since over 20 years. Toxins are accumulated during your life, but even before you come to life: hundreds of toxic products found in fetuses and in the umbilical cord.

Stress, negativity, poor diet, pollution, all this weakens the body and its functions of treatment and disposal. Which causes retention and gradual accumulation of waste in the body (metabolites). The result is a poisoning retention of waste (toxemia). Toxemia is the fundamental and universal cause of all diseases. And the disease will develop in line with the trends of the individual.

You can read also definition of Toxemia in my previous post.

I'm afraid you're mistaken in your impression that malignant cells are 'like dead cells' and that they don't require oxygen. In fact, quite the opposite. Because they're dividing so actively, they have a higher metabolism (and greater need for oxygen) than the surrounding cells.

That's strange, because that's not what I'm reading:

The development of cancerous cells is one major consequence of severe oxygen starvation.
http://www.breathing.com/articles/oxygen.htm

 

http://www.alkalizeforhealth.net/oxygen.htm

All normal cells have an absolute requirement for oxygen, but cancer cells can live without oxygen - a rule without exception. - Dr. Otto Warburg (Nobel prize for this discovery)

 

Deprive a cell 60% of its oxygen and it will turn cancerous. - McCabe

 

Normal Metabolism vs. Cancer Metabolism

"The fuel on which the body's cells run is called adenosine triphosphate (ATP). ATP must be created by all cells, including cancer cells, for energy. The biochemical process in which ATP is created is called oxidation phosphorylation and is oxygen-dependent. Healthy cells require the conditions of alkalinity and high molecular oxygen (O2) to produce ATP and function properly. In contrast, non-oxygen-respiratory organisms - like cancer cells - make ATP by fermentation phosphorylation, which requires the conditions of acidity and low oxygen to function, and actually produces additional acids." - Philpott, page 75.

 

http://cancertutor.com/Cancer/Ozone.html

Cancer cells die when exposed to oxygen (cancer cells are anaerobic).

 

 

That's actually why chemotherapy works: the basic principle is that you give the patient a toxin that kills cells, and the cells that die the fastest are those that have the highest metabolism (the malignant ones).
You mean: that's why chemotherapy doesn't work. If it worked, cancers wouldn't be the number one cause of death. There's more people dying of chemotherapy than people actually dying from cancers.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chemotherapy

Chemotherapy, in its most general sense, refers to treatment of disease by chemicals that kill cells," like arsenic.

HISTORY

The use of chemical substances and drugs as medication . the use of chemicals such as vitriol, copper, mercuric and arsenic salts, sal ammoniac, gold scoria, chalk, clay, coral, pearl, tar, bitumen and alcohol for medical purposes.

The first drug used for cancer chemotherapy, however, dates back to the early 20th century. Mustard gas was used as a chemical warfare agent during World War I (...) During a military operation in World War II, a group of people were accidentally exposed to mustard gas and were later found to have very low white blood cell counts[2]. It was reasoned that an agent that damaged the rapidly-growing white blood cells might have a similar effect on cancer. (...) As a result, many other drugs have been developed to treat cancer, and drug development since then has exploded into a multibillion-dollar industry.

 

The majority of chemotherapeutic drugs can be divided in to alkylating agents, antimetabolites, anthracyclines, plant alkaloids, topoisomerase inhibitors, and other antitumour agents. All of these drugs affect cell division or DNA synthesis and function in some way.

Some newer agents do not directly interfere with DNA. These include monoclonal antibodies and the new tyrosine kinase inhibitors e.g. imatinib mesylate (Gleevec or Glivec), which directly targets a molecular abnormality in certain types of cancer (chronic myelogenous leukemia, gastrointestinal stromal tumors). These are examples of targeted therapies.

In addition, some drugs that modulate tumor cell behaviour without directly attacking those cells may be used. Hormone treatments fall into this category of adjuvant therapies.

 

 

I will have to scratch my head over the remark about eating living foods that contain water and oxygen, though. Every food contains water to some degree (even bread is 30% water or something like that) and oxygen is something that you absorb through the lungs, not the gut, though even if you did, it would be in such tiny amounts.
Sure, I'm not surprised you're scratching your head, if you don't understand that it's important to get essential elements in food, things that are vital like oxygen and water. The air you breathe offer some but not enough. There's a reason why fruits and greens are 70% water, just like the planet, and just like our body. Not just a pure coincidence, it's because that's how life works. Remove the elements essential to life, and you get : cancer, death.

 

http://www.breathing.com/articles/oxygen.htm

 

Oxygen (O2) plus glucose (C6H12O6) through BMR yields energy in the form of high energy phosphate bonds (especially ATP, the primary energy unit of the human body) plus water (H2O) which dissolves carbon dioxide (CO2) and facilitates the hydrolysis of energy yielding phosphate bonds.  Preliminary research demonstrates that ATP may be an analog to one aspect of what the Chinese call "Qi", the Oriental Indians call "Prana", The French Elan Vital, The Greeks pneuma, the vital force or life energy.

Oxygen shortage in the human body has been linked to every major illness category including heart conditions, cancer, digestion and elimination problems, respiratory disease, inflamed, swollen and aching joints, sinus problems, yeast infections and even sexual dysfunction. Fresh live foods and rain water contain oxygen. Cooked foods and stagnant water has much less oxygen. Oxygen is our primary source of energy. It displaces harmful free radicals, neutralizes environmental toxins and destroys anaerobic (the inability to live in oxygen rich environments) infectious bacteria, parasites, microbes and viruses.

It is the main energy source for our brain function. It calms the mind and stabilizes the nervous system. Without oxygen we cannot absorb important vitamins, minerals, and other nutrients our body needs. When our cells lack oxygen they weaken and die.

Junk and cooked foods deplete oxygen stores. I call them negative foods as they use up more oxygen then they give off.

Both emotional and physical stress create very high oxygen loss.

 

SOME CAUSES OF CANCERS: http://www.breathing.com/articles/cancer.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ahah, I like when people have powerful arguments like this. It's so scientific . And I bet you don't even remember that you once replied with that same Twilight Zone link, a while ago, when you didn't have much to say neither.

 

But that's good, no need to argue, I wanted this thread for people to post their different opinions on cancer and their ideas on how to cure them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you say to the numerous people with cancer who already DO relax, drink juice and eat loads of fruits and veggies, but are still wasting away by the days?

 

So all the people are doing this instead of chemotherapy ? It would be great if it was the case, not so many people would die of cancers.

If we stick with the example of Lean&Green, I personally think (the best would be that he tells it in person) that he would try the natural method first. And THEN if it doesn't work he would try the insane and extreme method, with the radiations and chemicals, that exhaust to death millions of people. People who do this should just go to Tchernobyl instead, at least they would have a nice trip before leaving this world. Many people die from this trip, chemotherapy and radiotherapy, some wake up from this nightmare before it's too late and try the natural method. Numerous people, for whom the shock treatments failed, and who were told by the doctors that everything has been tried and that they would die in a couple of weeks, decided to go to natural hygiene institutes, when they still have some energy left, and after some weeks or months of peace, fasting or living foods, nobody could tell that they ever had a cancer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

IF cANCER HITS YOU CLOSE... THEN MAYBE DON'T WATCH BUT ANOTHER DOCUMENTARY ON SOMEONE WHO IS STILL FIGHTING.

SHE IS TRYING ALTERNATIVE METHODS. IS DOCUMENTING ALL OF IT.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=tbRM2RAjgh0

I liked that video. I like when the doctors confess that they don't understand. And the fact that she had to change her mind, her perception of cancer, and perception of life. Only an happy mind can be strong enough to fight cancer, imho. The doctors are curious to know how she made it, and she shows her tools : music, dancing, happiness, living foods; green smoothies and green salads.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

the thing as we know is everyone one is different so what works for one may not work for another.

 

this is because our bodies are so complex.

 

the more i research nutrition the more I see conflicting messages everywhere ... like one study says hot the other says cold.

 

One treatment is great the other is bad and going back and forth.

 

 

So unless you really have money it is tough to try lots of methods because many of then cost money.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think one can be so different than another. Yes, the human body is complex, but it all works with the same system. We're all humans. Even if someone was born with 12 legs, 3 heads and 16 arms, its body would work with the same principle, and would be subject to the same universal laws than anyone else. The main differences that we can see between a person and another, like different levels of hormones and different reactions to products, occur when we compare a man and a woman, or an healthy person with an unhealthy person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah we in principal have the same make upbut what foods we eat can trigger certain genes to be revealed.

 

I think this is why veggies are one of the reasons vegans are healthier because of their protective properties to our genes.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nutrigenomics

 

 

http://video.google.com/videosearch?q=nutrigenomics&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&sa=X&oi=video_result_group&resnum=4&ct=title#

 

 

 

 

http://lib.mexmat.ru/books/3604

 

http://www.eruptingmind.com/effects-of-food-on-dna/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...