How is the "War on Cancer" a War?
When you think of the word "war," what comes to mind? Doesn't it involve 2 or more entities confronting each other over some differences of opinion or possessions? While the tools and the motivation behind all wars may differ, one thing is always expected or understood: the goal is to win.
Since the so-called "war on cancer" was launched in 1971, many things have taken place, including the investment of billions of dollars into research. Regardless of all that has been done, though, very little progress has been made. In fact, it may even be cogently argued that this war on cancer has been a dismal failure.
What's Wrong with the Way This War is Being Waged?
Unfortunately, the right questions are not being asked when it comes to truly evaluating conventional medicine's approaches to fighting cancer. For example, while Gina Kolata in her New York Times' article "Advances Elusive in the Drive to Cure Cancer" delves into the many failures and deficiencies of conventional anti-cancer medicine, she doesn't touch upon the main reason why conventional medicine is most probably not working as well as expected.
Yes, cancers are complicated diseases, but what about the most likely sinister reason for the failures: too many people in the pharmaceutical and medical industry are benefitting from the failures in place. To put it more bluntly, cancer is much more profitable if conventional treatments (no matter how disappointing) continue to be the tools of choice.
How Profitable Are Conventional Treatments?
The numbers are mind-boggling. The pharmaceutical and medical industry rake in billions in cold, hard cash by pushing the 4 tools most used against cancer: surgery, chemotherapy, radiation and immunotherapy. These "weapons" may literally kill more people than they cure (actually, they aren't even listed as "cures") but, who cares, if you look upon them (as the anti-cancer industry does) as virtual gold mines.
Conventional anti-cancer treatments help employ thousands of healthcare and pharmaceutical so-called "professionals." There are also the huge profits from imaging equipment, medical supplies and the many chemicals/drugs most doctors (supposedly "fighting" cancer) consider indispensable.
The problem with most of these "indispensable" drugs and tools, though, is that most (if not all) of them are toxic or destructive. In fact, most of the people with the gumption to still defend conventional cancer treatments readily admit that chemotherapy and radiation are capable of destroying all cells--not just cancerous ones! In other words, if the cancer doesn't kill the patient, these tools may just as easily and quickly do so.
What Else is Wrong with the Present War on Cancer?
The list of deficiencies with conventional cancer treatments is rather long. For example, why do many doctors (who, incidentally, receive very limited training in dietary science from most medical schools) either stay away from dietary changes or actually put down the efficacy behind dietary approaches to preventing and even treating cancer? There is extensive evidence that connects diet and cancer, either as a causing agent or as a viable tool for fighting against cancer.
There is also something inherently wrong with actively fighting against or adamantly refusing to conduct research into alternative treatment options against cancer. Since when has it ever been in anyone's favor for scientific enquiry to be deliberately limited, encouraged against or condemned? Yet, it is no secret that the medical community has been for years engaged in a nasty, puerile battle against alternative options for the curing of cancer.
What is it that these doctors and pharmaceutical entrepreneurs fear so much?
For anyone to say that they just don't want to put people's lives at risk is ludicrous. Most of the people diagnosed with cancer these days will die from the disease. At best, conventional cancer treatments can buy people a little bit of time, or so may we all have been brainwashed into believing.
In fact, some critics are suggesting that these treatments may actually be shortening life spans. Who are we to believe: critics who may have more viable solutions (if only they were given the freedom to prove the efficacy of their programs) or the people who are getting filthy rich from the war on cancer's failures?
Conclusion
What should people diagnosed with cancer do? Should they blindly trust their doctors and the pharmaceutical industry? Clearly, these are questions which each person may have to answer on his/her own. Since the stakes are so high, though, maybe it's time that Americans start becoming more open-minded about this hot issue.
Blindly following your doctor's advice may be good enough for you; other people, however, may choose to take a more proactive approach.
One thing we know: conventional anti-cancer treatments are not working very well for too many people. Until doctors can offer patients a cure, maybe they should encourage patients to seek alternative treatments, especially when you consider the nasty, deplorable side-effects of chemotherapy, radiation, surgery, and immunotherapy.
At the very least, let's stop denying that profits create an unacceptable conflict of interest for both the pharmaceutical and the medical industry.
And why haven't we made more progress on cancer research, in spite of the billions spent? Research can only work only if all avenues are adequately explored--including so-called "alternative treatments." Other than greed, why does the medical/pharmaceutical establishment fear these options so much--to the point of opposing legitimate, aggressive research into these areas?
Do the people in the front lines of the "war on cancer" actually want to cure people from these diseases or do they just want to continue to profit from the war's numerous failures? This question should not offend any group, especially if they have nothing to hide.
References & Resources
1. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YFS5qlAzgc
2. http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/03/15/war-on-cancer/
3. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/health/policy/24cancer.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0
4. http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/War_on_Cancer
5. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/olivia-katrandjian/retro-report-nixon-cancer_b_4182302.html
Unfortunately the war on cancer has to be waged by each of us - supporting the natural and organic foods industry as my stance is that our processed foods and our environment are toxic. Our body is made to be self healing but if we "gum up" our detoxification systems with pesticides, household chemicals and destroy our gut bacteria with round up residues that are 70% of our immune system then we are headed toward a situation where our body does not destroy abnormal cells in the normal process of apoptosis and cancer develops. That makes my job much harder - simply, getting out of a hole is much harder than walking around it in the first place.
First suggestion - get your Vit D level checked and get it up over 50 with daily Vit D3 so your immune system can start to work properly with abnormal cell death. Then tackle the diet - get rid of sugar and as much processed carbs as you can and then move toward as much organic produce and grass fed protein you can to avoid the hormones and pesticides.
Then spread this knowledge amongst your friends and family, church family and others so WE can win the war without getting cancer - if we all took responsibility for what we ate we'd put a sizable dent in the cancer machine
If patients were EMPOWERED with practical dietary and lifestyle changes they could make to hopefully avoid cancer altogether, or mitigate its effects on those who have it already, think of the millions of people that would be unemployed immediately and the billions of dollars they would lose. It simply does not make good business sense for them to want to cure cancer. And yes, to them it's all about business. If I ever got diagnosed with cancer my first trip would be to Mexico where there are clinics that treat the entire body, their goal being to create an environment inside your body where cancer cannot thrive, versus here in the US where they simply treat the cancer symptoms. Maybe this is also the reason that many cancer patients who "beat" cancer see it return years later - because they were never taught what to do so that cancer couldn't thrive inside them.
Related Keywords
