Cary G Dean.
An Orthodox Cancer Treatment Quiz
Now let's test your knowledge of "Orthodox Medicine". First, we need to define a term:
Definition:
Total life The length of time between the diagnosis of cancer and the death of the cancer patient, whether it is death by cancer, death by cancer treatment or death by any other cause.
This is also called "survival time."
Question #1:
Chemotherapy and radiation put people into "remission." Putting people into remission proves that the "total life" (see above definition) of a person is significantly increased by using chemotherapy and radiation.
True or false?
-------------------------------------------
Question #2:
If a cancer patient lives 5 years after diagnosis, orthodox medicine considers that they are "cured" of cancer. Is this concept mathematically equivalent to the concept of "total life?"
Question #2:
If a cancer patient lives 5 years after diagnosis, orthodox medicine considers that they are "cured" of cancer. Is this concept mathematically equivalent to the concept of "total life?"
-------------------------------------------
Question #3:
The Medical Establishment would never approve a chemotherapy drug unless it was scientifically proven, beyond any doubt, that the drug significantly extends the "total life" of a cancer patient.
True or false?
Question #3:
The Medical Establishment would never approve a chemotherapy drug unless it was scientifically proven, beyond any doubt, that the drug significantly extends the "total life" of a cancer patient.
True or false?
--------------------------------------------
Question #1
Question #1
Chemotherapy and radiation put people into "remission." Putting people into remission proves that the "total life" (see above definition) of a person is significantly increased by using chemotherapy and radiation.
True or false?
True or false?
Answer:
People equate the concept of "remission" with the concept of "cure." Technically, "remission" means nothing more than one or more of the symptoms of the cancer are gone (e.g. destroying a tumor may put a cancer patient into "remission").
However, even if a tumor is destroyed, for example, and the person is judged to be in "remission," there still may be many areas of concentrated cancer cells in the body. Thus a person can still have potentially damaging areas of cancer in their body and they can still be considered to be in "remission."
There has never been scientific proof that the treatment of symptoms generally relates to a longer "total life." In other words, there has never been scientific proof that the concept of removing "symptoms" and the concept of increasing "total life" are related.
Doctors treat the symptoms of cancer in order to put patients into "remission," but their treatments have not been shown to increase "total life." Indeed, the "total life" of cancer patients has barely changed in over 80 years.
Furthermore, while many people do go into remission, for some types of cancer more than 90% of the people that go into remission will come out of remission (which is called "regression") and will later die of cancer. "Total Life" has to do with the eventual death of the patient, not the treatment of the symptoms of cancer.
Consider this quote:
"Ovarian cancer is usually detected at an advanced stage and, as such, is one of the deadliest and most difficult cancers to treat.
Therapy can eradicate the tumors, but most patients relapse within two years Normally, when a woman is diagnosed with ovarian cancer, she undergoes surgery to have the tumors removed.
The ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus and parts of the bowel are often removed as well. Chemotherapy follows the surgery, and about 90 percent of patients then go into remission, a period of "watchful waiting."
"The problem is that over the next five to 10 years, as many as 90 percent of women will relapse and die," says Berek. When the cancer returns in other surrounding tissue, it is more virulent and resistant to chemotherapy."
"The problem is that over the next five to 10 years, as many as 90 percent of women will relapse and die," says Berek. When the cancer returns in other surrounding tissue, it is more virulent and resistant to chemotherapy."
Of course the returning cancer is more deadly than the original cancer, the person's immunity system was destroyed while treating the symptoms of the first cancer.
The cancer may never have left the patient.
Once chemotherapy has damaged the immunity system, the patient is left far more vulnerable to cancer.
Question #2
If a cancer patient lives 5 years after diagnosis, orthodox medicine considers that they are "cured" of cancer. Is this concept mathematically equivalent to the concept of "total life?"
Answer:
It is assumed that the concept of "cure" (meaning patients who survive 5 years after diagnosis), is equivalent to the concept of "total life."
Consider two car manufacturing companies, Company B and Company G.
Let us define the "total life" of the cars these companies manufacture to be the number of miles the cars drive before the engine dies permanently and has to be replaced.
Suppose the "total life" of Company B cars is 100,000 miles and suppose the "total life" of the Company G cars is 300,000 miles.
Clearly, Company G makes far superior automobiles. How can the Company B executives make it appear that their car engines are as good as the engines made by Company G?
They can lie with statistics.
For example, what if Company B did a study of what percent of Company B car engines and what percent of Company G car engines were still running after 30,000 miles? Both companies would look very good and you could not tell them apart.
But if the study were based on what percent of Company B car engines and what percent of Company G car engines were still running after 250,000 miles, the truth about the inferiority of Company B car engines would be obvious.
But if the study were based on what percent of Company B car engines and what percent of Company G car engines were still running after 250,000 miles, the truth about the inferiority of Company B car engines would be obvious.
If the "benchmark" is carefully chosen to be well below the average, any company will look good.
That is exactly how orthodox medicine lies with statistics. A "cure rate" based on a patient living 5 years is like the engine test after 30,000 miles - it is meaningless.
The benchmark is way too low. "Cure rates" should be based on "total life" and nothing else.
For example, some cancers are very slow growing. The "cure rate" for these cancers is very high, when in fact a 15-year "cure rate" would show just how poor treatments are for some of these types of cancers.
Question #3
The FDA would never approve a chemotherapy drug unless it was scientifically proven, beyond any doubt, that the drug significantly extends the "total life" of a cancer patient.
True or false?
True or false?
Answer:
The FDA has never approved a chemotherapy drug that was shown to significantly increase the "total life" of a cancer patient.
Chemotherapy drugs are approved based on the treatment of the symptoms of cancer, not on "total life" rates.
The effectiveness of chemotherapy drugs is generally based on how well a new drug does treating symptoms, compared only to how other chemotherapy drugs do treating this same symptom!!
Furthermore, when a chemotherapy drug is approved for "extending life," the approval is also based on comparing one chemotherapy drug (or combination of drugs) to another chemotherapy drug (or combination of drugs).
Never, never, never, has a chemotherapy drug been approved by a study comparing the use of the drug on one group of patients, and comparing this group to a group of patients who refused treatments (in an FDA filing), nor has a study ever been done comparing chemotherapy to one of the top alternative cancer treatments (in an FDA filing).
"We have a multi-billion dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain.
Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison." Dr Glen Warner, M.D. oncologist
Now a person might think that it would be unethical to compare a chemotherapy drug to those who refuse treatments. If a person were secretly given a placebo, perhaps that would be unethical.
However, there are plenty of people who voluntarily refuse to subject themselves to orthodox treatments who could be used in a study to compare a chemotherapy treatment plan to those who refuse treatment!!
About the Author:
-------------------------------------------------------------
No comments:
Post a Comment