Sunday, December 25, 2016

Chapter 18 Let's Talk About Cancer

Chapter 18

Let's Talk About Cancer

  I'm not going to prescribe or play doctor in this chapter, merely explore the nature of the disease on a theoretical basis. Nevertheless, I think you will find that the mere act of exploration
opens up a whole range of possible treatment options—once you understand the true nature of the disease.

First, let's talk about the state of cancer in the United States today.

>If you believe what you read in the press, cancer treatment is making great strides.

>Diagnosis and treatment are better than ever.

>More people are being saved than ever before.

>People are living longer after diagnosis than ever before.

>Discovery of the cancer gene and the elusive "cure for cancer" are right around the corner.

>Things have never looked better for winning the war on cancer.

On the other hand, if you look just below the surface, you find an entirely different story.

>We spend $100,000,000,000.00 a year on cancer in the United States.

>In the Feb 9, 1994 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association, the "War on Cancer" was declared a failure. "In all age groups, cancer incidence is increasing. . . Few new effective treatments have been devised for the most common cancers."

>The incidence of cancer is soaring—up between 800% to 1,700% in the last 100 years (depending on whose numbers you look at). According to the American Cancer Society, 1 in every 2.5 Americans (and moving rapidly to 1 in 2) will get some form
of invasive cancer in their lives—and half of those who get it will die from it. (Now, it is true that the rates for some forms of cancer such as prostate cancer and colon cancer have dropped slightly in the last couple of years, but keep in mind that drop is only relative to the extremely high levels that were reached in the last 100 years and that the rates for other forms of cancer (such as lymph cancer) have soared—more than offsetting the small drops just mentioned.

>More people are dying than ever before from cancer. In the early 1900s cancer was a rare occurrence in the American population. Today, it is the number 2 killer in the United States—trailing only heart disease.

  So which story is true? They can't both be true. Can they?

  Actually, they can—sort of. It all comes down to a statement attributed to Benjamin Disraeli, one of England's great Prime Ministers. According to Disraeli, "There are three kinds of lies in the world: lies, damn lies, and statistics." And that's exactly what we have here: statistical lies.

 Just do a little logical thinking, and the truth begins to shine forth. So let's take these claims one at a time and see what the truth is behind them.

   "More People Are Surviving Cancer Than Ever Before"

  If mortality rates are virtually unchanged (as stated in the Journal of the American Medical Association), but 800 to 1,700 percent more people are getting cancer than ever before, then 8-17
times as many people will be saved—would they not? Thus the remarkable claims you see in the press.

  On the other hand, what you don't hear as often is that 8-17 times as many people are also dying—whoops!
Thus the rise of cancer to its position as the number two killer in the United States.[1]
So which is the most important statistic? Quite simply, none of them. It's the fact that survival rates are virtually unchanged. What that means is that modern medicine isn't really making much
of a difference.[2]

[1 It's also worth keeping in mind that the population of the United States has increased 360% in the last hundred years (75,000,000 to 270,000,000). That means you can multiply both the survival and mortality rates by 3.6. In other words, the 8-17 times becomes 29-61 times. And that's how cancer has risen from virtual obscurity to
become the number two killer in the USA, claiming several hundred thousand people a year.]

[2 Mortality rates are actually worse than they first appear. Consider the fact that when a cancer patient undergoes chemo, and then succumbs to pneumonia because their immune system has collapsed from the chemo, that is recorded as death by pneumonia—not cancer. Now add in all of the people who have died from the side effects of chemo and radiation, and you find that mortality rates are not just unchanged, but have probably gone backwards.]

  "People Are Living Longer with Cancer Than Ever Before"

  If better testing is diagnosing cancer earlier than ever before, then, by definition, people would be living longer than ever before after diagnosis, even with no real change in the effectiveness in
treatment or the actual survival rate—would they not? Bottom line is that people are not really living longer. They're just being given a longer death sentence. Now it is true that the statistics
claim to have accounted for this quirk. They haven't really. For one thing, they don't account for the number of people who die from the side effects of treatment.

  How Can This Be?
 Are we being scammed and lied to? Are cures being deliberately suppressed, as some people believe?

  Although many in the alternative health community believe otherwise, I think the answer to both questions is no. There is no scam, no deliberate suppression.

  On the other hand, with $100,000,000,000.00 dollars being spent every year on cancer in the United States, cancer has become, quite simply, a major industry. And therein lies the problem.You now have vested interests competing for a piece of this monstrous pie. This leads to a series of major problems.

>No one has an interest in preventing cancer, since that doesn't produce any money. All interest is in finding "a cure for cancer." This is where the fame is. This is where career advancement is. And yes, this is where the money is.

>Any cure found must be proprietary—otherwise no money can be made.[1]

>Any cure must come from within the medical community—to justify all of the money being raised and spent—and, in fact, to justify the doctor's very existence as a doctor.[2]

That means that

>Even though it's relatively easy to reduce the incidence of cancer by close to 90% (back to the levels experienced 100 years ago), no one in the medical community will tell you about it. (Just remove the toxins from your body—toxins that didn't even exist 100 years ago but are now present in our bodies in substantial amounts, and start regenerating your body with the essential nutrients that have been removed from the mass produced, processed foods that make up the bulk of today's diet). 

[1 And this is another area in which the deck is rigged against alternative treatments. Since it now takes several hundred million dollars to approve a new drug or treatment in the United States, any program that is not proprietary can never be approved, because no one can afford to take it through the testing process if they don't own the rights to it. When you hear drug companies complain about the high cost of drug approval, don't believe it. They love it. That's what keeps small players from disrupting their multi-billion dollar profit factory.]

[2 Actually, this is probably the biggest single factor. In the end, ego is more important than money.]

>Even though there are natural treatments that are at least as effective as chemo and radiation and surgery (not hard to do, since the medical modalities are so ineffective and have such deleterious side effects), no one in the medical community will tell you
about them.

>Even though the concept of a "cure for cancer" is basically bogus (more on that later), you will still be asked to raise and contribute billions of dollars to search for it.[1]

     So Let's Talk About the Nature of the Disease.
  Does anyone really believe that cancer somehow magically appears in isolated spots in your body for no particular reason? And that removing or destroying that cancer in that one isolated spot means that you're cured?

   Does the above statement sound silly, or even absurd, to you? If it does, you've got a problem. You see, virtually all modern cancer research and treatments are based on that premise.

>Surgically remove the cancer.

>Burn it out with focused beams of radiation.

>Poison it with chemo.

>Or all of the above.

  If we want to end the cancer scourge, we need to look elsewhere for answers. And probably the best place to start is with a discussion of what cancer actually is.

       What Is Cancer
   Cancer is fundamentally a disease of the immune system. What do I mean by that? Quite simply, in your body, as part of the normal metabolic process, you produce anywhere from a few hundred to as many as 10,000 cancerous cells each and every day of your life.

  So why doesn't everybody get cancer? Because your immune system has the ability to recognize each and every one of those aberrant cells and remove them from your body. That's what a
healthy immune system does.

  Then why do some people get cancer? Because one of three things happens (and more often than not all three together):

 1. You expose yourself to toxins and outside influences (such as heavy metals, radiation, rancid fats, viruses, bacteria, parasites, etc.) that dramatically increase the number of cancerous cells your body produces so that not even a healthy immune system can handle the load.

[1 I know a woman who had breast cancer and had run through all the usual medical treatments to no avail. She was dying, and in fact, had been sent home to die by her doctors. As a last resort she went on the Baseline of Health program and experienced a total recovery. To celebrate her recovery, she now runs regularly in "Breast Cancer" races to raise money for research—and she's absolutely oblivious to the contradiction. God bless her!]

2. You compromise your immune system to the point that it can no longer handle all of the cancerous cells your body produces—thus allowing some of them to take root and establish themselves.

3. Circulation (in the broad sense) is impeded—thus leading to both 1 and 2 above.

   Let's explore these three points in a little more detail.

   1. Exposure to Toxins and Other Outside Influences

  Some factors are known beyond a shadow of doubt; others are more hypothetical (but with strong circumstantial support).

>Exposure to radiation is an absolute known cause of cancer.

>Exposure to radon gas seeping up from the ground and into our houses is also a known cause.[1]

>Living in cities with polluted air like Los Angeles and Houston dramatically increase your chances of getting cancer. In fact, if you live in the Los Angeles basin, your chances of getting lung cancer are 426 times greater than if you live in an area with clean air.[2]

>There is now strong circumstantial evidence that transient viruses and bacteria are a major factor in producing cancer.

>Then again, we know that prolonged exposure to cigarette smoke is a known carcinogen

>Chlorine in our water is a known carcinogen.

>Excessive estrogen is the only known cause of uterine cancer and plays a major role in several other kinds of cancer including breast cancer and prostate cancer.

>Improper elimination and the improper balance of beneficial bacteria in the colon are known cancer causers. And colon cancer is now the leading cancer among men and women combined.

>Excessive build-up of free radicals is a factor. Related to this, of course, is the consumption of rancid fats and transfatty acids.

>There are over 2,000 known carcinogens in our water supply.

>Even something as simple as repeated acid reflux will eventually stress the lining of the esophagus enough that esophageal cancer results.


  Does it sound overwhelming? In a sense it is. However, it's only overwhelming if you're looking for a magic bullet cure. In fact, simple protocols such as the Baseline of Health will eliminate
virtually all of these factors from your body. Then the whole concept of preventing and reversing cancer becomes much more understandable.

[1 Radon gas is the number 2 cause of lung cancer in the US. Second only to smoking cigarettes according to the EPA, Surgeon General, and The American Lung Association. Millions of homes and buildings contain high levels of radon gas. ]

[2 Although California has made strides in reducing hazardous air pollution, a Congressional Report released on 3/1/99 found toxins at high enough levels that the risk of cancer was 426 times higher than health standards established by the 1990 federal Clean Air Act.]

2. Compromised Immune System

And how do we compromise our immune systems? As it turns out, almost every which way you can imagine.

>How good can your immune system be taking all the supplements in the world that you want) if your colon is packed with 20 lbs of old fecal matter? A substantial portion of your immune system then has to combat the effects of self-toxicity. Clean up your intestinal tract, and you free up your immune system.

>Beneficial bacteria manufacture potent immune boosters such as Transfer Factor and Lactoferrin right in your intestinal tract—if they're there. In other words, the proper balance of beneficial probiotics in your intestinal tract can substantially boost your immune system by increasing internal production of a number of powerful immune factors. Without those factors, your immune system is marginalized.

>Taking digestive enzymes between meals relieves stress on the immune system by helping to eliminate Circulating Immune Complexes from the body. Given today's enzymatically dead diet, this is essential to prevent a total breakdown of your immune system.

>Proper diet and nourishment boost your immune system. Each and every immune cell in your body is manufactured from the food you eat. A nutritionally deficient diet means functionally deficient immune cells. The bottom line is that you can't build the same immune cell out of pepperoni pizza, beer, and twinkies that you can out of whole living foods. Supplementation with the proper vitamin and mineral complexes will significantly enhance the production of your body's immune cells.

>Deficiencies of the key fatty acids is a sure invitation to cancer. In fact, some of the fatty acids actually work as immune system modulators that help to keep the immune system properly programmed so it doesn't attack itself.

>A full spectrum antioxidant boosts the immune system in multiple ways. Just one example is Curcumin. In Immunological Investigations, 1999, Vol 28, Issue 5-6, pp 291-303, there are published studies that prove that Curcumin can increase white
blood cell count by some 50% in just 12 days—not to mention circulating antibodies by some 512 in the same time frame.

 >Cleaning out the liver improves its ability to produce immune factors and remove bacteria from the blood. An impaired live is like a death sentence to your immune system.

>Cleaning out the blood and balancing your blood's pH also helps to improve immune function. In fact, low pH in body tissue is almost a guarantee for the onset of cancer.

>Invading pathogens can eventually overwhelm the immune system, rendering it incapable of performing its normal protective functions.

>Your mental attitude matters. There is a strong statistical correlation between depression and cancer.

>Lack of exercise reduces immune function and causes the lymph to stagnate—further compromising the immune system.

>And keep in mind that the ingredients in a single can of soda can depress parts of your immune system by as much as 50% for as long as 6 hours or more. So what does thatmean if you drink 4-5 cans of soda a day—or more?

 Again, what at first appears to be overwhelming becomes quite manageable when we view itas part of the whole.

3. Circulation

By circulation here, I'm using it in the broadest sense, as it applies to all of the body's circulatory systems: Blood, Lymph, and Energy.


  If there is any restriction of blood circulation (caused by anything from narrowing of the arteries to tension in the surrounding muscle tissue) several problems arise.

>Sufficient oxygen can no longer reach key areas of the body. 
Oxygen is a cancer destroyer.

>Sufficient nutrients can no longer reach that area of the body, thus starving it, weakening it, and making it vulnerable to mutation.

>The waste material produced by the cells can no longer be efficiently removed. The build-up of toxic waste in the cells eventually leads to cancer.


>Your lymph is your body's sewer system, removing dead cells, waste, toxic matter, heavy metals, bacteria, etc. from body tissue. Unfortunately, the lymph system has no pump of its own. If for any reason your lymph is stagnant, you end up poisoning yourself. Cancer is a likely outcome.


>Fundamentally, our bodies are pure energy systems. As you look more and more closely at the subatomic structure of all matter, the physical world begins to disappear. All that's left is a series of force fields and probabilities that create the illusion of matter as we know it. Certainly, we have to deal with this illusion (the physical world)
as we see it, but we also have to deal with the consequences of the world of energy that remains unseen—but is nevertheless the true reality behind all physical matter. The bottom line is that a major factor in the onset of cancer is when these energies in our body become unbalanced or diminished in any way.

>And, as we learned in the last chapter, cancer cells are almost exclusively low-energy cells.

   So Where Does That Leave Us?

  Once we understand what cancer actually is, it's easy to understand:

>Why medical treatments for cancer have had such dismal results

>Why most of the current research is a waste of time and money

>And most important of all, what you can do to prevent and in many cases even reverse cancer.

So let's take on these points one at a time

1. Why medical treatments for cancer have had such dismal results

  This is real obvious. Medical treatments are based entirely on eliminating the symptoms (or manifestation) of the cancer in your body. They do nothing to eliminate the causes of cancer—to
remove those things that stimulate it's growth in the body.

  Think about this for a moment. Does surgery or radiation treatment or chemotherapy do one single thing for any of the causes that we have discussed in the previous sections? And the answer,
of course, is zero, zilch, nada, nothing. All they do is attempt to remove the symptom (the physical manifestation of the cancer) that results from these causes. Is it any wonder they have had such a poor track record? And on top of everything else, now that we know the causes of cancer, we can see that radiation and chemo actually significantly compound the problem.

>Exposure to radiation is a known carcinogen. Every treatment increases the likelihood of future cancer.

>Chemo drugs are some of the most power carcinogens known. Think about this for a moment. The prime cancer treatment we use today actually fills your body with some of the most powerful cancer-causing drugs known. Whoa! Who came up with this

treatment? The absurdity of it is mind boggling. Even if you temporarily destroy the current cancer in your body by poisoning it with these drugs, haven't you significantly increased your chances of getting cancer down the road?

>But it gets even worse. Medical treatments do nothing to improve immune function in the body. In fact, chemo and radiation quite literally destroy immune function in your body.[1] This is the single most absurd aspect of the modern medical approach to dealing with cancer—destroy the very system in your body that can actually eliminate and prevent the recurrence of that cancer, and then do nothing to repair that damage. At the very least, this is highly irresponsible.[2]

>And maybe, most damning of all, these treatments are deadly in and of themselves. Chemotherapy drugs are incredibly toxic. The fundamental premise behind their use is actually frightening. "We're going to give you some of the most powerful poisons we
know in all creation. Why? Well, we hope your cancer will pull the poison in faster than the rest of your body—and therefore die before you do. Of course, if we're wrong, you'll die from the treatment and not your cancer. And at the very least, since it is so poisonous, you're going to feel really really ill—much worse than you've ever felt in your life. Your hair will fall out. You'll vomit repeatedly. You'll feel as though your very life is being drained from your body (which is actually what's happening).
But, of course, it's worth it if it works. And it is your only option." I don't know how many times I've seen people die from the chemotherapy and not the cancer. But two things, in particular, really gall me.

  -First, I know of numerous cases where people have gone through chemo, and despite all the suffering it didn't work.[3]  Unfortunately, the patients were so debilitated by the treatment, that another round of chemo was not an option. They were then "sent home" by their doctor to die. At that point, with no other options left to them, they tracked down one of the "miracle doctors." Amazingly, they began to feel better almost from day one. After a few weeks, they felt so much better that they went back to their original oncologist for a check-up. An exam showed no sign of cancer (or the cancer was dramatically reduced). The oncologist then proceeded to tell the patient that their alternative program had nothing to do with their recovery (bad enough in and of itself), but then went on to convince the patient to come back for another round of chemo to "make sure the cancer doesn't come back." And then the patient died of a heart attack as a side effect of that "insurance" chemo.

[1 I have seen numerous examples of people who have chosen to use immune boosting formulas, such as Immunity
Plus, while undergoing chemo and have actually seen their immune function not only not drop, but in fact, increase—even
double—during the course of that chemo treatment.]

[2 After we saw what Immunity Plus could do in concert with chemotherapy, I wrote to 6 major hospitals in the
United States with complementary health programs and offered to fund a study that proved the benefits of immune
system enhancement during chemo. Not one hospital responded. I wrote to each a second time. Again nothing.
With the third letter, I finally got a response. Finally, one of the hospitals wrote back and told me to never write
them again!]

[3 In fact, the benefits of chemo vary widely from cancer to cancer—sometimes improving "short-term" survivability
by as much as 50%; but also, in many cases, by 1% or less.]

- Another variation of this which I have seen repeatedly is the patient who uses immune boosting formulas (such as Immunity Plus and liquid minerals) while undergoing chemotherapy. The results are far beyond what the doctor expects. The patient, in fact, tests cancer-free half way through the chemotherapy program.
Nevertheless, the doctor insists on the last two or three rounds of chemo. And the patient dies as a result of the chemo in those final rounds.

2. Why most of the current research is a waste of time and money

This is magic bullet nonsense. Take the search for the cancer gene. Are there genes that give one a predisposition to getting cancer? Absolutely. This is exactly what the Baseline of Health talks about when it refers to your Personal Health Line at the time of birth. But looking for a cancer cure by finding the cancer gene will do nothing to eliminate all of the other factors that we know are responsible for cancer. And, in fact, we already know how small a role the "cancer gene" plays in the onset of cancer. There has been an 8-17 fold increase in the incidence of cancer in the last hundred years. Not even one-millionth of 1% of that increase can be related to genes. Genes evolve over hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of years. That means that the so-called cancer gene has had no impact on the huge increase we've seen since 1900. And that means that virtually 90% of all the cancer that we see today cannot possibly have anything to do with genes. And of that 10% that's left, only a certain percentage of that relates to the unknown cancer gene. That means, quite simply, that at best, genes were responsible for only a small percentage of the minimal cancer rates we had in the early 1900s, and that finding the "cancer gene" will affect only
that tiny percentage of cancer. Bottom line: look not for a cure in the cancer gene.

3. What you can do: the alternatives?

  According to the medical establishment, there are no effective alternative treatments for cancer. Your only options are chemo, radiation, and surgery. In fact, in half the states in this country,
it is illegal for even a medical doctor to prescribe anything other than chemo, radiation, or surgery as a treatment for cancer. The sad thing is that it absolutely is not true.There are effective alternatives.
But wait a second. Don't they test promising alternative therapies, and in each and every case find them invalid? And the answer is: yes, they test them, but skew the tests so that alternative therapies cannot pass. This is done in two ways.

The Whole Is Greater than the Sum of Its Parts

First, in almost all cases, alternative therapies are administered as part of a comprehensive program. Now that we've discussed the nature of the disease, it's easy to see why a comprehensive
program is the only thing that makes sense. Nevertheless, when the medical community decides to test the validity of a particular treatment, they insist on separating out the pieces from the

whole and testing them in isolation. 

  This would be akin to deciding to test a prospective football quarterback. The "alternative approach" would be to put him on the field with an entire team and see how he plays. The "medical
approach" would be different. How can we really tell if he's any good if there are other players on the field? Great receivers could catch lousy passes and we'd never know. A great offensive line
could make him look good by blocking so well that he had all the time in the world to find his receivers. No! The only way to truly tell if he's any good is to put him on the field alone against the
entire all-pro defensive team. And, of course, the moment the ball is hiked, he's swarmed under and killed.

   But then how do drugs pass this kind of testing? Quite simply, drugs are "magic bullets." In effect, they put him out on the field alone, but armed with an AK-47 assault rife. Of course, as soon as the ball is hiked, he shoots the entire defensive team and walks across the goal. Unfortunately, although he scores, there are side effects. The other team is dead, and the game is over-—but he did score.

   Look, just like football is a team game—with the team only as strong as it's weakest component—so too is alternative therapy for cancer a "team" program. On occasion, you may get good results using just one component or another, but overall you will get the best results when you run the program as a whole. To isolate components of a program from the whole is to treat them as drugs. That's not what they are, and they will fail that test by definition.

  Additive Vs Subtractive

  In addition, medical treatments and alternative therapies are different in an even more fundamental way. Drugs are subtractive, whereas alternative therapies are additive.

>Medical treatments such as chemo and radiation.

-As we've already discussed, medical treatments are subtractive in the very way they're evaluated. You subtract out every possible variable until you're left with the one active component.

-Traditional medical treatments are an all or nothing proposition. If you use chemo, you wipe out your immune system, which pretty much ends the possibility of using your immune system to overcome the cancer. That means medical treatments have to work consistently in a high enough percentage of cases, or they are dismissed as invalid.[1]

 That makes sense when testing subtractive therapies like drugs,
but makes no sense for testing alternative therapies. Nevertheless, that is the criterion used to evaluate alternative therapies.

Alternative therapies.

-Alternative therapies are not subtractive. They are "additive." Again, an alternative treatment that would be dismissed as ineffective because testing showed it to be only 10% effective in isolation, might nevertheless be an invaluable part of a
comprehensive program that contained seven 10% components—giving you a 70% chance of overcoming your cancer. But the medical establishment deliberately chooses not to test alternative therapies in this way—thus condemning all seven components with the "quackery" label. So the only way you hear about effective
alternatives is by word of mouth or anecdotal evidence. Fortunately, the effectiveness
of some of these programs is so strong, that it is impossible to suppress their
success. And that is why more and more people are turning away from the failing
programs of the medical community and turning to effective alternatives.

[1 And even here, the medical establishment does not play with a full deck. Doctors routinely prescribe chemotherapy for advanced lung cancer cases where the success rate is less than 1%. Any alternative therapy with a 1% success rate would be laughed into oblivion by the establishment.]


And lest I forget, one of the biggest arguments against alternative therapies is that they are a waste of money. Please! We spend $100,000,000,000.00 a year on a medical war on cancer that
has been declared a failure by its very generals. Spending $100 a month on supplements or even $2,000 for a Rife machine or an Ozone generator is a drop in the bucket compared to that obscenity.
How unbelievably hypocritical to claim that they are trashing alternative therapies to protect your pocketbook!

               General Recommendations

 Preventing Vs Reversing

 It is much easier to prevent cancer than to reverse it. The reason is very simple. Isolated cancer cells are not very strong and have no built-in support mechanisms; however, once they take root and begin to multiply, they build awesome support systems, and acquire a life of their own. In the case of tumors, for example, this includes the development of fully functional, complex vascular systems capable of providing tremendous amounts of nutrition and sustenance—unfortunately at the expense of your body's vital organs. Also, once they take root, cancer cells are able
to manifest their most important attribute—immortality. Unlike normal cells in your body, which have a limited life span (one of the main reasons we age and die), cancer cells, in general, do not
age and die. Functionally, they can live forever. This gives them a major competitive advantage over healthy cells in your body.

  The bottom line is that, yes, your body is capable of reversing an established cancer. Doctors see it all the time. They call it "spontaneous remission." But it is far easier to prevent cancer than
it is to reverse it.

     So what do you do to prevent or reverse cancer?
   This is the big question, isn't it? Unfortunately, I cannot prescribe or recommend any particular treatments in this book. That would be against the law. However, it is not inappropriate to give you some guidelines.

Chemo, Radiation, and Surgery

   First, surgery might play a role if a tumor were so large, for example, that it was impinging on another organ, thereby threatening near term death. In that case, surgery might make sense to give you the time to pursue alternatives.

   On the other hand, I would be very leery of any chemo or radiation treatments. I would need to see very convincing (and I mean convincing) statistical evidence that those particular treatments were indeed effective for my particular type of cancer before I would even give them a passing look. Remember, chemo and radiation are "subtractive" treatments.[1]

The Alternatives

   It's now time to take a look at the "additive" therapies—the therapies that remove the toxins from your body and build your body's natural defenses against cancer. They are additive in the
sense that they can all build off each other. This is a very important concept so let me cover it once again. With chemo for example, if it gives you a 1% chance of success (as with most cases of advanced lung cancer), that's it. Since you've subtracted out all other options, those are your odds: 1 in 100. On the other hand, make use of an additive alternative treatment that has a 10% chance of helping you, and there's nothing stopping you from adding another treatment that also has a 10% success rate. Now you've got a 20% chance of success. And therein lies the secret to success.

   Do everything. Do it all at once. Do it intensively. And repeat it. And once you have the cancer on the run, keep doing it until there is no sign of cancer for at least 6 months. By everything,
what do I mean?

   >  The Baseline of Health[2]  program is specifically designed to clean out and nourish virtually every major system in your body. It is by no means a cancer treatment. It is merely a system for optimizing the health of all the major systems in your body. And it is for that reason that it serves as the core of any program you use to deal with catastrophic illness. It can play a significant role both in removing the toxins from your body that promote the growth of aberrant cells and in rebuilding and optimizing your immune system. Make sure you do every piece of the program—not just
the convenient parts.[3] The liver cleanse and detox is crucial (particularly since it destroys parasites in the liver).[4] And don't forget things like taking the flaxseed, juice fasting, the mental exercises, and physical exercise. These are all key elements of the

[1 If you opt for chemo or radiation, it is absolutely imperative that you do something to repair your immune system concurrent with your treatment. Check with your doctor about using immune enhancers concurrently with your "therapy." They have consistently produced spectacular results in similar circumstances.]

[2 Following the Baseline of Health program is the best single method available for preventing cancer from taking root in your body. It also offers the best base from which to launch any program intended to reverse cancer once it has, in fact, taken root.]

[3 When using the Baseline of Health as part of a program for reversing cancer, you need to do it completely (no exceptions), intensively and repeatedly.]

[4 You should also eliminate all forms of propyl alcohol (internal and external) from your life since there are indications
these may play a role in promoting the growth of parasites in the body.]

  > Specific anticancer protocols to check out in the library or on the web 

-Check out the Budwig diet.

-Specialized antioxidants like curcumin, green tea, selenium, and L-carnosine should be explored.

-Acemannan concentrates from aloe help build the immune system.

-Ellagitannin extracts from red raspberries are proven powerful anticarcinogens.

-Check out using high doses (12 tablespoons a day) of stabalized rice bran.

-Check out Ukrain. This is expensive, but the results have been dramatic.

-Check out Carnivora. This is much less expensive, but the first dose requires the administration of an injection. After that, all doses are oral.

-Ozone Therapy. This therapy has been shown to be effective in burning cancers out of the body. It's administered using rectal insufflation. Unfortunately, the machines are not inexpensive—costing about $2,200.

-Rife Technology. There are several machines that have expanded upon the work that Royal Rife initiated. The basic premise of his work is that cancers can be eliminated by frequencies tuned to the individual electromagnetic signature of that particular disease. The medical establishment and self-appointed quack busters really dislike these machines which cost close to $2,000. Nevertheless, they work. Not as consistently as some proponents would have you believe (because it only addresses microbe induced cancers), but it does work, and can be a powerful addition to any cancer therapy.

-Track down a scalar energy charging chamber, or consume large amounts of scalar enhanced products to help raise cellular energy levels.

Is This a Cure for Cancer?

Let's be clear right off: anyone who says they have a cure for cancer is misinformed. I make this statement, not just to make the FDA happy, but because it is a simple impossibility—even
within the medical community. When I see ads for hospital-based cancer programs where patients talk about being "cancer free" for 5 years or 7 years or whatever, I gag. The simple truth is that no one is cancer free—ever!

First of all, not everyone gets well—no matter what program they use. That's the nature of life. Sometimes it's simply because there are so many variables. For example, if your house is concentrating
radon gas seeping up from the ground below, and you never checked for it and didn't know; why then, you could be doing any program in the world (from chemo to carnivora) and your odds of overcoming lung cancer would be significantly lessened. Then again, if you live in the middle of farm country and are continually exposed to pesticides, that too lessens your odds, no matter what you do. Or what if you had lived near Love Canal and were exposed to dioxin, or were one or Erin Brockovich's client's unknowingly exposed to Chromium 6 in your water, you
were in trouble no matter what health program you went on. Sometimes you just don't know. But even in those cases, your odds are still SIGNIFICANTLY better on a program designed to detoxify (remove those very toxins) from your body than on a program that adds more toxins to it.

    Also, it's important to remember that every single day of your life your body produces anywhere from a few hundred to as many as 10,000 cancerous cells as part of its normal metabolic processes. That means no one, by definition, can be cancer free, ever. The only question is: can your body deal with those cells and prevent them from taking root and multiplying? That's it, pure and simple.

    Any program that reinforces your body in that agenda is good and will improve your odds dramatically. Any program that undermines it is "questionable." Be assured that chemotherapy and radiation (at least in their current forms) will someday be considered a barbaric remnant of our medical past, like doctors not washing their hands before surgery and using mercury to treat syphilis.

Next Chapter 19


No comments: