29 February 2012

Chasing Cancer - Are We Avoiding the True Cause of the Disease by Design?

The industry of cancer treatment in the U.S. is a huge empire of multi-billion dollar business. It begins with a concern for our own health, and primary role doctors play in our lives. In the back of everyone's mind is thinking "will I live to old age and be able to enjoy my grandchildren." While we all have a life that is guided by lifestyle, fate and genetics, concerns are beginning to expand as we age, especially because we have all unfortunately a finite lifetime.

One disease that is always in the media is cancer, either breast, prostate or other cancers that disrupt families and make life wonderful people. Health systems current obsession with tests, diseases and interventions designed to prevent disease, not make a difference in the quality of life and in fact, can actually create some of the problems people experience .

Recently, mammograms were placed under the microscope because the constant radiation can actually cause cancer, he cautions. Many other types of projections have been proven less effective in preventing ADVERTISED and some tests such as PSA were so very vague, a lot of people were injured in the attempt to save them from cancer than in most cases would never have ended their lives or have affected the quality of it.

Cancer continues to take many lives, and one industry is currently in control of the process in the United States, other alternatives seriously considered, which is the definition of a monopoly. What is more disturbing is that all cancer research is based solely allopathic medicine whose sole purpose is to study individual cancers and create ways based drug prohibitively expensive and convoluted for the process, no guarantees of success. The idea of ​​trying to prove a system of thought, allopathy is the only way to help people with cancer is dogmatic and narrow-mindedness.

There are many other health care providers who thought differently, but their voices are constantly ignored by the monopoly of mainstream cancer treatment that controls most of the patients and insurance companies consider to be credible. The cancer industry continues to create the impression they give the best chance to extend live, but compared to that from organized medicine does not alternatives for cancer seriously. In fact, other methods and IDEA have been rejected outright, ensuring the continuation of the monopoly.

Others outside the mainstream cancer treatment have found that vitamin B 17 or Laetrile can actually be a nutrient that we need, but we are warned not to eat things like apricot kernels and apple, because they contain small amounts of arsenic, which appears to prevent cancer in animals at pasture. Cancer is a nutritional deficiency that has been conveniently ignored? If this is true, and we were told to avoid foods that contain it, not the health system fail us in keeping the secret? It could be argued that if this were adopted and cancer rates decreased significantly, there would be little need for the treatment of cancer and people's lives would be extended naturally.

Another case was a doctor in Italy who found that all cancers have a common problem of yeast (Candida albicans) that invaded the cells and causes them to turn into different types of cancer, but the problem was candida albicans. When treated with sodium bicarbonate, tumors decreased with this treatment relatively inexpensive. The doctor was reprimanded after one moved out of Italy (Dr. Simoncini) to conduct further research because organized medicine, there would not embrace his low-cost approach. The doctor who discovered the reason for stomach ulcers (Barry J. Marshall MD) was reprimanded too until he uses on the treatment itself which, when fully realized significantly decreased the Sales of popular drugs people took to relieve the condition for years. Now, of course, it is fully recognized, because no studies only, it proved, but that the introduction of antibiotics for H. pylori was grown in popularity, many people have avoided the disease process.

Is the cure for cancer right in front of us, but we are not allowed to see? If an inexpensive treatment for the disease was found, would it put the company in the cancer business, with affordable clinical treatment that is able to address the problem of the average person can afford with or without insurance? Currently, if the current systems, with current methods of radiation, excision and poison (chemotherapy) fail to save someone (see table for rates of cancer survival here) it is considered that they led a heroic struggle. If someone went the alternative route, and had the same or better chances of success, but did not survive, they are criticized for not going through the traditional system. The public is often told to believe that the other method is not appropriate and is a scam because it is not scientific, or was it? The War on Cancer is a war to the public and private money through charities and insurance rather than a war against a disease process that took many of us, no matter how rich we are (Steve Jobs is an excellent example).

Of course, with money spent and the fear of death in the balance, many terminally ill cancer patients will opt for the usual clinical trial, or opt for another treatment that may be just sales pitches. There are many snake oil sellers in the health care, many of them with a medical degree and others who sell the public a bill of goods. With all the money spent on research, should not we look beyond the disease model and examine all possibilities as to why cancer rates still rising? With all the money we spent to date, we are still unsuccessful cure regularly or understanding of the cause of cancer. If we realized the priest or cancer because there is, that knowledge has never been shared for the benefit of society at large. Since the large pharmaceutical companies or cancer treatment and diagnostics industry would not seek to improve their business model with a cure, perhaps we need to study the independence of the company the agenda that stand to benefit. We may be surprised by what we discover to have studied cancer in a uncorruptable. Is it even possible?

Although this article raises more questions than answers, the important point is for you to start wondering why, after all these years, cancer treatment is reliable, so dear and so damaging to us . Is there a more reliable solution found with a different level of thought.