The Causes of Cancer are well-known and so are the Cures

by Luis R. Miranda
The Real Agenda
February 7, 2012

It is not uncommon to see essays from so called cancer experts or doctors who privately or through foundations promote the old know-how when talking about cancer, cancer prevention and treatment. But articles that talk about cancer rates and the best methods to prevent and treat this disease are usually filled with half truths and often with plain bold lies. A recent commentary article posted on the New York Times, and written by doctor Susan Love, is a clear example of what the establishment medical industry does in order to keep patients ignorant and to continue the unnecessary search for a cure.

Cancer is not only a completely curable disease, in many cases even in advanced stages, but also an absolutely preventable one. In her essay Ms. Love begins by assessing the decision made by the Susan G. Komen for the Cure group to cut funding to Planned Parenthood, which the organization later retracted given the pressure exercised by the eugenics-driven organizationPlanned Parenthood– as well as the pharmaceutical industrial complex. The establishment medical industry co-opted organizations and foundations to protest Susan G. Komen’s decision and raised public awareness about the issue as if the defunding move would heavily impact Planned Parenthood’s ability to continue to carry out its eugenics programs. Planned Parenthood makes $164 million per year from abortions. That of course, was not pointed out by Ms. Love.

She actually went straight into the lies and half truths usually megaphoned by the establishment medical industry and the dying main stream media. She started by saying “we still don’t know what causes breast cancer, therefore we don’t know how to prevent it”. To Ms. Love’s surprise, doctors who treat and attempt to cure cancer through traditional and alternative methods have discovered that all cancers do have a common cause. Cancer is, as the latest study published by the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, has shown, a metabolic malfunction, not a consequence of cellular mutation or bad genetics, as many in the medical establishment tell us. It can be prevented and treated with diet and exercise, (also read thisenzyme therapy as well as with ingestion of dichloroacetate, as the Canadian study shows. What there isn’t right now is a treatment or cure that is equally successful for everyone, which is what the medical establishment wants us to believe. What doesn’t work is the traditional set of treatments -chemotherapy and radiation- which in most cases causes remission for a few years, but causes the cancer to spread and return. Cancer drugs make tumors more aggressive and deadly within 5 to 10 years after the patient is irradiated and poisoned. So, not all cancers are equal, true, but it is absolutely false that we don’t know its origin or how to treat it.

Ms. Love then talks about cancer screening as a tool to control cancer. Although she mentions that screening by itself is not an effective way to prevent cancers, she goes on to say it is the best way there is, therefore implicitly suggesting that women should continue to irradiate their bodies as often as their doctors recommend. She probably has not heard about the monumental number of false positives that causes doctors and patients to even consider surgery in cases when cysts found through the mammograms aren’t even malign tumors. So no Ms. Love, mammograms are not the best thing out there to diagnose or prevent breast cancer.

Ms. Love goes on to tell another lie that was manufactured within the medical establishment: That the HPV vaccine is an awesome way to prevent cancer of the cervix. She doesn’t say it, but perhaps she also believes that boys should be vaccinated against HPV, too. Again, Ms. Love probably is not aware of the fact that HPV does not cause cancer of the cervix, and that healthy women are able to prevent any disease caused by the HPV virus, with few cases of women who experience mild infections, and only a minority -less than 3000 a year- who actually develop cancer of the cervix, but not due to HPV. In fact, neither does Cervarix not Gardasil help prevent cancer of the cervix. In their own studies, pharmaceutical corporations reveal that both vaccines are barely effective in treating 4 of the more than 100 strains of human papillomavirus that exist. Even the Food and Drug Administration’s own papers reject the idea that these two vaccines help to prevent cancer of the cervix. The FDA says the HPV vaccine in women who have human papillomavirus increases the risk of cervical cancer by 44.6%, because this vaccines promote the development of precancerous lesions in the uterus, which eventually leads to cervical cancer. The American Medical Association (AMA) says: “There is significant evidence to indicate that there is no benefit from the vaccine. The disappearance of the virus during periods of 12 months is not related to the use of the vaccine. It is unlikely that vaccination has any significant benefit.” Ms. Love definitely ignores that the current global vaccination policies have been found to be fraudulent at best. Both Cervarix and Gardasil are well recognized for causing 3500 serious side effects which are not acknowledged by the medical establishment despite their proven serious consequences.

At the end of her essay, Ms. Love reinforces her views about the need to “find the causes” instead of “finding the cure”. Of course, the cures for cancer have already been found, and so have the causes. Except that the causes are not a common set of signs or symptoms that are the same on every patient. Each cancer patient has a set of causes that promoted and allowed cancer to appear and grow in him or her. I don’t think she understands that yet despite her college degree. Dear Ms. Love, neither Planned Parenthood nor any other medical organization that swears by the traditional, outdated and inefficient methods to treat and cure cancer actually offer medical care; they offer death care. They don’t treat the symptoms or the disease; they don’t cure. They kill. The only thing that has stopped millions of women and men from finding the cure for cancer is not the lack of that cure, but the ignorance, arrogance and economic interests of the pharmaceutical industrial complex to which you belong, voluntarily or not.


Hilarious: S&P Downgrades Venezuela on “Political Risk”

Reuters
August 19, 2011

Standard & Poor’s on Friday downgraded Venezuela’s credit ratings as it implemented a new methodology more heavily focused on political risk—a key weakness in the oil-producing country.

S&P cut Venezuela’s long-term sovereign rating to B-plus from BB-minus. The outlook on the new rating is stable. The agency’s new methodology was published on June 30, a little more than a month before it invoked political concerns to downgrade U.S. credit ratings.

Political risk has been a constant issue in Venezuela, where change in economic rules and nationalization of companies are common. Uncertainty about the health of President Hugo Chavez, who had surgery in Cuba earlier this summer to remove a cancerous tumor followed by chemotherapy treatment, has added to those risks, S&P said in a statement.

“In our opinion, changing and arbitrary laws, price and exchange controls, and other distorting and unpredictable economic measures have undermined private-sector investment and hurt productivity, weakening Venezuela’s domestic economy,” S&P analyst Roberto Sifon Arevalo wrote in a report.

Venezuela’s vast oil and gas reserves “somewhat” offset the policy uncertainty, S&P said. The country posts steady current account surpluses which, combined with strict capital controls, result in positive net asset positions.

However, S&P expressed concern about the actual level of Venezuela’s gold and foreign exchange reserves after reports that the country plans to repatriate them.

“When you have the reserves held abroad, you do have some level of confidence,” Arevalo told Reuters in an interview. “That is not going to be the case anymore. They are going to be held at the central bank domestically, then you fall in the same circle of lack of transparency that everything else has in Venezuela.”

Pharmacists getting Cancer from dispensing Chemotherapy Chemicals

Natural News

One of the side effects of chemotherapy is, ironically, cancer. The cancer doctors don’t say much about it, but it’s printed right on the chemo drug warning labels (in small print, of course). If you go into a cancer treatment clinic with one type of cancer, and you allow yourself to be injected with chemotherapy chemicals, you will often develop a second type of cancer as a result. Your oncologist will often claim to have successfully treated your first cancer even while you develop a second or third cancer directly caused by the chemo used to treat the original cancer.

There’s nothing like cancer-causing chemotherapy to boost repeat business, huh?

During all this, the pharmacists are peddling these toxic chemotherapy chemicals to their customers as if they were medicine (which they aren’t). While preparing these toxic chemical prescriptions, it turns out that pharmacists are exposing themselves to cancer-causing chemotherapy agents in the process. And because of that, pharmacists are giving themselves cancer… and they’re dying from it.

Why pharmacists are dying of cancer?

People who live in glass houses should never throw stones, they say. And you might similarly say that pharmacists who deal in poison shouldn’t be surprised to one day discover they are killing themselves with it.

Chemotherapy drugs are extremely toxic to the human body, and they are readily absorbed through the skin. The very idea that they are even used in modern medicine is almost laughable if it weren’t so downright disturbing and sad that hundreds of thousands of people are killed each year around the world by chemotherapy drugs.

Now you can add pharmacists to that statistic. For decades, they simply looked the other way, pretending they were playing a valuable role in our system of “modern” medicine, not admitting they were actually doling out chemicals that killed people. Now, the sobering truth has struck them hard: They are in the business of death, and it is killing them off, one by one.

The Seattle Times now reports the story of Sue Crump, a veteran pharmacist of two decades who spent much of her time dispensing chemotherapy drugs. Sue died last September of pancreatic cancer, and one of her dying wishes was that the truth would be told about how her on-the-job exposure to chemotherapy chemicals contributed to her own cancer.

Second-hand chemo

The Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA), it turns out, does not regulate workplace exposure to toxic, cancer-causing chemotherapy chemicals. At first glance, that seems surprising, since OSHA regulates workplace exposure to far less harmful chemicals. Why not chemo?

The answer is because the toxicity of chemotherapy has long been ignored by virtually everyone in medicine and the federal government. It has always been assumed harmless or even “safe” just because it’s used as a kind of far-fetched “medicine” to treat cancer. This, despite the fact that chemotherapy is a derivative of the mustard gas used against enemy soldiers in World War I. Truthfully, chemotherapy has more in common with chemicals weapons than any legitimate medicine.

So today, while workers are protected from secondhand smoke in offices across the country, pharmacists are still being exposed every single day to toxic, cancer-causing chemicals that OSHA seems to just ignore. The agency has only issued one citation in the last decade to a hospital for inadequate safety handling of toxic chemotherapy drugs.

As the Seattle Times reports, “A just-completed study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) — 10 years in the making and the largest to date — confirms that chemo continues to contaminate the work spaces where it’s used and in some cases is still being found in the urine of those who handle it…”

That same article goes on to report more pharmacists, veterinarians and nurses who are dead or dying from chemotherapy exposure:

• Bruce Harrison of St. Louis (cancer in his 50’s, now dead)
• Karen Lewis of Baltimore (cancer in her 50’s, still living)
• Brett Cordes of Scottsdale, Arizona (cancer at age 35, still living)
• Sally Giles of Vancouver, B.C. (cancer in her 40’s, now dead)

The great contradiction in cancer treatments

As the Seattle Times reports:

“Danish epidemiologists used cancer-registry data from the 1940s through the late 1980s to first report a significantly increased risk of leukemia among oncology nurses and, later, physicians. Last year, another Danish study of more than 92,000 nurses found an elevated risk for breast, thyroid, nervous-system and brain cancers.”

The story goes on to report how new safety rules are being put in place across the industry to protect pharmacists, veterinarians, nurses and doctors from toxic chemotherapy chemicals. But even the Seattle Times, which deserves credit for running this story, misses the bigger point:

If these chemicals are so dangerous to the doctors, nurses and pharmacists dispensing them, how can they be considered “safe enough” to inject into patients who are already dying from cancer?

It’s a serious question. After all, if nurses can become violently ill after merely spilling chemotherapy chemicals on themselves (it’s true), then what effect do you suppose these chemicals have when injected into patients?

The cancer industry, though, has never stopped injecting patients long enough to ask the commonsense question: Why are we in the business of dispensing poison in the first place? Poison, after all, isn’t medicine. Not when dispensed in its full potency, anyway.

The whole idea of “safety” in the cancer industry is to find new ways to protect the health care workers from the extremely dangerous chemicals they’re still injecting into the bodies of patients. Something is clearly wrong with this picture… if health care workers need to be protected from this stuff, why not protect the patients from it, too?

Nobody ever died from handling herbs

In contrast to all this, consider the truthful observation that no naturopath ever died from handling medicinal herb, homeopathy remedies or nutritional supplements. These natural therapies are good for patients, and as a bonus, you don’t have to wear a chemical suit to handle them.

Furthermore, medicinal herbs, supplements and natural remedies don’t cause cancer. They support and protect the immune system rather than destroying it. So they make patients healthier and more resilient rather than weaker and fragile.

But herbs, supplements and natural remedies don’t earn much money for the cancer industry. Only the highly-toxic patented chemotherapy drugs bring in the big bucks. So that’s what they deal in — poison for the patients. And when you deal in poison, some of it always splashes back onto you.

Chemotherapy doesn’t work

Beyond this whole issue of pharmacists and health care workers dying from exposure to secondhand chemotherapy, there’s the issue of whether chemotherapy actually works in the first place. Scientifically speaking, if you take a good, hard look at what the published studies actually say, chemotherapy is only effective at treating less than two percent of the cancers that exist. And that two percent does not include breast cancer or prostate cancer.

Yet chemotherapy is routinely used to “treat” breast cancer even though it offers no benefit to breast cancer patients. In effect, the cancer industry is engaged in a criminal treatment hoax that promises to make you healthier but actually gives you even more cancer — which is great for repeat business, but terrible for the cancer patients who suffer under it.

The level of quackery at work right now in the cancer industry is simply astonishing. You would think that if doctors and pharmacists were dishing out these chemicals to patients, they would make sure there was some sort of legitimate science to back them up. But they haven’t. The science doesn’t exist. Chemotherapy doesn’t work at anything other than causing cancer — and it accomplishes that indiscriminately, damaging any person it comes into contact with. Merely touching chemotherapy chemicals is dangerous for your health.

So if you’re considering chemotherapy for yourself, think about this long and hard: If chemotherapy is so dangerous that it’s giving the pharmacists cancer just from touching it, why on earth would you want to inject it into your body?

This is not an idle question. It is perhaps the most important question of all for someone considering conventional cancer treatment using chemotherapy. The question is essentially this: If chemotherapy causes cancer, how can it treat cancer?

Treating cancer with chemotherapy is like treating alcoholism with vodka. It’s like treating heart disease with cheese, or like treating diabetes with high-fructose corn syrup. Cancer cannot be cured by the very thing that causes it.

And to those who deal in poison, watch out for the cause-and-effect laws of biology. If you deal in chemotherapy chemicals, don’t be surprised if you get cancer one day. If you deal in chemical pesticides, don’t be surprised if you get Alzheimer’s. If you’re a dentist installing mercury fillings in the mouths of clients, don’t be surprised if one day you just go stark raving mad (because mercury causes insanity, and dentists breathe in mercury vapor thrown into the air from their drills).

If you work around chemicals, they will eventually impact your health, and never in a good way. There’s a karmic element in all this, too: If you spend your life dishing out chemotherapy drugs as a pharmacist, you have a lot to answer for. You have been an enabler of a very real chemical holocaust against the people. Don’t be surprised if that holocaust turns against you one day. Karma tends to work that way. Cause and effect is a universal law that cannot be escaped.

And if you’re a cancer patient, I urge you to think twice about the toxicity of anything you might allow in your body. If you are trying to HEAL your body, why would you allow yourself to be poisoned with a chemical that causes cancer?

Don’t let some cancer doctor talk you into chemotherapy using his fear tactics. They’re good at that. So next time he insists that you take some chemotherapy, ask him to drink some first. If your oncologist isn’t willing to drink chemotherapy in front of you to prove it’s safe, why on earth would you agree to have it injected in your body?

The Chemo that killed Alicia Parlette’s Story

San Francisco Chronicle

Alicia Parlette, who turned her incurable cancer diagnosis at age 23 into a Chronicle series about her experience, died just before Chemotherapynoon Thursday at UCSF Medical Center.

She was 28.

Ms. Parlette’s 17-part series, “Alicia’s Story,” drew tens of thousands of followers, who read about her trips to the doctor’s office, the therapist’s couch, her relationships with family and friends, and her faith in God.

Ms. Parlette had just begun her career as a copy editor for The Chronicle after graduating from the journalism department at the University of Nevada Reno when she found out in 2005 that she had a rare form of cancer in her hip and breast called alveolar soft part sarcoma.

She got the news three years after her mother died of cancer.

Despite treatments of interferon and chemotherapy, the cancer later spread to her lungs.

Ms. Parlette went to the emergency room on April 2 with breathing problems and debilitating pain in her hip. Tumors in her lungs had grown to the point she could no longer breathe on her own, and the tumor in her hip had caused it to fracture.

By mid-April, Ms. Parlette and her medical team decided to end treatment.

Days later, she and Lucas Beeler, the boyfriend she had met on BART in October, had a private commitment ceremony. He gave her the wedding ring worn by his mother and grandmother.

As her stamina declined, a steady flow of friends came to say goodbye, and thousands more sent messages via Facebook and a Web site set up for her.

Ms. Parlette recorded her thoughts on a digital recorder, and friends are planning to transcribe them. In her last days, she listened to friends read aloud from her favorite book, “To Kill a Mockingbird.” She died 20 minutes after her high school English teacher finished the last chapter.

In an April 14 interview with The Chronicle, Ms. Parlette said writing “Alicia’s Story” made her feel like a writer with a capital W.

“It became really like a lifeline in a way for me because I would often come to conclusions about things – things I didn’t even realize until I had written them.”

From the beginning, Ms. Parlette said her illness was linked with blessing. She didn’t think it was a coincidence that just as she was starting to feel creatively restless, she now had every reason to write.

She continued to work on her series despite her illness, and the first seven chapters were turned into a book.

For the past three years, Ms. Parlette shared a studio apartment in the NoPa neighborhood with her beloved rescue dog, Clarabelle.

Ms. Parlette also volunteered in the cancer center at UCSF Medical Center, sitting with patients waiting for chemotherapy treatments. Most recently, she celebrated Palm Sunday at Grace Cathedral with friends.

One of her last wishes was to turn all 28 chapters and updates of “Alicia’s Story” into a comprehensive book.

“Alicia loved working at The Chronicle,” said her brother, Matthew. “It gave her an outlet and made her feel good to help others with cancer. She appreciated all the love and support from everyone who read her story. She wants everyone to know that cancer sucks but always choose life and just do your best.”

In one of the earliest installments of “Alicia’s Story,” Ms. Parlette wrote:

“If I get through this, this story will help me remember the important moments along the way, the details, the dizzying emotions. And, in the worst of all circumstances, if I go through this life-changing ordeal and my body just wears out and I die, I will die a writer. The one thing I’ve always wanted to be.”

Ms. Parlette is survived by her father, Dave Parlette, and brother, Matthew Parlette, both of Roseville; and her fiance, Lucas Beeler of Fremont.

A memorial is pending.

More…