WHAT CANCER CURE?
By John J. Moelaert
John Moelaert has researched, spoken and written on the causes, prevention and politics of cancer since 1980. He is the author of The Cancer Conspiracy
NOTE: This article has been edited for clarity.
No matter how many people shave their heads or run for a cure, cancer will continue to spread and claim more and more lives so long as carcinogens are allowed to enter our food, water, air and soil (as has long been happening in Greater Hazleton).
Iinnovative research is blocked instead of encouraged and prevention is largely ignored.
Year after year, decade after decade, the public is made to believe that the battle against cancer is being won when, in fact, more people get and die of cancer today than ever before -- far beyond population growth.
In 1971 President Richard Nixon officially declared "war on cancer" and a cure was predicted within five to ten years. Now --decades later-- we have a cancer epidemic instead of a cancer cure.In 1971 President Richard Nixon officially declared "war on cancer" and a cure was predicted within five to ten years. Now --decades later-- we have a cancer epidemic instead of a cancer cure.
Cancer is not only a terrible disease but also a multi-billion dollar industry.
As Dr. Deepak Chopra has pointed out, more people make a living of cancer than die of it. Hence a cancer cure (especially an inexpensive one) would be about as welcome among cancer profiteers as a shark in a swimming pool.
When a cancer drug has proven effective in treatment trials but is considered not sufficiently profitable, production is stopped (Cancer: Taming the Beast CNN Aug. 28, 2005).
There is a widely-held illusion that all money raised to fund research to find a cancer cure. The facts are quite different. Only about 40 per cent of the money raised goes towards research and then only to research projects that are potentially profitable to the pharmaceutical industry. The rest goes to "salaries and benefits," (27 per cent), financing fundraising campaigns (12 per cent), with the balance covering miscellaneous expenditures.
The World Health Organization revealed about 80 per cent of all cancer is environmentally caused and can therefore be prevented but, having read the descriptions of dozens of cancer research projects, the word PREVENTION was not in any of them.
Moreover, the cancer establishment blocks any innovative research that has little or no potential fiscal benefit for pharmaceutical interests no matter how promising such research may be.
It is interesting to note that, while it is public knowledge how much politicians make, the incomes of executives and researchers of "cancer-cure organizations" who also get paid out of public funds are confidential and are not disclosed. Obviously they should be.
Curiously, claims of medical breakthroughs in cancer research often coincide with fundraising campaigns, never to be heard of again.
To understand the cancer industry's dismal failure to reduce the overall incidence and mortality of cancer consider this:
If the billions of dollars spent on cancer research ($32 billion during the past 25 years in the US alone) had been effective and if all the so-called cancer-breakthroughs had been true, then obviously fewer and fewer people would get and die of cancer instead of more and more (far beyond population growth).
Clearly the public is being misled by the cancer establishment. The future looks even worse. If present trends continue, new cancers are expected to increase 70 per cent by 2010.
For the past half century conventional cancer treatment has remained limited to surgery, radiation and chemotherapy (also known as slash, burn and poison). In most cases such conventional treatments fail.
In fact, the consequences of cancer treatment are often worse than the disease itself and frequently hasten death rather than prevent it.
A 33-year study by the late Dr. Hardin Jones, professor of Medical Physics at the University of California, found that "untreated cancer victims live up to four times longer than treated individuals." (The Betrayal of Health by Dr. Joseph Beasley).
The prestigious British medical journal The Lancet reported that studies have shown that lung cancer patients who undergo radiation therapy have a 20 per cent higher mortality rate than non-radiated ones.
A survey revealed that most doctors would not accept chemotherapy for themselves or their family if THEY had lung cancer.....Cancer patients subjected to both chemotherapy and radiation get secondary tumors 25 times the normal rate (The Cancer Industry by Ralph Moss, Ph.D.)
Misleading information is not limited to cancer treatment: it also applies to diagnosis. For example, mammography is widely believed to reduce the breast cancer mortality rate when, in fact, it increases the risk of inducing cancer.
Public ignorance about the politics of cancer is the result of widespread distortion and suppression of relevant facts by the cancer industry, most mainstream news media and the government.
As two-time Nobel Prize winner Dr. Linus Pauling put it: "The war on cancer is largely a fraud."
The veracity of that statement is widely substantiated by books such as: "The Politics of Cancer Revisited" by Dr. Samuel Epstein; "'The Betrayal of Our Health" by Dr. Joseph Beasley; "The Cancer Industry" by Ralph Moss. Ph.D; "'The Cancer Wars" by Prof. Robert Proctor; and "'Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know the Truth" by Phillip Day.
