-Caveat Lector-

Dave Hartley
http://www.Asheville-Computer.com
http://www.ioa.com/~davehart



http://www.canceranswer.com/chemotherapyreport.htm
In 1971 Richard Nixon announced the
                                   War on Cancer,
and promised a cure by the 1977 bicentennial.
In each of the 25 years since, more Americans have died of
cancer than the year before.
http://www.canceranswer.com/ralphmoss.htm
We have had 50 years of American Cancer Society
(ACS) brainwashing on the question of cancer, so most
 people out there believe we are making progress in the
war on cancer. We are not, we are
                                             losing
                                               the

                                                war.




Twenty years ago I was hired at Memorial Sloane Kettering
(MSK) cancer centre in New York as the science writer, later
promoted to assistant director of public affairs. Shortly after
I went to work there I went to visit an elderly Japanese scientist,
Kanematsu Sugiura, who astonished me when he told me he
was working on Laetrile (B17), at the time it was the most
controversial thing in cancer, reputed to be a cure for cancer.
We in public affairs were giving out statements that Laetrile
was worthless, it was quackery, and people should not
abandon proven therapies. I was astonished that our most
distinguished scientist would be bothering with something
like this, and I said why are you doing this if it does not work.
He took down lab books and showed me that in fact Laetrile
is dramatically effective in stopping the spread of cancer. The
 animals were genetically programmed to get breast cancer
and about 80 - 90% of them normally get spread of the
cancer from the breast to the lungs which is a common route
in humans, also for how people die of breast cancer, and
instead when they gave the animals Laetrile by injection
only 10-20% of them got lung metasteses. And these facts
were verified by many people, including the pathology
department.
LL: So this is verified, that Laetrile can have this positive effect?
RM: We were finding this and yet we in public affairs were
told to issue statements to the exact opposite of what we
were finding scientifically, and as the years went by I got
more wrapped up in this thing and 3 years later I said all this
in my own press conference, and was fired the next day,
"for failing to carry out his most basic job responsibility"
-- ie to lie to the public what goes on in cancer research.
You better not smoke and then most of the lung cancer
won't happen, but that is one example  of how the tobacco
industry has infiltrated the medical establishment. The
bigger thing is the industrial interests. If you look at the
board of MSK you will find the who's who of the petro-
chemical industry. Why are  they there? Again, very little
research is done on the effect of chemicals in causing
cancer. We know that is probably one of the main things
that causes cancer -- petro-chemical pollution. But that
is denied. Of course it's denied, because the people who
are paying the bill and directing cancer research have a
vested interest  in keeping the scientists away from that
area, and keeping them focused on DRUG cures, things
that can be patented, marketed and so forth, and the FDA
is in total collusion in this.
LL: If there was an even playing field some of the alternative
therapies would shine.
RM: The Japanese are not afraid to look at things that are
non-toxic. Here we will look at natural things as long as
they are more toxic than chemotherapy. We don't want
any competition. It would be unfair competition to have
a less toxic drug than chemotherapy because everyone
would then flock to the less toxic drug.
LL: What is really sick is the industry leaders value their
bottom line more than the well being and life of people.
RM: Yes, because we have set up a situation where it costs
hundreds of millions of dollars for a new drug. Once you
have got a situation like that you have got to have a patent
on the drug.
LL: We know that natural substances cannot be patented.
RM: If you want to change it, you change the law that
establishes the need for double blind clinical studies in
drugs. You eliminate the efficacy clause from the Harris
amendment to the food and drug act, which Harris
himself didn't even want. This was imposed by the FDA
and the drug industry. This upped the ante and made a
regulatory barrier. Now instead of it taking 1 million dollars
to establish the safety of a drug, you now need 300 million
dollars. So none of the small inventors, or the people with
good ideas can ever hope to possibly hope to get their drugs
approved. They put you in administrative limbo where the
best you ever hope to get is this backburner simmering kind
of thing, and I know of a number of good scientists who have
got IND's (Investigative New Drug Applications) to test
drugs, but when you try to market the drug they will put you
out of business, and Dr. Burzynski is the prime example.
Brilliant scientist, wonderful results in cancer, validated by
the NCI, and yet he is on the verge of federal indictment.
RM: If there is one thing you should pick up from this show
tonight it's this: If you ever get into a situation where a doctor
recommends chemotherapy to you or your family, ask to see
the studies that the chemotherapy actually extends the life
of the patient.
LL: With chemo you may be shortening your life, certainly be
under discomfort, certainly incurring huge costs. It can
bankrupt you or your family. You have a right to know.
RM: What are the actual toxicity? Go to a library to get a
physicians desk reference, or my chemotherapy report. I
am continuously amazed. I was doing some research due to
my consultations on AM L-- a type of Leukemia, and the
treatment is so intense and toxic that in the older group that
this particular patient fell into, 40% die from the toxicity of
the treatment.
LL: 40% would have lived longer if they hadn't had the
treatment.
RM: And the cure rate is miniscule, under 10%. It is terrible
odds. In Las Vagas you wouldn't gamble with those odds
unless you were crazy. The doctors fudge the statistics.
They are confounding and confusing different issues, the
response rate, the cure rate, the one year survival rate and
so forth. Many doctors don't know any better. They are
afraid. The widest prairies have electric fences and they
are afraid to wander too close to the edge of their own field
to find out what is on the other side because they know from
the example of Dr. Jonathen Wright or Burzynski that if you
stray too far from the herd you are liable to bump into one of
 those electric fences. So there is a kind of self censorship. I
have seen this a hundred times. You talk to oncologists and
doctors, and they are individually open-minded and interested
but as an aggregate they will not move until their leadership
moves because that is a very dangerous thing for an oncologist
to do. They would stand out too much, and they can't afford
to do that as they all depend on referrals from everyone else.
LL: Lop the tallest poppy. Where does good science happen?
RM: Dr Gavalo in Russia who gets 75% five year survival in
most carcinomas. Unbelievable. CG hormone. Trophoblastic
cells. Cancer is similar to pregnancy. Cancer looks like a
pregnancy. Dr Lance...isolate the blocking factor...analised
proteins...anti tumour necrosis factor...blocking factors of
tumour...we dismount immune system when pregnant...
remove blocking proteins...3 patients with over 2 pounds of
cancer...within 24 hours all dead...on autopsy they did not
have a single cancer cell...all gone in 48 hours...but kidneys
could not handle it...they did not know about detox...the word
detox does not appear in the main textbook on cancer or the
main medical textbook...the word in medicine refers to heroin
addicts and getting them off heroin...they do not conceive that
their are such things as toxins created by a tumour...where do
they think it all goes?...it goes straight to the kidney, liver,
lungs...Lentz learned to go slower... surgery can reduce tumour
load...this failure is more exciting than most of the success I read
about...it shows you how incredibly powerful the immune system
is...it is not just that people have failing immune systems...it is
primarily that the tumour can evade the immune system...it does
not see the tumour there...if you make it visible it will go in
 and wipe it out....the Burton Clinic in the Bahamas does this...
Lentz did learn (1986) 2 patients who were terminal are still
alive...in 1902 a man, Beard, discovered cancer is trophoblast,
wrong time wrong place............cancer is far too intelligent to
submit to the raid approach of Allopathic medicine
 LL: Other research?
RM: Burzynski, only available in Texas. Some results are
amazing, for example in brain cancer. The NCI sent a team,
finally, after we were asking them for 15 years, and validated
the cases. I met one of the boys who was treated for a tumour
about the size of pear in his brain. Within one month the
tumour was gone, and it is 3 years down the road, cancer
free. He has damage from the radiation treatment he
received prior to that, he lost some of his hearing In non-
Hodgkinson lymphoma I have a friend who had stage 4,
went through chemo, radiation and bone barrow transplant.
He failed the bone marrow transplantation. More
chemotherapy. Read my book and found out about
Dr Burzynski, and its 5 years, and he is compleatly free
of cancer... an amazing case.....he also took the whole
"chicken soup" of vitamins etc...why is this better than
chemo?...it is very low toxicity
LL: You are talking about not damaged immune systems
but how the immune system was fooled.
RM: Exactly, but you still have to have an immune system.
Chemo decreases it.
LL: And you are going to die when some other germ comes
along.
RM: Or another cancer comes along, which happens to
about 10% of the people who survive the chemotherapy,
they develop a second cancer, and they will never cure that
one. It is almost impossible to cure.
Another treatment COLEYS TOXINS which is one of the
ones that excites me the most. This is not generally available
though I do know of ways to get it in different forms. It was
invented here like many of our alternative treatments and
then they have to go abroad to be used. There is a Coley's
hospital in China. They can get it in China but not here. It
was discovered at MSK in 1893 and the results...over a
1,000 people were treated with it. It is basically a high fever
treatment. Some guy rung a radio show I was on, he had a
sarcoma that was operated on, it spread, and his doctor sent
him to Dr Coley. He was 13 at the time and 95 now. This is
82 years. Sarcoma is an incurable disease. A blow away
treatment. In advanced terminal breast cancer they got
complete remissions in 50% of the cases using this treatment.
LL: This is criminal.
RM: That is not saying what you would get if you used it in
conjunction with surgery, you may get a 100%
LL: It is criminal that these are not incorporated into the
standard procedures.
RM: You bet, it is criminal. I have known about this and lived
with it for 20 years. You know what? THEY know about it at
Sloane Kettering. They even put Coleys picture in their
publicity material, as a pioneer of immunology, but they
would never use the treatment themselves. They want to
develop DRUGS that can be spun off like Tumour Necrosis
Factor, like these other immunologically based drug treatments,
highly toxic, destructive of the immune system, incredibly
expensive.
LL: It's big business.
RM: Yes, he who pays the piper calls the tune, and the drug
industry pays the piper. Do you know what the MSK
president makes?
LL: $400,000?
RM: That's chicken feed. The president of MSK makes
2 million dollars a year, 2.2 million.
Coleys toxins are bacteria that force the body to fever and
kill them and the cancer as well. Tumours are very poorly
vascularised, so you disrupt their ability to get nutrients
and to get rid of wastes by raising the body temperature.....
this is really an effective treatment and it an OUTRAGEOUS
crime of the century that we at MSK were able to cure
cancer a 100 years ago that they can't cure today. This is a
fraud being perpetrated on the public....
LL: Why isn't the New York Times writing about this?
RM: The chairman of the board of Bristol Myers, the main
company producing anti-cancer drugs, who also happens
to be on the board of MSK, is also on the board of the New
York Times. Everybody's brother in law is an oncologist,
or on the board of somebody else's something or other, so
it is a money making thing for the establishment. A hundred
and seven Billion, with a B- $107,000,000,000 dollars a year business, and
we
are not going to get rid of it easily. The point is use your
vote....
LL: Or your mind
RM: Or your mind, what a novel idea.
LL: Lets work with it (cancer) rather than go out to stamp on
it like a cockroach.
RM: Chemotherapy is machismo practiced to the N'th
degree. It is a war in which you are the battleground.
--

DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
==========
CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic
screeds are not allowed. Substance�not soapboxing!  These are sordid matters
and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright
frauds is used politically  by different groups with major and minor effects
spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL
gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers;
be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and
nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
========================================================================
Archives Available at:
http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
========================================================================
To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to