WHY WESTERN MEDICINE WILL NEVER CURE CANCER

That Western cancer research is organized as a business whose fundamental motivation is profit is the subject of numerous excellent books and documentaries, among them Forest Gamble’s Thrive and Ty Bollinger’s The Truth About Cancer.

However in this article I would like to focus more on the notion that the very scientific model that Western medicine is founded on, and its singular focus on material processes, keeps it inescapably shut off from deeper causes of cancer—and thus renders it useless as an endeavour to actually find a cure.

Roundabout Definition

The National Cancer Institute defines cancer this way:

Cancer is the name given to a collection of related diseases. In all types of cancer, some of the body’s cells begin to divide without stopping and spread into surrounding tissues.

As we can see, this definition only defines the symptoms of the disease—one or more cells dividing uncontrollably—and does not attempt to identify the root causes of such aberrant cell division nor an overall ‘character’ that would more properly justify grouping a collection of diseases under the broad moniker ‘cancer’.

Tumors Are Not Cancer

It has been widely observed that our bodies manage ‘cancerous’ cells on a daily basis. Cells that show early signs of abnormal growth trigger mechanisms to repair those cells, suspend their growth, or fully kill them off.

Unlimited cell growth that leads to a tumor (an abnormal mass of tissue) can only happen if an individual cell goes through a host of discrete genetic mutations to render it incapable of containing its own growth. And even if this occurs, a number of larger-scale mechanisms under the purview of the immune system would need to be rendered ineffective in order for a cancerous cell to grow into a tumor large enough to be detected.

Which begs the question: if a healthy organism supplies a vast array of devices to prevent the incidence of cancer, should we not be looking towards the conditions that cause an organism to become unhealthy in our attempt to ultimately arrive at the cause of cancer and its subsequent cure?

Random Genetics  

In earlier times, the Western Medical Establishment maintained that cancer is a disease founded on genetic inheritance and random genetic mutation. This put an individual’s environment, mental/emotional state and lifestyle choices completely out of the cancer treatment conversation. Of course this was by design. Cancer sufferers were forced to put the entire business of curing their cancer in the hands of the professional, their ‘trusted’ oncologist.

In recent years, Western medicine has had to slowly (and grudgingly) admit to the impact of environmental factors. They now give lip service to warning the public about potential ‘carcinogens’.

However they continue to promote cancer treatment as the domain of the professional, rather than the individuals themselves. A person can quit smoking, for example, or avoid foods that have been labeled carcinogens, but if a cancerous tumor is detected, then the individual is still pressured into succumbing to the oncologist’s recommendations for surgical excision and/or the delivery of toxins. The individual still has no ‘role’ in their own treatment.

Holistic Paradigm

With a more traditional holistic approach, a cancerous tumor is seen more for what it is—a symptom of dis-ease, of an organism’s imbalance. The dis-ease of the entire organism over a long period of time suppresses the immune system and gives rise to the kinds of genetic mutations that eventually lead to the development of immortal cells.

Unlike the Western approach, factors that are not material are considered as the ultimate cause of the imbalance, including mental and emotional states. Stress, fear, and other negative thoughts and emotions play a part in interfering with and weakening the body’s natural defenses. 

Cancer Treatment

With its focus on the material, Western cancer treatment is predicated solely on dealing with the cancerous tumor; hence if the oncologist removes all visible signs of cancerous tumors then the public should conclude that they have done the right thing and they have done all they can.

The weakened or mutilated state of the patient is of no consequence; this is simply the necessary casualty of a job well done. The cancer ‘survivor’—if they actually manage to survive the treatment—is no closer to finding out about or even understanding the underlying causes of their cancer in the first place.

A holistic approach is by nature much less invasive. At all costs the patient’s strength and wholeness are preserved. The practitioner puts together a plan in partnership with the patient to restore balance and proper functioning within the organism. The ultimate objective is to empower the organism itself to use its natural defenses to erode and eventually eliminate the tumors.

For the holistic practitioner, then, the very same kinds of tumors in different patients are often seen as having completely different causes, based on the particularities of the whole person. For Western doctors, identical tumors yield the same treatment recommendations, because they are only focused on the tumor itself.

Cancer Research 

Western cancer research is thus centered on improving ways in which tumors can be removed or put into remission. Even their research into the genetic mutations that give rise to tumors does not look for a cause beyond material processes.

The ‘Fight Against Cancer’, still the battle cry for motivating people to give their time, effort, and money to Western cancer research, is an old paradigm that presents cancer as an invader from the outside. The Western researcher is cast as the tireless hero who will eventually find the ‘silver bullet’ that will cure cancer. But this is complete fantasy.

A cancerous cell is the native product of an organism that is no longer functioning according to its original blueprint. The way a cancerous cell develops exhibits a complex intelligence about its host organism, as though it was actually the organism’s attempt to give attention to its own diseased state.

The ultimate cure—beyond the reach of Western medicine—rests in being able to restore whole organisms to a state of balance and harmony, in partnership with the person themselves stricken with the disease. For those of us wanting to actually help find a cure for cancer, we might consider supporting research that is actually seeking to identify its root causes.

Source

10 Monumentally False Claims Made by Conventional Medicine about Health

The grossly deceptive world we live in couldn’t be better exemplified than by conventional medicine. More and more people are expressing their distrust. They see right through conventional medicine’s crooked corporate greed-driven hidden ulterior motives.

It starts with a deliberate narrow corporate sponsored curriculum in medicals schools. -This essentially mechanistic, pharmaceutical drug-based approach to health takes the focus of attention away from other alternative health practices to reduce competition.

In research institutions, ulterior motives find their way into corporate sponsored bad science to favour desired experimental outcomes related to profit. Crooked approval bodies then turn a blind eye to a new product’s potential harm while there are agendized political self-interests from corrupt politicians having their hand in allowing the product to get into the market.

Then there’s the paid off mainstream media to repetitively spread the related lies, deception and cover-ups… -In short, money is stronger than truth.

The health care system is a dismal failure because of these greed-driven corporations, governments and related crooked institutions. Indeed, they don’t have our best interest at heart and are capable of doing far more harm than good.

In light of this here are 10 monumentally false claims made by conventional medicine about health:

False claim #1– The symptoms are the cause of illness

No! The symptoms are just indicators or the knock-on effects of some underlying root cause. Treat the symptoms and not address the root-cause then the illness will forever return. More and more people are becoming aware that this is how conventional medicine’s Big Pharma drug treatment works and why it is failing us while they make tons of money on returning customers who will never be cured…

-Sadly, indeed, many people are still clueless to this deception while getting even sicker due to the drugs’ side effects.

False claim #2 – EMF’s (electromagnetic fields) don’t cause harm

The harmful effects of invisible EMF’s are only perceived when ill-health manifests as a consequence of usage: Used in conjunction with the various wireless apps; cell phones, laptops, tablets… then there are smart meters, microwave ovens and other radiations sources, these EMF sources interfere with our own natural bio-electromagnetic energy fields.

Do your research and pay heed to the potential dangers of this deceptively harmful technology.

False claim #3 –Only conventional medicine can effectively treat the life-threatening illnesses such as cancer, heart disease and diabetes.

As already mentioned with medical schools, when it comes to the treatment of disease, anything outside of conventional medicine’s mechanistic, pharmaceutical drug-based approach is basically ignored. Very little, or not enough time (if any time at all), is devoted to the highly effective roles played by the mind-body-spirit connection, nutrition, water and the environment in health and healing.

-In relationship to health and healing how can anyone not give these factors serious attention when they address the very fabric of our being? This wilful ignorance has made conventional medicine blind to the facts that there are cheaper, non-toxic, natural, alternative approaches that have produced highly effective results though addressing the above factors and are capable of curing life-threatening disease.

False claim #4 –Diet/nutrition does not play a major role in the prevention/reversal of cancer

Following on from 2, using cancer as an example and the role nutrition plays in the prevention/reversal of the life-threatening illnesses. Conventional medicine’s wing, the Cancer Research establishment, has basically ignored the life-saving, healing capabilities of diet/nutrition. Take, for instance, the acid and alkaline diets:

It has been established that the body’s blood pH lies somewhere between 7.3 – 7.45. If your blood pH is outside this range then you’d be dead. If someone eats toxic acid foods (essentially junk food) frequent and long-term, lowering the blood’s pH, then this could lead to a serious illness such as cancer.

The healthier option is to eat alkaline foods (e.g. pineapple juice, greens such as broccoli, spinach, watercress and the anti-cancer B17 rich foods like apricots or almonds…etc) that alkalize the body, give rise to a higher blood pH.

Further, conventional medicine has invalidated, suppressed or even ridiculed a number of brilliant and humane innovators with their cancer cures related to diet/nutrition.

There are, for examples, the highly effective Gerson Therapy pioneered by Max Gerson, Harry Hoxey’s herbal remedies and Dr Tullio Simoncini’s ‘Cancer is a Fungus’ using sodium bicarbonate injections.  All these innovations deal with a metabolic dietary deficiency related to a frequent and long-term bad acid diet.

EMF’s , new paradigm, alternative health, Big Pharma, bad science, natural health, false flag, Zika, conspiracy, Paul A Philips, cell phone danger, mind bodyHave you been PinkWashed? -Click on image

False claim #5 –Mammograms are saving lives

Not true. All the cancer establishment can say for sure is that mammograms detect cancer.  For breast cancer, the early detection claim is a myth because at this stage it cannot be known whether the cancer will turn out to be benign or harmful. Although there is no proof, the cancer establishment is more likely to say that the cancer will be harmful: There’s a lot of money to be made from their offered treatment so biasing; erroneously concluding ‘test positive’ results regularly occurs.

For instance, from a recent Swedish study involving some 60,000 women it was found that 70% of the cancer detected mamographically were not tumours as claimed. They were in fact benign.

Incidentally, mammograms increase the chances of cancer because of the radiation effects. The safer, alternative option for breast cancer screening is infra-red thermography.

False claim #6 –GMO’s are safe while feeding the world with higher yields

Tainting ecosystems; chemical toxicity, destroying species, wreaking havoc on farmlands, creating superweeds giving rise to superbugs and introducing unnatural factors into our food supplies… the harmful effects of GM foods are beyond dispute.

For well over 50 years, the biotech industry has had one major misunderstanding: It’s the idea that 1 gene codes for 1 protein. After completion of the ‘human Genome Project’ in the early part of this millenium it was shown that the 1 gene codes for 1 protein theory had not been correct and was oversimplified. Inserting one gene into a plant’s DNA has not just given rise to 1 protein but a number of other toxic rogue proteins leading to illnesses for consumers of GM foods.

Not ‘feeding the world’ and unnecessary GM foods have produced lower than anticipated yields.

False claim #7 –Vaccines are safe and effective

Officials of sorts making the blanket statement that ‘vaccines are safe’ should be held morally and criminally responsible. Consider the toxic overload children receive before the age of 6 years from some 30 plus different vaccinations (and ri$ing), assaulting their developing immune systems, resulting in a number of illnesses or deaths.

Often associated with vaccination is the term ‘immunization.’ This in fact is a misnomer. Vaccination is NOT immunization and this needs to be legally and scientifically challenged. Toxic, poisonous vaccines with their aluminium, mercury-based compounds, carboxylic acids, formaldehyde, protein foreign bodies and the many other nasty little critters have counterproductive synergistic effects when injected into the body: Thus,vaccines do the opposite to immunize, as immunity is not allowed to naturally develop.

False claim #8 –Fluoride in the water stops tooth decay

The claim that fluoride stops tooth decay is highly questionable with many contradictory findings. For example, tooth decay in fluoridated countries is no different to non-fluoridated countries. There have also been a number of studies to show that it is a nasty poison detrimental to health. Health institutions such as the American Medical Association have allowed these shocking revelations go by unheeded.

Essentially fluoride:  

* …at a concentration a little as 1ppm disrupts our enzymes responsible for DNA repair by half causing premature ageing.

* Affects our nervous and hormonal systems by denaturing (putting out of shape) our enzymes.

* Lowers IQ

*Is a carcinogen.

*Affects thyroid function

*May cause infertility

*Causes fractured bones

*Calcifies the pineal gland

-Don’t drink fluoridated tap water. Drink filtered water (e.g. reverse osmosis) instead.

False claim #9 – High cholesterol means you’ll have a heart attack imminently soon

Conventional medicine with the help of the mainstream media’s fanfare and fear mongering has managed to pull the wool over so many people’s eyes on this one. The claim that high cholesterol means a heart attack is on its way is a myth that has made billions for Big Pharma from statins drug sales as unnecessary treatment.

Contrary to popular belief  

*Atherosclerotic plaque formations (narrowing or clogging of arteries) indicative of heart disease can manifest regardless of blood cholesterol levels.

*The body produces around 3 times more cholesterol than that from your diet. So a steady diet of low cholesterol foods is highly unlikely to reduce your blood cholesterol.

*Stains used to lower cholesterol have failed to reduce heart mortality and total mortality rates.

Don’t be a sucker for the great cholesterol deception.

False claim #10 – The Zika virus causes birth defects

Because of a lack of scientific evidence, particularly from Brazil in recent months, the claim that the Zika virus causes microcephaly (severe birth defects resulting in an abnormally small head circumference) has received some major challenges. The CDC claimed that Zika was mainly transmitted via the mosquito Aedes Aegypti. They stated that the transmitted virus finds its way into the pregnant mother and then infects her foetus causing microcephaly.

However, the Brazilian health authorities admitted that there was some other cause and effect relationship because of the lack of evidence supporting the mosquito claim. This was backed up by a recent study from the New England Journal of Medicine. Having examined 12,000 Zika infected women no microcephaly was found. So it was concluded that Zika does not cause microcephaly.

-Consider the media-hyped hysteria prior to this conclusion. What about the unnecessary toxic chemical spraying to kill off the disease-carrying mosquitoes, forced abortions, vaccines and drugs used as countermeasures based on a false pretext?  Then there are the biotech companies who greatly benefitted from manufacturing their GM mosquitoes.

The Zika claim was a deliberately created scam for profit and the advancement of hidden agendas, such as a depopulation agenda (agenda21 aka 2030),typical of a false flag disease. Whether it’s Zika or any other claim more people need to wake up and recognise the patterns that make up a false flag diseaseto then take the necessary opposing action…

Finally

Don’t take for granted what health authorities are telling you or don’t blindly go into agreement with the sheep-like masses when it comes to health matters. –Save yourself the unnecessary suffering or even death. Know that by doing your own vigilant and careful research your health is in YOUR hands.

 

Source

Why You Should Not Trust Medical Experts…

Is it just me or are “free countries” like the US and Australia increasingly suffering from epidemics of human complacency, gullibility, and laziness?

These are the traits that breed tyranny in all its “glory.” In the realm of medicine, placing inordinate amounts of trust in designated “experts” is one symptom of our collective complacency. Most people seem to prefer to outsource our intelligence and capacity for critical thought to someone else, someone we’ve been conditioned to trust.

For example: “We asked an expert what would happen if no one got vaccinated and this is what they said, etc., etc.”

Asking “an expert” in this kind of context is an appeal to authority, a basic logical fallacy.

It’s a very appealing way out of actually investigating a subject in depth and thinking for oneself (appealing for some people, that is). Appealing to the authority of an “expert” is just too tempting for many chemically-addled humans at this point. Why painstakingly develop your own sophisticated viewpoint when you can just parrot what an “expert” has pronounced from on high without a second thought? They must know what they’re talking about, right? Why else would they be appearing on TV or radio as an “expert”?

Instead of placing all of your faith in someone promoted as an “expert,” how about something like this:

I investigated for myself and assessed the merits of arguments put forward by MANY “experts”, I learned HISTORY, I read scientific papers, studied clinical evidence and the testimony of endless insiders/whistleblowers, I listened to thousands of bereaved parents, investigated the Vaccine Injury Compensation Payouts ($3.5 billion and counting) and how hard it is to actually achieve justice, I studied the politics of medicine and vaccination (as well as human psychology), I weighed the evidence from all angles, and reached logical conclusions based on said evidence – far too much to get into in a short blog post.

 

But don’t worry, I’m sure your single “expert” knows what’s going on and should be completely blindly trusted, just like a Catholic would trust the Pope.

Vaccines, historically, were NEVER crucial in protecting ANY form of society, “developed” or otherwise.1 The idea of vaccines is to simulate the natural immunity acquired by a community’s contact with a disease – the evidence that vaccines work as advertised is, pardon my French, piss poor. Historians know that sanitation, hygiene, quarantine, water filtration, and better nutrition are to thank for the eradication and/or control of diseases and the reductions in mortality. All of the major reductions in disease mortality happened BEFORE vaccines were introduced as a result of these methods and interventions in living conditions, and moreover, there were some diseases whose mortality rates dropped in parallel and yet there was no vaccine even developed for them! What? You mean to say that vaccines have been given undue credit? Oh yes, absolutely.

In reality, vaccines succeeded in creating a raft of new diseases and harm (encephalitis, paralysis, developmental delays, autoimmunity, genetic damage, and on the list goes), a fact which is actively suppressed by the “authorities,” the same people who censor films like VAXXED and demonise anyone who asks legitimate QUESTIONS as they promote a cult-like ideology and social movement that promotes blind acquiescence over and above critical thinking and investigation.

In Australia we have reached the point where we value sacrosanct medical ideology over individuality, independent thought, and integrity in medicine. We value medical dogma over freedom, in point of fact, or the “authorities” do at least.

The Truth About Experts

“Experts” are people promoted by the pharmaceutical/medical Establishment to reinforce entrenched politically correct medical dogmas that tend, in the case of vaccines, to have little correlation to reality, if any at all. The job of the “expert” is merely to reinforce the lucrative status quo created by a multi-billion dollar industry.

Do you think industry will give that up voluntarily by admitting the truth? Why do you think industry fought so long to control medical education, hmm? In-doctor-ination! Imagine having hordes of mind-controlled board-certified shills out there pedaling your toxic wares for you and calling it “best practice medicine”!

Cha-ching!

Imagine if, at the same time, they also demonised and diminished the value of all of your economic competition?

Double cha-ching!

If you can’t overcome your egoic investment in the PC version of reality for your own sake, at least do it for the children who rely on adults to protect them from junk science and shitty medicine.

The Logic of Forced Medicine in a “Free Country”

There is a disturbing social undercurrent of medical zealotry in some nations, including both America and the Land Down Under. Some people just don’t seem to comprehend that you can’t have both “freedom” AND compulsory medical interventions. In the West it is a joke what we kid ourselves as constituting “freedom”. People push for mandatory vaccination and punitive measures for those who choose differently for their families, and at the same time have the dimwittedness to adhere to the “we’re a free country” fable.

It may have been once – and it could be again – but not through the coercive powers of government as it enforces medical tyranny by removing the freedom to CHOOSE. Without free choice there is only violence, coercion, extortion, and mind control. (Mind control is essential to getting the public to the point of fastening the chains to their own ankles, or in this case, campaigning for the erosion of freedom by forced medicine.)

You can’t have it both ways.

When you advocate for mandatory medicine, you advocate for medical tyranny1 – and you do it against the best available evidence.

Freedom means facing the unknowns and uncontrollables of life and having the capacity and the RIGHT to choose the responses to those challenges (real or imagined) that make the most sense to you. Freedom means that you can make that choice without fear of punishment or retribution (by government or anyone else), otherwise all you really have is a dilemma, not free choice.

You’re stuck between a rock and a hard place and all the while your government insults your intelligence by discouraging personal investigation, posing as the definitive arbiters of “truth” – truth that is just so self-evidently “true” that you’d have to be a crazy conspiracy theorist to exercise the audacity to dare researching the foundations of that “truth”… right? Because only baby killers are sceptical of government and medical authority figures, right? Only irresponsible luddites would investigate these things for themselves, right?

Only fans of disease epidemics could possibly entertain the thought of sustained personal investigation into narratives offered by government as gospel…right? Only paranoiacs would entertain neurotic thoughts causing them to want to assess the evidence on which medical authorities and government spokespeople base their opinions…right?

Which side of history do we want to stand on in the end?

Totalitarian regimes rely on many of the psychological and behavioural traits exhibited by people who are hostile to questioning the medical status quo: blind faith, unquestioning loyalty to the “leadership,” high levels of trust, fear of the unknown, abdication of responsibility for thoughts and decision-making, the subconscious drive to conveniently lay the blame for society’s ills on a subset of dissenters who raise questions or exhibit considered scepticism, and so on.

It’s just so much easier to be on the bandwagon than have the gumption, nous, initiative, and courage to critique the bandwagon ideology… until it’s YOUR child that the medical system damages and betrays, like the millions of others.

Unfortunately then it’s too late, and you yourself become a statistic: one of the many parents who bitterly regrets their blind faith in the featured “experts” of the medical system, experts who cannot help you undo the damage, and worse, will deny all responsibility and connection to it in the first place.

Freedom means having the option of not playing this sick game.

Source