I just did a quick count of all the people I know who have had chemo (14 people), and know of only 1 that survived more than 5 years. He was an exceptional case though (18 years old with the starting problem in his knee, major surgery, radiotherapy and follow up in his lungs after they cut everything up). People with radiotherapy that I know or have known seem to do better, but suspect that's more because of the site being more localised which allowed that treatment. In addition to the above I know of 4 more people who started chemo and quit after the first round, and when asked why they quit said something to the effect of "I would rather die than go through any more of that". Of course there are different chemo treatments and it would be wrong for me to generalise on that. The last fatality was my mother late last year. She had Taxol along with a couple of rounds of a platinum based therapy I can't recall the name of. I went back to England in a bid to get her onto something a bit less painful and damaging to her immune system (I believe that health, at least from a physical aspect, is immunocentric). She refused, as her doctor was giving her enough things already, so it was my unfortunate role to have to stand down and respect her wishes. I just *know* that together we could have given her much better odds than the doctor. That's what has me still studying all this stuff and take an active role. If people want to take the conventional route then that's their sovereign right, but if they want an alternative then I'm going to be there for them.
All that brings up a question that perhaps someone could offer advice on. If I say to someone in casual conversation that there are sometimes ways that have far greater possibilities than those offered by BigPharma, the response is "If that were true then everyone would be doing it and you'd be a millionaire". How can you explain in a nutshell without boring someone why the profit motive overrides the cure? Paul B From: silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com [mailto:silver-digest-requ...@eskimo.com] Sent: 16 September 2009 03:32 To: silver-dig...@eskimo.com Subject: silver-digest Digest V2009 #546 Why do these people (Health Ranger) emphatically claim that NO ONE has ever been cured of cancer by chemotherapy? My father in law had chemo for non-Hodgkins lymphoma at 85 and an interferon therapy a couple years later, then had heart bypass at 89 and was fine till 94. I know several women who've had breast cancer and after surgery and chemo have survived without cancer symtoms for all these years. That is just why alternative medicine proponants lose credibility, they make sweeping dismisals of all mainstream medical treatments. They are so hostile to physicians that they don't even realize that THE DOCTOR WANTS TO SUCCEED BY MAKING THE PATIENT WELL. Course, I'm thinking I might try home treatment if it ever happens to
