I wanted to share with you a paper I share with the cancer patients I
help. In 1991 my son was diagnoised with terminal brain cancer, at the
age of 13. He has been cancer free since 1992, without the use of
chemo or radiation. It is a bit lengthy but well worth the read. I
welcome your comments.

"Unless we put medical freedom into the Constitution, the time will
come when medicine will organize into an undercover dictatorship  ...
To restrict the art of healing to one class of men and deny equal
privileges to others will constitute the Bastille of medical science.
All such laws are un-American and despotic and have no place in a
republic ... The Constitution of this republic should make special
privilege for medical freedom as well as religious freedom."

Benjamin Rush, M.D., signer of The Declaration of Independence,
physician to George Washington.
From THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF BENJAMIN RUSH

CANCER:  What you may Not Have Been Told

In 1971, President Richard Nixon declared 'war on cancer'.  Since that
time, the US has spent more than one trillion dollars on treatment and
research.  One trillion dollars!  That is one thousand billion US
dollars.  Unfortunately, the overall death rate from cancer has
increased 5% and some cancers have increased several hundred percent.

The very basic concept of cancer is that certain types of cells have
gone 'amuck' in large numbers.  Cancer can be of two types:  one
benign, which is localized and only causes problems by its location
and rate of growth; the second one is malignant, which means it can
move from one place to another.  We all have cancer cells.  I have
them; you have them; newborn babies have them.  Whether or not these
cells will mutate depends on our immune system's ability to identify
these cells as abnormal and kill them.

Cancer is caused by a number of factors.  Some of the major factors
are chronic stealth infections (microorganisms), chemicals, radiation
and strong electromagnetic fields.  The microorganisms that cause
cancer include adenoviruses, herpes viruses, hepadenoviruses, and the
papovaviruses, which contain the, now famous, SV40 virus.  The SV40
was found as a contaminant in the polio vaccines during the 60s and
70s and has been shown to cause various types of brain cancers in
humans.

Investigating microorganisms as a cause for various cancers is only
now being explored.  Since 1967, when the US Surgeon General, William
H. Stewart, made the statement, "The book is closed on infectious
disease," funding for the investigation of microorganisms, as a causal
factor for cancer and other diseases, dried up.  The focus was
redirected to the research on genetic causes of cancer.  Subsequently,
billions of dollars went into this research.  Ultimately, this new
focus and increased revenue has made no appreciable difference to life
expectancy or quality of life for any patient. It has not improved or
identified viable treatments of cancer or other diseases.

Cancer-causing genes have been knowingly identified through laboratory
testing within the medial community.  So what?  Has this finding made
any difference in life expectancy or quality of life?  No.  It is
interesting to note the current biotech industry would not be where it
is today without this research and the financial support out of every
one of our pockets.  Every time we 'walk for the cure', hold benefits,
and make donations, we are supporting the financial appetite of the
problem and not the solution.

Chemicals are another cancer causing agent.  In 1990, Eilhu Richter
and Jerry Westin of Hebrew University's Hadassah School of Medicine
observed that between 1976 and 1986, Israel was the only country among
twenty-eight studied that showed a breast cancer rate drop.  Among
those twenty-eight, was the United States.  The richest, most
powerful, and supposedly, most medically advanced country in the
world, was out ranked by Israel.

The Israeli researchers were anticipating a 20% rise in breast cancer
mortality, consistent with other countries.  In fact, they amazingly
observed an 8% drop.  In the youngest group, instead of a 20% rise,
the rate dropped 34%.  Statistically, this is a 50% change.  This
magnitude of change, in the study of cancer, is enormous.  The
identifiable reason for this drop in mortality rates was attributed to
the 1978 ban on three organochloride pesticides:  alpha benzene
hexachloride, gamma benzene hexachloride (lindane which is typically
used for lice treatment), and DDT.  There are many studies showing the
toxic effects of chemicals.  Interestingly, chemical companies have
paid for studies that come to the conclusion that chemicals are good.
Yet, independent, non-industry organizations show significantly that
chemicals are harmful.   This, in turn, poses a very important
question of whose interests are truly being served.

One of the first forms of cancer treatment was radiation.  They began
using this form of treatment in the early 1900's.  Hum, the statistics
stated earlier says that even as late as 1971 cancer is on the incline
not the decline.  In more recent years, it has even been proven that
radiation is yet another known cancer causing carcinogen, beyond a
doubt.  Do you see a pattern forming?

ElectoMagnetic Fields (EMF's) are known to cause cancer.  Electricians
are ten times more likely than anyone in the general population of
developing cancer such as leukemia.  Cell towers, cell phones, high
power electrical lines and computers have all been named as potential
contributors to a cancer diagnosis.

The mechanism as to how cancer becomes established is always the same,
oxygen deficiency.  Two-time Noble Prize winner for medicine, Otto
Warberg, theorized that cancer was caused by the replacement of oxygen
with the fermentation of sugar.  In an oxygen-deprived state, the
normal tissue cells regress in their development and start to behave
like bacteria utilizing sugar as their means to get energy.  Cancer
cells, when they behave like bacteria, lose their growth inhibition.
They do not remain anchored to other cells and have an indefinite
proliferative life span.

Conventional therapies for the battle against cancer include
chemotherapy, radiation therapy, and surgery.  Patients need to beware
that what their medical doctor shares with them regarding cancer
treatments does not present the entire picture.  A doctor's word
should not be taken as gospel without further research.  In 1978, for
example, the Office of Technology Assessment, an arm of the US
Congress, issued a major report concluding that only 10-20% of all
procedures used in medical practices have been shown to be efficacious
by controlled trial.  In other words, 80-90% of what doctors implement
as treatment is unscientific guesswork.  Since then, this study, to my
knowledge, has not been repeated, as it would only serve to strengthen
the case against these conventional therapies.

The pharmaceutical industry, which is the most profitable industry in
the world, has a strong vested interest in what goes on in all
countries' governments, in particular, the industrial nations.  On
Capitol Hill, Washington DC, there are 625 (my last count) registered
lobbyists that are on the pharmaceutical industry payrolls.  That
equates to more drug lobbyists than senators and congressmen
combined.  Unfortunately, I have not found similar statistics for
Canada, though I have no reason to believe that the situation is much
better there.  In the US, more than half of the pharmaceutical
lobbyists were either former members of congress (21) or worked in
congress or other federal agencies (295).  Basically, they are 'hired
guns' to ensure that the interests of the pharmaceutical industry are
well served.  In the 1999-2000 US federal election $262 million was
spent by this industry for political influence.  Governments are not
immune to the influence of the long arm of the pharmaceutical
industry.  Pharmaceutical companies are not interested in winning the
war on cancer.  Their interest lie in waging the war on cancer, not
winning the war.  Why?  In waging a war, maximum profits for
pharmaceuticals are guaranteed by those convinced of victory over a
bitter enemy, regardless of the evidence to prove otherwise.

Two time Nobel Prize winner Dr. Linus Pauling wrote, "Everyone should
know that the war on cancer is largely a fraud."  According to the US
National Cancer Institute:  a five-year survival rate for cancer for
all nationalities was 49% in 1974 to 1975 and 50.7% in 1981 to 1986.
This represents merely a 1.7% improvement in thirteen years.  However,
the 1.7% improvement may be due to earlier diagnosis rather than true
survival rates.  Overall, from 1947-1984, the incidence of cancer in
the general US population grew by 40%.

Over the years, official medicine has poured billions of dollars into
radiation, chemotherapy and surgical research as the major weapons in
the 'war on cancer'.  The overall cancer death rate has risen by 5%
since the war began.  (Richard Waters, "Options", 1993.)  Dr. Alan
Levin of the University of California Medical School stated, "most
cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy".  According to
Dr. John Cairn of the Harvard University School of Public Health,
"Only 2-3% of the nearly one-half million Americans diagnosed with
cancer every year are being saved by chemotherapy."  In March 1971, a
New York Journal of Medicine study found that 10% of 133 patients
using the Chemo drug 5FU (5 Flouro Uracil) died as a result of the
drug's toxicity.  Some doctors jokingly refer to this drug as '5 Feet
Under'.

In February 1996, the WHO (World Health Organization) formally
designated Tamoxifen as a carcinogen.  According to Dr. Samuel Epstien
of the University of Illinois, the drug Tamoxifen (commonly used for
breast cancer treatment) is "a rip roaring liver carcinogen".  The
National Cancer Institute and Zeneca Pharmaceutical lobbied to keep
legislators from adding Tamoxifen to its list of carcinogens.
(Science News, March 2, 1996).  Zeneca's annual revenues from
Tamoxifen were $470 million.  Interestingly enough, Zeneca
Pharmaceuticals is one of the world's largest producers of pesticides
and industrial chemicals.  Zeneca makes the carcinogenic herbicide
acetochlor and other chlorine products creating annual revenues of
over $300 million on these chemicals.

Acetochlor and all polychlorinated herbicides are estrogen mimickers.
The body produces natural estrogen and progesterone in a balanced
combination.  When estrogen is produced in larger amounts, the body
becomes imbalanced and thus potentially puts the body into a
compromised condition.  This imbalance of hormones can lead to
cancer.  Tamoxifen is promoted as a form of chemotherapy treatment.
Zeneca claims Tamoxifen blocks estrogen mimickers.

Not surprisingly, who would know more about estrogens effects on the
body and how to block this than the company who produces estrogen
mimickers.  Estrogen mimickers on their own have one to one
estrogenicity factor.  This means that one molecule of estrogen
mimicker acts like one molecule of estrogen.  Put two estrogen
mimickers together and you have a compound that can have an
estrogenicity factor of 1600.  This means that the effects of two
molecules of two estrogen mimickers can act like 1600 molecules of
estrogen.  It is broadly known that estrogen is a significant cause of
breast cancer.

An NCI (National Cancer Institute) study followed 46,355 women and
tracked the 2,082 cases of postmenopausal breast cancer that occurred
among them.  Women on estrogens only were 20% higher risk.  Those on
both estrogens and progestins had a forty-percent higher risk.  A UCLA
study found that women who received combined Hormone Replacement
Therapy for five to ten years were 51% more likely to develop breast
cancer.

Radiation is another weapon in the war against cancer yet radiation is
also a major cause of cancer itself.  According to internationally
respected radiation expert Rosalie Bertells, her research provided
evidence that mammography's cause more cancer than they detect.  And
regular mammography's cause cumulative radiation damage not to mention
that as a diagnostic tool they are very ineffective.

This crude method will detect cancers that are no less than seven
years old.  Yet radiation therapy is a cash cow for most cancer
therapy hospitals and clinics.  Not to mention, most doctors are
lavishly treated by pharmaceutical companies with gifts.  According to
ABC Primetime Thursday night, (Feb 21, 2002) doctors were coerced with
$6 billion in parties, gifts and trips to "educate" medical doctors.

Radiation and chemotherapy are toxic substances which in turn can, and
do, generate cancer.  Adding a poison to kill a poison is not good
math for our bodies.  Yet government bows to the dictums of industry
which supports and promotes these aggressive interventions.

Government institutions are generally against alternative medicine.
As an example, the Ontario government proposed deregulation of
Naturopathic Medicine in 1982 as one MPP explained, "Naturopathic
Doctors are not a threat to the public and do not need to be regulated
because since their legislative inception in 1925 they have not killed
anyone.  Therefore, naturopathic doctors do not need to be
regulated."

In the US, official medicine also stifles alternative medicine.  The
Office of Alternative Medicine was established within the National
Institute of Health and given a mere $2 million research budget.  Yet
the same year, the National Institute of Health spent $68 million of
taxpayers' money on a single research trial for one drug.  One
chemical received 34 times more funding than an entire research
department that funds non-patentable research.

In conclusion, imagine that your body is the house of your soul and
you have been putting garbage in one room in your house for years.
Eventually, this garbage finally attracts flies.  Flies are like
cancer.  Chemotherapy and radiation therapy may kill the flies but
they also contribute to the garbage.  So, if you don't get rid of the
garbage, the flies will come back.

The comments I have made regarding the use of chemotherapy and
radiation are mine.  Everyone must make their own decision on what
they want to put into or expose their body to.
Jenny Hauf