I’m in the South of France doing a few repairs on my house, although I cannot grumble. The sun is out, it’s 22 degrees and I go for an hour on my bike along the coast road every morning. I have also been catching up on lots of health ‘stuff’. One piece I was sent was a blog by Kate Arney of Cancer Research UK. In the blog, Kate toes the CRUK line and trots out the mantra that ‘more people are beating cancer due to better drugs and earlier diagnosis’ (or words to that effect).
About 3 hours later, I came across research from the USA that showed if people took exercise whilst having radiotherapy, their survival rates increased. Clearly, this research is not factored in to the CRUK claim.
And this highlighted my concerns. We hear all the time about ‘rigorous research’ and ‘science-based medicine’, but where is the hard evidence that the lengthening of survival times is due to better drugs and earlier diagnosis? Indeed, early diagnosis is rather a medical myth. The US has virtually written off the PSA test, and a mammogram cannot detect a lump until a cancer has divided 20 times – about half way through its life.
Better drugs? Well I agree with Professor David Colquhoun on Question Time when he said that the problem with the latest drugs was that ‘they just weren’t very good’.
So, where is the rigorous scientific evidence that allows Cancer Research to make such a sweeping claim? It really looks like blatant hype to me.
The truth is that people who develop cancer don’t suddenly lose their intelligence. They don’t suddenly become stupid, or vulnerable. In fact, the mere suggestion is actually quite insulting to most of them.
Their intelligence allows them to understand what orthodox medicine can do for them. And it also means they understand its limitations. It means that almost all are using complementary therapies.
Their resorcefulness means they can use the Internet, talk to contacts in support groups the other side of the world, they can read from the American Cancer Society how exercise can increase their survival and even prevent a cancer returning; or that a Doctor at the NCI says they can supplement to prevent their cancer returning. They can speak to a woman who beat her breast cancer with an organic diet and Black Salve. They can speak to someone for whom Taxol didn’t work but damage their fingers.
Their realism means they can spot the propaganda, they understand about the bribery and fraud, the blah of tainted health officials.
You see, Cancer Research, you live in the past. In a time when Doctor knew best and patients blindly did his bidding.
Private ‘support groups’ are springing up all over the net. They won’t let skeptics in. They are open-minded.
They talk about what IVC can and cannot do; how cannabis works or doesn’t, what you can take when radiotherapy burns, or the drugs numb your toes. They are intelligent, enquiring and honest conversations, free from bias and vested interest. And it really lets the debate move forward. Doctors and professors even join in; in secret. And, horror upon horrors, people are using a wide list of therapies, surviving longer, and even beating cancer without having orthodox medicine.
It’s a smart health community and it’s growing. Maybe the truth is that ….
More people are actually surviving cancer thanks to their intelligence, resourcefulness and open-minded realism.
