Introduction
SECTION - Causes and Characteristics of Cancer - Part 1
INTRODUCTION TO TREATMENTS
Causes and Characteristics of Cancer - Part 2
CHELATION
Hydrogen Medicine
Magnesium Medicine
Bicarbonate Medicine
Iodine Medicine
SELENIUM MEDICINE
Diets, Fasting and Super-Nutrition
CO2, Cancer and Breathing
Oxygen Therapy for Cancer Patients
Cannabis Medicine
Final Considerations

Lesson 25 – Doctors and Dentists are Main Causes of Cancer

iatrogenic-disease1080

Doctors are one of the main causes of cancer; no wonder why we have lost the war on cancer. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy are both intrinsically carcinogenic treatments. Take the cancer drug tamoxifen, for example. It is classified by the World Health Organization and the American Cancer Society as a human carcinogen and has been documented to cause over two dozen health-destroying side effects, and yet it is still used as a first line treatment for certain types of breast cancer.

An iatrogenic illness is an illness that is caused by a medication or physician. Iatrogenic (treatment-induced) death of patients through heart attacks and cancer are common. In 2003, heart disease accounted for approximately 700,00 deaths per year and cancer deaths were around 550,000. Iatrogenic Disease, however, accounted for a little under 784,000 deaths, which made it the leading cause of death in the United States. How many cancer deaths are iatrogenic no one will ever know.  

Breast cancer survivors of chemotherapy, for example, are facing increased risk of heart disease—so much so that at least some doctors are debating if it’s time to abandon chemotherapy as a mainstay in breast cancer treatment. Drugs called anthracyclines are a breast chemo staple despite the well-known risks: They weaken women’s hearts. “In the process of curing their breast cancer, we’ve exposed them to some pretty nasty things. And it’s not just one nasty thing, it’s a sequence of nasty things,” explains Dr. Pamela Douglas, a Duke University cardiologist.

Diagnosis and treatment of cancer are potential traumatic stressors[1] that can make cancer worse instead of better. In an article titled, "Radiation Treatment Generates Therapy Resistant Cancer Stem Cells From Aggressive Breast Cancer Cells," published in the journal Cancer July 1st, 2012, researchers from the Department of Radiation Oncology at the UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center report that radiation treatment actually drives breast cancer cells into greater malignancy.

[1]Stuber M, Kazak A, Meeske K, et al: Is posttraumatic stress a viable model for understanding responses to childhood cancer? Child Adolesc Psychiatr Clin N Am 7(1):169–182, 1998.


Provoking Cancer Stem Cells


The researchers found that even when radiation kills half of the tumor cells treated, the surviving cells which are resistant to treatment, known as induced breast cancer stem cells (iBCSCs), were up to 30 times more likely to form tumors than the non-irradiated breast cancer cells. In other words, the radiation treatment regresses the total population of cancer cells, generating the false appearance that the treatment is working, but actually increases the ratio of highly malignant to benign cells within that tumor, eventually leading to the iatrogenic (treatment-induced) death of the patient.

Chemotherapy makes cancer more malignant. Radiotherapy has also been shown to increase cancer stem cells in the prostate, ultimately resulting in cancer recurrence and worsened prognosis.[1] Cancer stem cells may also explain why castration therapy often fails in prostate cancer treatment.[2]

None of this is a secret but don’t expect your oncologist to be open about it. The undesirable effect of helping to create cancer stem cells—cells researchers say—is particularly adept at generating new tumors that are especially resistant to treatment. The medical media is saying that this might help explain why late-stage cancers are often resistant to both radiation therapy and chemotherapy. Flooding the body with bicarbonates make them less resistant.

Stem cells are more likely than other cancer cells to survive chemotherapies and radiation therapies, probably because their “stemness” allows them to self-replenish by repairing their damaged DNA and removing toxins. “Radiotherapy has been a standard treatment for cancer for so long, so we were quite surprised that it could induce stemness,” said study researcher Dr. Chiang Li, of Harvard Medical School in Boston.

grandpa-grandchild-hospital680440

One of the last things the medical profession will admit is that doctors are a main cause of death and disease. Would ruin their image! You will not find any online symptom checkers listing the cause of your problems as being caused by your doctor or the drugs he is prescribing. It really hurts to look at pictures like the one above and to even think that children’s doctors are causing much of their suffering.

Many people who have received treatment for cancer have a risk of developing long-term side effects[3undefined] that can often kill the patient in the end. Modern oncology, is easily implicated in cancer reaccurance because they use tests and treatments that cause cancer. Radiation causes cancer. Harsh chemicals in chemotherapy cause cancer. Even biopsies can irritate and provoke cancers spread or its initiation through provoking inflammation and infection.

Radiologist Dr. Winship wrote, “Counting all the known cases in the United States, of childhood with carcinoma of the thyroid, almost 20 per cent have had irradiation to the thymus gland or to the neck for some other disease.” Cancer’s reaccurance after chemo and radiation is never blamed on treatment, it is always blamed on the cancer, which reasonable or true.

[1]Long-term recovery of irradiated prostate cancer increases cancer stem cells. Prostate. 2012 Apr 18. Epub 2012 Apr 18. PMID: 22513891

[2]Stem-Like Cells with Luminal Progenitor Phenotype Survive Castration in Human Prostate Cancer. Stem Cells. 2012 Mar 21. Epub 2012 Mar 21. PMID: 22438320

[3]Approved by the Cancer.Net Editorial Board, 02/2018


Why Use Treatments That Do Not Work


The New York Times says that, “these interventions can be just as brutal on the patient as they are on a tumor.” Dr. Ulrich Abel, who poured over thousands of cancer studies, published a shocking report in 1990 stating that chemotherapy has done nothing for 80% of all cancers; that 80% of chemotherapy administered was worthless. Ulrich Abel was a German epidemiologist and bio-statistician. In the eighties, he contacted over 350 medical centers around the world requesting them to furnish him with anything they had published on the subject of cancer.

Dr. Abel’s report and subsequent book (Chemotherapy of Advanced Epithelial Cancer, Stuttgart: Hippokrates Verlag GmbH, 1990) described chemotherapy as a “scientific wasteland” and that neither physician nor patient were willing to give it up even though there was no scientific evidence that it worked.

Abel’s research led him to a sober and unprejudiced analysis of the literature where he concluded that treatments for advanced epithelial cancer rarely were successful. By “epithelial” Dr. Abel is talking about the most common forms of adenocarcinoma – lung, breast, prostate, colon, etc. These account for at least 80 percent of cancer deaths in advanced industrial countries.

“More than a million people die worldwide of these forms of cancer every year and the majority of them now “receive some form of systemic cytotoxic therapy before death,” wrote Dr. Ralph Moss who continued on to say, “The personal views of many oncologists seem to be in striking contrast to communications intended for the public. Indeed, studies cited by Abel have shown that many oncologists would not take chemotherapy themselves if they had cancer.”


Death and Harm by Oncology


Image result for oncology death

“Cancer survivors age faster and are far more likely to die sooner,” if they have been treated by oncologists, one study showed. A review, published the journal of the European Society of Medical Oncology, found that the average life expectancy of childhood cancer survivors is 30 per cent lower than the general population.

In a study published in Nature in March 2012, researchers tried to replicate the results of 53 basic pre-clinical cancer studies. Of those 53 studies, only six were replicable. In his book, Bad Pharma, Dr. Ben Goldacre sounds a warning bell on the fact that drug manufacturers are the ones who fund trials of their own products.

“Drugs are tested by the people who manufacture them in poorly designed trials, on hopelessly small numbers of weird, unrepresentative patients, and analyzed using techniques that are flawed by design, in such a way that they exaggerate the benefits of treatments,” writes Dr. Goldacre in his book. “When trials throw up results that companies don’t like, they are perfectly entitled to hide them from doctors and patients, so we only ever see a distorted picture of any drug’s true effects.”

Death through medical ignorance how do we calculate that? Doctors themselves are not really equipped to treat cancer, diabetes, heart disease and metabolic syndromes, as they freely admit, because they have no training in nutrition. If a doctor cannot treat on the level of cause what are they doing? They are letting cancer continue to plague their patients with their ignorance of and inability to treat cause. 


Modern Dentistry as a Cause of Cancer


IMG_256

Dr. Thomas Levy believes, “Infected teeth, infected gums, infected tonsils, and even infected sinuses always cause enough discomfort to drive us to a physician or dentist, but none of these are life-threatening… right? Wrong! In fact, dead wrong! They often kill, and they typically do it in a silent fashion. The overwhelming evidence in Hidden Epidemic proves that these oral infections are responsible for most heart attacks and breast cancers, as well as a majority of other chronic degenerative diseases. And even more alarming is the fact that when these oral infections are asymptomatic (“silent”), which is usually the case, they are frequently even more deadly than when they hurt!”

Though this is basically true we would have a hard time believing these infected teeth are responsible for “most cancers.” The same is true for the assertion that “All cancers are preceded by an emotional shock,” as The New Medicine asserts. However, when we include the mercury in amalgam fillings we see that dentists are responsible for too many cancers. (See lessons on Toxicity as a Cause of Cancer, Doctors as a Cause of Cancer and Diabetes and the Hun Hordes of Mercury)

Mercury used in dental fillings comes into the dental office with the poisonous cross and bones symbol on the product information insert. Legally when the mercury is taken out of someone’s mouth it is considered a toxic waste that needed to be treated in a very specific way. Thus once planted in the mouth we could identify the mercury deposits as legalized toxic waste dumps.

But nothing about the toxicity of mercury seems to penetrate the dental profession as a whole and certainly the FDA has its head stuck in the sand over the issue. The federal government and the major dental organizations pretend some form of magic takes over turning a neurological poison into a safe thing once it is put in the mouth by a trusted dentist.

200 micrograms of mercury would fit on the head of a pin.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
dropping that pinhead of mercury into 23 gallons of water
would make it unsafe for human consumption.[1]

A person with a mouthful of mercury laden dental amalgam can easily absorb 200 micrograms in a week. Once mercury has attacked cells they become impaired in their ability to detoxify and nurture themselves because mercury suffocates the intracellular respiratory mechanism.[2] The cells thus become toxic, some die but the majority simply adopt, change their physiology and live in a state of chronic malnutrition. The presence of mercury in the tissues represses the immune system, which itself has to make a conscious adaptation to what could easily become a lethal heavy metal environment.  As mercury levels increase the immune system does something very interesting for the sake of survival. It begins to allow fungi and bacteria, which can bind large amounts of toxic metals, to grow. It does this to alleviate the respiration of the cells so they can breathe again but the cost is very high for the system has to provide nutrition for the microorganisms and has to deal with their metabolic products ("toxins").

The FDA official position is: Silver fillings used to patch cavities aren’t dangerous even though they expose dental patients to the toxic metal mercury, federal health researchers said in August of 2006. The Food and Drug Administration reviewed 34 recent research studies and found “no significant new information” that would change its determination that mercury-based fillings don’t harm patients, except in rare cases where they have allergic reactions. This statement comes despite the fact that mercury is a powerful toxin that can have serious neurological effects, especially in kids. It is known to directly harm the nervous systems of children, causing birth defects and other maladies.

Many dentists, holistic adherents and even the World Health Organization say mercury shouldn’t be considered totally safe under any conditions. Exposure to mercury is known to cause brain and kidney disorders. Women of childbearing age are particularly at risk because mercury exposure during pregnancy can cause neurological birth defects. Most civilized countries in Europe have banned their use except for special conditions. In terms of mercury fillings, and the CDC’s assertion that injecting babies and adults with mercury in the flu vaccine, its seems America is not civilized at all.

The greatest health danger from elemental mercury is breathing mercury vapor. Mercury is unique in that, at room temperature, it is liquid and can vaporize like water. Mercury vapors are invisible and odorless to humans. With amalgam fillings, mercury vapor is released through tooth-brushing and chewing.

“In 2001 I suffered from an acute case of mercury poisoning due to the unsafe removal of a “silver” filling by my dentist. It was very difficult to find the cause of my sudden illness, because few health care professionals are aware of the symptoms. Now I dedicate part of my time to warning others about “silver” mercury amalgam dental fillings.”

Virginia Pritchett remembers getting her teeth filled when she was 7 years old. Now, decades later, she cannot forget the health problems she suffered for years until the symptoms were linked to the mercury in her fillings. “I was 43 when I was correctly diagnosed,” Pritchett said. “I was having severe neurological problems and going into seizures.” In 1999, Pritchett had the five mercury fillings removed and replaced with composite materials. “If those were not taken out, I would be dead now,” said Pritchett, who lives in Mineral Wells.

The weight of currently available scientific evidence does not support the hypothesis that potent neurological poisons like mercury injected in children or implanted in their mouths will cause any harm. Some people believe the earth is flat too.

Most of our cancer patients have a lot of amalgam dental fillings.
Professor W. Kostler

Mercury vapors in the mouth is another form of air pollution. Each year in the U.S. an estimated 40 tons of mercury are used to prepare mercury-amalgam dental restorations. “Mercury from amalgam fillings has been shown to be neurotoxic, embryotoxic, mutagenic, teratogenic, immunotoxic and clastogenic. It is capable of causing immune dysfunction and autoimmune diseases,” writes Dr. Robert Gammal.

[1] EPA - Consumer Fact sheet on: MERCURY – Safe limit in water is 2ppb