|Back to Eclub Navigator|
A Cautionary Tale
The bad news we all know about. Britain leads the industrialised
world in its failure to halt the disease. The General Medical Council
likes to attack doctors using safe, alternative means to cure the problem.
More people will die of cancer next year than in previous years – more
people will contract it too. The UK has the worst cancer survival rates
of any western industrialised nation – frankly not surprising in a country
whose citizens have taken to yanking out their own teeth with pliers brought
at Homebase because they can’t afford the dentist. Into this woeful mix
you can toss all those upbeat charity reports: ‘The war on cancer is
being won, just give us another £170 million’, when the war
on cancer is being deliberately lost. Oh, and those 80% of women surviving
breast cancer? They really aren’t. In desperation to maintain credibility
and show progress for the big bucks spent, Big Cancer has redefined the
word ‘survive’ to mean only five years after initial treatment.
In the real world and not Bubbleland, ‘surviving cancer’ is not living another five years pumped full of chemical warfare agents, it’s dying in your own bed at the grand old age of 91 from something other than cancer – yanking your own teeth out with pliers bought at Homebase, for instance. And in the real world and not Bubbleland, the simple fact is this; cancer is still killing your family and mine and all the ‘experts’, pink ribbons and ££billions in the world don’t seem to be making a hoot’s worth of difference. And why exactly is that?
Because wars are only profitable while you are fighting
them, not when you’ve won them.
WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DOESN’T
In other words, what if cancer never was something
a drug could cure you of but a civilization wake-up call instead? What
if all the billions spent chasing a cure have been hopelessly aimed in
the wrong direction? Witness King Hussein of Jordan and many like him
treated with the best cancer medicine money could buy and they still died.
Then witness, as I have, the poorest victims of the disease doing the
basics, changing their diets, exercising, boosting their health, turning
their emotional lives around and clearing the problem. ‘But if it were
that simple, everyone would be doing it!’ people cry. No, they wouldn’t.
Do you have any idea how hard it is to change people’s habits, let alone
your own? I spend three hours a day on the phones talking to people about
such issues and trust me, they want to negotiate.
Doctors are caught in the middle, bristling at the
merest inference they are withholding a cancer cure. ‘If food really did
it,’ they e-mail me frostily, ‘we’d have been told about it,’ Wrong again.
You weren’t trained in even the basics of nutrition, mate, let alone lifestyle
and attitude. You have swallowed the enormous paradox that food is good
enough to keep you alive but not good enough to fix you when you’re sick.
Witness the muck they serve you in the hospital canteens at lunchtime,
let alone to your patient. From day one of medical school, they taught
you to stop thinking. And you’re still not thinking.
Witness the 1st November Daily Mail headline, ‘So
What Is Safe to Eat?’ decrying a recent £4.5 million effort
by 21 international experts to discover what’s really causing cancer.
The honest assessment resulted in the public being told to curb alcohol,
processed meats including pork (yes, that’s ham, bacon and sausages, Kevin),
and steer clear of red meat and table salt if you don’t want to get cancer
– advice, as Paul Hogan might say, which has proved about as popular as
a rattlesnake in a Lucky Dip. Britain’s ‘top’ cancer specialist Professor
Karol Sikora indignantly remonstrates, ‘Alcohol, red meat and bacon in
moderation will do us no harm and to suggest they will is wrong!’ And
Sikora should know, presiding as he does over the worst cancer survival
disaster of any western industrialised nation. By the way, what does one
have to do to be a ‘top’ cancer specialist under such circumstances?
Look, for a £20 donation, the World Cancer Research
Fund will send you a 650-page tome stuffed with literally thousands of
nutritional annotations for cancer which are routinely ignored because
the answers don’t pay. Things like, if you’re fat you’re more likely to
get cancer. If you smoke, you’re more likely to get cancer. If you take
drugs and medications, you’re more likely to get cancer. If you’re stressed,
depressed, grieving, bankrupt, jilted, divorced or just plain lazy, you’re
more likely to get cancer. If you lack vitamins B, A, C, E and D, you’re
more likely to get cancer. If you care, you’re more likely to get cancer.
See? Nothing there to make Porsche payments with, and who likes their
lifestyles judged anyway in this liberal, risk-averse society where we’re
told that anything goes but don’t even think of expressing an opinion
Doctors will continue to fail with cancer until they
buck the training and accept that a patient is not some collection of
malfunctioning cells but a human out of homeostasis. We have cultures
alive today who don’t get cancer. No stress, no speed cameras, no mobile
phones, no Iraq War. Don’t get me wrong, I truly believe 21st civilisation
has much to commend it but there are the downsides. As Berglas says, we’re
a toxic society and that includes the medicines. If cancer is striking
1 in 3 of us, that means something is going fundamentally wrong and we’re
either going to be honest about it or continue canoeing down that long
river in Egypt called De-Nial, splurfing down the rat-burgers until the
meat-wagon comes to collect us.
Science tells us that cancer is the judgment-bar of
lifestyle. It’s a call to repentance with no naughties to evade Matron’s
attention. Dr Ted Morter has the right idea. ‘Your body doesn’t care if
you are sick or healthy. It doesn’t plan for the future. Your body doesn’t
think and it doesn’t judge. It doesn’t care if you are hurting or if you
are happy. All it does is respond to survive. Your body makes thousands
of perfect survival responses every instant of your life. You may like
the results of these responses and call it ‘health’. Or you may not like
the results and call it ‘ill-health’.’
In other words, your body is an amazing piece of kit.
During my decades of public research, the overwhelming impression I got
was how little the citizen was being taught about what they could do for
themselves. Thus they were forced to rely on the ’experts’. Thankfully
this is changing. Jamie Oliver and Gillian McKeith are but two of the
personalities these days hosting programs in an effort to change our behaviour.
Government, so quick to sticky-beak into every nook and cranny of our
lives, seems not to be bothered. ‘Healthcare’ costs rocket as doctors
continue their ignorance of diet and lifestyle. Cancer remains the corporate
preserve of vested interests, these days spearheading legislation in some
countries that would make an SS Sturmbahnfuhrer blush. Parents arrested
at gunpoint for refusing chemo for their children. Kiddies whisked away
to be forcefully medicated to preserve their ‘human rights’. Mums on the
run to avoid toxic AIDS drugs for their children. Refusing vaccinations
for little Annabelle in Maryland USA can these days bring a SWAT team
to your door.
They say that corporations have neither bodies to be punished nor souls to be damned, though I do wonder how these New World Order minions sleep at night. Let’s leave that for another time. For all the rest —for all those willing to take charge of their lives and make a change for the better, the good news is, science has done what science was supposed to do. And science says cancer today need not be the Terminator even for those considered beyond hope. I agree. I’ve seen the dead get up and walk. I do not accept the bias of the word ‘terminal’. In the Oxford English Dictionary it’s where a bus ends up. If it ever had any medical relevance whatsoever, perhaps all it described was a doctor who ran out of ideas, and a patient who ran out of hope.