Curing disease

[Guest guest]

To all friends in the group.... Something to think about.

Curing Disease....the simple truth

Dorlands Illustrated Medical Dictionary defines "cure" as:

1. The course of treatment of any disease, or of a special case.

2. The successful treatment of a disease or wound.

3. A system of treating diseases.

4. A medicine effective in treating a disease.

Webster's II New Riverside University Dictionary defines "cure" as:

1. Restoration of health.

2. A method or course of medical treatment for restoring health.

3. A restorative agent, as a drug: REMEDY

4. Something that relieves or corrects a harmful or disturbing situation.

Notice the differences between the medical dictionary and the non-medical dictionary in the definitions and their orientation.

The Dorland's medical dictionary orientation is about "treating" the disease. Dorland's also defines a treatment as: "The management and care of a patient for the purpose of combating disease or disorder."

The non-medical dictionary orientation is about a method or process of restoration or correction.

While Dorland's dictionary does not define the word "combating", Webster's dictionary defines it as:

1. To fight against in battle.

2. To oppose vigorously: RESIST < drugs that combat infection > -vi. To engage in fighting: STRUGGLE. -n. Fighting, esp. armed conflict: BATTLE.

A conclusion can be made that modern medicine is about "fighting, combat, armed conflict, battle and struggle". All of these events usually produce casualties and almost anyone that has experienced our medical system can in someway relate to these definitions. Using this strategy, can we honestly relate to our problem being cured or our wellness being restored, or has the problem simply been suppressed?

As in the all too common headache, we typically take aspirin or some other pain medication, but it does not get rid of the cause of the headache. It suppresses the most obvious symptom, pain. There can be numerous causes of a headache from a misaligned spine or neck, an allergenic response to a substance, cranial pressure, a tumor, inflammation, or even sinus congestion, to name a few. To infer that pain medication fixes all of these plus the other numerous possibilities is missing the opportunity to take responsibility for our healing and authentically make a difference. Unfortunately, all to frequently and without much thought, we use the easy and most convenient strategy, even if it is ultimately harmful. We rarely consider the harm (side effect) until it also starts to produce its own obvious symptom.

What is a cure and how does it occur?

No thing cures! Not surgery, not radiation, not a drug, not a vitamin, not a mineral, not a salve, not an herb, not a thing. While the statement may sound ridiculous at first, it is nevertheless true. We are taught to believe that "taking something" can cure a problem in the body as if the "something" knows what to do and how to do it. When we look at the most obvious elements that participate in the curing process, we can only find one thing that "knows" what is going on and that is the body itself. The body uses many resources. Most of them come from what we ingest. Each individual cell in the body makes the distinction as to what it is going to use and how to use it. It decides what to allow into itself, what to use and what to avoid. If it didn't, there would be no such thing as immunity. This is the basis of all immunological function to the point of the cell being overwhelmed by a substance or event that exceeds its resistance to being changed. This phenomenon is called Gene Amplification and it is the determinant factor in the cell's resistance to being stressed by anything harmful to the cell's function. The cell will initially resist any attempted change or alteration to the point of being overwhelmed. The information regarding the surviving cell's resistance is passed on in the genes of a new cell following cellular division. The new generation of cell is more resistant to the stress because of the information passed on to it, and this is how cells basically become stronger and more resistant to challenges to their well being. We call it immunity. Collectively, the cells work as a team (holistically) creating what we interpret as an "immune system". You can see that something external to the cell's function can not cure anything because the so-called cure can only be induced by the cell and not by the tool the cell uses. The cell is alive, it breathes, eats, excretes waste material and replicates itself. The universe it does this in, along with all its friends and relatives, is called the body.

The body developed from a single cell about the size of this dot "." and to presume that it doesn't know what it is doing at any given moment is to deny the body's very act of creation itself. The body always knows what it is doing and it has always known how to do it even from the time it was as small as that dot. That the body makes mistakes is a myth. If the body were prone to mistakes, its evolution would have ceased long ago. We (that which is not the body) may not understand what the body is attempting to do and all to frequently, we misinterpret what it is attempting to do or communicate. But given the raw materials it needs to heal and to minimize, or more desirably, eliminate what interfered with its health in the first place, it heals itself according to its own priorities and methodology. After all, the body is recreating, replacing, healing, repairing and maintaining its own status to various degrees and from moment to moment anyway. The weakest link in its ability to maintain its health is us. Or put in a more philosophical way, the personality or being which occupies the body. A clue to this is that we cannot even talk about the body except as a possession of ours. If, in fact we possess it, then "who" is the "we" that is doing the possessing? It begs the question, who is it that is responsible for supporting and helping maintain the body that we use? Something to think about!

The body relies entirely on our ability to gather the raw materials and resources it ultimately needs to function qualitatively. To the extent that is denied or ignored, the body suffers. The quality of the raw material makes a difference. The body is made out of what we eat and drink (ingest), and the old engineering phrase "quality in, quality out," applies in the most literal sense. How safe would we feel if the next time we flew on a jet plane we found out that the nuts and bolts used to put it together were purchased at our local hardware store instead of being custom made to the exceptionally high standards for the specific purpose for which they are used? The same reasonable expectation of quality should apply to what we eat and drink, but when you look around and see what most of us are using for raw materials in the ongoing rebuilding of our own body it explains the advanced degeneration of health and rapid proliferation of disease in most industrial societies today.

When it comes to health, as well as human behavior, can we deny the influence the quality of raw materials being used in the ongoing recreation and maintenance of the body has? Are we being respectful of what nature has so exquisitely presented and made available to us? What happens when we introduce deficient and processed food, nonfoods and other unnatural substances in quantity into the body and for long periods of time? How does it interfere with the body's ability to follow it's own rules of health? How does it effect our own thinking processes? How does it influence our behavior and our emotions? What effect does it have on reproduction? What genetic effect does it have in our children? Are we being as responsible as we could be? Can we do better than we have been? Do we want to do better? Do we have what it takes to do better? Are we too lazy? Do we want someone else to do it for us?

"Let the government do it" is a good answer, except history has shown that putting our well being in the hands of others hasn't worked very well.

When we look around to see who is ultimately responsible for the job, there is no one else but us--the individual that occupies the body. If we own and drive a car, there are certain inherent responsibilities in maintaining the car to a qualitative standard in order to provide ourselves with a sense of security when driving it. We also want to provide that sense of security to any passengers. If we want the sense of security, we have to take the time and spend the money to produce the result we want. As there are always choices available to us, we can also pretend that we are secure and ignore the needs of the car. If we don't pay any attention to the brakes, we may eventually pay a price for our neglect. If we don't maintain fluid levels such as engine coolant and oil, the engine may be damaged by overheating or ultimately be destroyed by seizing completely. If we don't keep it fueled, it will eventually stop. Abuse and neglect can shorten the life of a car, sometimes substantially. With the body, as well as the car, we are free to cheat and think we're getting away with it. But eventually somewhere down the road there is a higher price to pay.

And it is usually our children who eventually get the bill.

Foot Note: It is an experiential fact that almost every kind of cancer in existence today is being reversed most often in less than 90 days by numerous methods. I and numerous people that I know are and have been involved in participating in it for several years. It is a virtual certainty that an industry that makes more than 100 billion dollars per year treating Cancer cannot afford for it to disappear.

Whether you choose to believe what has been written here is true or not is up to you. I wish not to seem arrogant or flippant, but I know from experience and not from concept what I am talking about.

If you want to move beyond the limitations of medical degrees and the academic community from which they come, and the adversary point of view from which it fosters its conclusions, open your mind to the possibilities present in your own creativity. There are more solutions than problems...... and your imagination is only the beginning.

Warmest regards,

J Bentley

PS: a special thank you to Webster for being a part of this group.

[Guest guest]

Curing Disease

Foot Note: It is an experiential fact that almost every kind of cancer in existence today is being reversed most often in less than 90 days by numerous naturally oriented methods. I and numerous people that I know are and have been involved in participating in it for several years. It is a virtual certainty that an industry that makes more than 100 billion dollars per year treating Cancer cannot afford for it to disappear.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"Reverse" does not mean cure. There are many treatments both conventional and "natural" that can "reverse" a cancer in minutes. The doubling time of most cancers is about 2-3 months. This means that if a cancer is temporarily reversed and half it's mass disappears, then one can only assume that 2-3 months have been added to the life -- which may or may not be a blessing. It could be a few extra precious moments to breath the air and say good bye to family or it could be spent in agonizing pain, cursing all creation while plummeting the family into bankruptcy.

If the treatment kills 99.9% of the cancer cells, you still have a death warrant, but with an approximate 4-year stay of execution. The retrenched cancer tends to be of sturdier stock than it's sissy ancestor cells.

Cancer cells are transformed. This means it is in the DNA. This means that every one must be wiped out or one must have a dedicated vigilant immune system ready to pounce.

[Guest guest]

> Curing Disease

>Foot Note: It is an experiential fact that almost every kind of cancer in existence today is being reversed most often in less than 90 days by numerous naturally oriented methods. I and numerous people that I know are and have been involved in participating in it for several years. It is a virtual certainty that an industry that makes more than 100 billion dollars per year treating Cancer cannot afford for it to disappear.

>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Reverse" does not mean cure. There are many treatments both conventional and "natural" that can "reverse" a cancer in minutes. The doubling time of most cancers is about 2-3 months. This means that if a cancer is temporarily reversed and half it's mass disappears, then one can only assume that 2-3 months have been added to the life -- which may or may not be a blessing. It could be a few extra precious moments to breath the air and say good bye to family or it could be spent in agonizing pain, cursing all creation while plummeting the family into bankruptcy. If the treatment kills 99.9% of the cancer cells, you still have a death warrant, but with an approximate 4-year stay of execution. The retrenched cancer tends to be of sturdier stock than it's sissy ancestor cells. Cancer cells are transformed. This means it is in the DNA. This means that every one must be wiped out or one must have a dedicated vigilant immune system ready to pounce.

Dear ,

Reverse in the context I put it in does mean cure. To be more specific "de-deferentiation". The cancer cells are reverting back into normal healthy cells, tumors are disolving and the body is reabsorbing the fluid and disposing of what it doesn't want. We must realize that healthy people don't "get" cancer and it is not something people catch. As an example, if you put almost any animal on a 100% processed denatured food diet, at least 80% of them will develop cancer. Interestingly, chickens raised for human consumption can develop it within two years.

If your point of view is adversarial and your strategy is to "kill" cancer cells , then where is the healing going to come from? The energy coming from and consistant with such a point of view is self defeating if one wants to heal. When the energy is shifted in the body from harmful to nuturing, from a lower frequency to higher frequency, from anger to respect, the opportunity for healing is created. The difficult task is to sustain the higher frequency in the midst of an ambience of lower frequencies. When the frequency gets low enough, what we call death occurs in the body. When we look around us these days, one does not have to look far to see that just about everything around is evolving into incongruent low energy states. Music becomes noise. What was once a challange is becoming stressful. Our environment once provided a sense of security and now people are reluctant to say good morning to a stranger. Our preoccupation with what we call negative seems to be a self fulfilling prophesy. Quality in...quality out. Junk in...junk out!

It is possible to "reverse" the phenomenon we call cancer easier than we can imagine. It can be done in seconds. However, to effect such a cause with deliberation is challanging, for it invites us to look at what we believe and how we believe it. And with our preoccupation with chemistry in medicine and the motivation behind the direction it has been taken, such a distraction has dominion in the face of what used to be a natural understanding.

The judgememts we make from what we perceive cancer to be, what we perceive it to do and what we believe the results are going to be, appear to have the biggest single influence on the outcome of such a challange. Perhaps there is a valuable clue in the difference between the survival rates with people that hold cancer as an inconvenience, as compared to a death sentence.

The body is not the enemy because there is no enemy. The body appears to have only one function and that is to thrive. What we put into it, how we treat it, what we think about it, and what we use it for can provide us with an abundance of clues as to what to do next....

Warm regards

Joe Bentley

[Guest guest]

>Dear Joe, I disagree with much of what you say, but first let me

>state what I see as points of agreement. All cancer is systemic.

>Nothing more need be said here. There is much more to healing cancer

>than extirpation of a visible growth. Second. Metaphors are very

>powerful. And here is where we split. When I see cancer in a person, I

>rage. I see a fire in the mine that must be stopped by any means

>possible as fast as possible. Yes, I see it as adversarial. You have to

>outsmart it a dozen ways at once while coming down on it with an iron

>fist. This can usually be done without damaging the host. I do not

>have the time of day for any metaphor that says, " Thum people call you a

>killer, Mr. Cancer, but I think of you as my wittle fwiend... " If this

>works for you then all I can say is that we move in very different

>circles. If you can't kill cancer, what are you going to do? Fawn and

>preen around it? Joe, if you want to have a deeper understanding of

>cancer than what is issued in the textbooks, review the relationship

>between retroviruses, endogenous retroviruses, oncogenes and chemical and

>other environmental co-factors. A good starting place would be the

>Special Virus Cancer Program Progress Reports of the late 60's and the

>early 70's. Much of this research is still classified higher than you

>probably realize classifications exist. As to the reasons for the

>secrecy, this is not the forum to discuss that. Let me just say you won't

>be making any government friends when you go snooping around. As to

>cancer in chickens, virtually all chickens have Marek's disease. This is

>an avian herpesvirus that causes tumors. It is the reason Virginia

>Livingston refused to permit her patients to eat chicken.

> [List, don't mistake any sarcasm I have as being hostility

>toward Joe. I like Joe. He is actually a very decent fellow.]

Dear ,

If you can find a way to get outside the body of academic references you

relate to so tightly, you may find that the outcomes you seek are easy to

accomplish and with out waging war against anything.

We (myself and associates) are seeing almost 100% recovery of stage 4 lung

cancer within 60 days and without the use of any drugs. We are seeing

recovery of pancreatic cancer and one liver cancer with 70 tumor

envolvement. We are seeing a lung tumor disolve in three weeks driving the

doctors into a frenzy because they don't know what is happening.

It is easier than you think to heal cancer, but it doesn't seem to work

very well if the point of view is from killing. Healing and killing don't

mix. Saying " Joe, if you have to have a deeper understanding of cancer.... "

reflects a point of view that doesn't work. Scientists of great status have

been sudying cancer for more than 30 years, spent 500 million dollars and

have gotten no where in " their war against cancer. " I have spent my anger

and have little interest left of cancer and more of an interest in

undestanding of the elements of healing. Out of necessity, I have come to

focus more on what I want than on what I don't want to happen and I have

paid a price for not knowing the difference.

Look at the process of how we think we " know cancer " . We perceive an event

we call cancer. We interpert what we perceive and filter it through our

education, ideas, judgements, attitude, biases, and the point of view we

have developed about it. Then we, all too often, frequently insist that we

are " right " about it and go about acquiring agreement from others that our

point of view is the " right " one. The end result indicates the person with

the most agreement wins, though temporarly.

This is a good game to run if what people perceive as their survival is at

stake or what they have their survival attached to. It makes it a great

money game, a game of desperation, of competition, of status and ego in

which almost no one authentically wins, and the drama goes on and on with

people chasing the promise of " a cure " . A great way to keep people in a

line waiting for your solution. Better than an " E " ticket at Disneyland!

Hatred of anything perpetuates that which is hated. We get what we resist,

and the evidence of that is abundant.

It is the love of health and not the hatred of cancer that will provide

that which people seek. Eveything else is just an illusion.

Warm regards,

Joe Bentley