War on Cancer; 30 Yr Failure

[Guest guest]

" War on Cancer; " 30 Yr Failure

by Ralph Moss 3:25pm Fri Feb 15 '02

The 30 year so-called " war on cancer " has been an abysmal failure for cancer

patients, but an enormous $$$$$$ maker for the pharmaceutical/medical

complex. They have, and are, making billions peddling the same toxic, cancer

causing drugs that have failed for over 50 years.

The truth of the matter is of course that there never has been a

determined, no holds-barred war on cancer. There is a fanatical and

hate-filled war being waged against the few courageous doctors and

innovative healers who prescribe natural treatments. There is a war of

protectionism. Protecting the status quo, protecting the grant money trough,

and above all, protecting the pharmaceutical cartels' monopoly.

There have been at least a dozen very encouraging cancer treatments in the

last seventy years. The Rife frequency machine, Laetrile, Hoxsey,

Antineoplastons, Coley's Toxins, Glyoxylide, Hydrazine Sulfate, Krebiozen,

Immuno-Augmentative Therapy, Dr. Max Gerson's Diet, to name a few. They all

have two things in common. The people advocating the therapy are branded

charlatans or quacks and the treatment is denounced as worthless by

scientists who have been selling us out for generations.

See my nonprofit web site for more information http://www.cancerinform.org/

The author of the article below, Ralph Moss, has been documenting this for

over 20 years. His life was changed in the late 1970's when he exposed the

cover-up by Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York. They

suppressed the benefits of Laetrile/amygdalin in fighting cancer. Why would

they do this you may ask? If an effective cancer treatment was found in

nature, it would spell economic disaster for the cancer indu$try.

Also see my Why would doctors suppress an effective cancer treatment section

http://www.cancerinform.org/docs.html

Thank you. Gavin

Exposing the Cancer Racket

http://www.cancerinform.org/

30th Anniversary of the War on Cancer

http://www.cancerdecisions.com/122401.html

By Ralph Moss (Ph.D)

December 31, 2001 marked the 30th anniversary of the " War on Cancer. " In

1971, President Nixon signed the National Cancer Act, launching a

multi-billion dollar assault on the dread disease. Congress designated this

Act " a national crusade to be accomplished by 1976 in commemoration of the

200th anniversary of our country. " Well, the Bicentennial came and went and

cancer is still with us. In 1962, there were 278,000 deaths from cancer in

the US. By 1982, that was 433,000. This year it reached 553,400. There is no

victory in sight.

Why so little progress? Health authorities neglect everything but the toxic

drug approach. Prevention is discredited, and alternative medicine has

largely been placated. The media, so aggressive in other matters, is a

pussycat when it comes to investigating cancer. Nearly everyone dances to

the tune of " Big Pharma. "

Magazine Covers (above) Each year, there is an orgy of false expectations

about cures. In May, the FDA approved a drug called Gleevec (STI-571) as a

treatment for chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML). The media went wild.

Barron's headlined: " Investing in Health, Curing Cancer! " It claimed " we are

finally winning the war. " The New York Times announced " the long- awaited

payoff from decades of research into the molecular biology of cancer. " Time

went over the top. Its May 28, 2001 cover demanded, " Is this the breakthrough

we've been waiting for? " The word " CANCER " was two inches high! It referred

to " a magic pill, a miracle breakthrough. " Not surprisingly, Gleevec flew

off the shelves, at a cost per person of $30,000 per year. Although CML

affects only 0.3 percent of all cancer patients, every kind of patient

wanted this " miracle. " You can hardly blame them. (View photo above, right)

But where's Gleevec now? At a recent symposium in New York researchers

quietly voiced their growing skepticism. " There are provocative datain CML

patients showing these are highly resistant to Gleevec, " said Connie J.

Eaves, PhD of British Columbia. " Stem cells in CML may not be responsive to

this agent at all. We are completely swept away by responses that may not

have very much to do with cure at all. "

Rudiger Hehlmann, MD of Heidelberg, Germany, agreed. He told researchers to

remember that there are no survival data for the use of this drug yet,

except for patients in blast crisis. " Euphoria is a bad advisor in

treatment, " he added, sardonically.

Goldman, MD, chief of hematology at Hammersmith Hospital, London, said

Gleevec as a single agent will not even cure the majority of CML patients.

" We do not know what the basis for resistance is. It may be acquired, or the

disease may already be resistant before the drug is used. "

" When Gleevec first came on the scene, " added T. Silver, MD of

Presbyterian Hospital, NYC, it seemed that the question of treating CML was

almost all solved. " But in the last year we have all begun to appreciate how

much we have to learn about how to use this agent. "

At the same time, critics were warned that they'd better get on the Gleevec

bandwagon. " Those who don't get on it are going to be run over by it, " said

one speaker. (All these quotes come from a trade magazine, Oncology Times,

and were not intended for public consumption.)

By next year, Gleevec may have gone the way of interferon, interleukin,

Endostatin, and a host of other seven day wonders. The leaders of the cancer

war may be on to some other miracle drug. At some point, the public will

have to stand up and say, " Enough! " Now might be a good time, since the NCI

has a new director. It is time for the " war on cancer " to focus on

prevention and the best complementary and alternative treatments. Such

approaches may not make a pile of money for the big drug companies, but they

hold a great deal more promise for cancer patients.