You can
view the interview with Jim Navarro from
Cut, Poison, Burn by
clicking here.
|
Story
at-a-glance |
-
For years, the FDA
tried to shut down
Dr. Burzynski's
alternative cancer
practice, using
non-toxic
antineoplastons to
treat highly lethal
cancers with a
success rate of
50-60 percent.
-
The conventional
medical approach is
to "search and
destroy" cancer
cells using surgery,
extremely potent
toxins and dangerous
radiation.
-
Most of the
conventional
treatments still
considered 'standard
care' were created
during a time when
knowledge of cancer
was minimal.
|
By Dr. Mercola
In 1971, US President Richard
Nixon declared war on cancer;
the National Cancer Act was
enacted and the national cancer
program was born. An impressive $1.6
billion dollars were allocated to
the program for the first three
years alone, and its director even
reported directly to the President.
So, after 40 years, how has the
war on cancer fared?
One would think that after four
decades of fervent research and
countless billions of dollars spent,
we would have this dreadful disease
under control. Just think of the
rapid explosion of ideas and
innovations within other technology
areas. Your cell phone is now more
powerful than the largest
supercomputers of that time, for
example.
Alas, the war on cancer has been
a MASSIVE failure, and the reasons
for this failure are clearly
explained in the featured
documentary Cut, Poison, Burn.
Greed bordering on the grotesque
has been allowed to rule the game
here, and the primary beneficiaries
of this 40-year long "war" are
pharmaceutical companies and the
tremendously profitable cancer
industry as a whole, including
so-called "non-profit" organizations
like the American Cancer Society.
Rather than decreasing, cancer
rates have increased during
the last 40 years, and
now surpass heart disease as the
number one killer of Americans
between the ages of 45 to 74.
According to statistics detailed in
the film, one in three women, and
one in two men will now get some
form of cancer in their lifetime!
Health Freedom is Severely
Restricted when You have Cancer
The film follows the struggles of
Jim and Donna Navarro, whose young
son was diagnosed with
medulloblastoma, a malignant brain
tumor. The conventional treatment
methods, which included potent
chemotherapy drugs and radiation,
offered virtually no hope. Even if
their son survived the treatment,
side effects could include hearing
loss, brain damage, cumulative
reduction in IQ and other cancers,
just to name a few.
The couple decided to refuse
conventional treatment for their son
and to seek alternatives, but like
so many others, they soon realized
that under the current medical
paradigm, they were not
free to seek whatever treatment they
saw fit for their child… Yes indeed,
the hard fought for freedoms that
America's forefathers sacrificed
their life for seem to have
gradually eroded to this sad state
of affairs.
Their doctor filed charges of
child abuse and child neglect
against them. Still, they fought for
their right to choose; to opt to not
have their son suffer needlessly
from a treatment that was just
as likely to kill their child
as the disease itself, while making
him suffer terribly in the process.
They had discovered Dr. Burzynski's
treatment facility in Texas, but the
FDA blocked them from getting his as
of yet unapproved treatment…
The Navarro's story is a
heartbreaking but important one, so
I hope you will take the time to
watch the film in its entirety, to
understand what could happen to you,
should you ever be placed in a
similar circumstance. If you want to
help the Navarro's pay off Thomas'
medical bills, I urge you to
purchase a copy of the film.
It's being sold on a 'value-priced'
basis, meaning you can download a
copy of the film for $1.99 and up,
depending on how much you're willing
to pay. You can also
purchase a DVD copy for $10. A
percentage of the proceeds from the
film will go to cancer organizations
that donate 100 percent of their
proceeds to families fighting
cancer—not the American Cancer
Society.
It's important to realize that
the cancer industry today is based
on wealth, not health. And the
federal government and
the American Cancer Society are
actually making matters worse, not
better.
I'm also making the DVD available
on my site. Of these proceeds, 80
percent will go to the producers and
Jim Navarro's family. I'm giving the
remaining 20 percent to
Grassroots Health's Breast Cancer
Prevention Project. All monies
donated to them from the sale of Cut
Poison Burn will be used to enroll
women 60 and over in a project aimed
to demonstrate the effectiveness of
vitamin D in breast cancer
prevention. More information about
this project can be found at
here. If you want to save on
shipping and handling, I encourage
you to purchase a digital copy of
the film
here.

Killing the Cancer Before the
Patient Dies from Treatment = Success…
People who face a lethal disease
will usually try just about anything
to survive. The brutal combination
of fear and bullying by the medical
establishment to submit to 'standard
care' is part of the foundation that
keeps the cancer industry going,
because standard approved care is
not cheap. The average cost per
patient, from diagnosis to death, is
$350,000, but can run as high as $1
million.
Since the war on cancer began in
1971, more than 14.8 million
Americans have died from some form
of cancer. Fifteen hundred people
die every day from cancer, and
565,000 people died in 2009 alone.
This amounts to Big Business.
And although there have been some
advances in the treatment of certain
types of cancer, we've made
virtually no progress at all over
the last century in the treatment of
the most common forms of cancer,
despite spending billions of dollars
in research each year.
Cancer can basically be viewed as
cell growth that is out of
bioregulatory control. The
conventional medical approach is to
"search and destroy" cancer cells
using surgery, extremely potent
toxins and dangerous radiation. And
for all the boasting about new and
improved drugs, current cancer
treatments are actually rather
archaic, and are nothing more than
the treatment of symptoms using
extremely expensive and toxic means.
As stated in the film, as long as
the cancer is killed before the
patient dies, the treatment is
largely heralded as a success…
Most of the conventional
treatments still considered standard
care were created during a time when
knowledge of cancer was minimal.
For example, chemotherapy was
invented in 1960, when poison gas
was found to kill cancerous tumors
in one mouse. As it turns out, they
were not quite able to replicate the
success on other mice, but for some
reason, for that initial one, it
seemed to work quite well. This
'fluke' of an experiment was the
original foundation of chemotherapy.
When it became clear that chemo
wasn't all that effective on its
own, radiation was added, and now
chemotherapy in conjunction with
radiation therapy is the norm for
many types of cancer.
Cancer Drugs Can Also Cause Cancer
Another problem is that many of
the
chemotherapy drugs have been found
to cause cancer. Such
is the case with the blockbuster
breast cancer drug Tamoxifen. It
does reduce breast cancer, but it
more than doubles your risk of
uterine cancer. And if you take it
for more than five years, you again
increase your risk of recurring
breast cancer. But rather than
remove it from the market, patients
are simply told that uterine cancer
can be successfully treated by
performing a hysterectomy…
The entire cancer industry built
on purging cancer cells from your
body by toxic means, and they will
not remove a drug simply because
it's dangerous, because there really
isn't such a thing as "too
dangerous" when you're dealing with
cancer drugs.
As Dr. Whitaker says:
"We started on the wrong
foot, and stayed on the wrong
foot, and now we are paying the
price."
The price is your health, even if
you survive the treatment, which
many do not. By and large, people
who get chemo die around the same
time as those who do nothing. The
main difference is that those who
get the standard care suffer far
more than those who get no treatment
at all.
The question is: Does it really
have to be like this?
No, it doesn't.
What Your Oncologist Won't Tell You…
In the film, Jim Navarro makes a
statement that really highlights the
sheer ludicrousness of the current
model of cancer care. Although the
doctor admitted that chemotherapy
"would not work" for their son's
particular cancer, and the package
insert stated that the drug has not
been proven safe or effective for
pediatric use, he still
insisted that chemotherapy had to be
used, and if the Navarro's refused
to submit their son to this
'standard care,' they could go to
jail and their son could be legally
taken from them.
Meanwhile, they were blocked from
using an alternative treatment
created by Dr. Burzynski—a
completely non-toxic treatment with
an average success rate of 50-60
percent—because it was not part of
the approved standard of care.
This is a dementedly inhuman
game; where a child's quality of
life and entire future is tossed
aside in order to maintain a highly
profitable status quo.
The truth of the matter is that
safe and effective alternatives to
this toxic and deadly paradigm do
exist.
I've already written two articles
about
Dr. Burzynski's gene-specific
treatment using antineoplastons,
peptides and derivatives of amino
acids that act as molecular and
genetic switches. They turn off
oncogenes, the genes that cause
cancer, and activate chemo
suppressor genes; the genes that
fight cancer. Furthermore, it's
completely non-toxic, and patients
suffer virtually no side effects at
all. Best of all, once the cancer is
gone, the rate of recurrence is slim
to none.
As a testament to the safety and
effectiveness of antineoplastons,
Dr. Burzynski has patients who have
survived with "incurable" cancers
for over 20 years, and are still
cancer free after going through his
program. Some of these cases are
highlighted in his film
Burzynski: The Movie, which you can
still view for free here.
A major part of the problem is
that—while the drug industry
initially opposed being regulated by
the FDA—they soon discovered that
it's an excellent way to eliminate
unwanted competition.
The price per drug approval is
about $1.6 billion, which
effectively eliminates innovative
drugs by individuals and small
pharmaceutical companies. In short,
the drug industry is a playground
that only the largest monopolies on
Earth can afford to play in. Dr.
Burzynski's story is a perfect
example of how the
FDA effectively curtails medical
innovation in order to protect
the profits of these industry
giants.
Instead of supporting the
development of a cure for cancer,
the US federal government spent $8
million of Americans' tax dollars to
persecute and prosecute Dr.
Burzynski over a period of 13 years,
in order to prevent his remarkably
successful treatment from being
used…
In the end, Dr. Burzynski
prevailed, but he still has not been
able to get his antineoplastons
approved by the FDA. And, despite
overwhelming evidence that the drug
is both safe and effective, the
American Cancer Society placed
antineoplastons on its unapproved
drugs list, warning patients away
from it.
Do they or don't they want cancer
cured in America?
Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez was not
interviewed in this film but he is
another prominent alternative cancer
physician who shared his run-ins
with the conventional cancer model
in
my interview with him earlier this
year.
The Irony that is the American
Cancer Society…
It's important to realize that
non-profits like the
American Cancer Society (ACS) are
defined by their financial support,
and the ACS funding comes from the
deep pockets of giant corporations
and industries—all of which
therefore have a vested financial
interest in the cancer business.
As Dr. Whitaker says in the film,
when you graciously donate to the
American Cancer Society, you are
perpetuating a failure. The ACS
is in fact an impediment to advances
in cancer therapy, and have no
interest in really finding a
cure—especially not a cure that
doesn't cost an absolute fortune.
Besides, as soon as a cure for
cancer is found, the society is
supposed to disband.
But you cannot disband an entire
industry, and that is what it has
become. It is now a cancer
industry.
Did you know that even the simple
PAP smear was opposed and left
largely unused for some 25 years, as
this inexpensive test would infringe
on profits? Once the PAP smear
finally did come into widespread
use, mortality rates from cervical
cancer dropped dramatically.
And so, the battle to suppress
innovation rages on.
Today, there are a number of
alternative cancer treatments that
are vehemently suppressed and
opposed, while bobble-heads talk
about 'doing everything we can to
find a cure for cancer.'
For example,
dichloroacetic acid, known as DCA
also appears to have remarkable
potential as a cancer treatment. The
reason it's not available as an
approved treatment for cancer is
because it costs merely pennies a
day, so no drug company wants to
touch it. You probably couldn't even
break even after paying the $1
billion or so to get the approval…
and this is the primary problem with
the current cancer paradigm: Only
patents make money, and if you can't
patent it because it's a natural
product, or if the treatment is not
going to be exceedingly profitable,
it will never see the light of day
as an FDA approved cancer treatment.
Nor will it be part of the standard
of care.
This paradigm blocks those who
can really help from doing so; it
blocks progress, hinders innovation;
limits personal choice; and
sacrifices those who need not
necessarily die—such as Jim and
Donna Navarro's son. His death
certificate reads:
Cause of Death:
Respiratory failure due to
chronic toxicity of chemotherapy
After 40 years of war on cancer,
that is where we are today…
"The National Cancer
Program is a bunch of sh*t."
Dr. James Watson, 1975
Discoverer of DNA, Nobel
Laureate
"Everyone should know
that cancer research is
largely fraud."
Dr. Linus Pauling, 1986
Nobel Laureate |