Greetings, chenyu.

I agree that contemporary cancer treatment leaves a lot to be desired. True, sometimes the cancer is cut out entirely and/or radiated successfully. Chemotherapy seems less successful.

I read regularily about new treatments that are sucessfully stopping cancer cells in their tracks. Many of these treatments are in an area we call alternitive health here in the USA. Alternitive health is kind of like "organic" gardening and farming. It is less drug and chemical minded and tries to build a healthy body from the inside out rather than drugging things to "death". I believe that these treatments are giving the best hope for real cancer cures.

I tend to think that stress and lifestyle plays more of a role in depression of the immune response than environment. Also, there are successful chemotherapy treatments and radiation treatments, but much depends on the specific type and site of cancer, plus the stage and whether or not it has spread to other organ systems. I haven't seen evidence to suggest that alternative therapies are as successful as tradition medical therapies here in the US as of yet. The biggest swing in research here seems to be in the introduction of type-specific treatments introduced at the cellular level to target areas, but it's still relatively new.
Mrs H

Mrs. H,

Much success in alternitive treatments is directed to preventing cancer in the first place...so you will not "see" much of that on the traditional medical radar screen. Also there is enmity of treatments "outside the system" by the powers that be.

I thought this was a thread about treatment of cancer, and was not thinking along the lines of prevention. Be that as it may, cancer treatments are dangerous and toxic, thus the need for FDA regulation and medical supervision. Being that alternatives are generally herbal in nature, and not FDA regulated, which tells me that the likelihood of cancer-curing capabilities is not likely. I'm not saying it is impossible, but chemotherapeutic agents are formulated to be toxic. That's often necessary to kill cancerous cells and tumors. Same thing with radiation treatments. Radiology techs wear lead lined aprons to protect them from radiation because of it's danger with repeated exposure. Camcer is an agressive disease that usually requires agressive treatment. When given the choice of sure death if left untreated as opposed to possible cancer survival with treatment and less chance of death from the cancer, most people I know will go for the treatment every time.
Mrs H

I'm a naturopathic doctor and iridologist. I can tell you from experience that many cancers have been treated and cured naturally. For each person the treatment is different, as each one of us is unique. The natural treatments are agressive as well; but they do not harm, as does chemo and radiation, they strengthen the body and relieve it of toxins so that it can do what it was intended to do: fight off disease. Fighting poison with poison is not my idea of successful treatment.

I'm not a doctor. But I'm calling some bluffs here. Name names and dates, make records available. Show us where "natural" cures work. Because I think this is dangerous ideology not backed by rigorous scientific studies. Hear say, rumour, and wishful thinking. Even financial gain as motive.

Cancer is life threatening. Quit screwing with people's lives. And IF you have cancer, DEMAND RIGOROUS SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH BY REPUTABLE SOURCES. DON'T PLAY WITH YOUR LIFE. Find a good doctor.

Show me the research!

I would like to see evidence for natural treatment efficacy too (other than anecdotal evidence). I tend to agree with Mrs. H about reliance on modern cancer treatments.

At the same time, I also think there is much to be said about natural preventive measures to prevent cancer and am aware from the literature, that in combination with modern medicine, there are intangibles that may contribute to successful treatment including strength of will, support groups, and even "faith" in higher powers. So I do not rule out the power of the human mind and spirit to assist healing, but personally, would probably exhaust modern medicine options first.

Well, Randy, I don't have a ready listing of cancer cures...whether "natural, spiritual, traditional...but they do exist.
Strange, A little bit after reading your uh post, I opened Dr. JonathanV. Wright's newsletter. In the title for this one it says, "2 cancer cures los Federales don't want you to have and how to regain your freedom to choose them."
One was the work of Royal Rife supervised by a research committee of physicians at USC. He developed vibratory frequencies for each cancer that worked successfully 16 out of 16 times in 1934. This continued for a time successfully. Later John Crane revived Rife's work, but his offices were raided, his records destroyed, and his equipment smashed. Other doctors working with John Crane were driven out of practice.

Then there is the story of Stanislaw Burzynski who developed a system of putting "anti neoplastons" back into the blood of cancer patients. Some were cured...particularly brain tumors. His success brought federal injunctions against him. by los Federales. He was deemed not approved enough by our system, but finally prevailed.

Randy boy, you go up against the "wrong" power and you are hurting.

I honestly am an advocate for herbal and alternative remedies, and herbals are the ^only^ kind of medicinal substance I have taken for about fifteen years, but I reiterate that I have not seen evidence of alternative effective treatments for cancer. If they exist, that's great, but I haven't seen it. What I have seen over the past twenty plus years are multiple cancer patients trying anything that offered any shred of hope, and have seen absolutely no successes. What I have seen, though, are success stories in the traditional American medical field. I remember my grandmother having breast cancer when I was a child. At the time, radical mastectomy was about the only option, and she also had radiation treatments for months afterwards. She lived another thirty or so years.
Mrs H