Monday, May 20, 2013

The Symptom of Cancer

Most people when they hear news of the dreaded SYMPTOM called "cancer" run straight away into the waiting hands of the conventional ("allopathic") doctor, whose only means of "treatment" - not cure - is to attack the symptom, because he was taught, since medical school, that this symptom IS the disease. It never occurs to this blind-sighted doctor that this symptom is NOT the disease, which is why he leaves the cause of the disease undisturbed. This is why the symptom almost always returns and finally kills the patient. No matter what "greatest doctor" they turn to, or what "great oncological facility" they go to, the results are usually the same. And when he loses the patient, the doctor thinks he tried his best, because anyways against this "disease" there isn't anything else he can do more.

It's not just the doctor who knows no better. The patients, the population at large - know no better. Which is why they run to these medical practitioners and facilities in the first place.

Actually it should be the very LAST place to go for someone with the symptom of cancer.

Unfortunately this incorrect mode of thought runs deeply ingrained in most people. Most remain ignorant of the real truth because the medical establishment continues to push this fallacy - purposely - to push their hidden agenda, namely, of making money by pushing drugs, surgery and radiation. These 3 modes of "treatment", plus the fact that hospital beds can thus be occupied, make for a great system of squeezing the last dollar out of the sick, dying person.

Any method that comes along that can claim better results, especially if it promises to be a cheaper way to go, if not more humane and much more effective, will be branded taboo and the forces of this mafia will come down hard on he who dares buck the system.

Do you ever hear the advertisements for these oncology facilities? "Oh, our facility is kinder and gentler to the 'victim', and we know so much about how to do it, and we've been at this for so much longer that we've perfected it, and we have instruments of precision better than any other facility, yak yak yak ...." It's outright shameful! They commit this disaster upon elders and children alike.

Chemotherapy is the delivery of poisons into the body, as if there weren't enough of that already. It's what caused cancer in the first place. Radiation burns the body. Surgery mutilates it. At best the symptom passes away for a short time, but because the underlying cause hasn't been dealt with, it is bound to return. Plus there is also the not insignificant aspect of secondary side-effects of these methods which make the poor patient feel all that much worse in his final days.

That these methods ultimately end up killing patients also serves the industry very well. They can then therefore attach dread, fear and "poor prognosis" to this so-called "disease". They can also therefore make the patient feel he must act quickly, without much thought, as if time is the most urgent matter to consider. The time between diagnosis of the dreaded "disease" and the application of a "treatment protocol" is a very short period, therefore, which, of course, plays right into the hands of this evil quackery.

Little to people realize the cancer symptom is nothing more than many years of poor nutrition or accumulative toxicity, and because they do NOT know this, they also do not know that there is a CURE, and nothing less than a full cure, if only they knew where to look.

Here's an example of someone who knew better!

Wikipedia & Medicine - Very Unreliable

Forget Wikipedia for your medical knowledge. Anything worthy of your knowledge the mafia will label quackery; Big-Pharma sends out its paid coolies to write stuff in their own favor. Here, for example, is the experience of Dr. Max Gerson's grandson, who posted on Wikipedia - for the benefit of people - and the result was, a document for the benefit of Big-Pharma:

August 9th,
By: Andrew W. Saul, Ph.D.

There is nothing quite like a paper trail, and Wikipedia has one. Consequently, you can read for yourself all the material that has been added, and then deleted.

For example: Wikipedia’s page about Max Gerson, M.D., is . The doctor is widely known for the nutritional cancer therapy that bears his name. Gerson’s principal biographer is his grandson, Howard Straus. Mr. Straus tells the Orthomolecular Medicine News Service of some interesting experiences he has had with Wikipedia bias:

“Some years ago, on seeing that the pages for Dr. Max Gerson and the Gerson Therapy were only stubs (short place-holders with little information on them), I took it upon myself to flesh out the pages. I thought Wikipedia was fairly neutral on balance, so I put in all the information that I could, and kept it factual with references, citations, and literature links.

“Within a month, the following had happened:

“The information was labeled as “biased” and “unreliable” because I am Dr. Gerson’s grandson and biographer. There appeared a big red flag at the top of the article labeling the articles neutrality “dubious.” The photograph I posted was removed. Provable, referenced facts, with dates and places, all suddenly became “claims,” even quotes from no less than Nobel Laureate Albert Schweitzer, M.D., who famously said: “I see in Dr. Max Gerson one of the most eminent geniuses in medical history.” Dr. Schweitzer and his wife were patients of Dr. Gerson, making this a first-hand account from a rather reliable source.

“All my links, references and citations were removed. They were replaced by links to the American Cancer Society and National Cancer Institute, which offer only criticism of the Gerson Therapy. Even quotations from published scientific papers were removed. Attempts to rectify these actions were immediately overwritten.

“It’s easy enough to show the progression of the pages, since Wikipedia displays former edits on request, dated and documented. One can verify this by clicking on the “History” tab at the top of the Max Gerson page, and looking at 2005 and before. My editing is archived at and also

“A second Wikipedia page, specific to the Gerson Therapy, has been completely removed. . To see something of what happened, you can click the “History” tab here as well.”

The OMNS adds just one other intriguing statement about Dr. Gerson’s work that is probably too “unreliable” to be seen on Wikipedia:

“I know of one patient who turned to Gerson Therapy having been told she was suffering from terminal cancer and would not survive another course of chemotherapy. Happily, seven years later, she is alive and well. So it is vital that, rather than dismissing such experiences, we should further investigate the beneficial nature of these treatments.” (H.R.H. Charles, Prince of Wales)

Max Gerson is not the only nutritionally-oriented physician whose work is slanted or censored at Wikipedia. Others include Matthias Rath, M.D., and Robert F. Cathcart III, M.D.

Matthias Rath, M.D.

Dr. Rath coauthored a number of papers with Linus Pauling. (1-8) They discussed high-dose vitamin therapy for cardiovascular disease. To see what is going on at Wikipedia concerning him:

Paul Anthony Taylor, a supporter of Dr. Rath, comments: “Instead of providing free access to the sum of all human knowledge, as is its supposed aim, Wikipedia would appear to be just another way of supporting the scientific, political and social status quo. In a sense, however, the game is already up for Wikipedia. The official exams watchdog in the UK, Ofqual, recently stated that schoolchildren should avoid it as it is not “authoritative or accurate” and in some cases “may be completely untrue” Believe it or not, one of Wikipedia’s contributors is the CIA, and they are not just updating their own entries, either. When it comes to nutritional therapies, you won’t currently find much of it on Wikipedia.”

Robert F. Cathcart, M.D.

The Wikipedia page for this physician has been deleted. Why? Because Dr. Cathcart “does not meet notability criteria per WP:BIO ” and “a quick google search shows up no reliable hits for this subject.”

Indeed? It appears that someone was not looking. Orthopedic surgeon Robert F. Cathcart III is the inventor of the Cathcart Elliptical Orthocentric Endoprosthesis, a replacement hip-ball joint still in widespread use today after 37 years. Some physicians report it to be superior to other similar devices. That alone qualifies him as notable, and invalidates the deletion of his page at Wikipedia. In addition, Linus Pauling personally singled out Dr. Cathcart for recognition for his nutritional knowledge as early as 1978. (9)

Possibly, just possibly, the real reason Dr. Cathcart is deleted from Wikipedia has much more to do with his outspoken advocacy of very high doses of vitamin C to treat viral illnesses. and either or

Here is all the deleted material on Dr. Cathcart:

Take a look and decide for yourself.

(Full article here: