Conventional Medicine’s “War on Cancer” – Examining the Truth

Jan 11, 2009 by

Conventional Medicine’s “War on Cancer” – Examining the Truth

1. By re-defining “cure” as “alive five years after diagnosis”: instead of using the word’s real meaning, which is “cancer-free”. Thus a patient could still have cancer the entire five years and die one day after the 5th anniversary date of diagnosis and still be recorded as a cure.

2. By simply omitting certain groups of people, such as African Americans, or by omitting certain types of cancer, such as all lung cancers patients, from their statistical calculations.

3. By including types of cancer that are not life-threatening and are easily curable, such as skin cancers and DCIS.

The statistics most commonly reported include many such easily curable cancers, such as localized cancers of the cervix, non-spreading cancers and melanomas, as well as “cancers” that many feel are not true cancers at all, merely pre-cancers. For example, DCIS is a pre-cancerous condition that is 99% curable and makes up 30% of all breast cancers. Deduct that 30% from the breast cancer cure rates and survival statistics and the figures are much less impressive.

4. By allowing earlier detection to erroneously imply longer survival.

5. By deleting patients from cancer treatment studies who die too soon, even if that is on the 89th day of a 90 day chemotherapy protocol.

6. By using a questionable adjustment called “relative survival rate” where they get to deduct a certain number of cancer victims who statistics say would have died during the five years of other causes such as heart attacks, car wrecks, etc.

Source: Tanya Harter Pierce “Outsmart Your Cancer”

These outrageous “fudges”, as Ms. Pierce too kindly calls them, have all been incorporated into cancer cure statistics to hide the fact that the war on cancer has been hopelessly lost and wrongly waged. In the opinion of many who are far more knowledgeable and qualified than I am, the so-called War on Cancer is little more than a hoax.

“Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud and that the major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them.” – Linus Pauling PhD (Two-time Nobel Prize winner).

“The National Anti-Cancer Program is a bunch of sh*t.” – James Watson, Nobel Laureate for Medicine in 1962, joint discoverer of the double helix of DNA, and for two years a member of the U.S. Joint Advisory Committee on Cancer

When it comes to mainstream successes, of the three major mainstream treatment methods, surgery is the only one with respectable success rates and even then it is only successful the vast majority of the time in those who have operable types of cancer that has not yet metastasized at the time of diagnosis — and most cancers are not detected prior to metastasizing.

And when it comes to Chemo, in the words of Dr. Ralph Moss:

“Chemo has some success in a few kinds of cancer, but in the conventional cancers which chemotherapy sometimes “works” such as small-cell lung cancers, the actual survival benefit is reckoned in weeks or months, not in years. And during this time, the patient is likely to experience major, even life threatening, side effects from the treatment, so the overall advantage to the patient is moot.”

Radiation results are even more dismal. In some studies, patients who opted for radiation have had lower survival rates than those who did not have radiation.(2)

Pages: 1 2 3


  1. Beverly

    This is so right on! It is disturbing that our society believes what these unethical or brain-washed doctors and big pharma are telling them. I know from experience that many doctors only want to prescribe drugs, they either don’t care or don’t know how much healthier we can be if we eat pure foods and use the natural aides God provided us with.


    politicans do nothing but lie to us why would the drug companies be any different.the doctors know no different they are just puppets over payed at best

  3. Ricknick

    I guess PT Barnum was right, there is a sucker born every minute. You people will believe anything you here. How many people does it take to die from these “Alternative Cancer” treatment centers. I guess it is because I live close to Seattle where the do quite a bit of experimental cancer testing. Most these other places have only testimonial but no hard facts. I have seen it over and over again, where independent agencies come in and say ok, lets see your documentation, lets see what you did step by step and they can’t produce it. I believe that 60 minutes even did a piece on the leading alternative cancer researcher and they couldn’t produce facts. I have people that would have been dead a few years ago but are now alive because of the strides they have made in cancer research, one of them has Multiple Myloma and got it at the age of 25 and this was about 7 years ago, only one of two cases ever diagnosed from someone that young getting that in the US. Normally an older persons, 65 and up disease. You can believe what you want but at least do some research. We have some very good cancer clinics here in the US and Seattle has a couple of the best.

  4. Ricknick

    There is a Cancer Alliance in Seattle between the Fred Hutchenson Cancer Center, Virginia Mason and Children’s Hospital that does some pretty ground breaking work. Don’t think they have made any strides, go visit any of them especially Children’s though and see the children there that would had died just a few years ago. It is easy to complain and buy into this hype, but none of it has been proven. Has some great testimonials, but no hard facts or documented trials. I guess I am going to have to go write myself a cancer/garage sale book to make some extra money.


  1. Discussing the “War on Cancer” | All 4 Natural Health News - [...] The medical establishment’s “war on cancer” is, at best, an abject failure. At worst, it is a disgusting scam. …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>