The Chemotherapy Fraud Exposed

 

Chemotherapy backfires – causes healthy cells to feed growth of cancer tumors

Tuesday, August 07, 2012
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/036725_chemotherapy_cancer_tumors_backfires.html#ixzz22yleICAl

(NaturalNews) Ever since chemotherapy was introduced into the practice of western medicine, doctors and oncologists have been trying to answer this nagging question: Why does chemotherapy seem to work at first, but then cancer tumors cells grow back even more aggressively while the body becomes resistant to chemotherapy?
It turns out that chemotherapy damages healthy cells, causing them to secrete a protein that accelerates the growth of cancer tumors. (http://ca.news.yahoo.com/chemotherapy-backfire-boost-cancer-growth-st…)
This protein, dubbed “WNT16B,” is taken up by nearby cancer cells, causing them to “grow, invade, and importantly, resist subsequent therapy,” said Peter Nelson of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle. He’s the co-author of the study that documented this phenomenon, published in Nature Medicine.
This protein, it turns out, explains why cancer tumors grow more aggressively following chemotherapy treatments. In essence, chemotherapy turns healthy cells into WNT16B factories which churn out this “activator” chemical that accelerates cancer tumor growth.
The findings of the study were confirmed with prostate cancer, breast cancer and ovarian cancer tumors. This discovery that chemotherapy backfires by accelerating cancer tumor growth is being characterized as “completely unexpected” by scientists.

The chemotherapy fraud exposed

As NaturalNews has explained over the last decade, chemotherapy is medical fraud. Rather than boosting the immune response of patients, it harms the immune system, causing tumors to grow back. This latest researching further confirms what we’ve known for years in the holistic health community: That chemotherapy is, flatly stated, poison. It’s not “treatment,” it’s not medicine, and it’s not prevention or a cure. It’s poison with virtually no medicinal value except in perhaps one to two percent of cancer cases.
The No. 1 side effect of chemotherapy is, by the way, cancer. Cancer centers should technically be renamed “poison centers” because they are in the business of poisoning patients with a toxic cocktail of chemicals that modern science reveals to be a cancer tumor growth accelerant!
Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/036725_chemotherapy_cancer_tumors_backfires.html#ixzz22ylTmtzw

The $200 Billion Scam

By Jeff Kamen

Why the government tries to bury the real cures.

Kathy Keeton‘s successful battle against cancer is more than personal good news–it has blown open a Washington scandal of astonishing proportions.

She wears fitted black pants and an ivory blouse accented by wisps of silk, which the warm wind wraps tightly around her dancer’s body. A man walking his white miniature French poodle directly in her path cannot keep from staring, and she has to tack around him to rendezvous with the sleek limo waiting at the corner for her and the solidly built man who follows a few paces back. *She is one of those graceful women you usually see only in the pages of high-fashion magazines. The angular bone structure, the edgy style, the controlled, hard-bodied personal power, is all hallmarks of her thoroughbred beauty. Such women compel us, but also keep us at a distance. You could empathize with the guy with the dog, who for a moment couldn’t move when she appeared out of nowhere and seemed to float straight at him. He probably missed the strange-looking leather case hanging from her right shoulder. A slim tube runs from the box discreetly into her clothing and then into her. It is a self-administered pain-control unit. Whenever the pain from the cancer she is fighting becomes too much to bear, she presses a button and another dose of medication pushes into her bloodstream, driving back the agony one more time. Kathy Keeton, Vice-Chairman of General Media International and wife of Penthouse Publisher Bob Guccione, enters the limo, curls into the deep leather seat, and reaches with her right hand to smooth her husband’s windblown hair. He has just closed the door, ordered the driver to head for Kennedy Airport, and asked after the comfort of a guest who is sitting on the floor in front of them, struggling to insert a balky cassette into a tape recorder. As the low-tech problem is being solved, Keeton stares out the window, watching the East Side of Manhattan pass in review. It was six months since they were at Cannes, on the eve of the opening of the 1995 film festival. There, suddenly, Kathy had become ill – deeply, nauseatingly ill. At first she figured it was food poisoning. Nothing else made much sense. Only six weeks earlier she had passed her annual physical, including a mammogram, with a perfect score. What would you expect from the founder of Longevity magazine and a global advocate of healthy living, who not only talked the talk but also danced the steps of vigorous exercise and high-fiber diet. Nevertheless she fell deeper into the unexplained illness, and Bob flew them home immediately.

Within hours of landing in New York City, Kathy was seen byher family physician, which probed, listened, and did not like what he suspected. He did some tests, told her to come back in a few hours, and then ordered her to see a specialist a few blocks away. Minutes later Kathy Keeton walked into the oncologist’s office, was directed to a small cubicle, where she removed and folded her clothes, put on a hospital gown, and waited for the doctor to examine her and tell her what was happening to her. In that moment of waiting Kathy began to know in her gut that something truly awful was wrong.

“I’m sorry,” she remembers her doctor saying. “It’s a very rare form of the disease. It’s called galloping breast cancer, because it starts by spreading rapidly from what had only recently appeared to be perfectly healthy tissue. The mammogram we took six weeks ago was not in error. The cancer simply wasn’t detectable at that time. It’s the nature of this kind of cancer that it takes off at a gallop, and metastasizes quickly So we need to act quickly, get you started on chemotherapy at once. We have some of the best people in the world in this field here at Mount Sinai, and I urge you to let me get you into their expert care. There is no time to waste. This form of cancer is often fatal, and quickly so. Untreated, you have six weeks to live. We really must move aggressively with the chemo.” In this circumstance most people immediately surrender to the direction of their doctors and undergo one of the great gambles of modern medicine. They begin a regimen of cell-poisoning chemotherapy, hoping that the powerful drugs will kill their tumors. Along the way the chemo usually shatters the life of the patient with waves of horrendous nausea and pain.

Many cannot bear the suffering, and choose to drop the chemo and be sedated until the inevitable occurs. For those who endure the chemo the outlook is not good, statistically. Only about 20 percent of patients are cured. The rest die anyway

Kathy and her husband knew a lot about all of this, years before it happened to her. Their magazines reported on cancer research and controversy. For more than a decade Kathy and Bob had published investigative stories about the work of Joseph Gold, M.D., a former U.S. Air Force research physician and now director of the Syracuse (New York) Cancer Research Institute.

Gold had discovered that small doses of hydrazine sulfate, a chemical used in rocket fuel, could function as an effective anti-cancer drug, and did so without any of the side effects of standard chemotherapy. Gold’s discovery, which first attracted the attention and support of the cancer establishment in the mid-1970s, just as quickly earned the enmity of the chemotherapists who had taken over the leadership of the federal war on cancer. If Gold’s experimental drug turned out to be as efficacious as initial studies and case reports indicated, there would be a lot less demand for chemotherapy. Further complicating matters, hydrazine sulfate is dirt cheap, unlike standard cytotoxic chemotherapy agents. The price of a single dose of chemo would buy a ten-year supply of hydrazine sulfate.

Kathy and Bob decided to hold off the Mount Sinai team, and called in Dr. Gold to see if, after all those years of supporting hydrazine sulfate in their magazines, the drug might work for them.

Gold examined Kathy and recommended a course of hydrazine sulfate. The Mount Sinai team warned Kathy that hydrazine sulfate would be a waste of her rapidly diminishing time. Kathy and Bob put up a united front, demanding that their doctors support Dr. Gold’s recommendations and make sure the hydrazine sulfate was properly dispensed to her in the hospital and subsequently at home, according to the established, published protocol. The doctors watched disapprovingly as, taking her first hydrazine capsule, Kathy waited and prayed.

Her diary entry for Saturday, August 11, 1995:
Joe Gold is my shepherd, I shall not die,
He leadeth me thru green pastures.
Yea, though I walk through the valley of
the shadow of the Crab, his care and
his calls shall comfort me, and / shall
dwell in the house of Hydrazine forever

In the pursuit of this story what has been uncovered is a skein of lies and betrayal-not by politicians or C.I.A. spooks, but by physicians and health-care investigators, many of whose salaries your federal taxes pay. It begins with the National Cancer Institute, pulls in the Food and Drug Administration, and ends up-perhaps most shockingly-with the U.S. General Accounting Office, Congress’s own investigative agency.

In the 25 years since the federal government declared war on cancer, an estimated $200 billion has been spent by U.S. taxpayers and private investors on research that has produced so little bang for the buck that it makes the Pentagon’s $600 toilet seats look like bargains for every American home. The cancer industry has become a huge jobs program for brilliant, even highly motivated, doctors and other scientists, whose efforts are misguided by the economic forces behind the industry. Directly put, it’s in the interests of all the fat cats in government and private enterprise who earn their living and status from what is largely a failed enterprise, to stick with it. That is why a drug like hydrazine sulfate is dumped on by the cancer establishment, instead of given legitimate support and honest evaluation.

The GAO–with its proud past of fair, impartial audits of the performance of other federal agencies-appears to have done something underhanded in the case of hydrazine sulfate. It has demonstrated a level of incompetence and avoidance of controversy that’s stunningly atypical of this investigative agency and its track record of unflinching pursuit of the truth without fear or favor. In fact the tenor of the incompetence leads to the inescapable conclusion that a deliberate deceptions cover-up-was perpetrated to save other federal officials and the government itself from a scandal of astonishing proportions.

The GAO defied logic, reason, and science to give its blessing to what in fact has to be seen as the NCI’s deliberately biased testing of hydrazine sulfate, which falsely made the drug appear to be without merit. What is so damaging to the GAO is that its investigators did their fact-finding jobs well, but the higher-ups who wrote that agency’s report avoided the inescapable conclusion that the NCI had betrayed the medical community and cancer patients everywhere by rigging the clinical trials.

The GAO’s investigators began their work by going through more than 100 pages of documents and hours of videotape obtained by Penthouse in pursuing this story over the preceding three years. They confirmed many of the allegations brought to them by Penthouse. The crucial consideration is that established medical practice forbids the use of alcohol, tranquilizers, or sleeping pills by patients taking hydrazine sulfate because those “incompatible agents” not only deactivate hydrazine’s therapeutic powers but also can make the sufferers much sicker. The GA0 investigators smoked out the truth that in its initially published study results the NCI chose not to reveal the ingestion of those incompatibles by the participants in its nationwide clinical trials of hydrazine sulfate.

Under pressure from the GAO investigators, doctors who conducted one of the NCI trials admitted in a letter to the Journal of Clinical Oncology that virtually all of the subjects had taken tranquilizers while receiving hydrazine sulfate.

Despite those admissions, the GAO still managed in its report to declare that the NCI’s trials “were not flawed.” That’s the equivalent of describing a car as having a broken transmission, four punctured tires, and useless brakes, but the vehicle is nevertheless just fine, thank you, and quite capable of carrying you safely on the interstate. In this pronouncement the GAO participated in wrecking the hopes of millions of cancer sufferers, dooming many to unnecessary suffering or premature and painful death.

In the “In” baskets of the upper echelons of the GAO there sits a direct challenge to the integrity and credibility of that much-admired organization. It is an unanswered eight-page letter from Dr. Gold, who as a young physician was part of the NASA medical team that made sure Colonel John Glenn was fit for his historic mission. For the past quarter-century Joe Gold has been fighting to win from the American cancer establishment acceptance of the astonishingly effective and inexpensive anti-cancer drug that he developed. For most of those 25 years the most influential people at the NCI and its major grantee institutions have rejected and vilified hydrazine sulfate, which costs less than a dollar a day and has no significant side effects when the established protocol is properly followed.

When the NCI published its deeply flawed taxpayer-funded national tests of the drug, making it appear ineffective, the FDA stopped issuing “compassionate use” permissions for physicians requesting hydrazine sulfate for their patients. That choked off the very limited official supply of the drug, prompting desperate patients-as well as some physicians whose own loved ones’ lives were hanging by a wire-to seek other, unofficial lines of supply.

One respected member of the cancer establishment, medical oncologist Lynn H. Ratner, M.D., who has a private practice in New York, is on the faculty of the Mount Sinai School of Medicine. He runs the cancer-education program for physicians at Lenox Hill Hospital and has decided to go public (see sidebar at end of article) with his own use of hydrazine sulfate.

Dr. Ratner told me in April of this year: “There are over 25 patients taking hydrazine sulfate [in our practice], 15 of them under my direct care…. The drug has helped my patients avert the terrible effects of cachexia [cancer-induced starvation]…. It is important to note that this drug is working against cachexia in all 15 cases that I am personally monitoring.

“It is abundantly clear to me that hydrazine sulfate deserves another clinical trial that would be conducted in a double-blind fashion in good-risk candidates who are not taking other anti-cancer drugs.”

“On the important issue of incompatibility, I think Dr. Gold is right, and the NCI needs to conduct the trials differently. The new clinical trials I am calling for should exclude those substances identified as incompatible, and it should be fair and impartial, without the biases that afflicted previous nationwide multi-institution clinical trials run by the NCI You can’t argue with the kind of success I am seeing in my patients.”

As this article was going to press Dr. Ratner told me he had begun documenting antitumor activity in one patient receiving only hydrazine sulfate.

If there is anyone in your life who has cancer, this article will be very personal indeed. It has been personal for me for a long time. It was nine years ago that I first learned of hydrazine sulfate. It was prescribed for my mother as a last-ditch treatment. She had nothing to lose; she had smoked her way into lung cancer, which ultimately spread to her brain and throughout her body. Erna Kamen was only 64 and an athlete, but none of that helped much. The surgeons and radiation specialists had done everything they could. At one point, to get even more radiation therapy than is generally allowed, she signed a release authorizing the doctors to give her yet another course of radiation. The family joke was that one more treatment and she would glow in the dark. Despite our hopes and prayers, the cancer continued its relent less assault, and further treatment was deemed to be useless.

As the widespread tumors disrupted her system’s capacity to process nutrients, her body shrank. My mom lost massive amounts of weight, along with her mental acuity. She virtually disappeared into her bedclothes. After yet another race to the hospital emergency room, I was told by her oncologist that she had only days to live, and that we should “take her home and make her as comfortable as possible” until she died.

The next day, at the direction of the oncologist, she started hydrazine sulfate. She managed with some water to swallow one capsule. We didn’t have much hope that it would do anything for her. After all, only hours earlier the NCI’s 1-(800)-4-CANCER public-information line had told us that hydrazine sulfate was worthless.

I needed to escape from the mounting emotional pain. So I pulled on shorts and shoes for an hour’s hard run, determined to numb my brain by pounding the concrete drawbridges and blacktop that lead to downtown Sarasota, Florida. Finally exhausted, I returned, showered, and fell into a deep, troubled sleep. Next thing I knew, my mother’s nurse was shaking me awake.

“Is she gone?” I asked
The nurse laughed.

“Gone? Are you kidding? I don’t believe it. She’s trying to sit up in bed, and she wants you to get up there. Listen! That’s her yelling for you to join her for breakfast. She actually wants to eat! “Hydrazine sulfate was my mom’s ticket to renewed life, and it brought her back for about four months, much of which she enjoyed. Although she back 23 pounds, hydrazine sulfate didn’t get a chance to do everything it could for her. She died after her medical team had made a major error in judgment: Her medication was switched, and she was taken off hydrazine sulfate.

Kathy Keeton sits at her computer, answering anxious e-mail queries about the drug. Much of her legendary energy has returned, which she now uses tirelessly to help other patients with cancer. She has hired a staff and provided it with space in the Penthouse offices, from which answers are sent to the thousands of inquiries received by Penthouse each week, as well as information on how to obtain hydrazine sulfate. Kathy has gone public with her experience. She has been in print in dozens of newspapers, on television and radio in the US and Europe. All of which has thrown a spotlight on peer-reviewed medical literature affirming the drugs safety and efficacy at all stages of cancer.

But despite her advocacy of hydrazine sulfate, Kathy is outspoken in her gratitude to the staff at Mount Sinai for helping her fight for her life. “The doctors are really wonderful, and I can’t say enough in praise of the warm and supportive nurses who did everything in their power for me,” she says with passion. “It’s not their fault that the medical establishment they’re part of prevents them from appreciating hydrazine. It’s the NCI that’s the real villain here.”

Almost a decade earlier thousands of people called in to TV stations, seeking information and help, in response to the seven times I appeared on Independent Network News, 1988 to 1990, reporting on the hydrazine-sulfate story and-on four of those broadcasts-the story of my mother.

Feeling the mounting pressure from my broadcasts and from Penthouse’s investigations, as well as ten years of double-blind positive clinical studies reported by UCLA’s Harbor Hospital, the National Cancer Institute finally went forward. Its long-awaited multi-institutional Phase III clinical trials of hydrazine sulfate got under way in 1989 and 1990. I had hoped that my report would in part lead to the rescue of hundreds of thousands of cancer patients who would soon gain access to this low cost, uniquely effective medication. But that sweet dream would become a nightmare.

By April of 1993 1 was writing in Penthouse that the NCI had prejudiced its nationwide testing of hydrazine sulfate by including in its study an unspecified number of cancer patients who had not been kept from using alcohol, tranquilizers, or barbiturates. This was incomprehensible.

Even the FDA itself had long warned physicians administering the drug to make sure patients did not consume alcohol, tranquilizers, or sleeping pills. (For almost ten years the FDA had made hydrazine sulfate available to doctors on a “Compassionate Use” basis.) I brought all this information plus supporting documentation (more than 100 pages) to the House of Representatives subcommittee with oversight responsibility for the NCI.

In Penthouse for July 1994 I wrote about the Russian oncology-research community’s illuminating experience with hydrazine sulfate. There, it has been brought to bear against a broad array of “incurable” cases of lung, lymphatic, and 30 other types of cancer, with surprisingly good results, for what is now almost a quarter century. One of the more startling findings by the Russians is hydrazine sulfate’s effectiveness against cancerous and non-cancerous tumors of the brain. Non-cancerous brain tumors are fearsome because they expand until they crowd out the brain, causing blindness, paralysis, and death. The Russians report that hydrazine-sulfate treatment results in a 45-percent response rate for cancerous brain tumors and a 65-percent response rate for non-cancerous brain tumors. The Russian doctors strictly forbid the use of alcohol, barbiturates, or tranquilizers by patients on the treatment. As one prominent Russian researcher (and former NCI consultant), Michael Gershanovich, M.D., told me: “Why would you want to give these things to patients receiving the hydrazine sulfate? The hydrazine sulfate would not work, and that would be wrong.”

At the Petrov Research Institute of oncology in St. Petersburg I heard a great deal about the Russian doctors’ fear of offending America’s all-powerful, grant-giving NCI -an institution with which the Petrov had enjoyed 17 years of collegial relations via the Joint U.S. – USSR Cancer Agreement.

But in the United States the NCI – sponsored researchers chose not to follow the Russian lead. Patients in the NCI -approved study protocols were permitted to drink alcohol and pop tranquilizers and sleeping pills. No fewer than 94 percent of those in one of the trials are known to have consumed one or more tranquilizers. Which means that only six percent of the subjects-16 of them, in this case-had any realistic chance of benefiting from the hydrazine sulfate. Want to bet that none of the 266 patients in this particular study was told in the required “informed consent statements” that the odds of getting any benefit at all had been reduced to about zero even before he or she swallowed the first capsule? Or been told that the consumption of alcohol, barbiturates, or tranquilizers could not only negate the therapeutic effect of hydrazine sulfate but cause, as the profession gently puts it, “morbidity and mortality”-sickness arid death?

The 16 patients whose charts do not show the presence of any incompatibles totaled roughly one-quarter the number of people in a previous clinical trial at Harbor-UCLA that, through its positive outcome, had inspired much of my reporting. The NCI initially dismissed those results because the number of patients involved was too small, they said, to be statistically significant.

In 1994, a year before the great love of his life would come down with breast cancer, Bob Guccione was a guest along with Dr. Joseph Gold on a talk-radio program I hosted on WWRC in Washington, D.C. On the air Guccione laid out the sorry history of the NCI’s bitter and determined resistance to giving hydrazine sulfate a fair test, and Gold explained how the drug works. The stations phone lines were quickly besieged by impassioned listeners who wanted to know what they could do to help. I suggested that they phone and fax Edolphus Towns (DL-N.Y.), then chairman of the House Intergovernmental Relations Subcommittee, which has the authority to investigate the NCI. Within minutes the congressman’s staff called us, demanding that we stop giving out the number, that the program’s listeners were “making it impossible for us to get our jobs done.” We politely declined to call off our listeners. A second call came from a senior aide to the chairman, who promised to get his boss to read the massive documentation I had submitted to the subcommittee … a year before the broadcast.

Within a week the chairman ordered the GAO to conduct an investigation into the matters raised by Penthouse. When the GAO’s investigators called upon senior officials of the NCI they ran into anger and resentment. At one point,informed sources say, there was considerable shouting and screaming, and a sense of NCI gloom over the possible outcome of the congressional investigation–a concern over what the costs might be to the powerful men and women who had waged war against the drug and its developer, and therefore against cancer patients. But the NCI brass shouldn’t have lost much sleep. The damage, as it turned out, would be very small indeed, and quite contained. No heads would roll; no blame would be fixed. Business-as-usual would prevail.

This is how it worked: The GAO slapped the wrists of the NCI for sloppy, incomplete record keeping of the drugs other than hydrazine sulfate that were taken by the patients in the clinical trials. As a result, NCI’s team leaders, as indicated, admitted in a letter to the Journal of Clinical Oncology what they hadn’t bothered to disclose in their original report to the medical community-that 94 percent of the patients in one study had received one or more tranquilizers. But if you didn’t already know that tranquilizers (and barbiturates and alcohol) were incompatible with hydrazine sulfate, the NCI letter wouldn’t have helped you to learn that. It simply confessed to not having fully reported on other drugs consumed by patients in the study. The NCI has always rejected the fact that some substances are incompatible with, and therefore deactivate, hydrazine sulfate, and that the mix can be extremely dangerous. Thus the NCI letter didn’t tell the truth, didn’t warn that mixing the incompatibles with the hydrazine sulfate was a time bomb.

Then in late 1995 came the official GAO report. It upheld the NCI’s testing methods in this case, making the GAO’s long awaited probe of the whole affair a veritable whitewash.

The GAO’s report is a stunning defeat for millions of cancer patients and their families in the United States and around the world. To affirm the NCI’s destructive conclusion–to say that the NCI’s hydrazine-sulfate studies “were riot flawed”–the GAO had to buy into the deceptive pronouncements and statistics that are at the core of the NCI’s case.

When Congress ordered the GAO probe it was believed that the GAO would conduct an independent audit of the NCI’s methodology–but hat did not happen. Instead, after an “internal review,” the GAO accepted the NCI’s own “retrospective analyses.”

Penthouse hired independent medical-statistics consultant Richard Wilkins, a former senior biostatistician at a major pharmaceutical manufacturer. He was asked to evaluate the NCI’s retrospective analyses.” Because of my long and emotional investment in the case, I waited with some apprehension for Wilkins’s report. What if it were I who was biased in my reporting? What if all those great results in Russia and America had been flukes?

I shouldn’t have worried. My copy of Wilkins’s conclusions came with a cover letter saying, “You are to be congratulated for bringing the important, indeed truly scandalous, hydrazine sulfate story to the attention of the American people. The enclosed should provide more ammunition for it.”

The hostility toward hydrazine sulfate at the NCI is bone marrow deep. The NCI’s longtime former director, Vincent T. De Vita, Jr., M.D., now head of the Yale University Cancer Center, had long attacked Dr. Gold and belittled his discovery. He told the Washington Post, ” it’s a ho-hum drug,” and the ABC News program “20/20,” “We throw away better drugs than hydrazine sulfate.” A renowned pioneering chemotherapist and a master at the politics of cancer, De Vita is an icon in the cancer establishment, with friendships among the powerful in almost every corner of American and international life. For more than a decade his word on anything having to do with cancer rolled down like thunder across the worldwide medical landscape. So it should not have come as a complete surprise that the GAO’s deck would be stacked against a full and fair assessment of the NCI’s hydrazine-sulfate trials. To come up with anything else would have reflected terribly on the NCI power structure, past and present.

Listen in as Mark Nadel, assistant director of the General Accounting Office, attempts, in a telephone interview with me, to justify the method and administration of the NCI’s clinical trials of hydrazine sulfate: “The reason [the use of tranquilizers) was incompatible, which threw us at first, was that it would heighten the sedative effect [of hydrazine sulfate]. In any case, in the admittedly small number of patients in the trials who did not receive the incompatibles, there was no (positive) effect seen of hydrazine sulfate and the issue of statistical significance shouldn’t blind one to the fact that no (positive) effect was seen.

Nadel must have assumed that I wasn’t paying attention, and that you, the reader, cannot think. Why do major clinical trials routinely embrace hundreds of patients and not just a few dozen? Because statistical significance is at the very core of measuring the success or failure of any experimental medication. For the sake of his report’s credibility, Nadel wants us to ignore the importance of statistics.

Here’s Dr. Gold on that question: “It is impossible to state that no effect was seen, because there weren’t enough patients who did not receive the incompatibles to document whether an effect was seen. Mr. Nadel’s insistence that the issue of statistical significance I shouldn’t blind one’ is stunning, since it is only statistical significance which can confirm any effect in a clinical trial. It is the basis of all clinical trials, and he knows it.

“The fact that hydrazine sulfate heightens the sedative effect of the incompatibles is only a secondary consideration of incompatibility. The primary consideration, which is demonstrated by both published and unpublished studies which were made available to the NCI before the commencement of any of their clinical trials, is that the combination of hydrazine sulfate and tranquilizers nullifies the therapeutic effect of hydrazine sulfate and causes vastly increased risk of additional illness and even death in test subjects.

“Additionally, prior to the commencement of the NCI’s clinical trials of this drug I alerted NCI that hydrazine sulfate is a member of the class of drugs called MAO inhibitors. As such, a patient who also is taking tranquilizers, barbiturates, beer, wine, or hard liquor cannot use it. It also cannot be used by patients who are permitted to eat raisins, yogurt, and a list of other foods containing tyramines (amino-acid derivatives). The NCI made no attempt to monitor any of these things in its studies, which can also have the effect of turning off hydrazine sulfate’s capacity to stop cancer-induced starvation and shrink the tumors themselves.

“Since hydrazine sulfate is an MAO inhibitor, and since MAO inhibitors and tranquilizers are recognized as incompatible, then the NCI studies are by definition intrinsically flawed. The use of incompatible agents constitutes negative-bias factors in a study design, and the effect of negative-bias factors is to produce a negative outcome.”

Kathy Keeton, whose silken hair, lustrous complexion, and flashing eyes do not look remotely like those of a patient with end-stage breast cancer, gives instructions to one of her assistants. It is spring 1997. She no longer wears the strange leather case that delivers pain medication. Kathy is full of life. Her words flow softly, with the clipped lilt of her native South Africa. She speaks of the information she has disseminated about hydrazine sulfate to cancer patients and their families all over the world. She speaks of the growing number of physicians prescribing this drug as a result of this information. She speaks of the class-action lawsuit her husband is considering launching against the NCI on behalf of all those patients who were cruelly given hydrazine sulfate without clear instructions to avoid alcohol, antidepressants, and/or sleeping pills. Kathy Keeton is a woman with a mission. She feels she has been literally “touched by an angel,” and is now dedicated to giving back by helping those in need.

This reporter has turned over to Congress the Wilkins report, which strips bare the NCI’s “retrospective analyses,” and Penthouse’s and my findings on the GAO’s cover-up of the NCI’s assault on hydrazine sulfate. You can help by writing, faxing, or calling your representatives in the House and Senate. Enclose a copy of this article; urge them to hold public hearings on this cover-up and to demand an impartial, properly administered large-scale clinical trial of hydrazine sulfate.

Every cancer patient on this planet should have the same chance that saved Kathy Keeton.

—————————————

http://just-say-no-to-chemo.blogspot.ca/2011/02/suzanne-somers-let-debates-begin.html

—————————————–

ALTERNATIVE SCIENCE:

Chemo A FRAUD – More Evidence It’s WORTHLESS
Rense.com, March 01, 2008

Chemo Therapy

…..RESULTS: The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA. CONCLUSION: As the 5-year relative survival rate for cancer in Australia is now over 60%, it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required.”
Chemotherapy…the massive, evil poisoning of the already immuno-suppressed human body…remains one of the most barbaric, criminal undertakings of modern ‘medicine’ against the human species. The cost of the average chemotherapy regimen: $300,000 to $1,000,000. It’s ALL about MONEY and PROFITS. YOU are worthless to the AMA-Pharma death machine. The FAKE war on cancer has raised over a trillion dollars to date and now one out of every TWO Americans will be confronted with cancer at some point. Most of all, the criminal ‘war on cancer’ has made a lot of people wealthy. It is, without question, one of the biggest hoaxes in human history.
There are MANY cures for cancer, from Rife to Essiac to Ozone to Hoxey to Glyconutrients to the simple cessation of poisoning one’s body with meat, dairy and processed foods loaded with MSG and countless other carcinogens. This particular article is but one of many showing that chemo (and radiation) do NOT extend the life of one cancer patient over another with the same cancer who does NOTHING. To devastate a body trying to cope with a disease by poisoning the hell out of it is beyond something from the Dark Ages.
So, when your ‘doctor’ tells you a tumor can be ‘shrunk’ ask him/her how that actually translates to ANY increase in survival. The vast majority of times chemotherapy will only HASTEN death…and utterly destroy the quality of life until then.
While chemo can shrink some tumors, the devastating cycotoxic nature of chemo ‘therapy’ further destroys the patients already compromised and failing immune system causing an even quicker demise. Until and unless the patient takes the responsibility for his or her OWN health and stops poisoning their own body…and begins to study so-called ‘alternative’ approaches to recovery…there is virtually no hope for true healing. Cancer doesn’t just ‘happen’…it is CAUSED by diet, lifestyle, stress, anxiety and environmental toxins in the work place and home.
Do a search for Rife and Ozone and Essiac. Read NotMilk.com and NoMilk.com. Read MadCowboy.com and MeatStinks.com. And others. Educate yourself if you want to live. By all means, see the new Rife Documentary (http://www.zerozerotwo.org) and prepare to be outraged beyond your worst imaginings. -JR
Comment in:
Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol).
2005 Jun;17(4):294.
The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies.
Morgan G,
Ward R,
Barton M.
Department of Radiation Oncology, Northern Sydney Cancer Centre, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia.
gmorgan1@bigpond.net.au
AIMS: The debate on the funding and availability of cytotoxic drugs raises questions about the contribution of curative or adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to survival in adult cancer patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We undertook a literature search for randomised clinical trials reporting a 5-year survival benefit attributable solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy in adult malignancies. The total number of newly diagnosed cancer patients for 22 major adult malignancies was determined from cancer registry data in Australia and from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results data in the USA for 1998. For each malignancy, the absolute number to benefit was the product of (a) the total number of persons with that malignancy; (b) the proportion or subgroup(s) of that malignancy showing a benefit; and (c) the percentage increase in 5-year survival due solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy. The overall contribution was the sum total of the absolute numbers showing a 5-year survival benefit expressed as a percentage of the total number for the 22 malignancies. RESULTS: The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA. CONCLUSION: As the 5-year relative survival rate for cancer in Australia is now over 60%, it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival. To justify the continued funding and availability of drugs used in cytotoxic chemotherapy, a rigorous evaluation of the cost-effectiveness and impact on quality of life is urgently required.

———————————