Cancer and Conspiracy

Cancer and Conspiracy

Cancer is the leading cause of death in the USA immediately after heart disease. The accepted methods of treatment: chemotherapy, radiation and surgery are very aggressive to humans. Chemotherapy uses poisons such as mustard gas to kill cancer cells. Cancer cells are weaker than healthy cells in the human body and by the use of poisons die before healthy cells. Of course, healthy cells die in the process as well as the human defence system against diseases. Radiation operates in a similar principle and surgery removes the cancerous tissues.

According to statistics of the American Cancer Association, 60% of patients survive cancer. These statistics may be exaggerated because of more favourable statistics regarding the fight against cancer suit the association better. It should be noted that according to the same statistics, people who survive cancer 5 years after the detection are considered cured. If the cancer returns after this period, it is a new case. This suggests that cancer survival is realistically below 60%.

Furthermore, under the influence of cancer-fighting drugs, people sometimes experience fatal heart attacks. If this or similar cases of deaths are not attributed to cancer, which is possible because it is a grey area, then the real survival rate is significantly below 60%. People younger than 45 years present 3% of the total number of deaths, while 70% of fatalities come from those aged 65 and over. The older bodies are weaker and bear the aggressive treatment harder.

The American Cancer Society predicts that every other man of the present population will get cancer while one in four will die from it, and one in three women will get cancer and each fifth will die.

This information should alert the American government to accumulate resources in the fight against cancer, but they do not. I guess the American government is convinced that enough has been done in the battle against cancer. In the last 40 years, the United States has spent over 200 billion dollars trying to cure cancer, but the cure is not found. It seems the apathy has overcome which accepts that nothing more can be done. The truth is that the whole fight against cancer is under the control of big business whose insufficiently successful treatment methods earn massive profits and that is more important to them than the lives of people. Dr. Peter Glidden explains it well in short.

***

There are many theories of cancer originations, as well as alternative methods of prevention and treatment of cancer in which nothing is invested.

Dr. Otto Heinrich Warburg (1883 - 1970), one of the leading cell biologists of the twentieth century, in his book "The Metabolism of Tumours," claims that the primary cause of cancer is a lack of oxygen in the cells. Normal cells cannot survive without oxygen, whereas cancerous cells can. According to him the primary cause of cancer is the replacement of the oxygen in normal body cells by a fermentation of sugar. Cancer is no more than a defence mechanism that some cells use to survive without oxygen. The support of this hypothesis lies in the fact that the heart is the only organ that hardly can have cancer because of the lack of oxygen in the heart causes heart attack and death.

Dr. Warburg exhibited that the lack of oxygen creates acid cells. Tumorous cells are highly acidic. A healthy pH level (potential of hydrogen) in the cell has a value of 7. All values less than that are acidic which is unhealthy. A lower pH signifies lower concentrations of oxygen molecules, which destroy healthy cells and help the growth of cancer. All values above 7 are alkaline, which has a higher level of oxygen molecules, favouring the growth of healthy cells and hindering cancer growth. According to Dr. Warburg, tumorous cells cannot survive in the presence of high concentrations of oxygen.

Dr. Otto Heinrich Warburg received a Nobel Prize in physiology or medicine in 1931. He was also the director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Cell Physiology in Berlin. It is surprising that the work of such a high authority has not been supported for over 80 years. To be clear, it is not easy to convey oxygen into the cell body because the kidney discards the excess of acidity and alkalinity. However, there are no justifications for the lack of research in the field of increasing the alkalinity of the body which, according to Dr. Warburg, will eradicate cancer.

Dr. Theodore A. Baroody, in his book Alkalize or die, from 2002, wrote: "Any stressor that the mind or body interprets and internalizes as too much to deal with leaves an acid residue. Even a mild stressor can cause a partial or total acid-forming reaction.” And continued: “The countless names attached to illness do not really matter. What does matter is that they all come from the same root cause: too much tissue acid waste in the body.”

***

This introductory presentation suggests that cancer is the result of an unhealthy lifestyle. Unhealthy diet, physical inactivity, and stress reduce the supply of oxygen to the cells and thus favourite the occurrence of cancer. So we can prevent cancer by eating healthy and being physically active. Exercise increases breathing and thus provide more oxygen to the cells which strengthen the body.

Food creates acidity or alkalinity in the body, all depending on what one eats. Unhealthy eating habits that produce acidity and should be avoided are meat, milk, sugar, refined flour, salt, and all their products. Healthy alkaline foods one should increase consumption of are raw fruits and vegetables, whole grains, honey. In this regard, cancer can be suppressed or reduced through a diet prevalent in alkaline foods. Elderly and sick people need to consume mostly such foods.

Dr.George W.Crile (1864-1943) one of the most excellent American surgeons claimed: “There is no such thing as a natural death. All deaths from so-called natural causes are merely the endpoint of progressive acid saturation. Any form of poor health indicates a disturbed state of body chemistry balance – generally an acid state. In fact, over-acidity is common to all health-robbing conditions. An infant is highly alkaline. An 80-year-old person is highly acid. Death is 100% acidity.” Also, he stated: “It is entirely impossible that cancer appears in a person who avoids foods that produce acidity and who rids the body of the acidity with a healthy alkaline diet. In general, cancer is not contracted nor is it inherited. What you are inherited eating habits, environmental and lifestyle. This can result in cancer.”

***

It has always been known what healthy food and healthy life are. A government that is concerned about the lives of the people would have to inform the public about the difference between healthy and unhealthy lifestyles. One cannot say that the governments in the Western world do not try to suppress cancer. The Canadian government, for example, recommends a healthy diet and sport and recreation. It calls for free clinical examinations for early cancer detection. It cures all citizens of Canada for free. (However, I cannot help feeling that the Government, by paying the bills for all citizens, primarily supports the Canadian medical industry.) It banned smoking in public places and introduced high taxes on cigarettes. Nevertheless, governments need to stimulate healthy lifestyles a lot more.

Western governments should stimulate the production of healthy food by applying tax burdens on unhealthy foods and by prohibiting the use of harmful ingredients in food. The food industry nowadays mostly processes foods with acidic characteristics, then for inexplicable reasons, removes its nutrients and inserts unhealthy substances. For example, from wheat they remove proteins, fats, and minerals, so only acid starch in the end remains. Then they bleach it using chlorine which destroys nutrients in the human body. Such food is consumed far more regularly than cigarettes, and therefore it most likely presents a more significant source of cancer than smoking. But taxing junk food would reduce the profits of the food industry; one of the most profitable industries for big business. They will surely oppose it. Big companies sponsor election campaigns in Western governments, and they will not act against their interests. They will not be taxing junk food.

Big businesses lobby in the parliaments of Western countries to permit the use of antibiotics, pesticides, preservatives, and toxins in food production to create higher profits. They have established the Codex Alimentarius Commission, an international standard for food production with which they impose rules for food production worldwide. In such a manner they plan to impose unhealthy food ingredients to all of humanity. This will make people ill worldwide. Furthermore, sick people are profitable to the pharmaceutical and medical industries. These industries really have no interest in healing people because healthy people do not need their products and services. The production of food, drugs and medicine, complement each other in creating profits and not in the health of people. We live in a very unhealthy and immoral society, physically and spiritually.

Big businesses support only those methods for treating cancer which bring profits to them and reject methods that do not make money. The average initial cancer treatment through adopted methods costs around $50,000. Big profits certainly discourage the medical industry from finding a cure for cancer, and it is indeed not interested in finding an inexpensive one.

***

True efforts in finding a successful cure against cancer today are reliant on individuals rather than institutions.

Dr. Tullio Simoncini, Italian doctor and oncologist, born in 1951, practiced the use of baking powder in the fight against cancer. Baking powder, or sodium bicarbonate, has a pH value of 10 and, as such, according to Dr. Warburg, is very suitable for the treatment of cancer. Dr. Simoncini claims that cancer causes the fungus Candida albicans, which is explained in his book: "Cancer Is A Fungus." Baking powder is indeed the best-known anti-fungal drug, and traditional medicine recognizes it as a cure for many health problems. Besides, baking powder is very inexpensive and adequately used is not harmful to the health of people in any way.

Dr. Simoncini’s teachings have attracted a lot of people suffering from cancer worldwide in the last 20 years. There are numerous testimonies that Dr. Simoncini cured their cancer. Many of them were scrapped by modern medicine. Unfortunately, one patient died after his treatment. I do not know if Dr. Simoncini made a mistake in the therapy, but he lost his medical licence in court and was sentenced to a prison term of three years. It was because his method of treatment was not permissible by the Italian authorities. In the United States 600,000 people die each year from cancer, and of course, no doctors lost their permit nor were they sentenced to jail because they used the legalized methods of treatment.

The regulation of cancer treatment in the world is mainly based on U.S. policy since the United States is recognized as the leader in the development of modern medicine. In America, the procedures are regulated by The Food and Drugs Administration (FDA), The American Medical Association (AMA), The American Chemical Society (ACS), The National Cancer Institute (NCI), and so on. Big businesses have used their economic power to develop control over these institutions and systematically suppress or ban all natural ways of treating cancer. Modern medicine considers natural healing unverifiable and prohibits doctors to use natural medication even though there is plenty of evidence on the effectiveness of treatment.

Science completely withdraws from Dr. Simoncini. First, it should be noted that science is very conservative and secondly, the big capital has been directing it for centuries. Science cannot develop without money, and big businesses only support science which is suitable for them, ignores science that is not useful to them, while science which acts against their interests corrupts or sabotages. Thus, scientific books are saturated with a large amount of incorrect or insufficiently correct knowledge. A scientist who adopts incorrectly or incompletely right knowledge would hardly accept their mistakes even when they become aware of it.

Medical doctors criticize Dr.Simoncini’s work with the thesis that it is not supported by science and clinical practice and that it is contrary to the widely accepted facts of oncology and microbiology. Besides that, scientific circles claim that the work of Dr.Simoncini has no scientific evidence supported by credible experiments and clinical trials. How can he prove his claims with scientific evidence and clinical trials when his method of treatment is not permitted when clinics are forbidden from using his process of healing? Thus medical science actually prevents the healing of people.

Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez, an American nutritionist, has treated cancer patients for more than 30 years by using only natural, healthy food. He argues that the results of his treatment of pancreatic cancer are better than the results achieved by chemotherapy. He has no problem with the authorities because no one can charge him for treating people with healthy food, but he does not have support from the American Institutes without which one cannot effectively fight cancer.

Dr. Gonzalez accuses conventional medicine of not supporting natural healing methods but trying to undermine them. In his book "What Went Wrong" he presents the struggle for recognition of his treatments by the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine and the National Cancer Institute. He did not succeed because biased scientists have sabotaged his work. They were entirely disavowing the positive results of his work. Alternative methods of cancer treatment cannot get support.

***

The adoption of the natural methods for cancer treatment and for the implementation of clinical research, must not be prevented, especially not because there are no side effects of such therapies. This does not necessarily need to eliminate chemotherapy and radiation as accepted methods of combating cancer. Clinical trials expanded by new treatment methods can present whether the results of such an anti-cancer treatment can be better. I believe it can be. I have as a philosopher come to the conclusion that truths in nature are very simple and we just need to see them. Therefore, I believe that the cure for cancer is somewhere among us, and we just need to pick it up.

I believe that a cure for cancer would have been discovered or at least good prevention if big capital did not prevent the effective fight against cancer. Big businesses are secretly united within a single entity and manage to lobby their interests in all governments, institutes, universities, and the media of the Western world, and thus they realize the power that rules the Western world. If there were two centers of power, they would fight each other for supremacy, and we would see it. You saw how uncooperative Slobodan Milosevic, Saddam Hussein, and Muammar Gaddafi ended up. There is an incredible conspiracy behind the big business. I wrote about it in the article: "Jacob Rothschild is Guilty for the Conspiracy Against Humankind."

Through analyzing the failure of the fight against cancer, I cannot help feeling that big businesses use cancer to reduce the over-population of the planet Earth. Cancer is beneficial to big capital because it rids marginalized people, those who do not have enough money for a healthy life, and especially the non-productive elderly. This is a result of the ideology of capitalism, according to which profit is the highest value. The insufficient interest of state governments, academic institutions and the media to solve the problem of cancer suggests that they are all controlled by the same center and are implicitly involved in the crime of murdering people. Conspiracy has affected every pore of today's society, and I do not see the possibility of a successful contest for the welfare of humankind if we do not face the source of the conspiracy. This is Jacob Rothschild.

October 12, 2014