King Charles II, 1685
Curiously, his strength seemed to wane
"The king was bled to the extent of a pint from a vein in his right arm. Next, his shoulder was cut into and the incised area was sucked of an additional 8oz of blood. An emetic and a purgative were administered followed by a second purgative followed by an enema containing antimone, sacred bitters, rock salt, mallow leaves, violets, beetroot, camomile flowers, fennel seeds, linseed, cinnamon, cardamom seed, saffron, cochineal and aloes. The king´s scalp was shaved and a blister raised. A sneezing powder of hellebore was administered. A plaster of burgundy pitch and pigeon dung was applied to the feet. Medicaments included melon seeds, manna, slippery-elm, black cherry water, lime flowers, lily of the valley, peony, lavender, and dissolved pearls. As he grew worse, forty drops of extract of human skull were administered, followed by a rallying dose of Raleigh´s antidote. Finally Bezoar Stone was given. Curiously, his Majesty´s strength seemed to wane after all these interventions and as the end of his life seemed imminent, his doctors tried a last ditch attempt by forcing more Raleigh´s mixture, pearl julep and ammonia down the dying King´s throat. Further treatment was rendered more difficult by the king´s death." [3]
We can be sure that the physicians gathered around the King´s bed were all leaders in their particular field - royalty and presidents do not settle for anything less. But as Proust observed, with hindsight, we can now see the hideous error of their therapeutics. Today, the skull-drops, the ammonia and the pigeon dung have long since disappeared from the conventional arsenal, but what will we say in a few years´ time when we look back on the ´highly respected´ cancer therapeutics of 2002? Will we dare to venture that there is nothing new under the sun?
Home Next
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
"Dear Steve, I'm writing from Georgia. I'm an 12 yr. old. I was hoping to find some information for a school project. But when I came to this site I found more than what I needed. Thanks to your site I made a 100 on the project. Since I hope to be a journalist your site helped me grab a better understanding of how people can have the same opinions and how they have different opinions. Thanks for creating this site Steve." Alex.
Thursday, October 4, 2007
Death by Doctoring
Cancer: the good, the bad and the ugly
Steven Ransom
Credence Publications
Every year in the UK, 200,000 people are diagnosed with cancer and 152,500 people die. [1] In the US, the annual death rate for this disease is approximately 547,000. [2] These deaths are recorded as cancer deaths, but how many of these deaths are really attributable to the disease itself? How many deaths should in fact be recorded as ´death by doctoring´? When we consider that conventional treatment consists almost entirely of radiation, chemotherapy and the long-term application of toxic pharmaceuticals, treatments which are all well known for their life-threatening side-effects, then the question becomes all the more legitimate. On chemotherapy for instance, note the following:
"Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon, or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade, yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors." Allen Levin, MD UCSF The Healing of Cancer, Marcus Books, 1990
The extraordinary evidence to substantiate Levin´s observations plus many other damning statements on conventional cancer treatments are presented for the reader in the following pages. We examine the much-publicised story of UK media personality, the late John Diamond, who opted for conventional treatment. What does his story tell us? John was known for his critical attitude towards many of the more popular alternative therapies. We look at some aspects of the alternative approach and ask if his criticisms were entirely undeserved. We hear from those within the cancer establishment itself who cite the conventional cut, burn and dissolve techniques as ugly and inhumane and from those who seriously question the amounts of money being invested in conventional cancer today given the depressingly low recovery rate. In the UK alone, £2.8 billion a year is spent in the conventional cancer emporium. That´s roughly £6,800,000 a day. US spending on cancer is ten times higher.
We also hear from those who defied conventional wisdom and opted for non-toxic, non-conventional cancer treatments, with remarkable results. And no, we are not talking dolphin or pyramid therapy. From the known range of anti-cancer treatments available, this story focuses on the naturally occurring Vitamin B17, Vitamin C and the supporting role of nutrition. Vitamin B17 in particular has been attracting a great deal of attention recently, despite the concerted efforts of the world-wide cancer establishment to suppress or distort all the positive reporting on this vitamin.
Some may baulk at this accusation. We must realise however, that with global spending on conventional cancer running into the hundreds of billions of pounds and dollars annually, any news of a successful anti-cancer treatment extracted from the simple apricot kernel could do some serious damage to the wealth of the mighty Cancer Inc. In the following pages, we read the testimonies and evidence in support of this charge.
But first, by way of introduction to the subject of ´death by doctoring´, we travel back a few hundred years, to the bedside of King Charles II, where fourteen of the highest physicians in the land are earnestly ´reviving´ the king from a stroke.
"Mr Ransom, I share your thoughts and I applaud you for your courage for bringing us ´Death by Doctoring´. The most dangerous place on planet earth is the hospital - next is the doctor's office - followed closely by the dentist's office." Frank D Wiewel, Former Chairman, Pharmacological and Biological Treatments Committee, Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM) US National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Cancer: the good, the bad and the ugly
Steven Ransom
Credence Publications
Every year in the UK, 200,000 people are diagnosed with cancer and 152,500 people die. [1] In the US, the annual death rate for this disease is approximately 547,000. [2] These deaths are recorded as cancer deaths, but how many of these deaths are really attributable to the disease itself? How many deaths should in fact be recorded as ´death by doctoring´? When we consider that conventional treatment consists almost entirely of radiation, chemotherapy and the long-term application of toxic pharmaceuticals, treatments which are all well known for their life-threatening side-effects, then the question becomes all the more legitimate. On chemotherapy for instance, note the following:
"Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon, or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade, yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors." Allen Levin, MD UCSF The Healing of Cancer, Marcus Books, 1990
The extraordinary evidence to substantiate Levin´s observations plus many other damning statements on conventional cancer treatments are presented for the reader in the following pages. We examine the much-publicised story of UK media personality, the late John Diamond, who opted for conventional treatment. What does his story tell us? John was known for his critical attitude towards many of the more popular alternative therapies. We look at some aspects of the alternative approach and ask if his criticisms were entirely undeserved. We hear from those within the cancer establishment itself who cite the conventional cut, burn and dissolve techniques as ugly and inhumane and from those who seriously question the amounts of money being invested in conventional cancer today given the depressingly low recovery rate. In the UK alone, £2.8 billion a year is spent in the conventional cancer emporium. That´s roughly £6,800,000 a day. US spending on cancer is ten times higher.
We also hear from those who defied conventional wisdom and opted for non-toxic, non-conventional cancer treatments, with remarkable results. And no, we are not talking dolphin or pyramid therapy. From the known range of anti-cancer treatments available, this story focuses on the naturally occurring Vitamin B17, Vitamin C and the supporting role of nutrition. Vitamin B17 in particular has been attracting a great deal of attention recently, despite the concerted efforts of the world-wide cancer establishment to suppress or distort all the positive reporting on this vitamin.
Some may baulk at this accusation. We must realise however, that with global spending on conventional cancer running into the hundreds of billions of pounds and dollars annually, any news of a successful anti-cancer treatment extracted from the simple apricot kernel could do some serious damage to the wealth of the mighty Cancer Inc. In the following pages, we read the testimonies and evidence in support of this charge.
But first, by way of introduction to the subject of ´death by doctoring´, we travel back a few hundred years, to the bedside of King Charles II, where fourteen of the highest physicians in the land are earnestly ´reviving´ the king from a stroke.
"Mr Ransom, I share your thoughts and I applaud you for your courage for bringing us ´Death by Doctoring´. The most dangerous place on planet earth is the hospital - next is the doctor's office - followed closely by the dentist's office." Frank D Wiewel, Former Chairman, Pharmacological and Biological Treatments Committee, Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM) US National Institutes of Health (NIH)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)