While conventional oncology has been relatively successful with the “liquid” cancers (e.g. lymphomas and leukemia) insofar as achieving the five-year “survival cut-off date”, (1) it has over-all failed with regard to the safe and efficient control and reversal of “solid” cancers, which constitute the vast majority of malignancies that affect humans and animals.
“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”. Cf. Morgan G1, Ward R, Barton, The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies. M. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2004 Dec;16(8):549-60. (Source) (2)
Since the publication of this meta-analysis, other studies corroborated this failure with solid cancers. (Source). Certain cancers like melanoma did a little better thanks to genetic engineering of the immune system, (Source) but over-all, cancer cells continue to outsmart conventional oncologists and their lab researchers. They resist treatment, including genetic-engineering immunotherapy, they mutate to continue their drive toward full conquest of the host, they recruit bacteria to detoxify them from the chemo insults, they repair the broken hydrogen bonds radiotherapy causes, they grow back tumors that are surgically remove, they hijack part of the immune system, they use ruse tactics to get the fibroblasts on board, they diligently craft the tumors micro-environment for optimal performance and they clone themselves without stop until the “enemy” (the host) is subdued, dead.
It’s no secrete that resistance to chemotherapy, radiotherapy and, among other conventional modalities, molecularly targeted therapies with high recurrence rates have been a major hallmark of conventional oncology for decades and continue to do so to this day. (3)
To read the following, the viewer must be either a consultee or a coachee. (Source)
To read more compelling evidence that shows even better than this analysis conventional oncology’s limitations and unreliability, click here (link reserved to registered viewers)
To view the Institute’s Private coaching data on Cancer cells’ Biological Strengths and Weaknesses Click Here (Password protected)
To learn more, consider scheduling a Consultation or coaching Session,
“All men make mistakes, but a good man yields when he knows his course is wrong, and repairs the evil. The only crime is pride.” Sophocles, Antigone
Escape Fire Documentary on a few of conventional medicine’s built-in flaws
(1). Different studies show that many 5 years survivors will get new cancers after the five years cut-off, including leukemias and lymphomas. This makes cellular sense because both chemo and radiation are intrinsically carcinogenic, will cause oxidative stress, promote DNA havoc and cause new cancer cells to grow, which usually takes a little more than five years.
(2). This Study is the result of close to one hundred studies incorporated within this meta-analysis. Other meta-analyses confirm this one, where less than 3 percent of cancer patents make it to five 5 years. This is true only when chemo is used as a stand alone. When more holistic techniques accompany chemo, radiation or surgery, the results are a little better. For the liquid cancers, the 5 years rate of survival can reach 40 to 50 percent. But what is usually not stated is that many of these cancers tend to come back after the 5 years mark. And if they do, they are considered to be new cancers.
(3). The mechanisms of resistance to conventional cytotoxic chemotherapeutics share many features, such as alterations in the drug target, activation of prosurvival pathways and ineffective induction of cell death. (Source). In the end, most advanced cancer patients tend not to survive relapse.
Copyright (c) 2019: Advanced Cancer Research Institute and agents.