Pancreatic Cancer Unusual Cures?
Pancreatic
cancer has come to the forefront of public awareness recently with news of
several famous celebrities that have been diagnosed with this difficult to
treat form of cancer. Lucian Pavarotti lost his life to pancreatic cancer in
September, 2007. Patrick Swayze is fighting for his life, against this
disease, as I write. Steve Jobs' previous bout of pancreatic cancer has caused
financial analysts to speculate whether his dramatic weight loss is due to the
cancer's return.
Perhaps
the most touching case of pancreatic cancer that has come to worldwide public
attention in the last few years, is the case of 47 year old Professor Randy Paunch,
of Carnegie Mellon University. The Internet video of his upbeat "last
lecture," presented on September 18, 2007, catapulted him to world-wide
fame and inspired millions of viewers. Sadly, less than a year later, he died
of complications from pancreatic cancer.
The
American Cancer Society estimates that 37,680 Americans get pancreatic cancer
each year. The five-year survival rate in the US is only 5%. Given the bleak
prospects offered by conventional medicine, it's easy to understand why there
is keen interest in pancreatic cancer alternative cures.
Alternative treatments
and cures for all forms of cancer, however, is one of the most
controversial topics in all of medicine, and have been for almost a century.
There are very good reasons for this controversy. Thousands of lives and
billions of dollars are at stake.
These
high stakes tend to polarize viewpoints into two conflicting camps. In one
camp, mainstream medical organizations claim that a general "cure for
cancer" has not yet been found. Thus, according to these authorities,
those who claim that cancer can be cured are unscrupulous "quacks" that
must be exposed to protect a vulnerable, and desperate, population from being
taken advantage of, and succumbing to "false hope."
Alternative
proponents, on the other hand, point out the conflict of interest inherent in
research agencies and support foundations that would cause their own demise by
succeeding in their stated goal of finding "a cure for cancer." They
further point out that, in "protecting a gullible public," they are
also protecting the enormous profits of the billion dollar cancer treatment
industry, which thrives on the continuation of the illness.
As
in discussions of religion and politics, rational considerations of evidence
usually turn quickly into emotional defenses of previously held positions. Thus
the purpose of my article is not to convince supporters of mainstream medicine
that alternative cures for cancer already do exist. My purpose is to share with
those who are curious and open minded, one of the most promising therapies
among alternative cancer cures, which applies particularly well to pancreatic
cancer because it is a systemic treatment.
In
1931, Dr. Otto Warburg won the Nobel Prize in Physiology for research that has
since lead to a very effective alternative cancer treatment. What was his
breakthrough discovery? He proved that viruses cannot proliferate, or even
survive, in an environment that has high levels of oxygen. Dr. Warburg is
quoted as saying, "Deprive a cell of 35% of its oxygen for 48 hours and it
may become cancerous." According to researcher Madison Cavanaugh, Dr.
Warburg "further stated that the prime cause of cancer is insufficient
oxygen at the cellular level, and that cancer cells cannot survive in a high
oxygen environment."
Of
course this raises an obvious question, "Will increasing the oxygen in the
body of a cancer patient eradicate the cancer?" In fact, this is the
million-dollar question, literally. It is a simple question, and you would
expect that in the 80 years since publication of Dr. Warburg's research, there
would have been substantial research to answer it. In fact, there has been
substantial research into what are called bio-oxidative therapies for curing
cancer, with truly amazing results. Almost all of this research has been
carried out by European doctors and scientists.
Why
have you not heard of this research? The simple answer is because these
procedures cannot be patented. Some forms can even be self-administered
easily, at home, in several minutes. Consequently, there is no financial
incentive for any company to do the strict, double blind, clinical trials,
which is the only "proof" that is acceptable to the medical
profession, nor to invest in marketing these treatments.
On
the contrary, there is a great incentive to suppress and discredit this
information, on the part of the pharmaceutical companies that sell the highly
profitable, patented drugs to treat cancer.
This
brings us back to the apparent stalemate between defenders of mainstream
medicine and proponents of alternative cancer treatments. Whether this deadlock
will ever be resolved is not the most important concern to individuals who have
been diagnosed with cancer. Each individual can look at all the information and
make an informed decision for their unique situation, in consultation with the
medical professional of their choice.
Simply
becoming aware of the existence of anecdotally proven alternative cures
for cancers that have so far defied conventional treatments, such as
pancreatic cancer, can provide an individual with realistic hope, and the
determination to search for answers outside of conventional sources.
No comments:
Post a Comment