• Due to excessive bot signups along with nefarious actors we are limiting forum registration. Keep checking back for the register link to appear. Please do not send emails or have someone post to the forum asking for a signup link. Until the current climate changes we do not see a change of this policy. To join the forum you must have a compelling reason. Letting us know what skills/knowledge you will bring to the community along with the intent of your stay here will help in getting you approved.

Chemotherapy Causes Cancer To Spread And Makes It Lethal

haidut

Member
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
18,920
Location
USA / Europe
Not really surprising, given what Ray has written over the years and other studies I have posted before. It is well known even among die-hard oncologists that chemotherapy is virtually guaranteed to cause a secondary cancer even if the person survives the primary tumor.
Chemotherapy Causes Cancer Metastases, Tumor Evolution

What is surprising is that despite all this evidence and the new study below, nobody seems to even be questioning the validity of the chemotherapy approach. Trying to kill "cancer" cells does not work. At best it provides a brief remission period after which the cancer comes back much more aggressive and most often deadly. Most primary tumors, and even metastatic cancer are relatively passive. Only after triggering their survival mechanisms do they become a killer disease. But don't expect that idea to make its way into the clinic any time soon. The industry is doubling down on aggressive therapy by proposing that research be shifted into putting cancer patients into the so-called "suspended animation" state so that much more toxic and potent drugs can be administered. If the even person emerges from that quasi-death state at all they would likely find themselves with no functioning kidneys, liver, heart, and brain. Which of course will make them patients to the organ transplant medical complex. I wish this was just a bad dream but that is where the cancer industry is currently heading and heavily lobbying for.

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy induces breast cancer metastasis through a TMEM-mediated mechanism | Science Translational Medicine
Chemotherapy may spread cancer and trigger more aggressive tumours, warn scientists

"...Chemotherapy could allow cancer to spread, and trigger more aggressive tumours, a new study suggests. Researchers in the US studied the impact of drugs on patients with breast cancer and found medication increases the chance of cancer cells migrating to other parts of the body, where they are almost always lethal. Around 55,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer in Britain every year and 11,000 will die from their illness. Many are given chemotherapy before surgery, but the new research suggests that, although it shrinks tumours in the short term, it could trigger the spread of cancer cells around the body. It is thought the toxic medication switches on a repair mechanism in the body which ultimately allows tumours to grow back stronger. It also increases the number of ‘doorways’ on blood vessels which allow cancer to spread throughout the body."

"...Dr George Karagiannis, of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University, New York, found the number of doorways was increased in 20 patients receiving two common chemotherapy drugs. He also discovered that in mice, breast cancer chemotherapy increased the number of cancer cells circulating the body and in the lungs. Dr Karagiannis said women could be monitored during chemotherapy to check if cancer was starting to circulate and doorways were emerging."
 

Mage

Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2017
Messages
55
Very interesting, and this is still the #1 recommendation for cancer patiens all over the world.

@haidut , if you knew someone with cancer, what would you recommend as a treatment?
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,037
For anyone interested, here's Hardin B Jone's famous article about orthodox treatment possibly shortening patient's life expectancy.
 

Attachments

  • DEMOGRAPHIC CONSIDERATION OF THE CANCER PROBLEM Hardin B Jones .pdf
    1.9 MB · Views: 66

michael94

Member
Joined
Oct 11, 2015
Messages
2,315
Of the conventional treatments for cancer, surgery is the one that makes the most sense. Cancer is a survival mechanism...The best way to deal with toxicity and maintain cell function is to switch to fermentation. This is common knowledge but mainstream oncologists don't make the connection. Sometimes this survival mechanism gets out of control but rarely is Chemo/radiation the best option.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
9,718
Location
Manila
Of the conventional treatments for cancer, surgery is the one that makes the most sense. Cancer is a survival mechanism...The best way to deal with toxicity and maintain cell function is to switch to fermentation. This is common knowledge but mainstream oncologists don't make the connection. Sometimes this survival mechanism gets out of control but rarely is Chemo/radiation the best option.
Can you please give references why the anaerobic process of fermentation is the best way? I know Ray Peat has talked about surgery not being an ideal solution, but that he does not rule out its use in conjunction with helping restore the cells' ability to heal through regeneration.
 

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
The results of this one single study probably do not warrant generalization to all cancers. Don't mistake that as support for chemo"therapy". I do believe they are likely more broadly generalizable. But not based on this one study of breast cancer.
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,037
The modern cancer death statistics are the subject of a gigantic ongoing fraud involving hospital staff.
To see absolutely:
 

haidut

Member
Thread starter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
18,920
Location
USA / Europe
The results of this one single study probably do not warrant generalization to all cancers. Don't mistake that as support for chemo"therapy". I do believe they are likely more broadly generalizable. But not based on this one study of breast cancer.

Did you see the second post included in the text? Third line from the beginning of the post. That one was on many other cancer types, including breast cancer. When two independent groups that do not know each other and have not referenced each other's work reach the same conclusions I would take notice.
 

managing

Member
Joined
Jun 19, 2014
Messages
2,262
Did you see the second post included in the text? Third line from the beginning of the post. That one was on many other cancer types, including breast cancer. When two independent groups that do not know each other and have not referenced each other's work reach the same conclusions I would take notice.
I think I missed that. I was responding to replies which were discussing just one study. Its always important not to overgeneralize, but, again, that doesn't mean I think they are wrong or limited. I am glad its being studied.
 

Similar threads

Top