If oncologist understood above, they would be looking for a way to reverse that cell physiology gently and in a non-toxic way (assuming they were honest and open-minded). That is how cancer is brought back under control -- gently and permanently.

One M.D. who has "broken mold" and treats cancer in a gentle and understanding way says that docs calling themselves "oncologists" are actually "chemotherapists," not oncologists.

Radiologists attempt to deal with cancer using radiation. This always has harmful effects on our body's ability to control our health -- our immune system.

"BUT I KNOW SOMEBODY WHO WAS CURED..."

All of us have heard of people who have been "cured" of their cancer using chemotherapy. Remember Lance Armstrong? The chemo- therapy poster boy? It so happened that Lance had one of few rare cancers (testicular cancer) which can be effectively con- trolled using chemotherapy.

In October, 1971, Dr. Gordon Zubrod, a leading researcher at National Cancer Institute, presented a list of cancer malig- nancies which were "highly responsive" to chemotherapy. All of these are rare in adults. But, most important, list has not changed since 1971. Here it is:

Burkitt's lymphoma; Choriocarcinoma; Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia; Hodgkin's Disease; Lymphosarcoma; Embryonal Testicular Cancer; Wilms' Tumor; Ewing's Sarcoma; Rhabdomyosarcoma; Retinoblastoma.

That's it. In 33 years since that list was published, there is no solid evidence that chemotherapy for other, more common, cancers results in significant increased survival.

One of my daughters was cured of Wilms' Tumor, a rare kidney tumor, when she was three using chemotherapy. But for all other common forms of cancer (breast, colon, prostate, lung, ovarian, etc.) chemo may show a temporary shrinking of tumor, what cancer docs call a "response." Most of time, chemotherapy treatment eventually kills patient. It killed my former wife ten years ago.

WHAT DOES CHEMOTHERAPY DO?

Chemotherapy targets dividing cells. The multitude of tests of new chemotherapy drugs test toxic (actually carcinogenic, or cancer- causing) substances against particular kinds of cancer cells in live patients. Usually this is done with half cancer patients in test taking an older chemotherapy drug. When there is even slightly more "response" with new drug, and over 50% of test group on new drug survives, a new cancer drug is approved.

Unfortunately, no cancer drug has "eyes" for only cancer cells. These drugs kill any dividing cell. Where are some of your fastest dividing cells? In your hair and your gut. That's why chemotherapy causes you to lose your hair and get nauseous. But these drugs also cause long-term damage to your organs -- kidneys, liver, heart, etc.

Doesn't it seem like there should be a better way? There is. More coming soon in another article.

I am a "reporter," not a medical professional. Any treatment for cancer or any other illness should be discussed with your medical professional.

* The average cancer patient generates $500,000 worth of revenue for cancer treatment "system" before they die. This is invisible to most cancer patients because it is covered by private insurance or Medicare/Medicaid. Over 1.2 million Americans are diagnosed with cancer each year. Over 570,000 Americans die of their cancer every year -- 1,500 every day. Cancer treatment is REALLY big busines.

* According to Forbes magazine, AstraZeneca made $630 million in 2001 on one breast cancer drug. Thay call it Nolvadex (commonly known as Tamoxifen). Why has name been changed? Because original patent for this drug was issued in 1972. It has been extended, as is typical for expensive prescription drugs, by manipulation of filler and packaging and other trivial changes made by AstraZeneca to extend life of patent and avoid cheaper generic forms of this drug.

* Have you ever wondered why a drug company would spend $200-500 million testing a new drug? Tamoxifen aka Nolvadex alone has made AstraZeneca and its predecessor companies over $18 billion in last 32 years. Forbes estimated that AstraZeneca would make $2.6 billion in 2002 on cancer drugs alone.

* Because of politics, our government's Medicare system encourages fraud and abuse that is rampant among oncologists. For example, chemotherapy drug Etoposide is sold wholesale to oncologists for them to administer it to cancer patients in their office. The cost to oncologist is $7.50 for a 100mg dose. The allowable Medicare reimbursement, however, is $129.24 for that same 100mg dose. The consumer (you and I) pay a co-payment of $25.87 for this dose -- almost three and a half times doctor's cost! Medicare pays rest from our tax dollars.

* According to Journal of American Medical Association (JAMA), average oncologist makes $253,000 a year. Of this, 75% is profit on chemotherapy drugs administered in his or her office. All of these drugs, like Tamoxifen and Etoposide, treat symptoms of cancer, not its causes.

* A recent survey of 64 oncologists on staff at McGill Cancer Therapy Center in Montreal found that 58 of them (91%) said they would not take chemotherapy or allow their family members to take it for cancer treatment. Why not? Too toxic and not effective. Today, 75% of cancer patients are administered chemotherapy. Go figure!

* Very few oncologists advise their patients that there are dozens of substances available which are inexpensive and effectively offset side effects of chemotherapy and radiation. Why? They just don't know about them. They're too busy to study what my readers and I study -- or too close-minded -- or both.

* The long-term survival rate of cancer patients with metastasized cancer treated with chemotherapy is 3%. Most of "alternative" substances I discuss have long-term survival rates of 50-70% when used alone (few of them are used alone). Combinations of different and compatible "alternative" substances boost survival rates to 90% or more.

* A recent survey by Life Extension Foundation found that 80% of cancer patients take some "alternative" substances for their cancer. Half of them do not tell their cancer doctor what they are taking. Obviously, this is a sad testimony to "ignorance and arrogance" of cancer treatment "system."

Enough? Do you see why you must be aware of cancer treatment environment before you "submit" to treatment? Our medical system has been completely corrupted by drug company money. You and I are not going to be able to change this in our lifetimes. What we can do, and what I'm dedicated to helping you do, is survive chronic, degenerative diseases like cancer by being aware of this and taking charge of your own health care.

Knowledge is power. More on how to do this soon. Stay tuned. By way, I'm just a "reporter," not a medical professional. I'm not selling anything except my books, which you'll find at my web site.