Truth about cancer

I have heard of "blood electrification" also known as "blood zapping" helping to avoid or treat cancers. Google these 2 expressions to find numerous websites on this. There is a lot of hype and almost unbelievable statements as usual, but there might be some truth in some. Here are just some interesting websites:

http://www.rexresearch.com/kaali/kaali.htm
http://altered-states.net/barry/newsletter133/beckq&a.htm
http://community.freespeech.org/blood_electrification_suppressed

Read here in a forum about it:

http://curezone.com/forums/f.asp?f=292

I had candida albicans for 23 years with all the bad symptoms and underwent all kinds of treatments and ate tons of pills, avoided everything sweet. But nothing helped. I started blood electrification in October last year and 6 weeks later I was eating fruits and chocolate like a world champion! Amazing. Hope it helps with cancer too one day.

Felix

 

Placebo treatments stronger than doctors thought
MARIA CHENG AP Medical Writer

Friday, February 19, 2010
Story last updated at 2/19/2010 - 9:49 am

LONDON — When it comes to the placebo effect, it really may be mind over matter, a new analysis suggests.

In a review of recent research, international experts say there is increasing evidence that fake treatments, or placebos, have an actual biological effect in the body.

The doctor-patient relationship, plus the expectation of recovery, may sometimes be enough to change a patient's brain, body and behavior, experts write. The review of previous research on placebos was published online Friday in Lancet, the British medical journal.

"It's not that placebos or inert substances help," said Linda Blair, a Bath-based psychologist and spokeswoman for the British Psychological Society. Blair was not linked to the research. "It's that people's belief in inert substances help."

While doctors have long recognized that placebos can help patients feel better, they weren't sure if the treatments sparked any physical changes.

In the Lancet review, researchers cite studies where patients with Parkinson's disease were given dummy pills. That led their brains to release dopamine, a feel-good chemical, and also resulted in other changes in brain activity.

"When you think you're going to get a drug that helps, your brain reacts as if it's getting relief," said Walter Brown, a clinical professor of psychiatry at Brown and Tufts University. "But we don't know how that thought that you're going to get better actually translates into something happening in the brain."

With growing proof that placebos work, some doctors are trying to figure out how to capitalize on their effects, without being unethical.

Blair said that to be completely honest with patients — to tell them they were receiving a fake treatment — would sabotage their belief in the drug, and thus, undermine any potential benefit.

But Brown didn't agree. For certain patients, like those with mild depression or anxiety, he said placebos were likely to work just as well as established therapies.

He said that even if doctors acknowledge they are giving such patients a placebo medication, but say it could be beneficial, "it might just actually work."

 

My sister just died at MD Anderson on Feb 2nd. She had been sick for a full year before doctors figured out she had lymphoma, they told her she had all kinds of crazy childhood ailments like 5ths disease, mono, etc. So, she had a full year wasted with no treatment, by the time she had been diagnosed, she was pretty sick. Two years of treatments with marginal success led to getting a stem-cell transplant just after Thanksgiving. She WAS cancer free when she died, it was the complications of the transplant itself that did her in. She developed a rare complication called TTP, a blood disorder and had to get platelet transfusions and dialysis and all this also somehow caused horrible pnemonia. My family was all with her in her room when she died, I hope I just drop from a heart attack or something like that.

If you do nothing, 99.9% of you WILL die. There is a success rate for treatment, depending on what you have, key is to catch it early. Most that get caught in latter stages will not live.

But to say that treatment is the killer is not a complete truth, like I said, it has to be caught early on.

 

Don't know about the statistics being 1/2 or not but right on post. I wouldn't be surprised if it cut the risk by more than half. And it also cuts the risk for cardiovascular disease and diabetes and obesity and lung diseases drastically too.

 

There is a great -and moving- article today on Bloomberg about the very things that I talked about.
The account of the suffering and ordeal lived by this family is a terrible thing to read and confirms much of my original post.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=avRFGNF6Qw_w

Here are some excerpts :

"What he didn’t reckon on was that the drug would make him violently ill. But it was the only possible therapy at that time. Injections of the protein -- at $735 a dose -- were intended to stimulate the immune response to help fight off the cancer’s invasion.

The overall response rate was about 10 percent. For most, it did nothing. "


"On Nov. 10, before discharging him, a doctor propped one of Terence’s scans on a light board and showed us a blizzard of white spots, thousands of tumors covering his lungs.

Avastin wasn’t stopping it. "



"Late last year, I waded through a snowstorm to Keith Flaherty’s office in Boston, where he had moved to a new job that would let him intensify his work on targeted therapy. Did we help Terence? Or harm him? There’s a possibility, he said, that the treatment actually made the cancer worse, causing it to rage out of control at the end. Or, as another doctor suggested in passing at the time, that the strokes were a side effect of the Sutent, and not the cancer. "


"The documents revealed an economic system in which the sellers don’t set and the buyers don’t know the prices. The University of Pennsylvania hospital charged more than 12 times what Medicare at the time reimbursed for a chest scan. One insurer paid a hospital for 80 percent of the $3,232 price of a scan, while another covered 24 percent. Insurance companies negotiated their own rates, and neither my employers nor I paid the difference between the sticker and discounted prices.

‘It’s Completely Insane’

In this economic system, prices of goods and services bear little relation to the demand for them or their cost to make -- or, as it turns out, the good or harm they do.

“No other nation would allow a health system to be run the way we do it. It’s completely insane,” said Uwe E. Reinhardt, a political economy professor at Princeton University, who has advised Congress, the Veteran’s Administration and other agencies on health-care economics.

Taking it all into account, the data showed we had made a bargain that hardly any economist looking solely at the numbers would say made sense. Why did we do it? "



"I learned that over the years of Terence’s battle with cancer, some insurers drove harder bargains than others. In December 2006, for example, UnitedHealthcare, a unit of UnitedHealth Group Inc., paid $2,586 to the University of Pennsylvania hospital for a chest scan; in March 2007, after I switched employers, WellPoint Inc.’s Empire Blue Cross & Blue Shield paid $776 for the same $3,232 bill.

The entire medical bill for seven years, in fact, was steeply discounted. The $618,616 became $254,176 when the insurers paid their share and imposed their discounts. Of that, Terence and I were responsible for $9,468 -- less than 4 percent. "

 

There is more than one type of cancer and some treatments have been developed that are specific to the particular condition. One is Rituximab which is used for some types of lymphomas and leukemias and apparently is quite successful with very few if any side effects. There are other *mab's (monoclonal antibodies) also and more under development.

I only know about this one because my daughter was treated with Rituximab - thankfully not for a cancer - but for an auto immune condition. It was strikingly successful where all the other treatments (steroids, IVIG, other immune suppressants) were of only temporary benefit.

There is a lot of dross on the net about medical conditions, and seeking expert opinion is the only sane course. Of course a healthy life style can only be beneficial.

 

Fat people are always giving me health tips.

 

But everybody who has the authority to prescribe is an "expert"
or thinks they are or is told to you that they are. How did you filter out the ones who only think they had what works? I see you went through alot of trial and error ...hoping for a better answer.