Cancer Diagnosis, Treatment and Healing – Summary and Introduction to TacticularCancer.com
|
About Cancer Treatment – Conventional and Alternative
Here are some general pointers about cancer, conventional cancer treatment, as well as “alternative” or natural cancer therapies.
- The conventional cancer treatment industry, which mainly uses surgery, chemotherapy and radiation to treat cancer, claims to have science on its side, to back up the effectiveness of its approaches. You will often read about doctors or spokespeople urging cancer patients not to forego “proven treatments”. But, the truth is that there is nothing “proven” or “evidence-based” about conventional cancer treatment. In fact, there is much science suggesting that not only are conventional treatments ineffective, patients may well be better off doing nothing or pursuing other forms of treatment. The industry also has certain tactics it uses to artificially make conventional cancer treatments seem more effective than they actually are.
- There is a serious conflict of interest in the medical industry. The people who profit from illness and the people who regulate the entire field are too tightly intertwined. To put it crudely, they are in bed together. Just flip open any medical journal, and you will see pages and pages of drug advertisements run by pharmaceutical companies.
Big Pharma, as the pharmaceutical companies are not so affectionately referred to, wield unspeakable influence and power over medical research parties, regulatory authorities, medical journals, hospitals, universities, doctors, and even the media. What this means is that what is being done in the medical field, and what is being published as fact in mainstream publications, is not always what is best for you, the people. It’s about money and profits. Unfortunately, this state of affairs exists not only in the medical and health arena, but in many, many other fields, too. - There are many “alternative” (I do not like this word, because “alternative” suggests inferiority, since they are not the first choice. But since most people use and understand this term, I use it too) cancer treatments out there which have displayed promising results. Certainly, many do better than what conventional treatments offer.
But, if they work so well, why have they not been taken on as mainstream treatment protocols? Why aren’t they publicized? Why isn’t money poured into the research of these cancer therapies? The answer has nothing to do with efficacy. Instead, much of this has to do with the politics and the money-factor of the cancer industry, as touched on above.
Furthermore, history shows that the scientific community is very often slow to accept innovation and changes, even if it’s pretty darned obvious. It took a long time for humans to accept that the Earth isn’t flat, that it isn’t the center of the universe, that scurvy is a disease caused by vitamin C deficiency and not some pathogen, etc. Inertia is strong, and the status quo is often the “right” way to do things, widely accepted by experts and laymen alike, even if it is clearly wrong.
There is also an inherent arrogance about the human psyche, in thinking that we can come up with solutions which are better than what Mother Nature has to offer. But for all our efforts at controlling and manipulating the environment, Mother Nature always has the last laugh. What makes us think Nature doesn’t already hold the answers for cancer? - Conventional cancer treatment focuses on the tumor, above all else. The very word “oncology” means the study of tumors. But they’ve got it wrong here – you must treat the entire person, holistically. What good is it to have no tumor, if a person is in pain, has no appetite, can’t eat, has no energy, is mentally drained and is emotionally broken? Add to that – hair falling out, kidneys struggling, liver failing, etc, even DEAD, and what you have is a situation whereby the “treatment” is worse than the disease itself.
After all, as you probably already know, chemotherapy and radiation are fraught with hundreds of dangerous side effects. Ask around – many people resonate with that line of thinking. Again, unfortunately, this narrow-minded approach of treating chronic diseases is prevalent throughout the conventional or allopathic medical field.
The truth remains that human understanding of how the body works is extremely limited. That is why, all the chemical drugs we create and use, and all that surgical cutting, maiming and repair, can only do so much. Just look around – haven’t you ever wondered why conventional medicine has NO CURE for VIRTUALLY ALL CHRONIC DISEASES? (cancer, diabetes, hypertension, etc.) It just deals with symptomatic control and relief, that’s all.
And, again, the industry is taking hell of a long time to learn the obvious. You simply CANNOT drug or cut a person back to health; only the remarkable immune system, with the right support and ingredients, can do that, i.e. maintain and restore health.Related Posts
-
Moderate Physical Activity Reduces Breast Cancer Risk In Postmenopausal Women
Posted on Jan 28, 2014
-
Exercise Like Brisk Walking Can Improve Survival Rates Of Men With Prostate Cancer
Posted on Jan 28, 2014
-
Cancer Survivors Who Exercise Have Better Life Expectancy Than Those Who Do Not
Posted on Jan 28, 2014
-
Prevention of Breast Cancer in Women Aided by Vigorous Activity
Posted on Jun 14, 2009
Tags
-
Recent Comments