Wat is kanker en waarom krijg je het? Ontdek de antwoorden – en de therapieën die ook écht werken – met een van de succesvolste genezers in de wereld. Dr. Patrick Kingsley en Lynne McTaggart de beheerder van What Doctors Don’t Tell You houden een teleconferentie die je zou moeten horen als je kanker hebt of iemand kent die dit heeft. Dr Patrick Kingsley is een traditionele dokter met één verschil. 30 jaar lang heeft hij zijn praktijk gevoerd in een rustig afgelegen dorpje in Engeland waar hij patienten behandelde met niet geneesbare kankers en mensen die op zoek waren naar de ‘laatste redding’. Hij heeft duizenden mensen behandeld die verstoten waren uit het traditionele medische circuit, ….. en hij heeft geen enkele van hen verloren! Dr Kingsley genas Lynne’s eigen moeder die in het eind stadium zat van borstkanker en te horen kreeg; U heeft nog drie maanden te leven. Zes maanden later zag de dokter die deze voorspelling deed haar lopen op straat, … en dacht een geest te zien lopen. Verbaasd drong hij aan op een onderzoek en inderdaad was de tumor volledig verdwenen waar voorheen een open bloedende wond was.
Dr Kingsley is een van de pioniers van ‘The New Medicine’ (de nieuwe geneeskunde). Alle ziektes inclusief kanker zijn het resultaat van een immuunsysteem dat niet goed functioneert. Alle ziektes kunnen overwonnen worden als eenmaal de oorzaak van het foutief functioneren van het immuunsysteem gevonden en gecorrigeerd is. Zoals hij zegt; “Ik genees niemand maar hij maakt dat het lichaam zichzelf kan genezen”. teleseminar zondag 12 December 19.00 uur
Why my mother’s fight against cancer still inspires
A letter from Bryan Hubbard, Publisher,
What Doctors Don’t Tell You
Almost every week I receive a letter or a telephone call from someone who has a family member with cancer. Their story – though always different and unique – has some similarities. The doctors are doing the best they can, but it doesn’t seem enough, and somehow or other they have heard about my own mother’s remarkable story and her fight against cancer. My mother, Edith, had been diagnosed with end-stage breast cancer some years ago now. Our family doctor gave her just three months to live, and told the family that we should say our good-byes. We’ll never know why Edith had nursed the cancer for several years without telling a soul. Perhaps she hoped that it might just go away, or perhaps it was an exercise in magical thinking that something we don’t define doesn’t really exist.
Whatever the reason, it turned out to be the best thing she could have done, even though the doctor said that her breast was by that stage the most awful thing he had seen in his years of practice. Of course, as editors of What Doctors Don’t Tell You, and knowing what we know, we couldn’t accept the death sentence. We asked the doctor if we could take charge of her care. As he had nothing to offer – she was too late for chemotherapy or radiotherapy – he was happy to do so. We immediately contacted one of our editorial panel, an eminent doctor who looks beyond the mainstream for effective treatments. He was confident he could reverse the cancer, even at that late stage, and when we met him with Edith, he explained what he would do. Central to the treatment was vitamin C therapy, given intravenously. This was to be combined with intravenous hydrogen peroxide, and a radical change to Edith’s diet.
It was a bold approach, because study after study had disproved the theory, first mooted by Linus Pauling, that high doses of vitamin C could kill cancer cells. Pauling had gone to his grave, certain that the theory was right, and yet never having the recognition from his peers. Within six months of treatment, Edith’s breast was healing. Within a year all signs of cancer had gone. The family doctor saw her in the street a year on from his gloomy prognosis, and he was convinced he had seen a ghost. He asked her to have a scan, which revealed no trace of cancer whatsoever. He heard about her vitamin C therapy, and he also wondered why he knew nothing about it. But then researchers only last year confirmed that Pauling was right all along. When they gave three terminal cancer treatments high-dose vitamin C, their tumours shrunk. As they reported in the Canadian Association’s Medical Journal, vitamin C is toxic to cancer cells.
Sadly it took medicine 30 years to prove Pauling’s theory – because every study before the Canadian one had used vitamin C tablets, when the therapy is effective only when given intravenously. To me, this is a scandal. Too many people have died from cancer when we had the means at our disposal to have saved the lives of many, many cancer victims. It just required someone to have been open-minded enough to test properly. It just required someone to think beyond toxic pharmaceuticals.
Stories like this remind me why we created What Doctors Don’t Tell You all those years back. There’s so much to say, so much hope to offer to people suffering from debilitating, chronic conditions. Doctors don’t have anything to offer these people other than pain-killers and other drugs that make life a little more bearable. It’s also important that our work goes on. We don’t get any support from governments, agencies or drug companies (surprise, surprise). Instead, we depend on you to support us. There are thousands of other Ediths out there with extraordinary stories to tell. It’s important we’re around to tell them – and right now we are, and we help those who find us. It would make so much difference to us if you can begin a subscription to What Doctors Don’t Tell You. Not only does it help us continue our vital work, it is a publication that every month is packed with insightful health information that just might make the difference to you, or someone close to you.
_______
Ondanks positieve resultaten van artsen blijven de media en Westerse geneeskunde doorgaan met hun verwoestende chemoterapie. Dit lazen we begin september 2011 in het British Medical Journal (BMJ)
| New score can tell doctors how long cancer patients have left to live |
| (Research: Development of Prognosis in Palliative care Study (PIPS) predictor models to improve prognostication in advanced cancer: prospective cohort study) http://www.bmj.com/cgi/doi/10.1136/bmj.d4920 (Editorial: Predicting and communicating prognosis in palliative care) http://www.bmj.com/cgi/doi/10.1136/bmj.d5171A new scoring system can more reliably predict whether patients with advanced cancer are likely to survive for “days”, “weeks” or “months” finds a study published on bmj.com today.Patients with advanced cancer and their carers often wish to know how long they have left to live. This information is also important for clinicians to help them plan appropriate care. Clinician predictions of survival are the mainstay of current practice, but are unreliable, over-optimistic and subjective.So a team of researchers, led by Dr Paddy Stone at St George’s, University of London, set out to develop a scoring system for use in patients with advanced cancer in different care settings that was as good, or better, than clinicians’ best predictions.The study involved 1,018 patients with advanced incurable cancer, no longer receiving treatment, and recently referred to palliative care services across the UK.Using a combination of clinical and laboratory variables known to predict survival, the team created two prognostic scores (PiPS-A and PiPS-B) to predict whether patients were likely to survive for “days” (0-13 days), “weeks” (14-55 days) or “months” (more than 55 days) compared with actual survival and clinicians’ predictions.Factors that could have affected the results, such as age, gender, ethnicity, diagnosis, and extent of disease, were taken into account.Both scores were at least as accurate as a clinician’s estimate. PiPS-B (which required a blood test) was significantly better than an individual doctor’s or nurse’s prediction, but neither scale was significantly more accurate than a multi-professional estimate of survival.This is the first study to benchmark a prognostic scoring system against current best practice, say the authors. However, further validation work is needed before the scales can be recommended for use in routine clinical practice, they conclude.In an accompanying editorial, Paul Glare from the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York believes that prognosis “needs to be restored as a core clinical skill, to optimise the patient’s treatment and planning.”He says that prognostic tools can help, but should not be applied blindly, and he points out that “communicating the prediction to the patient is as important as forecasting it.”Contacts:Research: Paddy Stone, Reader in Palliative Medicine, Division of Population, Health Sciences and Education, St George’s, University of London, UK |
Luister naar mijn radio interview met cardioloog dr. Thomas Levy, auteur van het boek ”Curing the Uncurable, Vitamin C, Infectuous Disease and Toxins” op …. verwijderd
Ruim 2 uur gezondheid verrijkende informatie! Overigens zijn 75mg en 90mg vitamine C per dag letterlijk moorddadig lage doseringen. Denk in grammen! De eerste 1000 mg heb je elke dag al nodig voor de uitwisseling van cellen van bloedvaten en botten (collageen). Subklinische scheurbuik is bloedend tandvlees, blauwe plekken en bloedneuzen. Neem maar een flinke hap natriumascorbaat!
Wat heerlijk om te lezen dat er steeds meer geloof wordt gehecht aan de theorie van Dr Hamer. Ik heb al jaren het boek van Louise Hay in mijn bezit waarin de meeste ziektes die er bestaan door allerlei gedachten en emoties kunnen ontstaan. Elke keer als er in mijn omgeving iemand ziek was bekeek ik in dat boek wat er voor gedachte aan gekoppeld zat. En 9 van de 10 keer klopte het. Mijn oom die zich al jarenlang bezighoudt in duitsland naar allerlei alternatieven voor genezing heeft veel van wat er hierboven beschreven wordt ook al verteld. Met name het stuk van de farmaceutische industrie die natuurlijk ontzettend machtig is speelt volgens hem ook een hele grote rol. Dus krijg inzicht in je ziekte door in ieder geval open te staan voor wat er in haar boek beschreven staat. – Suzan
