Cancer can be managed, can it be cured?

It is safe to assume the advent of cancer predates modern medicine. Over the past 5,000 years, people with cancer did not just die without some mode of management being rendered, however crude.

Through the centuries, natural therapies have been available and they were used by emperors and kings alike to combat all manner of diseases, including cancer. Unfortunately, their use has been suppressed in the past century in favour of western medicine.

The odds of surviving cancer with conventional medicine has remained largely unchanged in the past decades despite strides in medicine. This is an indication of how inadequate the present methods of management may be.

Many practitioners have found that optimum results are often obtained when conventional therapies are combined with natural, non-toxic therapies.

The naturally-oriented physician views the body as a closed internal ecosystem and believes the dysfunction of this ecosystem leads to the development of cancer. No treatment, conventional or otherwise, can completely eliminate all cancer cells.

The reason is simple. Cancer is a systemic disease, and there are simply too many potentially cancerous cells within the ecosystem of the body. Its growth process is affected by biological conditions.

 Non-genetically based cancers develop in the body because of toxins, poor oxygenation, poor nutrition, and other factors such as hormonal imbalance. Whether cancer cells continue to multiply or not  depends, to a large degree ,on the body’s biological terrain, which is what determines how the cancer is expressed.

The root of cancer, therefore, lies in the progress of growth and metastasis. Naturally-oriented physicians, therefore, fight cancer by optimising the internal terrain, enabling the patient’s system to destroy the tumour and discourage further growth.

The use of non-toxic natural therapies has had a huge success over the past few decades. For example, Dr. Contreras of the Oasis Hospital reported that his five-year survival rate for prostate cancer was 83 per cent when using natural treatment as compared to 73 per cent for conventional treatment. The American Metabolic Institute’s renowned scientist, Dr. Geronimo Rubio, reported a success rate in reversing stage 3 and 4 cancers from 65 to 75 per cent. The reversal rate for stage 1 and 2 cancer is 80 per cent.

The famous Gerson therapy boasts high achievements. In a study spearheaded by him, 153 patients in various stages of melanoma were examined. He reported that all 153 patients who underwent the Gerson therapy survived for five years. Only 79 per cent of patients who received conventional treatment survived this length of time.

Patients with Stages 3a melanoma who underwent Gerson therapy had a five-year survival rate of 82 per cent versus 39 per cent in conventional therapy. For stage 3b, the survival rate was 70 per cent versus 41 per cent in conventional therapy. In stage 4a, the rate was 39 per cent as compared to six per cent!

Today, many patients opt for combination therapy, using both conventional and alternative cancer treatments. This combined therapy is becoming more and more popular as the success rates are higher than either one alone. Human and animal studies have shown successful results when chemotherapeutic agents and natural compounds are combined.

 The rationale behind combining conventional therapies with natural treatments include a drastic reduction in side effects of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, achievement of a synergistic cytotoxic effect on cancer cells, as well as combating intestinal auto-intoxication through proper healthful eating habits.

This of course often requires a complete overhauling of certain bad habits learned over time and significant lifestyle modification. These benefits are easily achieved through medically supervised detoxification programs, such as the Mayr-type of detoxification available at Mart-Life Detox Clinic, Maryland, Lagos.

It is true that as regards establishment of natural therapies, scientific documentation and double-blind studies required by modern medicine are often incomplete; but anecdotal reports from patients point to their validity. They are by no means “quackery”. It is fair to say, however, that there is simply not enough data to pass the high level of scientific scrutiny.

Conclusion

Over the past 50 years, conventional treatments of surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy have been the cornerstone of cancer treatment. Today, the clinical success of these treatments has reached a plateau, and there is an urgent need to break through this cure plateau with new ideas.

Naturally oriented physicians view natural therapies as a way to complement conventional therapies and help the patient overcome cancer without suffering toxic side effects.

Today, many natural and non-toxic modalities are offered in countries such as Switzerland, Germany, England, Mexico, and the Netherlands, co-existing harmoniously with conventional treatments. The results are excellent.

 Modern natural medicine approaches cancer therapy by incorporating the use of antioxidants, lifestyle changes, herbs, removal of heavy metals and other environmental toxins, as well as dietary modifications.

These approaches help to prepare the cancer patient’s body for conventional treatments, while reducing toxic side effects. The use of both natural and conventional therapies in a logical and judicious manner makes sense. Neither conventional nor alternative treatment holds the magic bullet in cancer treatment. Combining the best of both worlds to combat cancer and side effects makes the most logical sense for the patient.