The Chemotherapy Mafia: Physicians ignore chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good
Unfortunately, Warner's case is not isolated. There have been so many attacks by the medical industry (especially in the U.S) on people who succeed in non-toxic (non patented, no profitable) therapies who become a threat on the market of the chemo industry. Such cases are documented in detail in an excellent book http://www.politicsinhealing.com
Other excellent books that open the mind: Questioning chemotherapy Ralph Moss (on the lack of therapeutic effect of chemotherapy) Chemotherapy helps cancer and the earth is flat. Lothar Hirneise (in German, lately translated into english) The cancer industry Ralph Moss (classic).
By the way feedback@caseyresearch.com email did not work for some reason.
Iris Atzmon
----- Original Message -----
From: Sianette Kwee
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 4:43 PM
Subject: Former president of the American Chemical Society: Physicians ignore chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good.”
Posted by Casey Research, Aug.8, 2006
The Chemotherapy Mafia
On July 20, 1995, the Washington State Medical Quality Assurance Commission raided the office of Glenn Warner, MD, an oncologist with unusual views on healing, and revoked his medical license. Allegedly, Warner had cured more than 1,000 patients from terminal cancer—not with chemotherapy and radiation but with diet and exercise regimens, certain immunotherapeutic drugs, and other holistic methods. When he appealed his case in court, the commission’s attorney, Beverly Goetz, argued that cancer patients were “incapable” and “unqualified” to decide whether they received quality care or not. Only experts—like the members of said commission—were capable of making that judgment call, she said.
Unfortunately, this standpoint seems to prevail in the United States these days. Self-determination takes a backseat in favor of state-mandated “health care.” A fact that becomes eerily obvious in cancer cases where minors are involved.
But first, we should ask how valuable chemotherapy really is. There is no doubt that cancer is big business in the U.S. While in 1990, $3.53 billion was spent on chemotherapy, the number more than doubled to $7.51 billion only four years later. By 2009, so the latest projections, cancer therapy products and services will rake in over $27 billion.
As the unfortunate Glenn Warner put it: “We have a multi-billion-dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain. Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison.”
Other experts agree.
Alan C. Nixon, PhD, former president of the American Chemical Society, states, “As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good.”
Alan Levin, MD, of the University of California Medical School agrees: “Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade. Yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors. . . Women with breast cancer are likely to die faster with chemo than without it.”
His opinion is echoed by Ralph Moss, former assistant director of public affairs at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and author of the book The Cancer Industry: “In the end, there is no proof that chemotherapy actually extends life in the vast majority of cases, and this is the great lie about chemotherapy, that somehow there is a correlation between shrinking a tumor and extending the life of a patient.”
Even the General Accounting Office (GAO) found in a 1987 study on the progress of cancer treatment that “For a majority of the cancers we examined, the actual improvements have been small or have been overestimated by the published rates. . . Progress has been made, but not as great as that reported.”
More and more cancer patients and their families are feeling skeptical about the value of chemotherapy and radiation as well. However, not allowed to think for themselves, some states have imposed mandatory treatment.
The first widely published case was that of Katie Wernecke, a 12-year-old Texan who was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s Disease in January 2005. After undergoing four rounds of chemotherapy, her cancer went into remission.
The doctors advised subsequent radiation treatment, but father Edward Wernecke had informed himself on the Internet and was taken aback by an article in the New England Journal of Medicine, written by Vincent DeVita, former director of the National Cancer Institute. DeVita stated that radiation “by itself increases the risk of late second solid tumors in the irradiated field and the incidence rises steeply when radiotherapy and chemotherapy are combined.” Other mentioned side effects were stunted growth, sterilization, and an increased risk of breast cancer.
Worried about the harmful long-term effects, Katie’s parents decided to forego the radiation and follow up with holistic therapies. When Michelle Wernecke took her child out of the hospital despite protests of the oncologists, the Texas State Department of Child Protective Services issued an Amber Alert. The mother was arrested and sent to jail for kidnapping. Katie was put into foster care, along with her three brothers who were later released.
At a court hearing in June, a radiologist asserted that Katie’s cancer had returned and that she needed to undergo treatment again. Even though Katie said in a video statement that she was not willing to undergo radiation, she was ordered by the courts to do so. What’s more, convinced that the Werneckes negatively affected her decisions, CPS cut off all communication with their daughter. Left to her own devices, the 12-year-old decided to make the choice herself, resisting treatment by pulling catheters out of her arm and disobeying doctors’ orders.
After a ten-month ordeal, at the end of October 2005, a district judge ruled that Katie could rejoin her family and seek alternative treatment out of state. “On June 11th, Katie celebrated her 14th birthday at home with family and friends,” her father writes in his blog. “Katie is doing very well. . . but she is not cancer free yet, so there is still a battle to win. She is in better physical condition than ever.” A happy ending?
Recently, another story broke the news: The case of Virginian teenager Starchild Abraham Cherrix. The 16-year-old, diagnosed with Hodgkin’s Disease last summer, had undergone three months of chemotherapy that, in his own words, left him weak and nauseated. When the doctors told him in February that the cancer was back, he refused more chemotherapy.
“I think it would kill me the second time,” said Abraham, who instead opted for a sugar-free, organic diet and herbal treatments at a clinic in Mexico. Here, too, Child Protective Services and the courts became involved, and a six-month-long battle began. In May, a judge ruled that Abraham’s parents were guilty of neglect for supporting their son’s decision; he also ordered shared custody between the parents and the Accomack County Department of Social Services, with the possibility of the Cherrix’ losing custody entirely.
Yet Abraham refused to comply with court orders, cheered on by supporters of holistic medicine: "I think it's my body. I can choose what's best for my body. If I don't have the right to do that, then I don't have any rights at all anyway."
At the Cherrix’ request, a second judge stayed the first court order until trial, scheduled to begin on August 16.
[Necessary intervention or medical terrorism by the nanny state? We’d like to hear from you at feedback@caseyresearch.com.] Claudia French RN, LPHA cfrench180@tampabay.rr.com International
Medical Veritas Association http://imva.info/
Diabetics International Foundation http://members.tripod.com/diabetics_world/
--------
It is VERY MUCH the same here in Sweden, I'm afraid...
Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden
Other excellent books that open the mind: Questioning chemotherapy Ralph Moss (on the lack of therapeutic effect of chemotherapy) Chemotherapy helps cancer and the earth is flat. Lothar Hirneise (in German, lately translated into english) The cancer industry Ralph Moss (classic).
By the way feedback@caseyresearch.com email did not work for some reason.
Iris Atzmon
----- Original Message -----
From: Sianette Kwee
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2006 4:43 PM
Subject: Former president of the American Chemical Society: Physicians ignore chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good.”
Posted by Casey Research, Aug.8, 2006
The Chemotherapy Mafia
On July 20, 1995, the Washington State Medical Quality Assurance Commission raided the office of Glenn Warner, MD, an oncologist with unusual views on healing, and revoked his medical license. Allegedly, Warner had cured more than 1,000 patients from terminal cancer—not with chemotherapy and radiation but with diet and exercise regimens, certain immunotherapeutic drugs, and other holistic methods. When he appealed his case in court, the commission’s attorney, Beverly Goetz, argued that cancer patients were “incapable” and “unqualified” to decide whether they received quality care or not. Only experts—like the members of said commission—were capable of making that judgment call, she said.
Unfortunately, this standpoint seems to prevail in the United States these days. Self-determination takes a backseat in favor of state-mandated “health care.” A fact that becomes eerily obvious in cancer cases where minors are involved.
But first, we should ask how valuable chemotherapy really is. There is no doubt that cancer is big business in the U.S. While in 1990, $3.53 billion was spent on chemotherapy, the number more than doubled to $7.51 billion only four years later. By 2009, so the latest projections, cancer therapy products and services will rake in over $27 billion.
As the unfortunate Glenn Warner put it: “We have a multi-billion-dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain. Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison.”
Other experts agree.
Alan C. Nixon, PhD, former president of the American Chemical Society, states, “As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good.”
Alan Levin, MD, of the University of California Medical School agrees: “Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade. Yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors. . . Women with breast cancer are likely to die faster with chemo than without it.”
His opinion is echoed by Ralph Moss, former assistant director of public affairs at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC) and author of the book The Cancer Industry: “In the end, there is no proof that chemotherapy actually extends life in the vast majority of cases, and this is the great lie about chemotherapy, that somehow there is a correlation between shrinking a tumor and extending the life of a patient.”
Even the General Accounting Office (GAO) found in a 1987 study on the progress of cancer treatment that “For a majority of the cancers we examined, the actual improvements have been small or have been overestimated by the published rates. . . Progress has been made, but not as great as that reported.”
More and more cancer patients and their families are feeling skeptical about the value of chemotherapy and radiation as well. However, not allowed to think for themselves, some states have imposed mandatory treatment.
The first widely published case was that of Katie Wernecke, a 12-year-old Texan who was diagnosed with Hodgkin’s Disease in January 2005. After undergoing four rounds of chemotherapy, her cancer went into remission.
The doctors advised subsequent radiation treatment, but father Edward Wernecke had informed himself on the Internet and was taken aback by an article in the New England Journal of Medicine, written by Vincent DeVita, former director of the National Cancer Institute. DeVita stated that radiation “by itself increases the risk of late second solid tumors in the irradiated field and the incidence rises steeply when radiotherapy and chemotherapy are combined.” Other mentioned side effects were stunted growth, sterilization, and an increased risk of breast cancer.
Worried about the harmful long-term effects, Katie’s parents decided to forego the radiation and follow up with holistic therapies. When Michelle Wernecke took her child out of the hospital despite protests of the oncologists, the Texas State Department of Child Protective Services issued an Amber Alert. The mother was arrested and sent to jail for kidnapping. Katie was put into foster care, along with her three brothers who were later released.
At a court hearing in June, a radiologist asserted that Katie’s cancer had returned and that she needed to undergo treatment again. Even though Katie said in a video statement that she was not willing to undergo radiation, she was ordered by the courts to do so. What’s more, convinced that the Werneckes negatively affected her decisions, CPS cut off all communication with their daughter. Left to her own devices, the 12-year-old decided to make the choice herself, resisting treatment by pulling catheters out of her arm and disobeying doctors’ orders.
After a ten-month ordeal, at the end of October 2005, a district judge ruled that Katie could rejoin her family and seek alternative treatment out of state. “On June 11th, Katie celebrated her 14th birthday at home with family and friends,” her father writes in his blog. “Katie is doing very well. . . but she is not cancer free yet, so there is still a battle to win. She is in better physical condition than ever.” A happy ending?
Recently, another story broke the news: The case of Virginian teenager Starchild Abraham Cherrix. The 16-year-old, diagnosed with Hodgkin’s Disease last summer, had undergone three months of chemotherapy that, in his own words, left him weak and nauseated. When the doctors told him in February that the cancer was back, he refused more chemotherapy.
“I think it would kill me the second time,” said Abraham, who instead opted for a sugar-free, organic diet and herbal treatments at a clinic in Mexico. Here, too, Child Protective Services and the courts became involved, and a six-month-long battle began. In May, a judge ruled that Abraham’s parents were guilty of neglect for supporting their son’s decision; he also ordered shared custody between the parents and the Accomack County Department of Social Services, with the possibility of the Cherrix’ losing custody entirely.
Yet Abraham refused to comply with court orders, cheered on by supporters of holistic medicine: "I think it's my body. I can choose what's best for my body. If I don't have the right to do that, then I don't have any rights at all anyway."
At the Cherrix’ request, a second judge stayed the first court order until trial, scheduled to begin on August 16.
[Necessary intervention or medical terrorism by the nanny state? We’d like to hear from you at feedback@caseyresearch.com.] Claudia French RN, LPHA cfrench180@tampabay.rr.com International
Medical Veritas Association http://imva.info/
Diabetics International Foundation http://members.tripod.com/diabetics_world/
--------
It is VERY MUCH the same here in Sweden, I'm afraid...
Olle Johansson, assoc. prof.
The Experimental Dermatology Unit
Department of Neuroscience
Karolinska Institute
171 77 Stockholm
Sweden
rudkla - 11. Aug, 22:43
