Eclub

CTM Eclub digest version, May 20th 2004

Up Front and Personal
This Month's Interview with
CTM Founder Phillip Day

ECLUB: We're doing this over the telephone from where?
PD: Limerick, Western Ireland.
ECLUB: How's the tour going?
PD: We're doing the ABC's of Disease Part 2 over here, and a more expanded tour of the island than last time. It's great. We have some R & R this weekend in the beautiful city of Limerick.
ECLUB: So what's new?
PD: It appears Tony Blair's goose is cooked.
ECLUB: So we've been reading.
PD: The most important thing for British, and indeed citizens of other nations to consider is that this man represents a new style of rule that must be crushed. He has consistently overridden the wishes of the majority who elected him. Any die-hard supporters of Blair need to clear the happy dust from their eyes and realise this sets a very dangerous precedent and a point of departure from safe democracy. This new style of 'rule by minority', overarching global socialism, seems to be the style of preference in many other countries too. If there is something in society a government jobsworth thinks will hurt someone else, it will be legislated upon, whether the people wish it or not.
ECLUB: Give us some examples.
PD: Iraq, the European Constitution, top-up fees for universities, the Nanny State, political correctness in schools and local government, ridiculous petrol price increases and a possible recurrence of that revolt, the chaos of immigration, the lie of multiculturalism, the lie that vitamins harm and therefore should be regulated by drug legislation, GM foods, condoms handed out in schools, fourteen-year-olds able to have an abortion without their parents even knowing about it, yadda, yadda. The majority don't want them and yet they have been forced into putting up with extremist, minority agendas which seem able to convince even the rats in the sewer that they have 'human rights'.
ECLUB: It seems, with all that's blown up about the EU Constitution and its implications for Europe - especially Britain - that they're going to squeeze it through, no matter what?
PD: What's happening in Europe will affect world peace in the years to come, similar to what was happening in the 1930s. The situation with the EU is obvious and inherently unstable. Those in Britain need to be reminded that we do not need to be in the EU to trade with the EU. Switzerland and Norway aren't in 'the club', yet they're doing fine, having free-trade arrangements in place to maintain and even improve their economic positions free of interference. The emotive language Tony uses of 'If we don't act now to be at the centre of Europe, we will be marginalised forever!' is bubblegum tommyrot. Britain is the EU's biggest customer! Will the EU nations suddenly punish Britain for not signing the Constitution? Hardly!
ECLUB: How's it working out for the smaller nations?
PD: We're noticing in Ireland, Dublin especially, how amazingly expensive everything has become. God knows how the Irish cope. And yet many in these smaller nations are seduced by the huge amounts of money, investment and building projects pouring into their countries. This is simply a socialist/communist redistribution of wealth around Europe, for which Britain, France and Germany are mostly footing the bill. The recipient nations such as Ireland, as part of the deal, are being talked into huge cost-of-living increases. There are also big holes in the EU's budget, such as with pensions. Big holes don't go away, they tend to get bigger. As I said, the EU socialist system is remote, overbloated, precariously unstable, profoundly undemocratic ('elected' MEPs cannot turn back or create legislation, such as the nutritional directives), and the people running it are among the most corrupt in living history.
ECLUB: This issue of EClub has the final part of the Cancer: Who Can We Trust?. Tell us how you intend rounding the series off.
PD: Steve Ransom's excellent book, Great News on Cancer in the 21st Century, deals so well with the mindset cancer patients are faced with, which needs to be overcome. We are highlighting key extracts from Steven's book to finish off the partwork. The idea that a patient's only option is chemo, radiation and surgery should be jettisoned in the 20th century along with vaccinations, thalidomide, and many other medical errors. I want to leave CTM subscribers with a permanent record in the EClub archives that there is a completely different, highly successful, non-toxic, non-invasive method for getting you back into the game of life if you have cancer. Read and be amazed. I am so spurred up with this message that next year, we're going back to basics and organising a world tour specifically on cancer itself and what the world should be doing about it.
ECLUB: What else is in this issue?
PD: We look at the criminal enterprise so often masquerading under 'psychiatry'. How qualified, in the light of damning studies, are psychiatrists to analyse and 'cure' society's apparent rampant problems of mental illness? Consider that mental health promoter Tipper Gore, the wife of the erstwhile US VP, is doggedly telling everyone that 28% of the American population is mentally ill because of problems outside of their control. This translates to over 70 million Americans not deemed responsible for their actions - an unsettling belief held by the wife of a one-time presidential hopeful aiming to lead the most powerful nation on Earth. Mrs Gore goes on to state that over a quarter of her country's population cannot help themselves and therefore need the malignant ministrations of the psychiatric profession, almost half of whose physicians are themselves apparently dependent on self-prescribed psychoactive medication.
ECLUB: Can't wait to read that one.
PD: The UK's Daily Telegraph, usually quite sensible, is still receiving a thoroughly-deserved kicking over that asinine article on vitamins being the real health scare. Meanwhile, the Daily Mail features an article on the Hunzas and discusses apricot kernels and Vitamin B17 along with organic, predominantly raw diets! Folks, the world is ripe for a sensible, mature and booming health system that relies on good, wholesome food and clean water, rather than the poisons the chemical industry has been shoving down our throat for decades.
ECLUB: Where are you next touring?
PD: I am invading my old home, the United States, while its mighty armies are abroad. I am moving in with a female frontline contingent (my wife, Samantha!), point of insertion, Phoenix AZ. Then we are sweep our forces eastward over the Rockies, forking left and right to overrun Minnesota and Oklahoma, finishing up in Atlanta. T'will be an invasion packed with laughter, life, and the liberation of common sense, and it will bring the strongholds down. Forget little Timmy's baseball practice, what America's going to hear in June will blow Hugh Heffner's rubber doll into an airship.
ECLUB: Good luck with the rest of Ireland, Phillip.
PD: Don't worry. I've got you your green hat, Brian.

The Story of the Rich Man and the Barrow Boys
by Rob Doust

Imagine a large town full of the usual houses, shops, offices, and streets. One of the streets is full of barrow boys, 14 in all, trying to sell their goods to the public. Into the street strolls the 4th richest man in town. He gathers all 14 around him, and offers them a deal.

The deal goes like this. "I will guarantee to buy something from you every day, at a price higher than normal, and you can take the extra amount, and share it out amongst yourselves. If you want, you can buy stuff from me, but as my prices are higher than yours, then you probably won't."

"It's part of the deal that I give you control of the whole of my wealth, savings, and pension fund. This can be shared out equally amongst all of us, and you can even bring in those 10 shoe-shine boys over there, to share in the wealth, plus anyone else you like, at any time."

The barrow boys couldn't believe their luck, and every time the 4th richest man in town's back is turned, they are laughing and making extremely rude hand gestures at him.

"Furthermore", says the 4th richest man in town, "If I buy anything from anywhere else in town, then I will buy it through you, and you can make a profit on it."

The barrow boys, who can spot a mug a mile away, know that the 4th richest man in town comes from a long line of wealthy ancestors, and that he has a lot of land with rivers flowing through it.

In no time at all, they secure fishing rights for themselves, the shoe-shine boys, and anyone else who joins in the future, while virtually excluding the 4th richest man and all his relations from fishing altogether.

By this time, the barrow boys are having to hang on to each other to stop themselves falling over, they are laughing so much.

"There is more to come," says the 4th richest man in town. "I will give you very large sums of money on a regular basis, and, at your discretion, you can give me back half of it anytime you like, provided I spend it on what you tell me to, and also provided that I match it with an equal amount."

"You mean that every time we tell you to spend a thousand pounds on something you might not even want, you will give us 500 pounds?" said the barrow boys, who by this time were rolling around on the floor, laughing helplessly.

"What do you know about gardening?" asked the 4th richest man in town. "Bugger all!" chorused the barrow boys. "Marvellous," said the 4th richest man in town. "You can tell my gardener what to plant, when to plant it, and even if he can plant it at all."

"What about your wife and kids?" cried one of the barrow boys, wiping the tears from his eyes, "won't they give you a hard time when they realise you are giving everything away?"

The 4th richest man in town said arrogantly, "Don't worry about them, I never tell them anything, except lies."

Then, in a fit of spite, he declared that the barrow boys could make up as many petty rules as they liked, and his wife and kids would be obliged to follow them all to the letter.

He also said that the boys could call his wife and kids anything they liked, or nothing at all.

"Just one more thing", said the 4th richest man in town, "I don't want the Press reporting what I've done." "No problem", said the barrow boys, "We'll take some of that money you're giving us, and bung our mate, the Reporter, a fistful. That'll take care of that."

"Good idea," said the 4th richest man in town, "and I'll give money from my wife's bank account to one of my chums to give a talk in my kid's school, telling them what a jolly good idea I've come up with."

"Shouldn't we all sign a binding contract?" said one of the barrow boys, who still didn't believe this was really happening to them.

"Of course," said the 4th richest man in town, "but we'll have to do it quick before the wife finds out."

Believe it, or not, that is precisely the deal that British politicians have spent the last 30 years hammering out with the European Union…. Except that it's worse. Much, much worse.

TEN FACTS

1) Britain's trade is divided up as follows: 60% internally, amongst ourselves. 34% with the rest of the world. 6% with the Eurozone. Only around 10% of British companies actually trade with Europe.

2) The 6% with the Eurozone is virtually a one-way street, as we buy cars, electronics, alcohol and cigarettes from them, but they buy little from us, as the Euro is always low against the Pound.

3) On two previous occasions, when we linked up with the Euro currency, (the 'snake' and the 'ERM'), we had to leave after a very short time because our economy went into a nosedive, only to pick up when we un-linked. This time round, joining the EU constitution or Euro, we won't ever have the option to leave.

4) The UK foolishly observes all of the petty rules coming out of Brussels, while the Europeans please themselves whether they follow the rules or not.

5) Britain is the fourth largest trading nation in the world. To hand over our wealth, (gold and foreign currency reserves, pension funds, oil, etc.), to be doled out among 24 other Euro-states is the height of stupidity.

6) Scotland and Wales are Euro-regions, thus keeping their names, while England has been divided up into 9 Euro-regions, and the name 'England' is seen nowhere on the new EU maps.

7) The BBC is funded by the licence fee to provide a Public Service. Its charter states quite clearly that it will give 'impartial coverage of news and current affairs to support fair and informed debate.' For some time now, the BBC has been receiving millions of Pounds of Euro money, and is very observably Pro-Euro biased.

8) The Government uses taxpayers' money to send teams into the schools to indoctrinate children into believing that 'being in Europe' is a good thing for us.

9) Britain gives Europe approximately £1.3 million every hour. If Brussels feels like it, the UK receives half back, provided we spend this 'rebate' on we're told to.

10) A significant amount of the tax increases, the infamous VAT and local government hikes such as Council Tax (recently raised from 10% to 18% in most areas), go towards paying for new roads, shopping centres and drainages schemes in other EU countries such as Poland, Ireland and Latvia. The British, as one of the few 'net contributors' into the EU coffers, are bearing the brunt of the costs for this modernising. The British people have never been given the option of voting on whether they wish to pay for the upkeep of other nations.

If British politicians sign and ratify the EU Constitution in whatever form, they will yield Britain's vital and final powers of control and self-governance to Brussels. The EU is then entitled to form any policy in the future to which Britain must adhere, no matter how damaging and grievous. There will be nothing any 'democratically elected' UK parliament will be able to do about any of it.

Fed up with the EU? Need to know more?

Further Resources

Spread the word to friends with The Real Face of the European Union by Phillip Day, a video documentary (PAL format only) which lays out the EU problem and what you can do about it.
Ten Minutes to Midnight by Phillip Day
Vigilance by Ashley Mote

Business Chiefs Turn Against EU
by Toby Helm

Business leaders have turned against the EU and its economic policies, dealing a serious blow to Tony Blair's hopes of winning a referendum on the EU constitution.

The ICM survey of 1,000 company chief executives found that 73 per cent of business leaders believed the European Union was "failing" and that Britain would be more successful if it retained the pound and reclaimed powers from Brussels.

Only 18 per cent of those interviewed believed that the European constitution would be good for their businesses; 59 per cent said it would be bad; 23 per cent did not know.

Even on the core EU policies - trade and the single market - the disapproval ratings were strong, with 82 per saying that the Government should handle trade negotiations and 14 per cent saying they should be left to the EU.

The survey was commissioned by the Eurosceptic New Frontiers Foundation which has strong links with many businessmen expected to campaign strongly against the European constitution.

The findings will alarm Tony Blair and other pro-Europeans, who have long argued that the majority of British businesses support the core economic policies at the heart of the EU project.

They suggest that in a period when Britain's economic growth has outstripped that of the sluggish euro-zone, business has become not just skeptical about much of just what emanates from Brussels but actively hostile.

Oliver Letwin, the shadow foreign secretary said: "Most business people now recognize the enormous damage being done by EU regulations. Along with the domestic regulatory interference they are responsible for halving the rate of productivity growth in this country and moving us from fourth place to 15th in the world economic league."

The poll shows hardening opposition among British executives to the European single currency. A large majority (77 per cent to 11 per cent) thought that replacing the pound with the euro and more integration would inevitably mean higher personal taxes.

Seventy-eight per cent thought that the euro and deeper integration would cause higher business taxes.

Seventy-six per cent of business leaders agreed that "stable British interest rates" were more important than "a fixed exchange rate between the pound and the euro", with only 18 per cent disagreeing.

Gordon Brown, the Chancellor, has made clear his reservations about the draft constitution and has pledged to prevent any EU move that could open the way to harmonization of British taxes.

He also promised to defend Britain's £2 billion annual rebate from the Brussels's budget negotiated by Margaret Thatcher in 1984. British negotiators believe it could be under threat as a result of loose wording currently included in the draft.
The Daily Telegraph, 28th April 2004

Fed up with the EU? Need to know more?

Further Resources

Brussels Accused of 'Police State Tactics'
By Ambrose Evans-Pritchard

The European Union was accused of using "police state tactics" to stifle criticism after police raided the offices of a Brussels journalist and seized a vast archive of documents identifying his sources.

Hans-Martin Tillack, Brussels correspondent for Germany's Stern magazine, said Belgian police took computers, mobile telephones, address books, bank statements and 17 boxes of documents.

They were acting on instructions from the EU's anti-fraud office, Olaf.

Mr Tillack was held incommunicado by police without access to a lawyer for 10 hours last month. The second raid occurred on Wednesday, (21st April). He is suspected of bribing an official to obtain an internal Olaf dossier in 2002.

He dismissed the claim as being pure fabrication intended to justify a "fishing expedition" through his files.

Herbert Bosch, an Austrian Socialist MEP in charge of overseeing Olaf, said: "What is happening is absolutely unacceptable. I don't believe there is a scrap of evidence against Tillack."

Chris Heaton-Harris, a Tory MEP, accused Olaf of "police state tactics" and said it was part of a pattern in which EU whistleblowers were singled out for harsh treatment.

Mr Tillack has clashed repeatedly with Olaf, accusing it of dragging its feet on serious corruption cases.
Daily Telegraph, 23rd April 2004

Further Resources

Glenys Faces a Storm Over £175-a-day EU Payout
by Graeme Wilson

Glenys Kinnock was caught up in a bitter row over EU expenses last night.

The wife of the former Labour leader, Neil, is one of thirty British MEPs facing accusations of exploiting the European Parliament's system of attendance allowances.

A fellow MEP claims she frequently drops in to sign the attendance register and thus qualify for the £175 daily payment, but then leaves within an hour. The controversy comes amid growing anger about the tax-payer funded 'gravy train' enjoyed by MEPs who can claim huge expenses without producing any receipts.

It will be embarrassing for Mr Kinnock, the EU Commission vice-president, who has been put in charge of a crack down on fraud within its £60 billion-a-year budget. And it will raise fresh questions about the fat-cat lifestyle the Kinnocks enjoy in Brussels.

Mr Kinnock is paid more than £160,000 a year in his job. He receives a £24,000-a-year house-keeping budget for his three storey home in Brussels, a £7,000-a-year entertainment budget and has use of a chauffeur driven limousine.

His 59-year-old wife is paid more than £70,000 a year as an MEP and can claim more than £100,000 a year in expenses.

The tax payer also pays for the couple's son Stephen, who works for the British Council in Brussels. His wife, Helle, is a Danish MEP. The allegations on expenses were made by Austrian, MEP Hans-Peter Martin, who claims Mrs Kinnock is one of the most prolific offenders.

He says she has left the parliament within an hour of signing the register on at least 26 occasions. But his efforts to high-light the issue have provoked a bitter backlash.

Another Labour MEP he accuses, North-East member, Gordon Adam, clashed with him last Friday as the Austrian tried to film him signing the register. Mr Martin was left lying on the floor after Mr Adam branded him a 'disgrace' and tried to snatch his video camera.

Mr Martin handed a dossier on his allegations to Pat Cox, president of the European Parliament, but was given short shrift.

"On the basis of what was sent to me there is zero evidence to support the claims of wrongdoing or a breach of the rules," said Mr Cox.

He accused Mr Martin of 'a grotesque attempt to maximize personal publicity'.

Other Labour members named by Mr Martin include Scottish MEP Catherine Stihler, Neena Gill (West Midlands) and Eryl McNally, (East of England).

MEPs are allowed to claim £175-a-day expenses for attending the EU parliament. which sits in Brussels three weeks a month and in Strasbourg for the remaining week. Mr Martin claims he has logged more than 7,000 occasions when MEPs have signed in for their allowance and then left to travel back to their constituency.

The practice does not breach the rules, but Mr Martin wants it outlawed.

He is particularly critical of the system as it applies to the Strasbourg week, during which there are no meetings on Fridays, but MEPs are still allowed to claim their £175. "The Brussels expense system is being abused, especially when delegates come in early, quickly sign in and then leave the city," he said.

A spokesman for Mrs Kinnock, who became an MEP in 1999, said: "Glenys doesn't want to say anything on this. She backs what Pat Cox said last week and does not want to give Mr Martin any more credibility or publicity."
Daily Mail, 26th April 2004

Further Resources

EU Attacked Over New Vitamin Rules

Vitamin and food supplement users have been badly let down by the Government's approval of a new European directive according to a Kent MP.

Former Asda chief executive and chairman, Archie Norman, warned the European Food Supplements Directive would see many supplements disappearing from shops.

The Conservative MP for Tunbridge Wells called on the Government to change the small print on the new law and save vitamins and mineral tablets used by millions of British people.

"Residents have been in touch with me asking me to help save the many vitamin and health supplements they have been using safely for years," he said. "This Government has let down vitamin and food supplements users by rubber stamping the badly-drafted European Food Supplements Directive. It is too late to reverse that decision, but it is not too late to change the way the laws will be enforced and the small print."

Under the European directive, to be enforced from August 1, 2005, vitamins like 1g vitamin C tablets - on sale in health stores such as Holland and Barrett - would be banned, say the Tories.

The EU directive is designed to harmonise the rules on vitamins and food supplements across the European Union. It provides a list of vitamins and minerals that can be used in food supplements. It also includes upper limits on certain vitamins.

Working with pressure group Consumers for Health Choice, actress Jenny Seagrove and the Tories' shadow health minister, Tim Yeo, launched an online petition against the plans. Mr Yeo said: "With the public's help, we will do everything we can to force ministers to preserve access to these products on behalf of British consumers."

Earlier this year, opponents of the new rules won their fight to take this issue to the European Court of Justice on the grounds that it was unlawful and would unfairly affect millions of people, threatening both health and trade.

London MEP John Bowis, the Conservative health and consumer rights spokesman in the European Parliament, said: "British consumers should have the right to choose what quantity of vitamin supplements they want to buy. There is not a single recorded case of a death caused by an overdose of vitamin supplements. This directive is not about consumer safety, but about the EU interfering in people's lives."

Mr Norman was chief executive of Asda Group PLC 1991-96 and chairman between 1996-99.
Kent on Sunday, 25th April 2004

Further Resources

Pain, Placebos and Panacea
Examining the Religion of Medicine
by Phillip Day

As a final word on this four-part cancer investigation, it is necessary for us to take a brief look at the credibility of today's medical establishment - the same establishment still willing to lie to oppose B17 and nutritional treatments for cancer. Credibility often becomes an issue when the words 'nutrition' and 'cancer' crop up in the same sentence, and it really shouldn't. After all, when you get down to the basics of it, the issue of B17 is not one of credibility. All a cancer sufferer wants to know is: "Does it work or doesn't it? And if it does, will it work for me NOW?"

Krebs has little time for B17 detractors: "Scientific truth isn't dependent upon credibility or lack of it. The scientific reality either is or it isn't. And this is the scientific reality - that the seeds of all common fruits (except citrus) contain vitamin B17, an anti-cancer vitamin."

Yet since the cancer and general medical establishment are hot to make an issue of credibility, it's only fair in turn to examine their credibility. Let's also talk about the victims of cancer and how they react to their diagnosis. Let's explore too our worship of medicine, for in examining all three together, one can begin putting together a bizarre picture of a public often times desperate to participate in an elaborate religious healing ritual, one in which danger, personal cost to the patient and a potent fear actually appear to be the vital ingredients.

Psychologist and medical researcher Richard Totman studies the effects of faith and suggestion at the heart of our drug-based medical religion today. He has this to say:

"Take anything that is either nasty, expensive or difficult to obtain, wrap it up in mystery and you have a cure."

Have we become the congregation of a medical religion in whose surgery and hospital temples we attempt to seek a kind of redemption? Certainly we take an almost ghoulish delight in telling others what is wrong with us and what our doctors are trying to do to put it right. I remember my daily train journey into London involved enduring the non-stop medical anecdotes of a family friend - what Kevin was suffering from today; what Mary's latest pills were doing for her, and so on. These conversations are an extremely common social ritual, as is apparently the need to endure some kind of ghastly sacrifice at the altar of ill-health and emerge bloodied but victorious, thanks to our faith in doctors and their wonderful, life-saving chemicals.

Do some of us subconsciously make ourselves sick in order to enter this healing/redemption ritual? Judging by the following testimonies from doctors themselves, such a 'blasphemous' notion does not appear too wide of the mark.

"I was brought up, as I suppose every physician is, to use placebo, bread pills, water injections and other devices... I used to give them by the bushels..."
Professor Richard Cabot, Harvard Medical School, 1903

"Whatever the rights and wrongs, placebo prescribing is widely practised and, if we admit it to ourselves, so is the habit of prescribing for largely social reasons."
Dr K Palmer, British general practitioner, 1998

Drug-taking as a ritual
Not much has changed in 95 years, it seems. Many studies have been conducted examining the effects of placebos. The fact that pharmacologically inert substances such as sugar and bread pills have a measurable clinical effect on illness is proof positive that our healing religion is alive and even kicking into a higher gear today.

To illustrate this point, in a television episode of the enthralling series Trust Me (I'm a Doctor), shown on British TV on 11th November 1997, Dr Phil Hammond asks a group to test the strength of a fictional drug he named Ketofenfobraphen. Hammond describes the impressive-sounding drug to the group as 'a powerful new painkiller that works by selectively blocking the effects of prostaglandin 2 alpha'.

"It's been licensed in the USA and Japan for a year," Hammond enthusiastically tells his volunteers, "and sales have gone through the roof. In fact, I'd recommend you to buy shares in the company. Its beauty is that it works quickly - usually within ten minutes - although it can occasionally give you a dry mouth and make you feel dizzy. Mind you, it's expensive - seven tablets for £14.99 and they do not taste very nice - but it's the best drug in its class and I use it all the time for my knee. And when the British Lions were on tour in South Africa, they insisted on having some flown out especially..." etc. etc.

Note that in giving out the details of Ketofenfobraphen, Dr Hammond is careful to mention each aspect which will affect the outcome of the healing ritual: The drug is a 'wonder drug'. It is officially sanctioned (licensed). It produces side-effects (dry mouth and dizziness). It is horribly expensive and has an unpleasant taste. And lastly, a group most of us look up to (the British Lions) think it's the business.

The volunteers were randomly split into two groups after being told they would receive either Ketofenfobraphen or a placebo. In reality both groups were given different coloured placebos. Ten minutes after taking the tablets, they were blindfolded and asked to submerge a hand in ice and pull it out only when it got uncomfortably painful. Hammond reports that after five minutes, twice as many volunteers who thought they had been given the painkiller still had their hands in ice:

"When I asked if anyone had suffered side effects as a result of taking the 'powerful painkillers', one woman said she had felt faint and dizzy soon after swallowing the pills."

Officially sanctioned quackery
We hear cries of 'quackery!' levelled by the medical establishment against treatments unsanctioned by them and yet official quackery on a vast scale, in some cases involving highly toxic and deadly drugs, surrounds us in breathtaking abundance. Got a pain? Have a drug. Got a headache? Have a drug. Got a bad attitude? Have a drug. When the only tool you have is a hammer, very soon everything starts looking like a nail. The pharmaceutical industry cynically ignores unprofitable prevention in favour of successfully snowing us that biotechnology is the future for mankind's health. I beg to differ. I think, if we do not get prudence and quick, biotechnology will be the ruin of us. It already contributes to the third leading cause of death in the western world, as we found out earlier.

Also, as we are discovering, and as Ralph Nader and many others have found out, 'orthodox' medical quackery has created sickness and death on a scale that is hard for us to accept at first, but the true picture is beginning to emerge along with the scandals and hard statistics which show us where the real problem lies.

Have we become like the shade-tree mechanic who spends so much time tinkering with his car that it no longer runs the way it used to? Professor Chris Bulstrode, an orthopaedic surgeon turned medical teacher, puts the compelling case for less doctors and medicine, not more:

"More doctors just means more illness. If we want a healthier and happier country, we should get rid of a lot of doctors. I cannot have been the only person who was absolutely incensed to discover that when the Berlin Wall came down, the military strength of the Eastern Block was an order of magnitude less than we had been led to believe. I want to try all the Western generals for lying to the public about how strong the Russians were. These generals have done three things over the last thirty years. They have frightened the hell out of the Russians, they have frightened the hell out of us, and they have stolen a huge amount of money from the budget that could have been used elsewhere. As I was thinking about this, I realized that this is exactly what we as doctors do in health care."

Cancer as a social stigma
So how does this medical and drug tinkering apply to cancer? A person receiving a cancer diagnosis for the first time is a frightened individual. Cancer has been bred into us as the secret fear at the back of the 20th century mind, the Sword of Damocles come to destroy our family, corrupting our vitals a little each day, to rob a little boy of his mother, a daughter of her father. Yet cancer also remains a potent social stigma, despite its abundance, causing relatives and friends politely to distance themselves in some cases from the unfortunate sufferer in question.

Who doesn't hate the idea of a hospital? Who doesn't fear the fateful diagnosis of the oncologist? Cancer victims are pitied as much today as they ever were in decades past because cancer still seems insurmountable and frightening ("Jack's got cancer." "Oh, well. That's it for him then."). More often than not, cancer victims sense an isolation; they realise that something has changed that won't ever be the same again. They know almost nothing about the circumstances surrounding the cause or onset of their illness, and so they turn to the easy familiarity of their local doctor or mainstream medical consultant who they hope will offer some comfort and a way out.

Thus the cancer victim enters the medical ritual. The procedure that follows runs a well-worn and predictable path in orthodox medicine. The instillation of fear. The patient enters a foreign environment of strange words, stranger machines and the strangest smells. A biopsy or similar operation to test for tumour malignancy followed by the commencement of surgery, chemo- or radiotherapy. Sometimes the life of the patient appears to be extended or shortened by some months. Sometimes surgery cuts out the tumour without spreading the cancer. Sometimes it doesn't. More often than not the resultant chemotherapy or radiation treatment poisons or burns the patient's immune system, liver and kidneys into complete submission before the cancer itself closes for the kill.

Cancer patients who do stride out on their own to investigate the alternatives to orthodox treatments become bewildered and disheartened by the rainbow of cure-alls and snake-oil remedies confronting them. Yes, even in the realm of alternative health there are the true quacks. All promise long life and happiness and some cost a small fortune. Often times, the intrepid patient will discuss alternative therapies with their doctor who understands their emotional need to search, but who tactfully reminds them of all the work being done by the pharmaceutical companies to cure their condition.

Doctors not to blame
No one would seriously blame doctors for the woes of the world, or even for their failure to cure cancer in our loved ones. These busy and overworked ones have barely enough hours in the day to do what they have to do. They simply respond to disease by applying the training they themselves submitted to with a willing and honest heart. Naturally, most do not want to confront the awful possibility that what they were taught in the hallowed halls of medical academia would not be in the best interests of their future patients. Yet, years later in the heat of the cancer war, they do not see their medicine working, and this presents a problem for many of them.

Could this, in itself, be the tragedy of where we have arrived as a society today? In a commercial environment, where the life and health stakes are high and doctors have to rely on medical briefing packages prepared for them by their peers and the commercially compromised drug industry, what indeed becomes of the rest of us when part of the industry-accepted science in which these doctors were trained has proved to be so tragically flawed?

Some reading this will have their hopes raised by the information contained within it, only to have them dashed when they excitedly broach the B17 metabolic therapy subject with their doctors, the majority of whom, we must remember, were trained, rightly or wrongly, in allopathic medical institutions funded by the pharmaceutical industry. The 'establishment' responses from GPs and oncologists usually go something like this:

"Ah, B17! That old wife's tale! Doesn't work. Never has done. We disproved that one back in the '70s, Mr Smith. It's cyanide, for goodness sake!"

Or: "If B17 really worked, Mrs Winterbottom, don't you think we'd be prescribing it and the good news would be all over the newspapers?"

But nutritional therapy for cancer can never be part of the orthodox healing ritual for four reasons.

Ø It cannot be patented.
Ø The mystery of cancer and its treatment would evaporate.
Ø The drug establishment and cancer charities would be cut out of the profit loop and our grocers would become our new doctors!
Ø An end would come to the fear which binds the followers to the medical religion.

Not all doctors, as we have seen, are negative to nutritional therapy. Some, as we shall see in a minute, have become curious and excited in cases where their patient's 'miracle' regression can be provably put down to nutritional therapy - in other words, after the patient has ceased all conventional treatment to return home to die or, as the cancer establishment puts it, 'to enjoy a remaining quality of life'.

Nearly all GPs have an honest heart and are desperately involved with their patient's struggle for survival (the heroes of the B17 story are almost all doctors). As we have seen from the oncologists and biochemists quoted earlier, more than a few have noticed with despair the inability of orthodox treatments to arrest cancer and so are willing to take a fresh look at the alternatives. Those who have taken the trouble to do their homework recognise that Krebs' and Sugiura's research on B17 is based on solid science and there is nothing sensible to gainsay it. As a result, official medical attitudes towards cancer are changing, but tragically not fast enough to save a lot of us at the present time.

Human like the rest of us
The point that needs to be made and fully understood here is this. Hard though it may be for most of us to accept, doctors and professors get up each morning and put their pants on, one leg at a time, just like the rest of us. As all are part of flawed humanity, PhDs don't stop greed, nor do the letters 'MD' guarantee a perfect and impartial diagnosis. This hasn't stopped an institutionalised medical arrogance automatically rearing its offended head when non-sanctioned treatments that work with cancer challenge accepted dogma. Can doctors and the medical establishment always be trusted to know what's right for us? Not in all cases. Richard Smith put it this way in March 1997:

"Doctors are set apart. We are a priesthood with our own rites, beliefs, systems of initiation and tribal practices. And we have special powers. The public turns to us in moments of extremity and expects an answer, even a solution. Often we cannot provide it..."

And that from the editor of the British Medical Journal!

Traditional medicine is increasingly coming under fire as cracks appear in the flawless picture we have painted of our medicinal saviours. When Trust Me (I'm a Doctor) - the book and the TV series written by Dr Phil Hammond and Michael Mosley - came before the British public, the British National Health Service (NHS) and private medical practice were portrayed in a strange new, disturbingly dark and foreboding light. Dr Hammond remarks:

"In BBC2's 'Cardiac Arrest', an NHS hospital was depicted as a war zone, with staff bullying one another, humiliating patients and taking the path of least resistance in order to survive. The only way to cope was not to care. For the first time in a British TV program, nurses were portrayed as a bunch of clock-watching, bolshy witches, and the rougher side of doctors was shown... one making easily overheard remarks about a man with lung cancer ("He's got so much asbestos in him, it'll take a year to cremate him.") A bullied female doctor with an alcohol problem committed suicide. All very bleak and unsettling."

The picture painted by most who have worked in the National Health Service is one in which overworked and inexperienced junior doctors are engaged in a daily struggle to keep their heads above crushing workloads. Some of these believe their problems started during medical school, where they were first introduced to the deeply ingrained cronyism and party culture of the medical establishment.

A harsh reality
Two surveys, reported in The Lancet, discovered that heavy drinking and illicit drug use were common among second-year medical students, and that these invariably increased after graduation. Of the 90 house officers studied, 60% of both sexes exceeded their safe limits. 35% of men and 10% of women reported using other drugs such as hallucinogenic mushrooms, LSD, ecstasy, amyl nitrite, cocaine and amphetamines. As for their mental state, 21 percent of men and 45 percent of women had anxiety scores indicating possible pathological anxiety.

Stress too was to be a major factor in influencing the later mental conditions and competence of doctors when interacting with their patients. In 1991, a study of doctors who qualified in 1986 found that 58% of men and 76% of women regretted entering medicine.

Dr Hammond states: "Drinking and drug abuse are clearly coping mechanisms picked up in medical school, but it is impossible to predict which of the many heavy student drinkers will go on to develop a problem. The BMA estimated that up to 13,000 practising UK doctors are addicted to drugs or alcohol. If each makes 2,000 clinical decisions a year, at a conservative estimate, that is 26 million decisions affecting patient care [including prescribing potentially lethal drugs] made by doctors who can't function without alcohol or other drugs."

Doctors often neglect to advise their patients of their true condition. Patients are usually frightened and in awe and tend not to ask for an interpreter when their consultants revert to medical jargon, with predictable and unfortunate consequences. A study of 100 patients interviewed within five days of major abdominal surgery found that 27 didn't know which organ had been removed and 44 were unaware of the exact nature of the surgical procedure, despite having been counselled before the operation.

Neither do doctors appear to be as in control of emergency events as Casualty and ER would have the public believe. A Cardiff Royal Infirmary study polled 113 doctors in cardiac arrest teams from 62 teaching and district general hospitals in England and Wales. Only 32 could cite the full sequence of managing ventricular fibrillation (the commonest cause of cardiac arrest) and 32 didn't even know the initial actions to take.

The medical establishment bravely dons the mask of unflappable capability, and yet the statistics imply a worldwide allopathic disaster is occurring. Trust Me reports that between 4-13% of admissions to hospital in the United States are due to medical accidents. 7% of these patients suffer permanent damage and 14% die. In England, where there are about 8 million admissions a year, even the lower figure extrapolates to 320,000 medical accidents a year, resulting in 40,000 deaths and 20,000 cases of permanent disability.

And orthodox medicine is the one crying 'quackery'?

High-profile flaws
Dispelling the myth we have been sold that doctors are society's guardian angels and above medical reproach, scandals abound within Britain's National Health Service of chronic bed shortages, patients being treated on trolleys in corridors and bungled medical procedures occurring far more frequently than the public realises. Surgeons occasionally pick up names like 'Chopper', 'Slasher' or 'Hacker'. Rodney Ledward, a Kent gynaecologist, was struck off by the General Medical Council in September 1998. Known as 'The Butcher' by his colleagues, he nevertheless was able to practise his incompetence for sixteen years before he was eventually stopped. Most of his colleagues knew of his ineptitude but were unwilling to be the ones to blow the whistle. As a result of their silence, hundreds of women today bear the scars from the hacking of a doctor who once boasted he was 'the fastest gynaecologist in the South East', having on one occasion completed seven hysterectomies between 8am and noon.

On 23rd March 1999, the front-page news in England told the tale of Anita Froggart who had a breast removed after being wrongly diagnosed as a cancer victim. Doctors later admitted that a sample of her healthy tissue had been mixed up with one from a cancer patient.

At the time of writing, the Bristol Royal Infirmary is the target of a £15 million General Medical Council enquiry that will rock the foundations of British medical practice for years to come. Several hundred babies are believed to have perished or were maimed after botched cardiac procedures by incompetent surgeons, producing such an inordinately high mortality rate that the institution was referred to among consultants for years as 'The Killing Fields' or 'The Departure Lounge'. Even though GPs would go out of their way to refer their patients away from Bristol to other areas, once again nothing official was done. Whistle-blowing Bristol nurse Helen Stratton later reported:

"Parents used to say, "See you later!" to their children and I used to stand there thinking, "No, you won't."

So is our medical establishment above reproach? Hardly. But the irony is, most doctors know it even if the public doesn't. Yes, doctors are necessary and a valuable part of our society. But what are we to make of the scandals which rob us of our loved ones when so much can be done to stop these senseless tragedies from happening? As Ernst Krebs remarks, you're a pretty rotten expert if you die from the very diseases you are trying to prevent in others. Sad though it may be to accept, we do have cardiologists dying of heart attacks, neurosurgeons succumbing to strokes, osteologists dying of osteoporosis and, yes, oncologists perishing from cancer.

Our own neglect
I believe though that the real tragedy of cancer lies not just with our overworked doctors and their deeply flawed establishment, but with us. Most ordinary citizens gave up looking after themselves years ago and moved the responsibility to BUPA, Blue Shield and the government to do it for them. Now society's general perception is that our doctors constitute our first and last line of defence against any crippling illness and we cannot survive without them. This is baloney. Once upon a time, no one had medical insurance. Hard to believe, but there you go.

Of course, true and responsible medicine has a part to play in our society today - no question of it. Every time I fell off my motorcycle as a teenager, I was grateful to the Accident & Emergency Unit for stitching me back together again with great skill, a kind word and some marvellous coffee. Certain ailments are best treated in our hospitals - who would argue? But when is enough enough? Is it when medicine ceases to be for the good of the patient and begins operating for the good of the shareholder? If it is, we are way past that point today, and our health industries have become ever more cynical and manipulative in their dealings with their patients' misery and weakness as time progresses.

As for our worship of drugs and all things medical, I beg to remind you that the great George Washington was bled to death in 1797 by some of the most well-educated medical practitioners of his day. No doubt, had you been at the august president's deathbed raising a fuss as they slashed his wrists, these learned professionals would have angrily turned on you: "We know what we're doing. We're DOCTORS!" The men who killed George Washington were extremely intelligent. They were experienced practitioners who were no doubt highly educated. And they were wrong.

If cancer seems mysterious and frightening, that is because society has packaged it that way. But the reality is, humankind has been ravaged in the past by those supposedly insurmountable environmental diseases we looked at earlier, and these have been beaten by nothing more controversial than a change in diet, a change in environment and a simple vitamin. To our ancestors living back then, these diseases seemed every bit as complicated and terrifying as cancer appears to us today. But the names of these diseases are all but out of the modern dictionary. So why not cancer?

METABOLIC DISEASES

Disease	Prevented by	Death Rate	Status
Scurvy	vitamin C (ascorbates)	varies	Defeated
Pellagra	vitamin B3 (niacin)	97%	Defeated
P. Anemia	vitamin B12 (& folic acid)	99%	Defeated
Beriberi	vitamin B1 (thiamine)	-	Defeated
Cancer	vitamin B17 therapy	varies	Defeated

Turning off the tap
When man rids himself of the delusion that a complicated-looking and horrendous disease requires an equally complicated, horrendous (and expensive) treatment in order to cure it, we can then return to sanity. And what is sanity? Is sanity not gauged by the reaction of the man facing an overflowing sink? Will he reach for the mop or the tap?

Today, because of the religion of medicine, billions are spent on cure and a minuscule amount by comparison on prevention, and so we don't turn off the tap of harm, we just mop up the damage. Our diets are processed, overcooked, irradiated, sugar-laden and vitamin- and mineral-deficient, and even as we scoff all that haûte cuisine in the world's finest restaurants, convincing ourselves we are so civilised, we are living the real insanity in a world we are increasingly polluting with every new step of our technology. Our bodies cannot appreciate the decor of a five-star restaurant, they only react to what comes down the gullet in the form of nutrition. Most of us are still running the gasoline car on diesel. We are, quite literally, what we eat.

Imagine if the government told us that, in order to improve road safety statistics, it was going to remove seatbelts from cars, ban airbags, outlaw anti-lock brakes, repeal the baby-seat laws and instead pour millions into teaching doctors how to fix the resultant broken heads in the hospitals. If this were to happen, Members of Parliament or Congressmen would be dragged outside by an outraged public and given the good news in the parking lot in no uncertain terms, and yet this attitude is the unbelievable state of affairs in healthcare today.

Of course we see the token gestures made by our leaders towards educating us in disease prevention. I worked in advertising, I used to see their pathetic campaigns ("Eat those fruits and vegetables, kids!"). The sorry truth is, the prevention ethic doesn't bring in tax revenues from drug licensing, nor does it find a way of replacing the incredible incomes governments receive taxing tobacco and alcohol. Ironically We the People know cigarettes and whisky are bad for us, and so in our guilt and naughtiness we don't mind forking out the government tax on them. Look me in the eye and tell me we're not certifiable already with this kind of attitude.

The most deadly items to our health are those we put into our supermarket carts. Stop and think next time you go shopping. Many products masquerading as personal and household care items contain chemical toxins that are known carcinogens. Much of the food now available is nothing more than highly processed commercial material passed off to the public as edible matter. And here am I, from the bottom of my heart, telling you, "Don't trust others to look out for your health! Do it yourself!" The dangerous farce of genetically modified foods and food irradiation should convince you of ulterior corporate agendas even if the foregoing chapters haven't. We must become good at prevention ourselves and look after our families. It takes only a little common sense and a small degree of consistency. If we simply turn off the tap, we will avoid the flood.

Author Paul B Rogerson comments: "In my experience, the great majority of those who learn about B17 say, "Wow, that's neat!" and then proceed to do nothing to change their dietary regimen. And so inevitably these folks will form part of the cancer statistics of the future. What a sad indictment on our civilisation that we have become too fond of our gluttonous habits, too lazy in our self-discipline, too apathetic with our leaders and their agendas, that even when faced with such monumentally good news as this, in the final analysis most of us are not going to do anything to save ourselves."

In World Without Cancer, Edward Griffin summarises his findings on four available treatments for cancer:

SURGERY: Least harmful. Sometimes a life-saving, stop-gap measure. No evidence that patients who receive radical or extensive surgical options live any longer than those who receive the most conservative options, or, for that matter, those who receive none at all. Believed to increase the likelihood of disseminating cancer to other locations.

When dealing with internal tumours affecting reproductive or vital organs, the statistical rate of long-term survival is, on the average, 10-15%. After metastasis, the statistical chances for long-term survival are close to zero.

RADIOLOGY: The burning out of tumours using x-rays. Very harmful in many ways. Spreads the cancer and weakens the patient's resistance to other diseases. Serious and painful side-effects, including heart failure. No evidence that treated patients live any longer, on the average, than those not treated. Statistical rate of long-term survival after metastasis is close to zero.

CHEMOTHERAPY: Toxic drug therapy. Also spreads the cancer through weakening of immunological defence mechanism plus general toxicity. Leaves patient susceptible to other diseases and infections, often leading to death from these causes. Extremely serious side-effects. No evidence that treated patients live any longer, on the average, than untreated patients. Statistical rate of long-term survival after metastasis is close to zero.

VITAMIN [METABOLIC] THERAPY: B17 seeds, amygdalin tablets or B17 administered intravenously. Non-toxic. Side effects include increased appetite, weight gain, and lowered blood pressure. Eliminates or sharply reduces pain without narcotics. Is a natural substance found in foods and is compatible with human biological experience. Destroys cancer cells while nourishing non-cancer cells.

Further Resources
Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know the Truth by Phillip Day
Great News on Cancer in the 21st Century by Steven Ransom
The ABC's of Disease by Phillip Day
B17 Metabolic Therapy compiled by Phillip Day

Medicine or Chemical Warfare?
by Steve Ransom

WARNING: Leukeran (chlorambucil) can severely suppress bone marrow function. Chlorambucil is a carcinogen in humans.
label on a Glaxo chemotherapy bottle

Mustard gas
During the Second World War, a ship carrying mustard gas exploded. In the autopsies carried out on the crew-members, it was noticed that exposure to the mustard gas had caused destruction of fast growing tissue and had slowed down the reproduction of white blood cells. It was surmised that since cancer grew rapidly, these poisons could kill cancer tissue swiftly.

Fighting for breath
Mustard gas was one of the most lethal of the poisonous chemicals used during the war. Almost odourless when breathed in, it can take up to twelve hours to wreak its havoc. Yperite, its main constituent, is so powerful that only small amounts have to be added to high-explosive shells in order to render them 'effective'. Once in the soil, mustard gas remains active for several weeks. Victims present skin blisters, sore eyes and violent vomiting.

Mustard gas causes internal and external bleeding and attacks the bronchial tubes, stripping off the mucous membrane. This is extremely painful and most soldiers had to be strapped to their beds. It usually took a person four or five weeks to die of mustard gas poisoning. On the effects of mustard gas, one nurse, Vera Brittain, wrote:

"Sometimes in the middle of the night we have to turn people out of bed and make them sleep on the floor to make room for the more seriously ill ones who have come down from the line. We have heaps of gassed cases at present: there are 10 in this ward alone. I wish those people who write so glibly about this being a holy war, and the orators who talk so much about going on, no matter how long the war lasts and what it may mean, could see a case - to say nothing of 10 cases of mustard gas in its early stages - could see the poor things all burnt and blistered all over with great suppurating blisters, with blind eyes - sometimes temporarily, sometimes permanently - all sticky and stuck together, and always fighting for breath, their voices a whisper, saying their throats are closing and they know they are going to choke."

The scientists were right; exposure to these gases did kill cancerous tissue, but, as Ralph Moss states in his book Questioning Chemotherapy:

"The amount of toxic chemicals needed to kill every last cancer cell was found to kill the patient long before it eliminated the tumour."

While these poisons and the ones that followed did cause some tumours to shrink, these reductions in mass did not increase the lifespan of the patients and the patients' quality of life suffered enormously. This is no wonder, as we can now see that taking chemotherapy is equivalent to being exposed to chemical warfare. On this point, authors of Toxicity of Chemotherapy, M C Perry and J W Yarbo note:

"Almost without exception, every drug developed for four decades that is active against cancer has produced side-effects that are reminiscent of the outgrowth of these agents from research on chemical warfare."

Ralph Moss again:

"I remembered the story of a celebrated Sloan-Kettering chemotherapist who, when he found out that he had advanced cancer, told his colleagues, 'Do anything you want - but no chemotherapy….' It was an open secret that an official of Sloan-Kettering sent his mother to Germany for unconventional treatment."

In an article entitled "Chemotherapy: Snake-Oil Remedy?" Dr Martin F Shapiro explained that while "…some oncologists inform their patients of the lack of evidence that treatments work, others may well be misled by scientific papers that express unwarranted optimism about chemotherapy. Still others respond to an economic incentive. Physicians can earn much more money running active chemotherapy practices than they can providing solace and relief to dying patients and their families."

WARNING
The following label accompanies the GlaxoSmithKline cancer drug Alkeran:

WARNING: Alkeran (melphalan) should be administered under the supervision of a qualified physician experienced in the use of cancer chemotherapeutic agents. Severe bone marrow suppression with resulting infection or bleeding may occur. Melphalan is leukemogenic in humans. Melphalan produces chromosomal aberrations in vitro and in vivo and, therefore, should be considered potentially mutagenic in humans.

DESCRIPTION: ALKERAN (melphalan), also known as L-phenylalanine mustard, phenylalanine mustard, L-PAM, or L-sarcolysin, is a phenylalanine derivative of nitrogen mustard.…

And Glaxo's leukaemia drug Leukeran has the following label attached to the bottle:

WARNING: Leukeran (chlorambucil) can severely suppress bone marrow function. Chlorambucil is a carcinogen in humans.

Danger! Toxic spill!
The result of a spill of chemotherapy onto the bare hand is burning and scarring. Is it any wonder that people are worried about what might be happening to their insides as chemotherapy is intravenously fed into the body? Is it any wonder that chemotherapy nurses wear protective gloves? Is it any wonder that so high a percentage of oncologists refuse to submit to the treatments they advocate to their patients? Hazel had every right to be concerned about the internal damage taking place as she was being intravenously administered chemotherapy for her breast cancer.

Go immediately to
the Emergency Room
The following information is taken from a medical college website, specialising in bone marrow transplant accompanied by chemotherapy 'support'. The site is not for the faint-hearted. This particular text discusses the procedures in place to dispense with clothing and other contaminated apparatus after a chemotherapy spill. The lady overleaf is wearing the regulatory, full-protective suit to deal with such a spill.

"Contaminated pads and towelling, the outer pair of gloves, and shoe covers are placed in the first chemo waste disposal bag, which is then knotted and placed in the second waste disposal bag. The remaining protective clothing and gloves are placed in the second chemo waste bag.

Goggles can be reprocessed and are bagged separately in a zip-lock bag and sent to pharmacy with the chemo spill kit after they are removed. The chemo waste bags must be sealed securely and disposed of in the biohazard waste containers. A "Medication Incident Report" must be filled out after any chemotherapy spill.

If skin comes in to contact with the drug:

· Remove gloves and protective clothing.
· Rinse the contaminated area thoroughly with warm water.
· Wash thoroughly with soap and rinse again with warm water.
· If skin is not broken, wipe affected area thoroughly with gauze saturated with a diluted 0.05% chlorine bleach solution and rinse with warm water. If the skin is broken, use 3% hydrogen peroxide. Wash off with warm water.
· Note the drug(s) that made contact, as there may be a specific antidote.
· Go immediately to the Emergency Room."

This is what is pumped into the patient undergoing conventional chemotherapy treatment. We are reminded of Professor Charles Mathe, who stated:

"If I contracted cancer, I would never go to a standard cancer treatment centre. Cancer victims who live far from such centres have a chance."

Are these people really dying of cancer?
Having had opportunity briefly to examine the toxicity of some conventional cancer treatments, we can return to that earlier question, 'How many of these deaths are really attributable to cancer itself? How many deaths should in fact be recorded as 'death by doctoring?' Dr Mollie Hunter wrote a letter recently to Professor Michael Gearin-Tosh which was published in the UK Daily Telegraph. Dr Hunter was writing about an experience with one of her patients who had been receiving chemotherapy for her myeloma cancer and steroids for the effects of her chemotherapy:

"I got to see her in only the last stage of her illness when she kept getting repeated bronchitis. The steroids she was on not only lowered her immune system but collapsed her vertebrae so that her spine curved and her chin was on her chest and she could not breathe. She really died of respiratory failure due to her curvature of the spine, due to her steroid treatment, but I signed the death certificate myeloma. It made me wonder at the time how often the true cause of death is recorded, i.e. the treatment and not the underlying illness."

How much longer can we continue to sanction chemotherapy and similar toxic interventions as frontline cancer treatments? And why aren't we asking more questions of establishment medicine? In the face of such disastrous therapeutics, what keeps us in our current state of passivity? (c) Copyright 2003 Steven Ransom

Our Hereditary Submissive Attitude?
by Steven Ransom

"I kind of went into a trance and although
something didn't feel quite right, I found
myself nodding to chemotherapy." Hazel

Whilst in the main dismissing the 'alternativist' treatments (as he called them) and writing in a generally confident manner about his trust in the conventional medical paradigm, journalist and cancer-sufferer John Diamond would sometimes waver:

"What if those denying alternativists were right? What if the truth was that no life had ever been saved by radiotherapy and that there was every chance that my cancer would be made worse by it being irradiated? What if the truth, as pronounced by a couple of book,s was that the main effect of cancer surgery was to release stray cancer cells into the body, allowing them to set up home elsewhere?… I turned to the medical books for solace and got none."

Talk with cancer patients and one soon discovers that many of them report that they have an uncomfortable gut feeling that there must somehow be a better way forward. Yet they still find themselves returning to their oncologist for more of the same 'uncomfortable' treatment. Why is this, when there are, as we shall see, well-founded, non-conventional and non-toxic treatments available?

Surely, one significant factor is our hereditary submissive attitude to the medical orthodoxy and its archetypal symbolism - the white coat, the stethoscope, the years of knowledge represented in those framed diplomas. Every artefact speaks of us being in the hands of experts. On top of this, there is the added pressure that can be exerted upon the patient at the point of diagnosis by the cancer physician.

"We must move aggressively"
In his essay entitled The $200 Billion Scam, Jeff Kamen reports on how a cancer diagnosis was delivered to Kathy Keeton, the late wife of Penthouse magazine magnate, Bob Guiccione:

"I'm sorry," she remembers her doctor saying, "It's a very rare form of the disease. It's the nature of this kind of cancer that it takes off at a gallop, and metastasises quickly, so we need to act quickly and get you started on chemotherapy at once. We have some of the best people in the world in this field. I urge you to let me get you into their expert care. There is no time to waste. This form of cancer is often fatal, and quickly so. Untreated, you have six weeks to live. We really must move aggressively with the chemo."

Here is Gawie Marx's story:

"A week before my planned vacation to Miami and the Caribbean, I noticed a big bruise on my right upper leg, and decided to see my doctor because it looked awful. For some reason the doctor decided to take a full blood count. He told me he would let me have the results the next afternoon. At that stage I did not even know what a full blood count was! I was still sleeping the next morning, when Dr Petersen phoned me and instructed me to go and see a certain Professor Peter Jacobs. He actually told me the Professor was waiting for me. I was still not concerned, because I did not feel sick.

Prof Jacobs told me I had acute promyelocytic leukaemia (APL). He told me I was very sick and he had to start treatment immediately. I did not listen to what he was saying - I could not believe I had cancer. I told him there was nothing wrong with me - I was feeling fine. But that was not the case. My white cell count was 0.7 and my platelets 6. I was admitted into hospital the same afternoon and had my first platelet transfusion.

My folks and my one brother were with me that evening and the following day my youngest brother and his family came down from Johannesburg to see me. The treatment I was going to receive consisted of a course of all-trans-retinoic acid for 3 months, followed by 3 rounds of 7-day continuous Ara-C with 3 days of idarubicin chemotherapy."

Hazel recalls a similar rushed experience:

"Basically, I was in shock from the diagnosis. I was sitting there, with the doctor saying that this treatment was the best available and that it was actually a matter of life or death that I received it. My husband was sitting next to me, telling me that I needed to go along with it. I kind of went into a trance and although something didn't feel quite right, I found myself nodding to chemotherapy."

And in Janet's story, we discover a particularly hurried and pressurised encounter with the establishment:

"It all started when I went into the gynaecology clinic on base for very heavy bleeding, which was unusual for me. This was on Thursday, 4th May. They said that they couldn't see anything because of all the blood, but that there was definitely something wrong with my cervix. They stressed how important it was that I see a cancer specialist off-base within the next couple of days. That really scared me. I left there more freaked out than when I went in, with no answers.

On Monday, 8th May, I went down to Salt Lake to see a specialist oncologist. After my examination, he had Dee and I come into his office. He determined that it was cervical cancer and that he believed it was still stage 1 and I would not be able to have any more kids. Of course that hit me very hard. He said I needed a radical hysterectomy, which is more drastic than a regular hysterectomy…. they take out a lot more tissue, etc. He scheduled my surgery for that Thursday, 11th May.

The surgery took 4 hours. They removed my cervix, uterus, ovaries, 20-some-odd lymph nodes, and a bunch of tissue surrounding the uterus. All went well. A couple of days after my surgery, my pathology report came back. They got all the cancer from my cervix. The cancer had already started to spread to the lymph nodes, but they believe they removed all that as well. The tumour they removed was about the size of a golf ball.

I was in the hospital for a week. I came home Wednesday, 17th May. I cannot believe that just 6 months before all this, I had a normal pap done. I don't understand. The Doctor said that I had some really nasty cancer cells. It just progressed so fast. I am just soooo thankful that it was found when it was. If I would've waited 6 more months for my annual exam, I just know that the cancer would've been too far gone to stop. I just know it.

On Monday, 10th July, I began both radiation therapy and chemotherapy. The reason for me having to go through both the radiation and the chemotherapy is that it increases my survival rate to around 85%. My chemo doctor said that if I decided not to get treated, the chances of it coming back were pretty high and that if it did, it would take my life. Scary thought, so, needless to say, I decided to do it."

Most definitely, the power imbalance that exists in all doctor-patient relationships, (whence the term 'shrink' in psychiatry) is a key agent in determining the direction of treatment. As we shall see, there is plenty of evidence to suggest that Janet, Hazel, Gawie and countless other cancer patients are being coerced into a one-sided regime, in which perfectly valid treatment options are not being made available to them - options that do not involve such drastic medical intervention. And while there are some people who credit their cancer recovery to chemotherapy, the simple fact remains that some people recover from cancer anyway - they are blessed with strong immune systems. Can we really credit cancer recovery to toxic chemicals?

A sea of conflicting information
Shock and fear at point of diagnosis, combined with the powerful influence inherent in the doctor/patient relationship, is one aspect of the equation. The move away from conventional cancer treatment towards non-conventional treatments is also being hampered by the vast sea of confusing, conflicting and often bizarre information posing as 'helpful' alternative cancer advice. Take the Internet, for instance. A first-time patient, or someone just plain interested in researching cancer, can soon become thoroughly confused and disheartened. Some four thousand links come up under "alternative cancer treatment" alone!

But an anxious patient, without the luxury of a clear guide to hand, and with no time to separate the wheat from the chaff, turns off his computer. He is faced with having to make decisions based solely on his own somewhat overwhelming and probably demoralising Internet search, together with a kind of blind, desperate faith that, somehow, the well-qualified oncologist has got to be right, "… and didn't he warn us that there were a lot of Internet 'cancer kooks' out there wanting your money?" The patient then finds himself right back at square one and, by default, the chemotherapy suggested earlier seems overall to be the 'safest' bet. In the view of health reporter Phillip Day, author of 'Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know The Truth', "Many people just gulp, enter the cancer tunnel and hope they come out the other end."

Genuine treatments do exist!
Despite the fact that an Internet search can quite easily generate confusion, there is actually a wealth of well-documented, credible information available on the web on natural, efficacious treatments for a variety of serious illnesses, including cancer - information that in some instances has been on record for many years. But information on such treatments is not widely known in the public domain. This is because genuine medicine has often had to fight tremendously hard to be clearly heard. And there are particular reasons why this has been so.

Before discussing specific natural cancer treatments in more depth, it is important that we briefly examine the reasons for the current levels of confusion surrounding genuine natural medicine as a whole. Sometimes, it is not so much where to look for genuine treatment and advice, as how to look for it. Wilful distortion, negative propaganda campaigns, unwitting stupidity - you name it. Conventional and alternative, it's taking place on both sides of the fence. We must learn to read between the lines.

The Merchants
by Steven Ransom

"If man were to throw his entire medicine cabinet
into the sea, it would be better for man and worse
for the fishes." Oliver Wendell Holmes

In their long, hard battle for proper recognition, genuine natural treatments for serious illnesses have always had to fight on two fronts. Firstly, they have had to do battle with the drug merchants, who use every trick in the book to undermine any genuine treatments not under their own jurisdiction. And they will employ all means possible to disseminate their damaging disinformation on 'the non-conformists and their wares' as far and wide as possible in order to protect their own lucrative market. No department, private or public, is beyond the reach of the merchants' all-consuming influence.

Thriller writer John Le Carré spent many years working in the British Foreign Office and knows the politics of big business very well. His most recent book, The Constant Gardener, focuses on the corrupt nature of the pharmaceutical industry. Interviewed on the subject, Le Carré stated:

"Big Pharma is engaged in the deliberate seduction of the medical profession, country by country, worldwide. It is spending a fortune on influencing, hiring and purchasing academic judgment to a point where, in a few years' time, if Big Pharma continues unchecked on its present, happy path, unbought medical opinion will be hard to find."

The following report, dated February 2002, comes from the Journal of The American Medical Association:

Most Doctors Who Set Guidelines Have Industry Ties: The vast majority of doctors involved in establishing national guidelines on disease treatment have financial ties to the pharmaceutical industry that could potentially sway their recommendations and inappropriately influence thousands of other physicians, a new study concludes.

Eighty-seven percent of guideline authors had some type of relationship with drug companies, yet these often were not disclosed, according to survey responses from 100 authors of guidelines published from 1991 to 1999 for common diseases such as diabetes, high blood pressure and asthma.

More specifically, 38% of respondents said they had served as employees or consultants for pharmaceutical companies and 58% had received financial support for medical research. In addition, 59% had links with drug companies whose medications were considered in the particular guidelines they authored.

Selling sickness
The British Medical Journal recently featured an article entitled "Selling Sickness: the Pharmaceutical Industry and Disease-Mongering". The report, which readers are strongly advised to read for themselves, reveals the calculated manner in which unnecessary fear of disease is instilled into the public mind, in order then to market equally unnecessary drugs and related pharmaceutical services. In the introduction to their study, the BMJ authors state:

"There's a lot of money to be made from telling healthy people they're sick. Some forms of medicalising ordinary life may now be better described as disease-mongering: widening the boundaries of treatable illness in order to expand markets for those who sell and deliver treatments. Pharmaceutical companies are actively involved in sponsoring the definition of diseases and promoting them to both prescribers and consumers. The social construction of illness is being replaced by the corporate construction of disease....

Although some sponsored professionals or consumers may act independently and all concerned may have honourable motives, in many cases the formula is the same: groups and/or campaigns are orchestrated, funded, and facilitated by corporate interests, often via their public relations and marketing infrastructure. A key strategy of the alliances is to target the news media with stories designed to create fears about the condition or disease and draw attention to the latest treatment. Company-sponsored advisory boards supply the 'independent experts' for these stories, consumer groups provide the 'victims' and public relations companies provide media outlets with the positive spin about the latest 'breakthrough' medications."

Through information taken from leaked documents and other sources, the authors single out GlaxoSmithKline, Merck, Pfizer and Roche - all leading pharmaceutical companies - as engaging in this practice to one degree or another. The authors summarise their report as follows:

"Some forms of 'medicalisation' may now be better described as 'disease-mongering' - extending the boundaries of treatable illness to expand markets for new products.
Alliances of pharmaceutical manufacturers, doctors, and patients groups use the media to frame conditions as being widespread and severe.
Disease-mongering can include turning ordinary ailments into medical problems, seeing mild symptoms as serious, treating personal problems as medical, seeing risks as diseases, and framing prevalence estimates to maximise potential markets.
Corporate funded information about disease should be replaced by independent information."

For those interested in the extent to which this brazen form of 'marketing' has penetrated and 'shaped' our collective understanding of illness and disease, readers are encouraged to obtain a copy of the Credence title, Plague, Pestilence and the Pursuit of Power. In this book, the reader discovers that engendering a heightened fear of minor illnesses and disease is a useful political tool for profit and control and is being used to influence public reaction in a wide variety of ways.

A great number of profitable oncology services are now being offered to a fearful population - a population whose understanding of cancer has been 'shaped' almost entirely by those who sell and deliver treatments. Great News on Cancer in the 21st Century reveals the extent to which establishment medicine has been teaching us what to think about cancer but not how.

Forever 'unproven'
G Edward Griffin is the author of World Without Cancer. On the approval and licensing of non-pharmaceutical cancer treatments, he states:

"Therefore - and mark this well - as long as the present laws remain, the only substances that ever will be 'approved' for cancer therapy will be proprietary. No substance from nature will ever be legally available for cancer or any other disease unless its source can be monopolised or its processing patented. No matter how safe and effective it may be, and no matter how many people are benefited, it will forever be relegated to the category of 'unproven' therapies. As such, freely available cures from nature will always be illegal to prescribe, to promote, and in many cases even to use."

In opposition to the incessant drive by big business to dominate our health choices, Dr Matthias Rath provides another non-populist summary of the primary ethics of the merchant's house:

"Throughout the 20th century, the pharmaceutical industry has been constructed by investors, the goal being to replace effective but non-patentable natural remedies with mostly ineffective but patentable and highly profitable pharmaceutical drugs. The very nature of the pharmaceutical industry is to make money from ongoing diseases. Like other industries, the pharmaceutical industry tries to expand its market - that is, to maintain ongoing diseases and to find new diseases for their drugs. Prevention and cure of diseases damage pharmaceutical business and the eradication of common diseases threatens its very existence.

Therefore the pharmaceutical industry fights the eradication of any disease at all costs. The pharmaceutical industry itself is the main obstacle, why today's most widespread diseases are further expanding, including heart attacks, strokes, cancer, high blood pressure, diabetes, osteoporosis and many others. Pharmaceutical drugs are not intended to cure diseases. According to health insurers, over 24,000 pharmaceutical drugs are currently marketed and prescribed without any proven therapeutic value. According to medical doctors' associations, the known, dangerous side-effects of pharmaceutical drugs have become the fourth leading cause of death after heart attacks, cancer and strokes.

Millions of people and patients around the world are defrauded twice: A major portion of their income is used to finance the exploding profits of the pharmaceutical industry. In return, they are offered a medicine that does not even cure."

More vested interests
In an eye-opening book entitled Reclaiming our Health: Exploding the Medical Myth and Embracing the Source of True Healing, author John Robbins has collated some interesting statistics:

The Cancer Industry
Percentage of cancer patients whose lives are reliably saved by chemotherapy - 3%

Evidence to show that, for the majority of cancers, chemotherapy exerts a significant positive influence on survival or quality of life - none

Percentage of oncologists who said that if they developed cancer they would not participate in chemotherapy trials due to "the ineffectiveness of chemotherapy and its unacceptable degree of toxicity" - 75%

Percentage of people with cancer in the United States who receive chemotherapy - 75%

Company that accounts for nearly half the chemotherapy sales in the world - Bristol-Meyers Squibb

Chairman of the Board, Bristol-Meyers Squibb - Richard L Gelb

Richard L Gelb's other job - Vice-Chairman, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Director, Bristol-Meyers Squibb - James D Robinson III

James D Robinson III's other job - Chairman of the Board, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

Director, Ivax, Inc. Chemotherapeutics - Samuel Broder

Samuel Broder's other job (until 1995) - Executive Director, the National Cancer Institute.

Organised medical crime
Dr Richard Schulze has spent many years speaking out against the pharmaceutical cartels and promoting personal responsibility in healthcare. One of his more famous sayings is "Getting well is easy, it's the getting sick that takes years of constant, dedicated, hard work." When he was 11, his father died in his arms of a massive heart attack. At 14, his mother also died of a heart attack. They were both only 55 years old. At 16 years of age, Richard was diagnosed with a genetic incurable heart deformity.

After curing himself of this so-called incurable disease through changes in his lifestyle (and no surgery), he set out on a mission to help others. Schulze had first-hand experience of being in the clutches of the orthodoxy and determined to set out to do something about alerting the wider world to some of its perils. Dr Schulze now travels the world, delivering his message:

"Over 200 years ago, Ben Rush, who signed the Constitution of the United States, warned that we needed to include a medical freedom clause in the Constitution. He said if we didn't it was likely that one group of doctors would monopolise healthcare by passing legislation to outlaw other types of doctors and systems of medicine.

This is exactly what happened. Over the last 80 years, organised medical groups and pharmaceutical companies, using lawyers, bribes, lobbyists, insurance companies and the strong arm of the Food and Drug Administration, have been very busy. They have corrupted elected officials to pass laws to remove any competition. They have crushed Natural Doctors, Natural Medicine and Self-Care. Their goal is to monopolise healthcare and make us dependent on medical doctors and pharmaceutical drugs. It almost worked!

We have watched them pass more and more laws restricting our rights. They have made many healing herbs, foods and even nutrients illegal. Natural health professionals who flourished a few decades ago are now barred by law to practise, and natural doctors, holistic healers, health food store-owners and even family members of the sick have been arrested and jailed for using natural remedies. If you disagree with your doctor regarding the medical treatment of your children, they can be taken away from you, put in a foster home, and you can be arrested for endangering the health and welfare of your child.

There are many people who are jailed every year, put there for disagreeing with medical doctors and their policies. Organised medical crime has gone so far, they have outlawed words for other health professionals to use, such as 'Diagnose' and 'Cure'. Just by using these words you can be arrested for practising medicine without a license."

It seems that the delivery system of 21st century conventional healthcare is being bought and taught to think of treatment and prevention of disease in pharmaceutical terms only. The current move by the European Parliament to restrict the nutritional supplement market is a case in point. In its sights are over 300 vitamins, minerals, herbs and other nutrients, whose sales they are seeking to streamline and bring under their own jurisdiction. All this under the guise of wanting to protect the public from harm.

The following text is taken from an article exploring the potential ramifications of this move:

"Imagine dropping by your favourite health food store to find it boarded up and out of business. So you go around to your local drug-mart to pick up some vitamin C, but the only dosage on the shelf is ridiculously low. The druggist informs you that 60mg is now the maximum dosage available without a prescription. So if you've been taking a mega-dosage of vitamin C to help fight heart disease or build up your immunity against cancer, you'll have to find a doctor willing to prescribe that dosage - you're no longer free to decide on your own how much of this natural vitamin you want to take.

Sounds like a nightmare? It gets worse.

Imagine that all of this is the result of new legislation imposed by lawmakers with direct ties to pharmaceutical companies - powerful companies that will use the law to create an enormous new source of profits. Now that's a real nightmare. But what makes it truly nightmarish is that, incredibly, it will soon become a reality in the United Kingdom and most of Europe - if the global pharmaceutical industry has its way."

A number of health organisations are currently spearheading the fight against the pharmaceutical industry and various monopolies, as they seek to legislate against our free choice of natural nutrients. If this legislation is passed, it will directly affect YOU in many ways. Positive moves are afoot to thwart their attempts and a website address is included at the end of this book to enable you to find out more about this directive and register your protest quickly and easily.
© Copyright 2003 Steven Ransom
Extracted from Great News on Cancer in the 21st Century

Further Resources

Great News on Cancer in the 21st Century by Steven Ransom
Cancer: Why We're Still Dying to Know the Truth by Phillip Day
The ABC's of Disease by Phillip Day
B17 Metabolic Therapy compiled by Phillip Day

Ventolin Inhalers 'Can Aggravate
Asthma Attacks', Scientists Warn
by Michael Day

A chemical used in Ventolin inhalers, the world's best-known asthma treatment, can make the condition worse in some patients, scientists have warned.

Research at the University of Pittsburgh suggests that the chemical reverses the protective effects of other drugs which prevent asthma attacks happening.

Asthma specialists said that this could explain why some sufferers who use the inhalers frequently report a gradual deterioration in their condition over several months.

One leading specialist, Dr Mark Aronica of the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio, said: "The concern is that this chemical could build up in patients who take the drug frequently. We need clinical studies to find out whether this is the case."

In their research, which was presented to the annual meeting of the American Academy of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology in San Francisco, the scientists examined the impact of salbuterol - also known as salbutamol - which is the active ingredient in Ventolin inhalers, on other steroid drugs.

Salbuterol, which is prescribed to more than four million British asthma sufferers, comes in two slightly different forms. One is ( R ) salbuterol, the active form of the drug, and the other is (S) salbuterol.

The latter is an inert by-product which is left in Ventolin inhalers because it is expensive to remove and was previously thought to be harmless

In the Pittsburgh experiments, the addition of ( R ) salbuterol reduced the swelling and inflammation of the airway tissue of asthma sufferers, making it easier for patients to breathe.

The (S) form, however, reacted with the steroids, which are commonly used to reduce inflammation of the airways, negating much of their effect.

The chief researcher, Dr Bill Ameredes, an assistant professor of cell biology and physiology, said: "I was shocked. It has the opposite effect compared to the active form. That was the striking finding."

Dr Ameredes said that the inert form of salbuterol might remain in the blood and weaken the protective, anti-flammatory effect of steroid drugs. "We need to think about this some more," he said.

Most asthmatics use drugs called "inhaled steroids" daily to prevent symptoms of asthma, such as coughing, wheezing and breathing difficulties, from appearing. When symptoms occur, patients are supposed to use medicines such as salbuterol to relieve them. Salbuterol and similar drugs work by forcing the airways to expand, allowing more air to pass into the lungs. The finding from Dr Almeredes team suggests, however, that salbuterol should be used sparingly.

Dr Martyn Partridge, professor of respiratory medicine, at Imperial College, London, and the chief medical adviser to the National Asthma Campaign, said that asthma sufferers should not discontinue treatment without first seeking medical advice. "Even if salbuterol does have this unwanted effect, and we're not sure that it does, it's likely to be specific to this drug and not to other drugs in this class," he said.

He said that by taking regular, low-dose inhaled steroids, most people with asthma could avoid symptoms and the need for salbuterol-type drugs. One American drug company, Sepracor, now sells a purified form of salbuterol that contains only the active form of the drug. It is not yet on sale in Britain

Although Ventolin inhalers are used predominantly by asthma sufferers they can also help people with other breathing problems. The chemical salbuterol is also used in some other inhalers.

A spokesman for GlaxoSmithKline, which makes Ventolin, said: "Salbutamol (salbuterol) is for the short term relief of asthma symptoms and has been used by millions of patients worldwide. If the patients are experiencing regular symptoms and are relying on their short term medication they need to see their doctor who may review their medication."

Several smaller drug companies sell their own versions of Ventolin, containing the same drug, salbuterol, but marketed under different names.
The Sunday Telegraph, 11th April 2004

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: Asthma suffers should examine the chapter on the condition in The ABC's of Disease for simple and effective measures to take. Asthma usually indicates a weak immune system, and so effective, permanent solutions to the problem need to address immunity as well as the other factors involved.

Further Resources
The ABC's of Disease by Phillip Day

Diabetes Rates will Double over 30 Years
by Sarah Womack

Diabetes rates will double worldwide by 2030 even if the obesity rate remains stable, an international team of researchers said yesterday.

The rate will go up even higher if, as is expected, more people eat a so-called western diet and stop exercising.

"The number of people with diabetes is projected to rise from 171 million in 2000 to 366 million in 2030," the researchers write in the latest issue of Diabetes Care.

Diabetes is one of the leading causes of premature death in the UK and is closely linked to heart disease. Both are strongly associated with a poor diet and lack of exercise.

"The human and economic costs of this epidemic are enormous," said Sarah Wild of Edinburgh University who, with colleagues in Australia, Denmark and Switzerland, used United Nations data to project future diabetes rates.

They go for "a concerted, global initiative" to reduce the epidemic.
The Daily Telegraph, 28th April 2004

FROM THE CAMPAIGN FOR TRUTH IN MEDICINE
Overweight, obesity, heart disease and diabetes will statistically kill several members of your family over the next ten years, and make the lives of others a living misery. All this before cancer, stroke and other diseases are even taken into account.

In the month of June, the UK's world-renowned investigative medical journalist and author Phillip Day visits America to tour coast-to-coast, explaining the simple initiatives all citizens can take to avoid any of this happening.

To find out more about one of Phillip's regional and highly-motivating health seminars in the US and what it can do for you and your family, click here for further details.

Further Resources
The ABC's of Disease by Phillip Day

Examining Depression, Suicidal Tendencies
by Phillip Day

Profile
In her opening address, the World Health Organisation's Director General Dr Gro Harlem stated: "…initial estimates suggest that about 450 million people alive today suffer from mental or neurological disorders…. Major depression is now the leading cause of disability globally."

There is of course no question that depression blights the lives of millions around the globe. A million people commit suicide every year, with between 10 to 20 million suicides attempted annually. Suicide in the US for males between the ages of 35-49 is the number three cause of death, outstripping even diabetes, iatrogenic death (physician-induced) and motor vehicle accidents.

Canada has a particularly bad problem with depression and suicides, with a person killing themselves every two hours. Hospital records for 1998/1999 show that females were hospitalised for attempted suicide at one and a half times the rate of males. Around 9% of those hospitalised for a suicide attempt had previously been discharged more than once following an attempt on their own life in that same year. Physicians wrote out 3 million prescriptions for Paxil (paroxetine) alone, one of the most common anti-depressant medications. Sales for Paxil in 2000 exceeded those in 1999 by 19%.

Depression symptoms
Feelings of doom, the inability to take action, listlessness, and that thick lead blanket of despair wreck the lives, not only of the sufferer, but their family, friends and co-workers too.

Histadelia
On the physical front, nutrient deficiencies, glucose intolerance and allergy are extremely common in those suffering from depression. One major cause is an excess of the neurotransmitter hormone histamine - a condition known as histadelia. Dr Carl Pfeiffer asks: "Do you sneeze in bright sunlight? Cry, salivate and feel nauseous easily? Hear your pulse in your head on the pillow at night? Have frequent backaches, stomach and muscle cramps? Do you have regular headaches and seasonal allergies? Have abnormal fears, compulsions and rituals? Do you burn up food rapidly and sometimes entertain suicidal thoughts? ...If a majority of these apply to you, you may benefit from a low-protein, high complex carbohydrate diet (fruits and vegetables), 500 mg of calcium, am and pm, 500 mg methionine am and pm and a basic supplement program. Avoid supplements containing folic acid as these can raise histamine levels."

Some of our most loved stars, such as Marilyn Monroe and Judy Garland, were likely histadelics. Drawing from over 30 years' experience, Pfeiffer estimates that at least 20% of schizophrenics are histadelics and these are often the problem patients in psychiatric hospitals, since they do not respond to the usual drug treatments, electroshock or insulin coma 'therapy'.

Blood histamine levels can be analysed. Often, the compulsive obsessions, blank mind, easy crying and confusion may highlight an underlying chemical addiction to cane sugar, alcohol or drugs. Histadelics experience high saliva discharge and rarely have cavities. Often they are seen wiping saliva from the corners of their mouth. Excess histamine presents rapid oxidation in their body, and their high metabolic rate and subsequent attractive body shape are sometimes potential indicators for the underlying condition. Marilyn Monroe was often heard to remark to photographers: "You always take pictures of my body, but my most perfect feature is my teeth - I have no cavities."

A high sex drive characterises the histadelic, who achieves orgasm and sustains it easily. Drug addicts and alcoholics also tend to be histadelic. Heroin and methadone, for instance, are both powerful histamine-releasing agents. A severe insomnia also characterises the condition, and sufferers often use heavy doses of sedatives in order to get to sleep. The sedatives themselves often become an addiction problem, further compounding the plight suffered by those with depression.

Depression - the nutritional link
Traditional psychiatric treatments are mostly useless for the histadelic depressive. Electroshock, examined in detail in The Mind Game, is a barbarous initiative, which mostly traumatises the patient further. Lithium in lower doses of 600-900 mg is partially effective, but does not have greater efficacy at higher dosages. Anti-depressant drugs are simply mood ameliorators and can be addictive. Nor do histadelics respond to B3 mega-doses usually recommended for schizophrenics. B9 (folic acid) definitely worsens the condition.

What has been shown to work are treatments which modify how the body releases and detoxifies histamine. Calcium supplementation releases the body's stores of histamine and the amino acid methionine detoxifies histamine through methylation, the body's usual method of breaking down the neurotransmitter. Laboratories can test for histamine levels in the blood and this is often one of the first best steps a practitioner can take to determine if histamine is a player in their patient's depression.

Maes et al also found that serum levels of zinc in 48 unipolar depressed subjects (16 minor, 14 simple major and 18 melancholic subjects) were significantly lower than those in the 32 control volunteers.

Helping those with suicidal tendencies
The major problem with those suffering from chronic depression is suicide. Today, such family members are often consigned to psychiatric care, which, as we have seen in The Mind Game, creates problems of its own for the patient. Research group Truehope states:

"One of the particularly tragic outcomes of a mood disorder is suicide. Over 90% of suicide victims have a significant psychiatric illness at the time of their death. These are often undiagnosed, untreated, or both. Mood disorders and substance abuse are the two most common. Around 15-20% of depressed patients end their lives by committing suicide."

In times gone by, caring family members gathered around and gave the depressed relative the assurance and attention to talk things through. Often drug addiction or substance abuse were key factors. Today, with the fracturing of the family unit, the denigration of religion, and the separation of many families from each other with the hectic pace of 21st century life, psychoanalysis has simply taken over the task of counselling that used to be carried out by caring relatives or the neighbourhood minister. I feel strongly that this has had a deleterious effect on our society, in view of the medications prescribed which appear to have a quieting effect, but underneath are propagating a roiling of the emotions.

I further believe that a neighbourhood pastor/minister, or the equivalents in the other religions, have a pivotal role to play in maintaining the mental stability of their parishioners. It simply has not worked the psychiatric way, with psychiatrists themselves, as we discuss in The Mind Game, often committing suicide more often than the public they are supposed to be treating.

Combining nutritional
good sense with counselling
In our current times, more than ever, it is essential for the depressed to have an understanding friend or relative with them constantly. Ideally this should be someone the depressed person looks up to, and from whom they can take guidance. Measures should be taken to remove influences that can have a depressing effect on the patient. These include newspapers, TV news, video and computer games, heavy metal, rap, pop and other 'culture' music preaching negative conditioning messages. Instead, positive influences, serene surroundings, such as countryside outings and an active, outdoors lifestyle with plenty of exercise, far removed especially from those settings which have surrounded the patient during their bouts of depression, are ideal for setting the tone for recovery.

Negativity is an emotional, spiritual force which has a compounding effect on the body. Religious writings, such as the Bible, concentrate on eradicating negativity from a person's life and replace it with a model that offers an explanation of where that person fits in the overall scheme of things. Since Nietzsche apparently killed God, man has become his own deity. This little god has not been doing very well in administering his own creation, over which he seems to exercise so little control. We're born. We live. We die. Then what? It's enough to drive anyone to depression.

And then we see the constant onslaught of bad news. During my lectures, I invite the audience to go home and comb through a daily national newspaper with marker pens and put a big red 'X' next to every article that is bad news. Then I ask them to do the same for the TV listings. Then go back through the newspaper and put a big blue 'X' next to every single article that is absolutely NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS. This will give a stark indication of how much junk we take into our brains for absolutely no achievable gain.

What we focus on becomes our reality. Ecuador does not feature in most people's lives in the west, because very few people go there and we don't focus on it. Yet out street, our workplace, our family, our cars - these are part of our focus and so describe our physical context. When we understand that we become what we focus on, then we need to change the focus. It isn't hard to see how someone fixated on splatter films and Satanism is going to have a negative focus in that direction - with all the concomitant effects this will stir up.

Take action
On the physical side, the following may be of benefit to the depressive:

· DIET: COMMENCE THE FOOD FOR THOUGHT LIFESTYLE REGIMEN
· RESTORE NUTRIENT BALANCE: COMMENCE THE BASIC SUPPLEMENT PROGRAM, ensuring:
· Vitamin B6, 50 mg, am and pm
· Zinc (gluconate), 25 mg, am and pm
· Calcium, 500 mg, am and pm
· Magnesium, 200 mg, am and pm
· Manganese, 10 mg, am and pm
· Methionine, 500 mg, am and pm
· TIP: Histadelics should avoid supplements containing folic acid as these can raise histamine levels
· TIP: Avoid negative conditioning, including newspapers, TV (especially soap operas) and acquaintances with a negative attitude
· EXERCISE: A regular program should be set up with a personal trainer, if possible, to keep you in the traces
· Plenty of rest
· No stress

Further Resources
The ABC's of Disease by Phillip Day

Herbal Toxins?

More angry responses to Britain's Daily Telegraph in response to its article that alternative medicine is the real health scare….

You are wrong to suggest that doctors used to tolerate complementary and alternative medicine (CAM). Until quite recently a doctor could be struck off for associating with a CAM practitioner, which explains why patients are still hesitant about telling their GPs what other therapies they are following.

To compare the dangers of medical herbs with mainstream treatments is unwarranted. A leading American medical journal has written: "Each year prescription drugs injure 1.5 million people so severely they require hospitalization and 100,000 die."

The House of Lords Committee inquiry in 2000, on which I served, recommended much more research into alternative medicine. Until that takes place, any statements on its effectiveness will be based on belief or anecdote, not good science.
(Earl) Baldwin of Bewdley, Upper Wolvercote, Oxfordshire

Your leading article says that as many as 70 per cent of British breast cancer patients are "compromising their chances of survival by using alternative remedies which either do not work or are positively harmful" (Opinion, March 21). Obviously an alternative remedy may be an incorrect one, but is it usually only after chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy and possibly surgery that most patients seek alternative answers. Sometimes they should be sought much earlier.

I was diagnosed with reticular blastoma, which affects the lymph system, luckily at an early stage. I was offered chemo/radiotherapy but was given three months to live. I chose instead the Gerson therapy cure, basically a "detoxifying" programme with specific organic food diet, supplements and coffee enemas for a year. That was in 1976.
Hilda Saenz de Deas, BPhil (complementary medicine), Oxford

And this brilliant extract from Booker's ever excellent article 'Kava kava is not a danger'

Doubtless the Food Standards Agency, the Medicines Control Agency and the European Commission will have applauded this newspaper's leading article last week defending their regulatory onslaught on firms making and selling vitamin supplements and health foods. Under the heading, "The real health scare", this singled out the banned kava kava, described as a "South American herbal remedy", as demonstrating the need for tighter regulation.

I am not sure how closely the editorial was based on examining the evidence, but for a start kava kava is not South American but a herb of Polynesian origin, now drunk as a relaxing infusion by millions of people all over the world. Despite the claim that it can cause "severe liver damage", the case adduced for banning it, as I wrote here last year, is "so flimsy as to be a parody of science".

Our regulators cited 70 "possible" or "probable" cases of adverse reaction associated with kava kava worldwide, four supposedly fatal. One of these involved an 86-year-old American who died in his sleep after drinking a cocktail of herbs, one of which was kava kava. It then turned out that he was a diabetic with severe heart problems and under heavy medication. The other claimed "fatalities" were similarly dubious. None was in the UK.

Yet on these grounds the MCA bizarrely claims that the ban will prevent "one UK-based death per annum", saving "£1.4 million" a year. What makes this even odder is that the same MCA that wishes to ban kava kava happily permits the continued sale of many pharmaceutical products which cause genuine health damage, such as the non-prescription painkillers which account for 2,000 deaths a year.

In the name of consistency, this newspaper should call for a ban on products which are infinitely more dangerous, such as paracetamol, alcohol, tobacco and peanuts (which kill six people every year). Alas, it is easier for the media to join in promoting health scares than to see through the woolly thinking that usually lies behind them.
Sunday Telegraph 28th March 2004

How to Live to 100

PHILLIP DAY'S COMMENT: A people famed for their longevity are the Hunzakuts. These have been abundantly discussed in our bulletins and books over the years, and their dietary habits and lifestyle examined. Imagine our surprise when one of the major national dailies in Britain, The Daily Mail, covered the subject of longevity in their Lifestyle section, endorsing apricot kernels and Vitamin B17! This is for all those who have had any doubts that the truth wins out (even though you might have to live to 115 to see it).

Pakistan
Hunza, a valley on the old Silk Route in north-east Pakistan, is home to about 20,000 people and said to be the inspiration of the original Shangri -La. Hunzukuts of all ages apparently thought nothing of walking to the nearest town around 60 miles away. Doctors found that cancer rates were zero, serious illnesses virtually unknown and digestive disorders such as ulcers, appendicitis and colitis did not exist.

Diet:
Described as the 'happy land of just enough' Hunza inhabitants eat around 1,900 calories a day, including 50g protein, 36g fat (mainly essential fats of vegetable origin) and 354g carbohydrates. Nothing is eaten between rising and doing two or three hours' work in the fields, giving the digestive system a good chance to wake up. They use organic compost, with every scrap of organic plant and animal waste collected and used.

Apricots: a typical Hunzukut might eat 50 or 100 in a day, and apricot-eating competitions are frequently held. Fresh apricots are a rich source of copper, iron, potassium, fibre and beta-carotene. Apricot kernels are a good source of vitamin B17, an effective anti-cancer agent.

Fruit and nuts: families have mulberry, cherry, apple, peach and pear trees. Walnuts, a source of omega 3 essential fatty acids, are also eaten.

Vegetables: spinach is the most commonly used green leafy vegetable, usually eaten with potatoes or chapattis. Hunza spinach is rich in fibre, protein, vitamins and minerals such as magnesium, calcium and iron, as well as being full of flavour. Potatoes are another staple.

Root vegetables: onions, sweet potatoes, yams, radishes and red coloured carrots full of beta-carotene are used in vegetable curries and stored in cellars over the winter. Juice from cooking vegetables, which is steeped in minerals, is drunk regularly.

Chapattis: found everywhere in Hunza, made from ground whole-wheat flour which keeps the germ and husk. Chapattis are an excellent source of fibre, minerals and B vitamins. Because they are cooked for only a few minutes the nutrients are preserved.

Beans and pulses: the Hunzukuts eat around 50g of protein daily, mainly from the pulses. They are high in B vitamins, protein and fibre and are filling without being fattening. The inhabitants also enjoy sprouted beans in salads, which have double or triple the content of certain vitamins and minerals and are a source of vitamin B17.

Glacier water: The Hunzukuts drink up to ten glasses of water a day to keep their system cleansed and hydrated.

Lifestyle:
Plenty of aerobic exercise. Their traditional sport is polo and they love to dance.

Daily Mail, 30th December 2003

Further Resources
Health Wars by Phillip Day
Food for Thought by Phillip Day
The ABC's of Disease by Phillip Day

Miracles on Film
A personal message from CTM founder Phillip Day

Dear All,

Credence intends to produce a film of testimonies for public release to show the powerful effects of natural, nutritional medicine on a whole range of illnesses. While testimonies are not of scientific value, they are tremendously important social tools to demonstrate to others real experiences of how serious disease was overcome.

Many write to me of a stubborn old Uncle Jack or other relative in their family 'who just won't listen! Honestly Phillip, I could kill them!' Perhaps if you sat that relative or friend down and they watched a 45-60 minute film with great recovery testimonies from people who look just like them, might that not loosen some bolts?

I have scheduled filming to commence, so let's make the film! We already have outstanding testimonies we can use and doctors willing to participate, but I'm on the lookout for any who have had an experience involving recovery from serious illness using nutritional principles. Your story will not only be a great inspiration to others, it represents an unbeatable opportunity for the hurt and anxiety you personally suffered to be turned into a force for good. We won't be furnishing any of your personal details on film, other than Pat Smith, Kansas, under your handsome/pretty image, and the stage will be yours. Doctors also willing to appear (albeit some of you with your faces blanked out), are invited to contact us. We want to hear from practitioners concerning the nutritional treatments they use to great effect for their patients.

Initially, if you wish to participate, I would be grateful if you could submit by e-mail a one-page account of your experience, which ideally should take the following form:

My name is XXXX
In July 1998 I was diagnosed with XXXXXX
This is what the doctor told me to do.
This is what I decided to do, based on information I received from XXXX.
This is how I am today.
If there was one thing I could tell others watching this film, it would be XXXX.
Finally, my name, address and a contact telephone number you can use to get back to me. I also, in writing, grant Credence permission to use my testimony.
Signed XXXXX

Please send your testimony by e-mail to Credence who will then be in touch to let you know whether we will be visiting your neighbourhood. Alternatively, we will be filming at most of the meetings I am holding for the rest of the year, (US, UK, Ireland, Australia, New Zealand, Singapore… phew!!). Let us know if you'll be coming so we can film your testimony before the meeting.

It is not beyond the bounds of possibility we will accept home videos from those living in areas where we won't have time to get a crew in. We do want to keep the quality tight though, so let us know whether you would be willing to shoot yourself (cinematically speaking), and we can offer some suggestions on making your contribution a great success.

Please note this film will not be made for commercial gain. It will be great quality (in NTSC, PAL, etc.), lovely music, dignified, erudite, doctors in white coats also explaining the medical rationale. They'll be a nice cover and sturdy box and the product will be cheaply priced to cover costs and a little left over.

That's it! Another mission! Let's get busy and do some good.

Phillip Day

From The Mailbag

"Heard Mr Phillip Day on 18/03/04 at Bournemouth. He was brilliant. It would be good if he could speak to future leaders in universities - as well as old codgers like me!" - Richard M., Dorset, UK

"Well done and many, many thanks for all the wonderful awareness and TRUTH you are spreading." - Mrs Charmaine D., Hampshire, UK

"I am aware of the limitations of mainstream science." - Richard K., Hampshire, UK

"I found Phillip Day's talk as informative as ever. I would welcome more information on the truth in medicine." - Diane L., Hampshire, UK

"Now I have discovered the injustices being put upon us all, I thoroughly support your cause. Well done. I hope we can change this dreadful situation." - Jo C., Suffolk, UK

"I welcome facts with sound reasoning and trustworthy backup." - Ms Colleen B., Opotiki, New Zealand

"The truth will eventually be realised and accepted, even by the Medical Fraternity. This is our only hope for the future of mankind." - Mrs Moonyn L., Victoria, Australia

"Phillip Day has the resources and the knowledge to make one think. Reading Health Wars helped me to better understand that we must take a more active role in our own health." - Larry G., Ohio, US

"Extremely important mission. It is a great idea to unite the efforts worldwide into one and offer guidance to local health freedom activities. You have my utmost support." - Dr Alexander Y., Hong Kong, China

"Give them hell, Phillip!!" - Mr & Mrs Kenneth B., Colorado, USA

"Keep up the good work. I must have been asleep for the last 30 years. When is Phillip coming to Wales again? He was brilliant. My friends want to see him now." - Mrs Myriam A., Wales, UK

"Dear Phillip Day, Thanks and congratulations on the work you are doing. I had your office send your cancer book on Metabolic Therapy to a friend in the USA - and another in Guatamala. Both had been diagnosed with cancer. I also spoke at length with them on the phone. Both followed your advice. Both recovered! Thank you." - Dr M F., Isle of Man, UK

"The CTM mission is mine alike. I am very passionate about creating a better future with a holistic approach. It is organisations like CTM that gives me faith in humankind and inspires me to make a difference. Thank you for all you do." - Mrs Brooke C., Western Australia, Australia

"Having changed direction late in life, listening to Phillip Day and observing the way the population is blindly following the so called scientific knowledge of man, I think the CTM mission is on the right road to educating mankind about this amazing thing called the human body…. We should not surrender our wellbeing to the hands or ideas of people whose primary interest is not to the benefit of humans."
- Ronald A., Queensland, Australia

"Just started reading your book "Health Wars". I am taking a nutrition course through the Global Institute and your book is part of the course. Very inspiring and full of content." - Leonardo F., CT., USA

"Thank you for the CTM newsletter - I'd like to share with you that I emailed your office earlier this year and you gave me some sites to look up re. sarcoid etc. as soon as I was conventionally diagnosed. This diagnosis took some five months and I forget how many doctors' and pathologists' visits…. but a hell of a lot! After your answer to me I sought out a naturopath. I am seeing this naturopath now - he took one and a half hours to meet me, diagnose me and prescribe. I am on a different regime of diet and supplements - I FEEL GREAT - I have felt lousy for years. Thank you to whoever took the time to write back to me and make the first suggestion." - Anon

"I feel very grateful knowing that there are people like you who are looking out for people like us by keeping us informed of very relevant and pertinent issues that relate to our general health and well-being. Thank God for you." - Tracy H., Western Australia, Australia

"I am always wanting to be up on the latest concerns with health as a responsible care-provider for 34 years. I need to know the up-dates on all aspects of alternative and complementary medicines." - Penny S., Georgia, USA

"Dear Phillip, I am sure that all at CTM are huge advocates as well and I was sorry to miss our dentist, Bill Read, last month in Melbourne. I would like to thank you for your work and applaud you for not trying to make money on your tours through exorbitant fees. This makes it affordable to those who need as many financial resources as possible to fund their own treatments. The very first time I saw you speak I said that I would one day be working with you. I am currently indulging myself in some training to commence my public speaking mission. I look forward to your next tour." - Sandra, Brisbane, Australia

"I am doing a talk to an ME group soon (having made a full recovery from ME myself in 5 years) and would like to take along some of your information. If you have anything I could have to bring along on chemicals in food and the environment and the dangers of vaccines, I would be very grateful. I would like to make others aware of your existence. Many thanks. "- Gwyneth H., Monmouth, UK

"These are the best healthcare books I have ever read. Many thanks - go on further!" - Michael R., Austria

"Keep up the good work - we need you." - Christina M. Adelaide, Australia

"I just absorb this information and really enjoy reading and learning more about what is happening. Thank you for such great work!" - Denise A. USA

"I come from a biomedical science background and once worked in the pharmaceutical industry. Real health information is a vital issue and I am frustrated with the medical profession and drug industry who control preventative health issues." - Belinda F., NSW, Australia

"I believe it is very important to encourage people to know about the natural healing abilities of our bodies… Much sickness can be avoided if we understand more than what our doctors may tell us or even know about…" - Rex W., Auckland, NZ

* * * * *

A copy of the Credence film, 'The Real Face of the European Union' was sent to the BBC. Here is their response:

Dear Jennifer

Thanks for sending us the Real Face of the European Union. It's not for us, I'm afraid, as we don't deal with current affairs documentaries and we rarely, if ever, buy in programmes. We prefer to fully fund programmes and be heavily involved in the editorial process.

Sara B.
Development Executive
Documentaries and Contemporary Factual Commissioning

Reply from Credence to the BBC:

Dear Sara

Thank you for responding so quickly. Needless to say, we are not surprised with your response. After all, the documentary contains information the British public should be entitled to, and being so heavily controlled by the government, we realise this is not a possibility at the BBC.

As you said yourself, you like to be heavily involved in the editorial process!

All we can hope for in the future is for the BBC to be representative to the people as well as detach itself from the shocking bias and manipulation it currently serves.

Best wishes

Jennifer Coles
Credence UK