There have been a lot of overwhelmingly positive reviews as well as hundreds being healed from the documentary film Cancer Can Be Killed. There was one published negative review from a kid in his 20’s, not even a doctor, who was perhaps hoping to make friends as he tries to get into medical school. Noticeably absent from the article was a scientific approach, evidence, or any sort of legitimate arguments despite being written for a website titled Science Based Medicine (SBM). I felt no need to defend the film as there was nothing in the review that threatened the revolution happening in health care right now. But recently, the Wall Street Journal, Wired magazine and other Pharma protectors have been using similar tactics, so I thought it was time to nip this shameful form of slander in the bud.
First of all, “science based medicine” is an oxymoron, kind of like military intelligence, only worse. There is NO SCIENCE in today’s medicine. Science tests everything and comes up with results that prove what works. Medicine tests only drugs and drugs don’t work to heal the body. Pharmaceuticals are great at dealing with emergencies, but they only treat symptoms. So when a website sciencebasedmedicine.org rolls out this review, you know its chief goal is to protect the status quo. They have no interest in pushing the boundaries of cancer care, no interest in dealing with the horrendous murder and maiming of thousands of children and adults with petrochemicals when in fact cancer can be killed by finding out what is wrong with the body and fixing the systemic problem.
Western Allopathic medicine is full of corruption. You would think SBM would clean their side of the street first before slandering hard working gifted practitioners that are saving lives. But they have no shame. I have yet to see them write about their profession like other brave doctors calling for change . . . https://medium.com/@drjasonfung/the-corruption-of-evidence-based-medicine-killing-for-profit-41f2812b8704.
I, on the other hand, have skin in the game. I’m not a shill for alternative treatments. I’m a man who loves his wife and wants to see her heal. And it worked! So I sent my friends to get healing cancer treatment and it worked for them too. Cancer Can Be Killed is a mic drop. It is irrefutable evidence that people are being healed without chemo, radiation or radical surgery. That love has translated into helping other patients get the information they need to thrive. If there are treatments out there that work, that kill cancer, then everybody needs to know about it, and suppressing that information should be criminal.
Two quotes come to mind in helping us understand the difference between a real scientist and somebody who wants to preserve their oversized paycheck. “Science only moves forward by defying conventional wisdom.” ~Carl Sagan. And from Upton Sinclair . . . “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”
SBM’s (science based medicine) main argument is that the film contains only testimonials and not science, that there is no proof that things like IV nutrients, Hyperthermia, Ozone therapy and Cannabis actually work. There is PLENTY of proof that they work. The curious issue is why SBM would try to discredit somebody’s experience or in this case thousands of people’s experience. Dr. Jason Fung explained it well in the film Flipping The Script: “The original intent of evidence based medicine was to say we have evidence, and we have clinical experience, when you combine the two it’s very powerful. What we’ve done instead is say evidence based medicine is the only thing that matters and somebodies clinical experience matters almost not at all. So that when you corrupt the evidence, all of a sudden all of medicine is corrupted. So now all we want to do is give drugs.” In other words, clinical experience has been discredited so that power and control can be retained through corrupt evidence.
Make no mistake, allopathic medicine is the only business allowed the luxury of conflicts of interest to the tune of paying Harvard medical professors, Ethics Boards, Medical Journal editors, kickbacks for doctors, payments to elected officials to publicize whatever they want you to believe. But the corruption doesn’t end there. The real corruption is restricting what gets tested and then calling anything not tested — unproven. That is precisely where we have been with cannabis, hyperthermia, IV nutrients, and ozone therapy . . . the chief weapons functional medicine doctors and naturopaths are using. On top of that corruption, the federal government joins forces with Big Pharma and restricts any testing to preserve profits for chemo providers.
Let’s start with hyperthermia and cannabis. The government has not allowed the standalone testing of hyperthermia, and only recently allowed the use of ultrasound hyperthermia without chemo or radiation. Testing began on cannabis back in the 70’s and was quickly shut down once they realized how effective it was. Here are the results of hyperthermia with a variety of tumor driven cancers ( how curious that testing was only allowed with chemo and radiation?!?):
And then test results here: https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fonc.2017.00132/full
As far as cannabis is concerned, there are too many studies to cite and too many success stories to write about: Here are a few good ones:
IV nutrients have been used to incredible success and Dr. Colleen Huber has documented her results here:
Reviewer, Braden MacBeth says Vitamin C does nothing for cancer . . . (try telling that to Cornell University and Science Daily)
MacBeth, in a brazen attempt to re-write history claims that sugar doesn’t feed cancer, Ozone therapy has no evidence, and an alkaline diet has no effect on ph balance . . . despite the fact that Dr. Otto Warburg won the Nobel prize for just these discoveries: https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/15/magazine/warburg-effect-an-old-idea-revived-starve-cancer-to-death.html
Here is Dr. Huber’s study on sugar: https://natureworksbest.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Sugar-Cancer-Study.pdf
Braden says that chelation therapy is “nonsense treatment” even though it is approved by the FDA: https://oradix.com/ninety-percent-reduction-in-cancer-mortality-after-chelation-therapy-with-edta-the-famous-swiss-study/
By all means, do your own research. As you go online, there will be articles from chemo enablers trying to discredit real science. But listen to the people who have actually healed their cancer . . . THAT IS THE ULTIMATE PROOF. It’s the only way we know that something is real. I speak with people every day about how treatments healing the immune system have worked. My only motive is to help people heal themselves of cancer. I’m not trying to get into medical school. I’m not trying to get a big payday. I want cancer patients to succeed just as we have. I can’t believe it’s so hard for people to figure out you stand a better chance by strengthening the body’s immune system than suppressing it with chemo, radiation or the slew of drugs associated with surgery. But when fear strikes, the allure of the guy in the white coat who knows everything, is a powerful aphrodisiac. Such a shame that people don’t know that oncologists are not trained to kill cancer, they are trained to use drugs. They don’t travel the world to find the truth. They travel to work everyday to satisfy their drug overlords who dictate the limited options they are able to use.
I’ve gone to too many funerals of people dying from chemo. I was shocked and horrified to watch a 12 year old boy die 24 hours after starting Car T cell therapy. I still can’t get used to the fact that folks like SBM are quick to point out the few dying from natural treatment and never acknowledge the thousands dying from chemo and traditional treatment. It makes you wonder why out of the thousands of medical people out there, none of them actually visit natural cancer clinics to find out what is working.
“It is the responsibility of scientists never to suppress knowledge, no matter how awkward that knowledge is, no matter how it may bother those in power; we are not smart enough to decide which pieces of knowledge are permissible, and which are not.