- 1 Chemo Resistance
- 2 The Tumor’s Micro-Environment
- 3 Cancer Stem Cells
- 4 Oncological Surgeries and Biopsies
- 5 Nocebo Catastrophes
- 6 Allopathic Cancer Immunotherapies’ Strengths & Limitations
- 7 Limitations
- 8 A few cancers like pancreatic cancers do not respond at all to allopathic immunotherapy
- 9 Tentative Conclusion
- 10 Conditions for immune-surveillance Improvement and Holistic Oncology
- 11 Tentative Conclusion: The evidence collected so far suggests that the future of cancer reversals Resides More in Holistic Science than in Hi- Tech Allopathic Oncology
- 12 FOOTNOTES
« L’urgence en cancérologie, ce n’est pas d’opérer, mais c’est de traiter les micro métastases. » Prof. POUYARD Institut Curie (“The urgency in oncology is not to use surgery, but to address micro-metastases”)
While conventional oncology has been more successful with the “liquid” cancers (e.g. lymphomas and leukemia), (1) it has over-all failed with regard to the production of safe and efficient control/reversal procedures for “solid” cancers, which constitute the vast majority of malignancies that affect human and mammalian sentient beings. Resistance to chemotherapy, radiation and molecular-based targeted therapies has been a major and consistent hurdle facing cancer research and clinical praxis for at least the last 30 to to 40 years.
The mechanisms of resistance to conventional cytotoxic chemotherapeutics, radiation and to therapies that are designed to be selective for specific molecular targets share many features, such as alterations in the drug target, activation of prosurvival pathways and ineffective induction of cell death. (Source), to which one can add bacterial interventions and a few other mechanisms that the Institute covers in its workshops and coaching sessions. All of which explains why, in the end, most advanced cancer patients tend not to survive relapse and conventional oncology’s treatment plans, and all the more so that their resilience and immune backbone has been allopathically compromised.
In this perspective, meta-analyses after meta-analyses have shown that for most of the common solid cancers, mainstream cancer treatments based solely on cyto-toxic chemo-therapy bestowed upon cancer patients less than a 3 percent “five years” survivability success rate. (2)
The Tumor’s Micro-Environment
Furthermore, chemotherapy tends to worsen the tumor’s micro-environment, that which is key, because what is called the “bioterrain” since Pasteur and Claude Bernard, and micro-environment by modern American scientists is specifically instructed by malignant cancer cells to come to its aid in subduing the human host.
“Long considered the most effective cancer-fighting treatment, chemotherapy may actually make cancer worse (…) The extremely aggressive therapy, which kills both cancerous and healthy cells indiscriminately, can cause healthy cells to secrete a protein that sustains tumor growth and resistance to further treatment (…) Researchers in the United States made the “completely unexpected” finding while seeking to explain why cancer cells are so resilient inside the human body when they are easy to kill in the lab”. (Source)
Cancer Stem Cells
But there’s worse. Both Radiation and Chemotherapy spur the engine of metastases, what are called the cancer circulating stem cells, to mutate, fortify and spread even more. In other words, without addressing cancer stem cells holistically (ie cancer stem cells usually make up less that one percent of the cancer cells within a tumor), (3) relapse is virtually guaranteed, (4) while the formation of other types of cancers is abundant. (5)
“The cancer stem cell (CaSC) model predicts that, even if “ …conventional” cancer cells can be killed by chemotherapy or radiotherapy, only the destruction of CaSC, considered responsible for relapse, will allow full recovery, thus demonstrating the importance of CaSC-targeting for patient outcome”. (Source)
Oncological Surgeries and Biopsies
Oncological Surgeries can also significantly contribute to the spreading of the malignancy, via the cellular adhesion, immune suppression, surgical stress and inflammatory pathways. Sometimes a well encapsulated tumor can be ok to remove when a patient does not want to treat it holistically and when the surgery is diligently performed. But in so many cases, there is cancer cell leakage in the lymph and blood circulatory systems. One of many other pieces of evidence is invoked below.
“Potential mishaps include pressing a ligature, while tying, against a protruding tumor and cutting into it; inserting a hemostat into the tumor area to gain control of an escaped short pancreaticoduodenal artery stump which has retracted; grasping a lymph node with forceps which invariably fragments it spilling any cancer cells it may contain; and injecting local anesthesia into or adjacent to a lesion for biopsy. If the lesion is a cutaneous melanoma or other cancer the resulting pressure may force cancer cells into the lymphatic or bloodstream”. (Source)
Similar metastatic “risks” with biopsies, another conventional oncology procedure that is considered by Happiness Medicine and Holistic Oncology to be deleterious.
“Considering the fact that, every tumor cell, is bathed in interstitial fluid, which drains into the lymphatic system and has an individualized arterial blood supply and venous drainage like any other normal cell in our body, inserting a needle or a knife into a tumor, there is a jeopardy of dislodging a loose tumor cell into either the circulation or into the tissue fluid. Tumor cells are easier to dislodge due to lower cell-to-cell adhesion.” (Source)
The dislodging of these cancer cells into the general circulatory system then tends to promote additional metastatic risks.
“This theory with the possibility of seeding of tumor cells is supported by several case studies that have shown that after diagnostic biopsy of a tumor, many patients developed cancer at multiple sites and showed the presence of circulating cancer cells in the blood stream on examination”. (Source)
And, among other conventional oncology nefarious procedures, conventional diagnoses and prognoses procedures have built-in and often fatal flaws.
“A large body of evidence suggests high levels of distress and psychiatric symptoms among patients who receive a diagnosis of cancer.1-9 Patients with cancer have been shown to be at increased risk for suicide10-17 and cardiovascular events (Source).
Allopathic Cancer Immunotherapies’ Strengths & Limitations
In 2013, Science magazine called cancer immunotherapy the “breakthrough cancer technique” of the year ( ). That this research is a breakthrough for conventional medicine is a good sign. From Paracelssus’s fever therapy in 5 BC to Coleys vaccines, Gonzallez protocoal and more, holistic oncology has been focusing on immunotherapy for over 2000 years, as that is one of the keys to resolving cancer.
So finally, conventional medicine is catching on, with what its experts are calling “check point inhibitors” ( ) within the general framework of drug based “immuno-therapeutics”. (6)
While many of these checkpoint inhibitors work with “natural” antibodies, its limitation is that this procedure can also attack healthy cells. ( ). The gist of the procedure (see Blog) is to inhibit a membrain protective protein on the membrane surface of cancer cells so that they are immune from the immune system’s surveillance system. ( ) There have been a few cancers for which these inhibitors have prospered, up to 20 percent for advanced cancers (as opposed to under 5 percent) and at a cost of over one million dollars a year. ( ).
This section under construction
A few cancers like pancreatic cancers do not respond at all to allopathic immunotherapy
Be that as it may, we’ll see if genetic engineering in this field will be wiser than the billions of years of cellular evolution. For many of the tougher cancers, like pancreatic cancer, immunotherapy does not work at all. (12).
While there have been so improvement in remission for 4 or 5 cancers, the overall effect of these inhibitors appear to be be deleterious. (7) By blocking this protein with these checkpoint inhibitors, healthy cells’s proteins can also be blocked and then attackedIn effect, as with any synthetic drug, there are risks and side/adverse/toxic effects, if only because synthetic molecules which are not evolutionarily natural, and therefore recognizable, are considered toxic. Adverse events from immunotherapy are usually a consequence of artificially stimulating the immune system too much and-or inappropriately, so the immunse system attacks normal tissue.
Conventional oncology experts do claim that these inhibitors are “natural antibodies”, but are they ?
To be developed
Thus, with synthetic chemical immunotherapy, turning on and off the immune switches is not reliable. And this activity remains damaging, even if there can be an improvement over cyto-toxic tumor shrinking drugs (Ibid). At least, this stratagem is a hair less moronic because it’s targeting the cancer more upstream, in the immune system, as opposed to downstream, at the tumor, which is but an end-process symptom, one that tries to encapsulate cancer cells in one area so as to spare the body from a metastatic wild fire or fire storm.
In the short to mid term, some of these immunotherapeutics appear to be beneficial for a few cancers, but later on, significant adverse and toxic effects can also ensue. (8)
Conditions for immune-surveillance Improvement and Holistic Oncology
One UCSF study found that cancer immunotherapy only really works if the immune system is holistically activated. (9) Which makes a lot of sense. That’s why the Institute prefers holistic immunotherapy as opposed to the hi-tech “hype” immunotherapy that costs, on average, a little over one million dollars a month. (10).
True, there are a few cases like with Jimmy Carter where cancer immunotherapy appears to have prospered. But what the Institute knows is that when the immune system is boosted artificially and sectorial, its anti-cancer effects dont last long. (11). It’s not difficult to find a few success cases in any area of experimentation, including allopathic immunotherapy. But five success cases out of 100 is only per cent of a 5 years survival rate. So far, the Institute has seen no evidence that this approach has a significant cure or survival rate.
Yet, for this type of cancer to be reversed, it is vital to activated the immune sytem to get its T-cells to gently guide pancreatic cancer cells into apoptotic disappearance. Honcology have a few allopathically unexplored techniques. (13). Not intereste, no big money therein.
Top: A human T-cell (or T lymphocyte) from the immune system: Picture taken via a scanning electron micrograph. This is a key player in the immune response to cancer cells. Image Public Domain
Tentative Conclusion: The evidence collected so far suggests that the future of cancer reversals Resides More in Holistic Science than in Hi- Tech Allopathic Oncology
Meanwhile, with well-designed and monitored holistic & happiness cancer protocols that fine-tune the immune system to recognized cancer cells’ protein signature while proactively addressing Professor Weinberg’s “cancer hallmarks”, (9) cancer patients, even advanced cancer patients, can expect a 50 to 100 percent survivability success rate, defined as at least five years of remission at costs that are over 1000 times cheaper. (14) Therein lies to problem of the Cancer Research Industry.
Christian Joubert (HMI director)
(1). One of the reasons why this is so is because liquid cancer have way fewer DNA mutations, thus it is easier to address these cancer cells with cytotoxic chemotherapy than solid cancers which can have thousands of DNA mutations. However, given the carcinogenic and mutagenic nature of cancer drugs, new cancers tend to be produced. And-or, old cancers are spurred. But usually after a few years. This is why many of these liquid cancers patients are subject either to relapse or to new cancer, usually after the five years “survival” mark-off period. Once the patient has reached the five years mark, he or she is statistically “cured”, in remission. So any other relapse or new cancers after the five years is counted as a new cancer. This is one reason why the success rate of liquid cancers is higher than with solid cancers and institutions like the American Cancer Society is able to reap in hundreds of millions of dollars in donations making people believe there is progress in cancer research and clinical practice. But from the viewpoint of holistic oncology, mainstream oncology is statistically misleading and intrinsically incompetent or fraudulent because almost never are the cancer root causes addressed and many of these cancers that relapsed after the five years mark-off are branded as new cancers that don’t have an iatrogenic cause.
(2). “The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA”. Cf. Morgan G1, Ward R, Barton, The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies. M. Clin Oncol (R Coll Radiol). 2004 Dec;16(8):549-60. (Source) When targeted therapies are combined with clinical nutrition and lifestyle change, the surival rate is much better. But in conventional oncology, diet and lifestyle changes are not relevant. In the last conventional oncology textook that the Institute reviewed, diet and lifestyle were mentioned once in a few lines in a student textbook that was over 600 pages, a textbook written by DeVita et al.
(3). Many studies have identified different populations of cancer cells, within the same tumor, with the same or closely related properties as normal stem cells. Interestingly, the cell surface markers expressed by these particular cancer cells are the same as those expressed by normal stem cells, suggesting cancer can also arise from the direct malignant transformation of stem cells. In the Institute’s research, we found that both chemo and radiation are major contributing factors in this malignancy and metastatic transformation.
(4). Over the years, the Institute has gathered accumulating and “incriminating” evidence that both radiation and chemotherapy can’t kill these cancer stem cells because, inter alia, they are slower growing, slower dividing (via the mitosis mechanism) cells. By design, chemo and radiation kill fast growing cancer cells, those which are not metastastically dangerous. Hence, the tumor shrinkage epiphenomenon. But as indicated elsewhere, there are no credible studies that show a correlation between tumor shrinkage and survivability. In other words, all of Conventional Oncology’s hype about tumor shrinkage is at best misleading, at worse, a fraudulent claim, if only because most allopathic oncologists allege that radiation and chemo driven tumor shrinkage is a sure marker of progress, when in reality, it is not. And this assertion’s scientific proof has been supported by the evidence for over ten years.
(5). And to make matters worse insofar as prostate cancer therapy is concerned, by chemically castrating the prostate cancer patient with anti-testosterone treatment, this high tech conventional oncology procedure not only favors accelerated aging, but also other cancers, including pancreatic cancers, as low testosterone had been identified as a significant risk factor for these difficult cancers. See the Institute’s research on this.
(6). Tumors put the brakes on the immune system, which keeps it from killing cancer cells. Immunotherapy drugs fight these brakes. For lung cancer, these drugs are called checkpoint inhibitors, they include medications such as nivolumab (Opdivo) and pembrolizumab (Keytruda). These drugs take the brakes off so the immune system can do its job. But because these are artificial, synthetic, lab made drugs, they are not well recognized or processed by the human body. So they can attack other tissues than these so called brake inhibitors.
(7). Another common side effects of drug immunotherapy is thyroid dysfunction, Usually, once the thyroid is damaged, it does not recover. And since the thyroid is a major metabolic regulator not having a healthy one is inviting big damages. Other common serious side effects of immunotherapy are colitis and pneumonitis, inflammation of the colon and lungs, respectively. In other cases, some combinations of immunotherapy drugs can cause the immune system to attack the brain, causing devastating neurologic complications, such as coma or paralysis. Patients also report deep fatigue. As the immune system attacks cancer with the help of immunotherapy, the tumor may actually swell or increase in size before shrinking later, a phenomenon called pseudo-progression. “It’s difficult to distinguish pseudo disease from real cancer tumor growth.About 10 to 15 percent of patients will experience some toxicity from immunotherapy. On the other hand, about 5 to 10 percent of patients have a dramatic response (remission). For now, immunotherapy is only approved for use in patients with metastatic lung cancer. Clinical trials are underway for patients with earlier stage cancer. (Source)
(9). For M.I.T.’s Professor Weinberg and most of the other recognized mainstream allopathic oncologists, cancer is a genetic disease with six inter-related cell physiology alterations: 1) autonomy in growth signals, 2) insensitivity to growth inhibitory (antigrowth) signals (e.g. tumor suppressor genes), 3) evasion of programmed cell death (apoptosis), 4) limitless replicative potential as long as there’s glucose in the micro-environment, 5) sustained vascularity (angiogenesis), and 6) tissue invasion and metastasis. (Source) . While we do not refute the importance of these above-mentioned elements, the Advanced Cancer Research Institute’s fundamental research work has determined that they are “epi-phenomema”, meaning not central to the cancer process, if only because it has been shown that a damaged mitochondria prevails over an altered nucleus insofar as malignancy is concerned. In order to benefit from cancer reversal, the health recipient must activate a treatment plan based on a correct analysis of carcinogenesis. This is the starting point to any and all safe and efficient cancer control and reversal processes.
(10). However, when an advanced cancer patient has gone through the chemo-radiation-surgery-biopsy conventional treatment system and cancer still proliferates, it is more difficult to reverse these types of iatrogenic cancers than malignancies that come from advanced cancer patients who have been allopathically spared, meaning who are conventionally virgin.
TO EXAMINE THE INSTITUTE’S COACHING SESSIONS, PLEASE CLICK THE “SERVICE” LINK BELOW OR CLICK HERE.
Pineapples central bromelain enzyme was evaluated to be superior to the classical chemo 5-Fu
” The largest increase ( approximately 318 %) was attained in mice bearing EAT ascites and receiving 12.5 mg/kg of bromelain. This antitumoral effect was superior to that of 5-FU, whose survival index was approximately 263 %, relative to the untreated control. Bromelain significantly reduced the number of lung metastasis induced by LLC transplantation, as observed with 5-FU. The antitumoral activity of bromelain against S-37 and EAT, which are tumor models sensitive to immune system mediators, and the unchanged tumor progression in the metastatic model suggests that the antimetastatic action results from a mechanism independent of the primary antitumoral effect”. Planta Med. 2007 Oct;73(13):1377-83. Epub 2007 Sep 24.
text under construction
“In general, mankind, since the improvement of cookery, eats twice as much as nature requires”. Benjamin Franklin
At the Pyrenean Holistic Center’s rejuvenation retreats, individualized diets are based on some of these foods. In addition, every day, we go to the waterfall and along the way pick wild plants and herbs like wild hops, plantain, stinging nettles, wild carrots that we juice. Depending on the workshopee, each meal is from 50 to one 100 percent rawfoods. See raw food links for a list of rawfood centers.
CLINICAL, EXPERIMENTAL & EPIDEMIOLOGICAL EVIDENCE SHOWS THAT A PLANT-BASED DIET CAN SIGNIFICANTLY SLOW DOWN THE CANCER MALIGNANCY PROCESS IN ANIMALS AND HUMANS
“Studies comparing vegetarian to nonvegetaran groups show much less cancer among vegetarians, especially those avoiding dairy products” (Joel Fuhrman, MD, “Fasting and eating for Health” , St Martin’s Gfiffin NY, 1995, page 35. Among hundreds of others, the study he is referring to is: Phillips, Garfinkel et al. ‘Moratilty among Californian Seventh day adventists for selected cancer sites” (Journal of National Cancer Institute, 1980:65:1097-1107)
“….all animal food consumption, even fish and chicken, raises the rates of cancer” quoting from Dr Fuhrman (ibid., page 33), who supports this piece of allegation with over tweny years of medical practice and key studies, such as the ones orchestrated by Chen, Campbell, Peto, entitled: “A a study of diet nutrition and disease in the People’s republic of China, Published by University of Oxford Press, Cornel University Press, China Publishing Hosue in 1988.