My 10 Questions To Challenge The Cancer Research Establishment

-By Paul A. Philips

Cancer research headed by the medical/pharmaceutical establishment has a motto that goes “cancer together we’ll beat it” or words to that effect. This comes with a proviso: In order to beat cancer a never-ending funding stream is needed from the public. Lots and lots of funding in fact.

In spite of this funding over the recent decades gone by, there has been an overall rise in cancer incidents/deaths. Especially in the last 5 roughly years. (Hint: Consider the elephant in the room. That major event that occurred in 2020 and the so-called medication that followed…)

Therefore, cancer research, headed by the medical/pharmaceutical establishment, still hasn’t come up with a real effective solution. It has been said that this monumental failure is due to the greed/profit driven allopathic model by which its approach to dealing with cancer is based on.

-Having no intention of ever finding a cure as it would stand to loose huge revenues.

Further, there has been much accusation over the funding. Significant amounts of cancer charity donations have been siphoned off and misappropriated: Funds have gone to line the pockets of executives who have become wealthy from these cancer donations. Therefore, cancer charities have become money making scams, based on cynically manipulating well-meaning donors into the hopium dangling carrot, that one day a cure will be found.

If the cancer establishment had any genuine welfare concerns then they would have to look beyond their current paradigm approach. Is a more holistic approach really needed? Many people seem to think so for a number of reasons. Some would go further and say that certain holistic approaches have been looked into and found to be highly effective. There is much evidence to support this claim…

-Consider this from Rupert Sheldrake’s perspective where he broached the subject of mechanistic medicine and the need for a new scientific paradigm.

However, the cancer establishment have not only ignored this, but also unjustly ridiculed it. For example, google “Gerson Therapy” and you will find the cancer establishment dissing it with much criticism. However when looking at alternative viewpoints there are many people having good things to say about Gerson Therapy.

In retrospect of the above, here are my 10 questions to challenge the cancer research establishment.

With a lack of real success in finding a cure for cancer isn’t it high time the establishment recognizes that the mechanistic approach to medicine is the limiting factor and a more holistic approach is needed that fully addresses the very fabric of our being?
In light of the above, shouldn’t there be greater recognition given to the body’s natural capacity for healing and the related naturopathic healing methodologies associated with the mind-body-spirit connections?
How much consulting have you had with naturopaths to hear the ‘other side of the story?’ Have you looked into the numerous case-testimonials from those claiming they have been cured and the methodologies that had been used?
Isn’t the placebo effect an example of the mind-body-spirit connection which needs more investigation and explaining? -Same goes for the nocebo effect.
Following on with nutrition, consistent with the saying of the ancient Greek physician Hippocrates ‘Let your medicine be your food and your food be your medicine’ How can the cancer research establishment generally ignore the idea that nutrition can be used for cancer prevention and reversal when our physical bodies by nature exist through the building blocks associated with nutrition?
How can the cancer establishment consider the role of vitamins and enzymes to be unimportant when so much research and development has been done to try and imitate these molecules and their role in the body’s metabolic processes?
Supported over and over by convincing research how can the establishment ignore the important and highly effective role of sunlight (vitamin D3 source) as a form of cancer prevention/reversal? The same goes for a high-dose vitamin C regimen when it comes to the treatment, prevention and reversal of heart disease.
Again, supported by research, how can the establishment basically ignore the importance of exercise and its role in cancer prevention and healing as the same goes for avoiding toxicity and detoxification programes?
If the said to be pioneers of alternative medicine with breakthrough cures are mere ‘quacks’ then how is it that you fail overall to provide sound, logical and informative reasons why they are this?
Could it be, by ignoring these claimed to be successful cheap, natural and non-toxic cures it serves a hidden ulterior motive? That being that hoary old chestnut greed and self-interest?

Note

This not intended to be construed as medical advice. For medical advice you should consult a related healthcare professional at all times. However, it is hoped that in light of these 10 questions the reader will do their own diligent research.