More on the 5 Year Cancer Cure Rate

REMINDER: In The Archive is all of the articles that I
have posted since I started this blog. There is TONS OF
INFORMATION there for you to learn from. It's the type
of information that not only saved my life...It also has
given me a better quality of life.

                    SPONSORS

     World's #1 Publisher of Information About 
     Alternative Cancer Treatments
              http://bit.ly/ZVR6Qw


      The Solution For Disease FREE Health. 
              http://bit.ly/RGNZ0i



Continued from 4/23/14


More on the 5 Year Cancer Cure Rate

When you see a chart of orthodox medicine 5 year cure rates, you might
see a number like: 45%, meaning 45% of cancer patients for this particular
cancer lived 5 years after diagnosis.

There are many statistical tricks that are used to get to this 45% figure,
but even if this number were accurate (which it is not), even this number
is worthless. I will explain why.

When you see a number like 45% you are supposed to think in your mind
this thought: The cure rate for those who refuse all orthodox treatments,
and refuse all alternative treatments, is 0%. That is what they want you
to think.In other words, they want you to think that the difference
between refusing all treatments and using chemotherapy, etc. is 45%. You
are supposed to think: a 45% 5 year cure rate for orthodox medicine, minus
a 0% 5 year cure rate for those who refuse all treatments, equals a difference
of 45%. You are supposed to think that orthodox treatments are superbly
beneficial because they are 45% effective.

But what is the truth? What if the 5 year cure rate for those who refused
all treatments was 50%? If that were the case, then 5% those who go on
orthodox treatments would die before the 5 years is up, whereas they would
not have died if they had refused all treatments. Would this statistic cause
people to run to the nearest hospital to have chemotherapy? Of course not.

My point is that orthodox medicine doesn’t want you to know the 5 year
cure rate for those who refuse all treatments and they especially don’t
want you to know the 5 year cure rate for those who go on alternative
treatments. Even though there are many people who refuse all treatments,
this statistic is not kept. Why? Because they don’t want you to know that
orthodox cancer treatments only have an overall REAL cure rate of 3%.

But what would be the REAL cure rate be of those who refused all
treatments?? They don’t want you to know that number.

When the side effects of chemotherapy and radiation are taken into
account, people would demand that orthodox treatments are at least 15%
higher, or more, than for those who refuse all treatments or go on
alternative cancer treatments. That statistic will never be calculated by
orthodox medicine.

This 3% number does not mean that there would be an overall difference
of 3% on a 5 year cure rate basis (that is too short of a time to evaluate
orthodox treatments), it means that when all the dust settles, only 3% of
the patients have actually been cured with orthodox treatments. But what
would this cure rate be if people did not take any orthodox cancer
treatments and ate better foods, such as a lot of carrots?

Now do you understand why orthodox medicine uses so many 
statistical tricks?

By far the most important statistics you need to know in order to make an
informed decision are suppressed and not kept. Why? Because they don’t
want you to make the obvious choice of going with alternative medicine
instead of orthodox medicine. But going with alternative medicine requires
a lot of homework on your part to make sure you go on the right
alternative cancer treatments.

More will be said about the suppression of data in a moment. More on
Treating the Symptoms of Cancer

Dr. Philip Binzel, M.D., a medical doctor who used alternative cancer
treatments, discussed several key issues relative to the treatment of
the symptoms of cancer. Let us look at a longer version of a quote
that was mentioned earlier:

    “When a patient is found to have a tumor, the only thing the doctor
discusses with that patient is what he intends to do about the tumor. If
a patient with a tumor is receiving radiation or chemotherapy, the only
question that is asked is, “How is the tumor doing? No one ever asks
how the patient is doing. In my medical training, I remember well seeing
patients who were getting radiation and/or chemotherapy. The tumor
would get smaller and smaller, but the patient would be getting sicker
and sicker. At autopsy we would hear, Isn’t that marvelous! The tumor
is gone! Yes, it was, but so was the patient. How many millions of times
are we going to have to repeat these scenarios before we realize that we
are treating the wrong thing?

    In primary cancer, with only a few exceptions, the tumor is neither
health-endangering nor life-threatening. I am going to repeat that
statement. In primary cancer, with few exceptions, the tumor is neither
health-endangering nor life-threatening. What is health-endangering and
life-threatening is the spread of that disease through the rest of the body.

    There is nothing in surgery that will prevent the spread of cancer.
There is nothing in radiation that will prevent the spread of the disease.
There is nothing in chemotherapy that will prevent the spread of the
disease. How do we know? Just look at the statistics! There is a statistic
known as “survival time. Survival time is defined as that interval of
time between when the diagnosis of cancer is first made in a given
patient and when that patient dies from his disease.

    In the past fifty years, tremendous progress has been made in the early
diagnosis of cancer. In that period of time, tremendous progress had been
made in the surgical ability to remove tumors. Tremendous progress has
been made in the use of radiation and chemotherapy in their ability to
shrink or destroy tumors. But, the survival time of the cancer patient today
is no greater than it was fifty years ago. What does this mean? It obviously
means that we are treating the wrong thing!

    We are treating the symptom  the tumor, and we are doing absolutely
nothing to prevent the spread of the disease. The only thing known to
mankind today that will prevent the spread of cancer within the body is
for that body’s own defense mechanisms to once again function normally.
That’s what nutritional therapy does. It treats the defense mechanism, not
the tumor.

    The woman with a lump in her breast is not going to die from that lump.
The man with a nodule in his prostate gland is not going to die from that
nodule. What may kill both of those people is the spread of that disease
through the rest of their bodies. They got their disease because of a
breakdown of their defense mechanisms.

    The only thing that is going to prevent the spread of their disease is to
correct the problem in those defense mechanisms. Doesn’t it seem logical
then, that we should be a lot less concerned with “What are we going to
do about the tumor?” and a lot more concerned about what we are going
to do about their defense mechanisms?
    Philip Binzel, M.D., Alive and Well, Chapter 14

I want to emphasize a key point in that quote. Orthodox medicine treats
symptoms. They would have you believe that the tumor is the cancer. The
tumor is not the cancer. The tumor is a symptom of a symptom. A tumor
is a symptom of cancer and cancer is frequently a symptom of a weakened
immune system. Is it best to treat the symptom of the symptom or is it
best to treat the cause?

Alternative cancer treatments focus on building the immune system,
selectively killing cancer cells and sometimes on converting cancerous
cells into normal cells. Alternative cancer treatments are usually not
interested in shrinking tumors. Why? Because if you safely kill the
cancer cells in a tumor, and throughout the rest of the body, the tumor
is as harmless as your little finger, even if the tumor tissue is still there.
It is not the tumor tissue that is dangerous, it is the cancer cells.

And therein lies one of the major differences between orthodox medicine
and alternative medicine. Orthodox medicine focuses on the size of the
tumor, alternative medicine focuses on the cancer cells in the tumor.

Many alternative cancer treatments do not shrink the size of tumors.
Some do shrink the size of tumors, but some do not. So what? If the
cancer cells in a tumor are dead, the cancer will not spread and the
tumor is harmless.

This is what Dr. Binzel was talking about when he stated that orthodox
medicine was treating the wrong thing.

Only if the tumor is pressing on another organ, or is blocking some bodily
function, is the tumor dangerous. But in that case the tumor’s danger has
nothing to do with cancer.

Another interesting thing in that quote is that nothing that orthodox
medicine does treats the spread of the cancer. While it is true that some
chemotherapy is designed to kill fast spreading cells in the body,
chemotherapy always kills far more normal cells than cancer cells, Many
normal cells in the body are fast spreading and are killed by chemotherapy.

Chemotherapy would almost always kill the patient long before it would kill
all of the cancer cells in a body.

Copyright (c) 2003, 2004, 2006 R. Webster Kehr, all rights reserved.

 God Bless Everyone & God Bless The United States of America.

Larry Nelson
42 S. Sherwood Dr.
Belton, Tx. 76513
cancercurehere@gmail.com

Have a great day...unless you have made other plans.

Judging Orthodox Medicine

       World's #1 Publisher of Information About Alternative
                               Cancer Treatments
                             http://bit.ly/ZVR6Qw


               The Solution For Disease FREE Health. 
                            http://bit.ly/RGNZ0i

Let Us Count The Ways

There are some things in the above quotes that may have
shocked you. The concept that people will die more quickly
if they have surgery, chemotherapy and radiation treatments
may surprise some people. How is it possible that people
who go through treatments can die quicker than people who
refuse treatments?

In fact, there are many ways that orthodox cancer treatments
can kill a cancer patient long before they would have died
without treatment of any kind. For example:

    Malnutrition #1: About 40% of cancer patients die of
malnutrition before they would have died of their cancer.
Two of the causes of this malnutrition, which are related to
chemotherapy, will now be discussed: First, chemotherapy
makes a person very nauseous and causes them to throw-up.
This causes many people to develop anorexia  the loss of
appetite or desire to eat. This situation is not good at all
because it can lead to a condition known as cancer cachexia
a wasting syndrome characterized by weakness and a noticeable
continuous loss of weight, fat, and muscle. Cachexia is a
common cause of death of cancer patients.

    Malnutrition #2: Second, chemotherapy destroys the lining
of the digestive tract of many cancer patients, making it
impossible for the body to absorb the nutrients of the foods
they eat, leading to malnutrition. As one person put it, even
if a cancer patient eats like a king, they can literally die
of malnutrition.

    Destroys the immune system: Because chemotherapy and
radiation destroy a person’s immune system, many cancer
patients die of opportunistic infections, such as sepsis or
pneumonia. As a side note, more than 200,000 Americans a
year die of sepsis. When a cancer patient dies of sepsis it is
most likely because chemotherapy destroyed the patient’s
immune system, allowing sepsis to easily kill the patient. It
may be counted as a sepsis death, not a cancer death. This is
just one of many ways that the medical community can hide the
true statistics of chemotherapy and radiation.

    Destroys the immune system: Because chemotherapy and
radiation kill white blood cells (white blood cells are the
body’s natural defense against cancer), chemotherapy and
radiation destroy not only a body’s natural defense against
the cancer they currently have, it also destroys the body’s
defense against new cancers.

    Destroys Red Blood Cells: Because chemotherapy and
radiation kill red blood cells (red blood cells carry oxygen
to the cancer cells and oxygen helps keep cancer from
spreading), cancer cells do not get a normal supply of
oxygen. Since cancer cells are anaerobic, this allows them
to thrive and divide faster.

        So, if a Cancer patient is already Acidic & if Acid
drives out the oxygen causing an anaerobic atmosphere that
Cancer loves, how much sense does it make to take
Chemotherapy that will kill more of your oxygen carrying Red
Blood Cells? By a matter of deduction and the use of common
sense once again, wouldn’t that create an even more anaerobic
atmosphere and provide an even more desirable situation for
Cancer to wreak havoc?

    Kill a Vital Organ: Chemotherapy and radiation frequently
kill a vital organ of a patient, such as the liver or heart.
One metal found in at least three types of chemotherapy is
virtually guaranteed to kill the patient of heart disease.

Once the damage is done, nothing, not even alternative cancer
treatments, can save the patient.

    Helps Spread the Cancer: Surgical biopsies can release
cancer cells into the blood stream, causing the possibility
that the biopsy will cause the cancer to spread, meaning
metastasize. Some cancer surgeries can also cause cancer
cells to get into the blood stream, especially if the surgery
does not get all of the cancer cells.

    Chemotherapy is Carcinogenic: Chemotherapy and radiation
can dramatically increase the probability that a person will
get certain types of cancer. For example, many women treated
by chemotherapy and radiation for breast cancer later develop
uterine cancer. Chemotherapy drugs are not only toxic, they
are carcinogenic.

    Lose the Will To Live: Many cancer patients are so
devastated by the sickness and nausea orthodox treatments
give them, that they lose the will to live, meaning they lose
the will to keep fighting their cancer.

Now are you surprised that the three major studies mentioned
above all yielded the same conclusion: there is no scientific
evidence that orthodox treatments extend the total life of
most cancer patients?

The above list is a rather small listing of the side-effects
of orthodox treatments. If you want a more complete picture
of how bad orthodox treatments are watch the videotape Cancer
Doesn’t Scare Me Anymore by Dr. Lorraine Day, M.D., available
at many health food stores or at Dr. Day’s website

I should note that alternative treatments for cancer have
none of the above problems. Alternative cancer treatments
generally include dietary items that build a person’s immune
system, cause no additional pain, provide large amounts of
natural nutrients, do not spread the cancer, selectively
target and kill cancer cells, cause no damage to normal
cells, and so on.

Judging Orthodox Cancer Treatments

So how can we judge whether orthodox cancer treatments should
be used at all?

Everyone knows that surgery, chemotherapy and radiation cause
a patient to become very sick and they do massive damage to
the immune system, they can damage vital organs, etc. How,
then, can we justify the use of these three treatments? I
would suggest that we judge orthodox medicine based on three
important criteria:

First, the increase in total life of the patient by use of the
treatment, Second, the damage done to a patient’s immune system,
which causes a severe weakness in the person’s ability to fight
their current cancer, plus their ability to fight future cancers, and
Third, the loss of quality of life of the patient.

Orthodox medicine fails in all three of these categories!!

First, there is no scientific evidence that in the vast
majority of cancers, orthodox treatments extend the total
life of patients. Second, the damage done to a patient’s
immune system is very severe, plus it even kills many red
blood cells and can damage vital organs. Third, orthodox
treatments not only cause severe trauma to the patient, but
they also cause severe damage and stress to their body.

Suppose I made the statement: In order to justify the damage
done by orthodox medicine, to both the body and quality of
life of a cancer patient, orthodox medicine must increase the
total life of the patient by 30%.

Now some people might not like the 30% number, they may pick
20% or another person might pick 100%. But whatever number
you personally pick, note that there is no scientific evidence that in
97% of the cases, orthodox treatments extend the total life of patients
one minute. In fact, in most cases orthodox medicine shortens the
life of cancer patients!

The 97% number came from cancer expert Ralph Moss, PhD, who
could only identify a few very rare types of cancer for which he
thought orthodox treatments actually extended the total life of
cancer patients.

    2 to 4% of cancers respond to chemotherapy The bottom
line is for a few kinds of cancer chemo is a life extending
procedure Hodgkin’s disease, Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia
(ALL), Testicular cancer, and Choriocarcinoma.
    Ralph Moss, Ph.D. 1995 Author of: Questioning

Chemotherapy

Actually, it is very doubtful Hodgkin’s disease patients have
their life extended by more than a few years. In any case,
how can we justify the use of orthodox cancer treatments? We
cannot in 97% of the cases. Even for the 3% that are
benefited there may be alternative treatments that are even
better than chemotherapy.

What exactly is the significance of the 97% figure Dr. Moss,
and many others, have calculated? The significance is that

THE REAL CURE RATE FOR ORTHODOX CANCER 
TREATMENTS IS 3%!!

In other words, whenever you see an overall cure rate for
orthodox medicine higher than 3%, it is a number generated
purely by deceptive statistical tricks!! Compare the 3% REAL
cure rate of orthodox medicine to the REAL cure rate of 93%
of Dr. Kelley, for those patients to him before it was too late.

Then ask yourself why the FDA approves one chemotherapy drug
after another and yet ignores alternative cancer treatments!!

Also, ask yourself why every year more people die of cancer
than died in the prior year. Ask yourself if all of these
breakthroughs in chemotherapy drugs you hear about every
weekactually change that 3% figure (answer: they never do,
they are comparing one worthless drug to a newer, more profitable
worthless drug and they are only talking about symptoms or
temporary regression).

Now ask yourself if the REAL 3% cure rate justifies the
massive pain and suffering of orthodox cancer patients and
whether it justifies the massive damage done to their organs,
immune system, red blood cells, etc.


Copyright (c) 2003, 2004, 2006 R. Webster Kehr, all rights
reserved.



            Continued


Thank You  Dr. Mercola

God Bless Everyone & God Bless The United States of America.

Larry Nelson
42 S. Sherwood Dr.
Belton, Tx. 76513
cancercurehere@gmail.com

Have a great day...unless you have made other plans.

Air Pollution: What Can You Do to Lower Your Risks?

REMINDER: In The Archive is all of the articles that I
have posted since I started this blog. There is TONS OF
INFORMATION there for you to learn from. It's the type
of information that not only saved my life...It also has
given me a better quality of life.

                     SPONSORS

        World's #1 Publisher of Information About                    
               Alternative Cancer Treatments.            
                     http://bit.ly/1kQKj7b


         The Solution For Disease FREE Health...
                    http://bit.ly/RGNZ0i 



Air Pollution: What Can You Do to Lower Your Risks?

    If you happen to live in a heavily polluted area, the best option is to
move, but I realize that isn’t always a practical option. For most people,
it’s better to focus your attention on your immediate environment,
which you have more, if not full, control over. The most effective way
to improve your indoor air quality, for instance, is to control or
eliminate as many sources of pollution as you can first, before using
any type of air purifier.

    This includes accounting for molds, tobacco smoke, volatile organic
compounds from paints, aerosol sprays and household cleaners, pesticides,
phthalates from vinyl flooring and personal care products, pollutants
from pressure-treated wood products, radon gas and more

(see tips below).

    The next step to take is free open some windows. Of course, this can
only take you so far, but it's an important and simple step. Next, since it
is impossible to eliminate ALL air contaminants, one of the best things
you can do is incorporate a high-quality air purifier. My recommendations
for air purifiers have changed over the years, along with the changing
technologies and newly emerging research. There are so many varieties
of contaminants generated by today's toxic world that air purification
manufacturers are in a constant race to keep up with them, so it pays
to do your homework.

    At present, and after much careful review and study, I believe air
purifiers using Photo Catalytic Oxidation (PCO) seem to be the best
technology available. Aside from using an air purification system,
there are a number of other steps you can take to take charge of your
air quality and greatly reduce the amount of air pollutants generated
in your home:

        Vacuum your floors regularly using a HEPA filter vacuum
cleaner or, even better, a central vacuum cleaner that can be
retrofitted to your existing house if you don’t currently have one.
Standard bag or bagless vacuum cleaners are another primary
contributor to poor indoor air quality. A regular vacuum cleaner
typically has about a 20-micron tolerance. Although that's tiny,
far more microscopic particles flow right through the vacuum
cleaner than it actually picks up!

Beware of cheaper knock-offs that profess to have "HEPA-like" 
filters get the real deal.

        Increase ventilation by opening a few windows every day for 5
to 10 minutes, preferably on opposite sides of the house. (Although
outdoor air quality may be poor, stale indoor air is typically even worse
by a wide margin.)

        Get some houseplants. Even NASA has found that plants markedly
improve the air!

        Take your shoes off as soon as you enter the house, and leave them
by the door to prevent tracking in of toxic particles.

        Discourage or even better, forbid, tobacco smoking in or around
your home.

        Switch to non-toxic cleaning products (such as baking soda,
hydrogen peroxide and vinegar) and safer personal care products. Avoid
aerosols. Look for VOC-free cleaners. Avoid commercial air fresheners
and scented candles, which can out gas literally thousands of different
chemicals into your breathing space.

        Avoid powders. Talcum and other personal care powders can be
problematic as they float and linger in the air after each use. Many
powders are allergens due to their tiny size, and can cause respiratory
problems

        Don't hang dry-cleaned clothing in your closet immediately. Hang
them outside for a day or two. Better yet, see if there's an eco-friendly
dry cleaner in your city that uses some of the newer dry cleaning
technologies, such as liquid CO2.

        Upgrade your furnace filters. Today, there are more elaborate filters
that trap more of the particulates. Have your furnace and air conditioning
ductwork and chimney cleaned regularly.

        Avoid storing paints, adhesives, solvents, and other harsh chemicals
in your house or in an attached garage.

        Avoid using nonstick cookware, which can release toxins into the air
when heated.

        Ensure your combustion appliances are properly vented.

        Make sure your house has proper drainage and its foundation is
sealed properly to avoid mold formation. For more information about
the health dangers of mold and how to address it, please see this
previous article.

        The same principles apply to ventilation inside your car especially
if your car is new and chemicals from plastics, solvents, carpet and audio
equipment add to the toxic mix in your car's cabin. That "new car smell"
can contain up to 35 times the health limit for VOCs, "making its
enjoyment akin to glue-sniffing." Tips for Eliminating Noise Pollution
Using… Noise

    We’ve covered air pollution, but what can you do about noise pollution
in your home to protect your heart and overall health? If you live in a very
noisy area, such as near a highway or airport, you may want to consider
moving.

    If that is not an option, consider adding acoustical tile to your ceiling
and walls to buffer the noise. At the very least, you can sound-treat your
home by adding heavy curtains to your windows, rugs to your floors and
sealing air leaks. If noise is only an issue occasionally, sound-blocking
headphones can eliminate such disturbances.

    If noise is an issue during the night, you may want to consider adding
pink noise to your bedroom. Pink noise is steady with a consistent
frequency, like the sound of wind or constant rain. Research shows that
steady pink noise can help slow down and regulate your brainwaves for
more stable sleep and improved sleep quality. While pink noise CDs are
available, you can also simply turn on a fan in your bedroom to block out
noise disturbances and instead take advantage of this beneficial type of
pink noise.

Thank You  Dr. Mercola

 God Bless Everyone & God Bless The United States of
America.

Larry Nelson
42 S. Sherwood Dr.
Belton, Tx. 76513

cancercurehere@gmail.com

Have a great day...unless you have made other plans.

Both Air And Noise Pollution Increase Cardiovascular Risk

                     SPONSORS

        World's #1 Publisher of Information About  
             Alternative Cancer Treatments.            
                 http://bit.ly/1kQKj7b


         The Solution For Disease FREE Health...
                 http://bit.ly/RGNZ0i

By Dr. Mercola

    Air pollution and noise pollution often go hand-
in-hand, as some of the most heavily air-polluted areas
are also those near loud busy roadways and airports.

    Because of this connection, some have tried to
dismiss studies linking air pollution to increased
heart risks, blaming it on the noise in the area
instead and vice versa.

    Now new research has settled this point of
contention, as it looked at air pollution and noise
pollution simultaneously and found that each form of
pollution was independently associated with heart
risks, specifically subclinical atherosclerosis, or
hardening of the arteries.

Air Pollution and Noise Pollution: A Double Whammy to
Your Heart

    If you live near a busy highway, you’re likely
being simultaneously exposed to two major pollution
sources that can harm your heart: air pollution and
noise pollution from the traffic.

    In a German study of more than 4,200 people,
researchers used a measure of arterial hardening
known as “thoracic aortic calcification” (TAC) to
estimate heart risks. Exposure to fine particle air
pollution increased TAC scores by nearly 20 percent
while exposure to noise pollution increased TAC by
about 8 percent.

    This was after controlling for other variables that
may influence heart health, such as age, gender,
smoking, physical activity, alcohol use and more.
What this means is that people living in high-risk
areas need to account for both types of pollution to
protect their heart health. As researchers noted:

         Both exposures seem to be important and both
must be considered on a population level, rather than
focusing on just one hazard."

Air Pollution Is Strongly Tied to Heart Risks

    You may think air pollution mostly impacts your
lungs, but it actually has a serious impact on your
heart, as well. In fact, the US Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that 5 percent or
more of heart disease deaths may be related to air
pollution exposure.

    For starters, it’s known that exposure to one type
of air pollution, ozone, may trigger inflammation of
your vascular system, increasing risk factors associated
with heart disease.

    Ozone exposure has also been linked to a change in
heart rate variability and a reduction in the ability
of blood clots to dissolve, both of which can lead to
heart problems.

    Additional research published in the journal PLoS
Medicine, showed that, on average, the thickness of
the carotid artery increased by 0.014 millimeters per
year after other risk factors such as smoking were
accounted for.

    Those who had higher levels of exposure to fine
particulate air pollution experienced thickening of the
inner two layers of the carotid artery (which supplies
blood to your head) quicker than those exposed to
lower levels of pollution. According to the authors:

        "Linking these findings with other results from
the same population suggests that persons living in a
more polluted part of town may have a 2 percent higher
risk of stroke as compared to people in a less polluted
part of the same metropolitan area.

    For people with existing heart conditions the risk
may be even steeper, with one study showing that
breathing exhaust fumes from heavy traffic may trigger
a heart attack among this population a risk that
continues for up to six hours afterward as well. Simply
being in heavy traffic has even been found to triple
the risk of suffering from a heart attack!

    Interestingly, both fine particle matter air
pollution and noise pollution are believed to increase
your cardiovascular disease risk through similar
biologic pathways, including by causing an imbalance in
your autonomic nervous system (ANS). Your ANS is
intricately involved in regulating biological functions
such as blood pressure, blood sugar levels, clotting
and viscosity.

How Does Noise Pollution Harm Your Heart?

    According to research published in Environmental
Health Perspectives, long-term exposure to traffic
noise may account for approximately 3 percent of
coronary heart disease deaths (or about 210,000 deaths)
in Europe each year. But how exactly does noise harm
your heart?

    One of the key ways is by elevating stress hormones
such as cortisol, adrenaline, and noradrenaline, which,
over time, can lead to high blood pressure, stroke and
heart failure. One review of research showed that
arousal associated with nighttime noise exposure
increased blood and saliva concentrations of these
hormones even during sleep. Deepak Prasher, a professor
of audiology at University College in London and a
member of the WHO Noise Environmental Burden
on Disease working group, states:

        Many people become habituated to noise over
time The biological effects are imperceptible, so that
even as you become accustomed to the noise, adverse
physiological changes are nevertheless taking place,
with potentially serious consequences to human health
Taken together, recent epidemiologic data show us that
noise is a major stressor that can influence health
through the endocrine, immune, and cardiovascular
systems.

    The impact can be significant. Among women who
judge themselves to be sensitive to noise, chronic
noise exposure increased the risk of cardiovascular
mortality by 80 percent! Chronic noise exposure also
leads to health risks beyond your heart, such as
hearing loss, diminished productivity, sleep
disruption, impaired learning and more. Air pollution
similarly causes wide-reaching risks to health

Air Pollution Also Tied to Hyperactivity in Kids

    In related news, a study found that children
exposed to traffic-related air pollution before their
first birthday had a higher risk of hyperactivity at
the age of 7. The research suggests that air pollution
may be having a negative impact on brain development,
possibly by causing blood vessels to constrict or
causing toxic buildup in the brain.

    Noise pollution has also been tied to risks
specifically in children, including an impairment in
reading comprehension and long-term memory
among those exposed to chronic aircraft noise. Like
 adults, children living near heavy traffic areas may
be at significant risks of health issues from exposure
to both noise and air pollution simultaneously.

 Thank You  Dr. Mercola

                  Continued on  4/21/14


 God Bless Everyone & God Bless The United States of
America.

Larry Nelson
42 S. Sherwood Dr.
Belton, Tx. 76513
cancercurehere@gmail.com

Have a great day...unless you have made other plans.

Q&A...Final portion of the Article...Treating vs Curing Cancer.

REMINDER: In The Archive is all of the articles that I
have posted since I started this blog. There is TONS OF
INFORMATION there for you to learn from. It's the type
of information that not only saved my life...It also has
given me a better quality of life.

                  SPONSORS

    The Solution For Disease FREE Health...
             http://bit.ly/RGNZ0i


World's #1 Publisher of Information About Alternative
     Cancer Treatments Cancer Defeated                 
          http://bit.ly/1kQKj7b      


           Continued from 4/14/14

Copyright (c) 2003, 2004, 2006 R. Webster Kehr, all rights

reserved.

Question #4

Among the thousands of scientific studies on chemotherapy,
there is massive scientific evidence that chemotherapy extends
the total life of cancer patients compared to those who refuse all
treatment. True or false?

Answer: The next quote answers this question:

Professor Hardin B. Jones, PhD stated:
My studies have proved conclusively that untreated cancer
victims live up to four times longer than treated individuals.
If one has cancer and opts to do nothing at all, he will live
longer and feel better than if he undergoes radiation,
chemotherapy or surgery
Now consider this quote:

In 1975, the respected British medical journal Lancet reported
on a study which compared the effect on cancer patients of (1)
a single chemotherapy, (2) multiple chemotherapy, and (3) no
treatment at all. No treatment ‘proved a significantly better
policy for patients’ survival and for quality of remaining
life.

Barry Lynes, The Healing of Cancer The Cures the Cover-ups and
the Solution Now!

And this quote:
A German epidemiologist from the Heidelberg/Mannheim Tumor
Clinic, Dr Ulrich Abel, has done a comprehensive review and analysis
of every major study and clinical trial of chemotherapy ever done.
His conclusions should be read by anyone who is about to embark
on the Chemo Express. To make sure he had reviewed everything
ever published on chemotherapy, Abel sent letters to over 350
medical centers around the world, asking them to send him
anything they had published on the subject. Abel researched
thousands of articles: it is unlikely that anyone in the world
knows more about chemotherapy than he.

The analysis took him several years, but the results are
astounding: Abel found that the overall worldwide success rate
of chemotherapy was ‘appalling’ because there was simply no
scientific evidence available anywhere that chemotherapy can
extend in any appreciable way the lives of patients suffering
from the most common organic cancers’. Abel emphasizes that
chemotherapy rarely can improve the quality of life. He
describes chemotherapy as ‘a scientific wasteland’ and states
that at least 80 per cent of chemotherapy administered
throughout the world is worthless and is akin to the emperor’s
new clothes neither doctor nor patient is willing to give up on
chemotherapy, even though there is no scientific evidence that it
works!

(Lancet, 10 August 1991) No mainstream media even mentioned
this comprehensive study: it was totally buried.
Tim O’Shea, The Doctor Within

Three major studies all came to the same conclusion: orthodox
cancer treatments do not extend the total life of cancer
patients. In fact, in many cases they shorten the total life
of cancer patients.

Yet virtually every cancer patient on earth has been told by
their doctors something like this: if you take this  chemotherapy
you will live 6 months longer than if you do not take it. This
statement is ubiquitous but totally unscientific!!

Here is a prophetic quote about the future of chemotherapy and
radiation:
Twenty years from now we will look back at chemotherapy and
radiation as [being as] barbaric as using leeches, Steve
Millett, manager of technology forecasts for Battelle

Unfortunately, this quote is nonsense. I personally have seen
quotes from cancer researchers who claim it will be at least
50 years before there will be a dent in cancer. That is more
accurate becuase that is what everyone wants.

Question #5

Orthodox proponents claim that for some kinds of cancer, cure
rates have gone up over the past 10 or 20 years. They claim
this is just another proof that orthodox treatments are
superior to alternative treatments. Do you agree?

Answer: Yes, some cure rates have gone up. This is the most
damaging deception of all.

Suppose Company B (as discussed above) makes some small
improvements in their engines and the total life of their engines
increases from 100,000 miles to 102,000 miles. Because
of this, suppose the percentage of their engines that last
30,000 increases from 92% to 93%.

Now imagine the CEO of Company B makes the following
announcement:

The percentage of our car engines that last 30,000 has
increased from 92% to 93%. This proves that Company B cars
last longer than Company G cars.

Is the CEO right? Of course not, Company G engines still last
300,000 and Company B engines only last 102,000. It is an
absurd claim. What the Company B executive has done is compare
the old Company B cars to the new Company B cars. The CEO
has not compared the total life of the Company B cars to the
total life of the Company G cars.

That is exactly what the FDA does. When orthodox medicine says
that cure rates have gone up, they are comparing their old 5-
year chemotherapy stats to their new 5-year chemotherapy
stats.

They are not comparing the total life of orthodox treatments
to the total life of alternative treatments or even the total
life of those who refuse treatments.

Orthodox medicine is continually improving their treatments,
all with a loud clarion blast of publicity. Their cure rates
are always going up and a cure is always just around the
corner.

But look at it this way. Company B can improve their engines
to last 102,000, and 5 years later they can improve them to
104,000,  and 5 years later to 106,000, and so on. In the mean
time people who bought cars from Company G have cars that
last 300,000, then 5 years later 305,000, then 5 years later 310,000,
 and so on.
So when will Company B catch up to Company G? Never!!

But this sophisticated deception goes much deeper. Cure rates
will go up if the cancer is diagnosed earlier! In other words,
if the American Cancer Society convinces women to get
mammograms (which are carcinogenic, by the way) more often,
their breast cancer will be diagnosed earlier, on average, and
the cure rates for breast cancer will go up! The cure rate did
not go up because of some improvement in chemotherapy or
radiation, but because women have carcinogenic mammograms
more frequently!

There are many ways to manipulate the cure rates of orthodox
medicine.

In truth, the gap in total life between alternative cancer treatments
and orthodox cancer treatments is greater than the gap between
Company G cars and Company B cars. The Cameron/Pauling
study proved that. While the Cameron/Pauling Vitamin C
therapy is not one of the best current alternative cancer
treatments, there are newer Vitamin C therapies that are among
the best treatments.

Orthodox medicine, by using sophisticated definitions and
deceptive statistics, has convinced the public to believe that
orthodox cancer treatments extend the total life of patients.
But there is no scientific evidence for that belief!!

I want to emphasize that these deceptions were not developed
by ignorant people who didn’t know what they were doing. They
are sophisticated, carefully designed statistical deceptions
combined with carefully chosen deceptive terminology! A normal
person would automatically think only about total life, but
the total life numbers are carefully hidden. More will be said
about those doing the deception later.

Copyright (c) 2003, 2004, 2006 R. Webster Kehr, all rights

reserved.

 God Bless Everyone & God Bless The United States of America.

Larry Nelson
42 S. Sherwood Dr.
Belton, Tx. 76513
cancercurehere@gmail.com

Have a great day...unless you have made other plans.