The Real Cancer Healers ... and the Future of Medicine
PeterB
HISTORICAL REVIEW OF CLINICAL TRIALS AT THE OASIS OF HOPE HOSPITAL
Since 1963, one hundred thousand patients have been treated at the
Oasis of Hope Hospital founded by Dr. Ernesto Contreras, Sr.. Patients
have come here from every part of the world seeking cancer therapies
and treatment approaches pioneered by the Contreras doctors,
specifically the Metabolic Therapy . Dr. Contreras called his cancer
therapy "metabolic" because it enhances normal function of organs
while provoking an adverse environment for malignant cells. This is
accomplished through a treatment program that provides detoxification,
natural anti-tumor agents such as laetrile, whole foods and juices,
emotional and spiritual support, and immune stimulation from vitamins,
minerals, phytochemicals and enzymes.
In 1981, we conducted a retrospective study to document the five-year
survival rates of our cancer patients. It is important to note that 95
percent of these patients came to us with stage IV cancers after
conventional therapy had failed to help them. They had been sent home
to die. We treated them with our metabolic therapy and the results
were encouraging. Our overall five-year survival rate for all types of
cancer was 30 percent. We also noted that 86 percent of our patients
outlived their prognosis and reported an improvement in their quality
of life.
Malignancies in the lung, breast, colon and prostate are the most
prevalent in our experience. For this reason, we designed a
prospective study on the efficacy of metabolic therapy focused on
these advanced stage IV cancers. In the table below, we compare our
results against those from clinical trials with conventional
therapies.
Type of cancer: Lung
Distant1 Number of patients: 200
5 yr. survival rate: 30% (Oasis) / 2% (Conventional)
Type of cancer: Breast
Distant1 Number of patients: 130
5 yr. survival rate: 39% (Oasis) / 21% (Conventional)
Type of cancer: Colon
Distant1 Number of patients: 150
5 yr. survival rate: 30% (Oasis) / 8% (Conventional)
Type of cancer: Prostate
Distant1 Number of patients: 600
5 yr. survival rate: 86% (Oasis) / 33% (Conventional)
1. Distant: A malignant cancer that has spread to parts of the body
remote from the primary tumor either by direct extension or by
discontinuous metastasis to distant organs, tissues, or via the
lymphatic system to distant lymph nodes.
2. Source: American Cancer Society Cancer Facts & Figures 2001
The Oasis statistics when compared to the Conventional statistics are
dramatically better. What makes these results astounding to me is the
difference between the Oasis group and the Conventional group. The
Oasis patients had already undergone surgery, radiation or
chemotherapy. They had endured the hair loss, nausea, burns and
devastation of their energy levels and immune systems. Those in the
Conventional group had no previous treatment to damage their general
condition. They had a fresh start. We can only speculate on the better
results we could achieve with patients that would avoid conventional
therapy before they arrive to the Oasis of Hope.
In spite of the impressive results, our studies were rejected by all
peer reviewed medical journals. The only studies that these groups
recognize are single drug double blind clinical trials. Our study just
didn't meet those criteria. In fact, our results depend on a
combination of therapies. This makes it difficult to single out one
active agent, and this is the objective of cancer research. Scientists
want to identify the means and we have focused completely on the end
result.
Our results in lung cancer were so dramatic however that one group of
oncological authorities did invite us to make a presentation at the
World Congress on Cancer in Buenos Aires. Unfortunately, the Congress
coordinators canceled our participation at the last minute due to
opposition from some outspoken doctors. Once again, those who insisted
that the results were secondary and that our study did not adhere to
their guidelines were able to silence us.
In the past, financial restraints and negativity from the oncological
community have hindered us from conducting standard double blind
clinical trials. But the legal and medical environment is changing as
more and more people demand access to alternative medicine. The
governments in the USA and Mexico have already established offices of
alternative medicine in their health departments. The Ministry of
Health in Mexico has approved our application for a clinical research
organization (CRO) and we are now positioning ourselves for research
grants. We intend to conduct the necessary trials to publish the
results in an effort to make valid therapies available to people in
any part of the world.
We have never been on a crusade to prove the value of alternative
therapies. In fact, we have often been criticized for our use of
conventional medicine. We keep focused on our ultimate goal, the total
well being of our patients. We try not to limit our patients to either
alternative or orthodox therapies. We offer them what are the most
effective and least harmful options. Our approach compliments
conventional medicine with natural elements and mind/spirit support.
To our critics who wage that we do not utilize pure science, we would
like to remind them. Medicine is much more than science, it is a
healing art.
(c) 2005 Oasis of Hope Hospital, All Right Reserved
drce...@insightbb.com
This is very interesting.
Peter the Moron claims that such data does not exist.
The Moron recently posted that conventional cancer treatment was no
better than alternative cancer treatments, but much more painful and
costly.
What is most revealing is that most of these patients were determined
to be terminal, i.e. there is nothing more I can do to you or for you,
so go home and die, yet many, up to 30% or more survived the
prognosis.
One can only wonder what the percentage would be if the "alternative"
approach were the first approach tried rather than that of last
choice?
DrCee
You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons.
Peter Moran
news:e7edc588-88dc-424c...@w4g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
WHy not? How is it ethical to offer them to patients without knowing
whether they work?
> In fact, we have often been criticized for our use of
> conventional medicine. We keep focused on our ultimate goal, the total
> well being of our patients. We try not to limit our patients to either
> alternative or orthodox therapies. We offer them what are the most
> effective and least harmful options. Our approach compliments
> conventional medicine with natural elements and mind/spirit support.
> To our critics who wage that we do not utilize pure science, we would
> like to remind them. Medicine is much more than science, it is a
> healing art.
Art doesn't work on with cancer. You need methods that actually do
something.
I don't believe that they can produce 30% 5 ysr on patients with metastatic
lung cancer and the other figures need more detailed analysis. The five
year rates of breast and colon cancer with lymph gland spread are in excess
of 50% so that the exact mix of patients needs to be known..
PM
JOHN
"Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
news:ZOydnVUKd4qyd4bVnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@internode...
>
> I don't believe that they can produce 30% 5 ysr on patients with
> metastatic lung cancer and the other figures need more detailed analysis.
> The five year rates of breast and colon cancer with lymph gland spread are
> in excess of 50% so that the exact mix of patients needs to be known..
That is what happens when you promote allopathy, you end up believing your
own propaganda
If the patient has not undergone any conventional treatment (especially
chemotherapy or radiotherapy), GNM has a success rate of 95 to 98 percent.
Ironically these statistics for Dr. Hamer's remarkable success rate were
delivered by the authorities themselves. When Dr. Hamer was arrested in 1997
for having given three people medical advice without a medical license, the
police confiscated his patients' files and had them analyzed. Subsequently,
one public prosecutor was forced to admit during the trial that, after five
years, 6,000 out of 6,500 patients with mostly "terminal" cancer were still
alive. With conventional treatment the figures are generally just the
reverse. [2007 pdf] Dr. Hamer's Medical Paradigm By Caroline Markolin, Ph.D.
http://whale.to/cancer/hamer.html
Citizen Jimserac
>
> HISTORICAL REVIEW OF CLINICAL TRIALS AT THE OASIS OF HOPE HOSPITAL
> http://www.oasisofhope.com/clinical_results.html
Impressive, intriguing and interesting.
There is near hysterical shouts that no alternative
cancer treatment systems work and yet we see this example.
Another example is the "Cancer Treatment Centers of America" which at
their web site indicate that in addition to standard therapies, they
utilize Acupuncture, Homeopathy and Naturopathy!
There are self appointed skeptic "watchdogs"
(perhaps watch"weasles" is more correct)
in this group who will foam at the mouth
and scream that no research at all supports
Acupuncture or Homeopathy, even when confronted
with a growing body of research with positive
results.
One pathetic moron (who wasted
my time in endless fruitless "discussions"
until I caught on) believes that because he
would get an "effect" if he poked himself
anywhere with a needle, this somehow refutes ALL of Acupuncture and
invalidates meridian theory and the existence of discrete points.
What does NOT work is doing surgery to REMOVE cancer
or chemotherapy to POISON it away yet an ELABORATE and extensive
disinformation campaign has been in place for quite some time to
INSIST that it does and, worse, that these two things are the ONLY
viable therapies to be used against cancer.
As the existence of this hospital and organizations such as the Cancer
Treatment Centers of America prove,
really sick people tend to go to places where
the chance of health building humane treatment and reasonable
prospects of success occur - word travels far faster than the
disinformation, condemnations, phony or misdirected research,
protestations, confusions, quacker pronouncements by self appointed
skeptics and all the rest of the vast machinery in place to BLOCK
KNOWLEDGE of successful alternative systems of medicine.
Citizen Jimserac
drce...@insightbb.com
Petey the Moron wrote:
> > We have never been on a crusade to prove the value of alternative
> > therapies.
>
> WHy not? How is it ethical to offer them to patients without knowing
> whether they work?
How ethical is it to offer treatments to patients knowing they do not
work like the organized mafia we call the medical monopoly?
>
> Art doesn't work on with cancer. You need methods that actually do
> something.
Yes, and your methods really do something. They destroy the quality
of life, bancrupt people, and kill over 500,000 victims a year in the
US alone.
I would not be too egotistical and proud of those facts if I were you.
>
> I don't believe that they can produce 30% 5 ysr on patients with metastatic
> lung cancer and the other figures need more detailed analysis. The five
> year rates of breast and colon cancer with lymph gland spread are in excess
> of 50% so that the exact mix of patients needs to be known..
>
> PM
>
You do not believe anything except what some peed-on psuedoscientific
journal might propagandize.
Peter Moran
news:vOSdnQIFe7Es2YHV...@bt.com...
>
> "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
> news:ZOydnVUKd4qyd4bVnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@internode...
>
>>
>> I don't believe that they can produce 30% 5 ysr on patients with
>> metastatic lung cancer and the other figures need more detailed analysis.
>> The five year rates of breast and colon cancer with lymph gland spread
>> are in excess of 50% so that the exact mix of patients needs to be
>> known..
>
> That is what happens when you promote allopathy, you end up believing your
> own propaganda
>
> If the patient has not undergone any conventional treatment (especially
> chemotherapy or radiotherapy), GNM has a success rate of 95 to 98 percent.
> Ironically these statistics for Dr. Hamer's remarkable success rate were
> delivered by the authorities themselves.
No, you cannot just make things up, John. In the their own speil, the
Contreras clinic makes it clear that the results they claim are those of the
combination of convenitonal and alternative methods they themselves employ.
Remember Liam Holliday-Williams the famous New Zealand case? They gave him
chemotherapy when alternative methods failed to control his neuroblastoma.
They claim 95% results even in stage lV cancer, up to 1981. Yet three
naturopaths, in a search for alternative methods worthy of further
interest, followed up 31 patients treated by Contreras at his Mexican
clinic in 1983-84 using postal questionnaires [7]. The patients were
treated with Laetrile, a modified vegan diet, proteolytic enzymes, and
antioxidant supplements. 9 of the patients were lost to follow-up,
suggesting death or decline in at least most. The 22 remaining patients
were confirmed to have died within a mean period of seven months.
See: Long Term Follow-up of cancer patients using Contreras, Hoxsey and
Gerson therapies. Austin S et al. J. Naturopathic Med. 1994; 5(1):74-75
This was published as in
>When Dr. Hamer was arrested in 1997 for having given three people medical
>advice without a medical license, the police confiscated his patients'
>files and had them analyzed. Subsequently, one public prosecutor was forced
>to admit during the trial that, after five years, 6,000 out of 6,500
>patients with mostly "terminal" cancer were still alive. With conventional
>treatment the figures are generally just the reverse. [2007 pdf] Dr.
>Hamer's Medical Paradigm By Caroline Markolin, Ph.D.
>http://whale.to/cancer/hamer.html
This is a blatant fiction. WHy do alternaitve supporters lie so much?
Hamer is a absolute nut who belieives that cancer is something that people
bring on themselves -- the cruelist, and most stupid, and the most conrary
to all experience and empirical evidence, of all the crazy notions that
alternative medicine has ever come up with.
PM
D. C. Sessions
> "JOHN" <jo...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:vOSdnQIFe7Es2YHV...@bt.com...
>> "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
>> news:ZOydnVUKd4qyd4bVnZ2dnUVZ_sudnZ2d@internode...
>>> I don't believe that they can produce 30% 5 ysr on patients with
>>> metastatic lung cancer and the other figures need more detailed analysis.
>>> The five year rates of breast and colon cancer with lymph gland spread
>>> are in excess of 50% so that the exact mix of patients needs to be
>>> known..
>>
>> That is what happens when you promote allopathy, you end up believing your
>> own propaganda
>>
>> If the patient has not undergone any conventional treatment (especially
>> chemotherapy or radiotherapy), GNM has a success rate of 95 to 98 percent.
>> Ironically these statistics for Dr. Hamer's remarkable success rate were
>> delivered by the authorities themselves.
>
> No, you cannot just make things up, John.
Warn us next time, would you? This is a very nice wireless keyboard
and the beer wasn't bad either.
> In the their own speil, the
> Contreras clinic makes it clear that the results they claim are those of the
> combination of convenitonal and alternative methods they themselves employ.
> Remember Liam Holliday-Williams the famous New Zealand case? They gave him
> chemotherapy when alternative methods failed to control his neuroblastoma.
>
> They claim 95% results even in stage lV cancer, up to 1981. Yet three
> naturopaths, in a search for alternative methods worthy of further
> interest, followed up 31 patients treated by Contreras at his Mexican
> clinic in 1983-84 using postal questionnaires [7]. The patients were
> treated with Laetrile, a modified vegan diet, proteolytic enzymes, and
> antioxidant supplements. 9 of the patients were lost to follow-up,
> suggesting death or decline in at least most. The 22 remaining patients
> were confirmed to have died within a mean period of seven months.
>
> See: Long Term Follow-up of cancer patients using Contreras, Hoxsey and
> Gerson therapies. Austin S et al. J. Naturopathic Med. 1994; 5(1):74-75
So? What do you expect a bunch of shills on the payroll of the Evil
Organized Chemotherapy Conspiracy to say. The very fact that the
enemies of Truth, Justice, and Choice of Realities had to hire a
bunch of no-names like them to do their hatchet job shows how
desperate they are.
If the Contreras, Hoxsey and Gerson therapies *really* didn't work,
they could have gotten a top-flight expert like Gonzales to say so.
>> This was published as in
>>When Dr. Hamer was arrested in 1997 for having given three people medical
>>advice without a medical license, the police confiscated his patients'
>>files and had them analyzed. Subsequently, one public prosecutor was forced
>>to admit during the trial that, after five years, 6,000 out of 6,500
>>patients with mostly "terminal" cancer were still alive. With conventional
>>treatment the figures are generally just the reverse. [2007 pdf] Dr.
>>Hamer's Medical Paradigm By Caroline Markolin, Ph.D.
>>http://whale.to/cancer/hamer.html
>
> This is a blatant fiction. WHy do alternaitve supporters lie so much?
> Hamer is a absolute nut who belieives that cancer is something that people
> bring on themselves -- the cruelist, and most stupid, and the most conrary
> to all experience and empirical evidence, of all the crazy notions that
> alternative medicine has ever come up with.
It can't be wrong, since despite the things that different schools of
alternative medicine disagree about [1] one of the few things that
they *do* agree on is that cancer is entirely the fault of the victim,
except in cases where it's been maliciously caused by Evil Organized
Medicine.
[1] Well, not publicly. There's an understanding that they don't
do that sort of thing in places like MHA.
--
| Shit happens. Sometimes it happens to you. |
+--- D. C. Sessions <d...@lumbercartel.com> ---+
PeterB
> "JOHN" <j...@nospam.com> wrote in message
But the relative lifespan gains were skewed positively to the
Contreras patients as the percentages show. It's also dishonest of
you to claim that conventional agents were used broadly in his
patients, when that is not indicated. Instead, natural agents were
preferred, and if a patient wanted a standard treatment option, which
some did, it was made available.
> See: Long Term Follow-up of cancer patients using Contreras, Hoxsey and
> Gerson therapies. Austin S et al. J. Naturopathic Med. 1994; 5(1):74-75
>
> This was published as in
>
> >When Dr. Hamer was arrested in 1997 for having given three people medical
> >advice without a medical license, the police confiscated his patients'
> >files and had them analyzed. Subsequently, one public prosecutor was forced
> >to admit during the trial that, after five years, 6,000 out of 6,500
> > patients with mostly "terminal" cancer were still alive. With
> > conventional treatment the figures are generally just the
> > reverse. [2007 pdf] Dr. Hamer's Medical Paradigm By Caroline
> > Markolin, Ph.D. http://whale.to/cancer/hamer.html
>
> This is a blatant fiction. WHy do alternaitve supporters lie so
> much?
After reading many of your commentaries, PM, I have to conclude that
if you say it's a lie, it *must* be the truth.
> Hamer is a absolute nut who belieives that cancer is something
> that people bring on themselves -- the cruelist, and most stupid,
> and the most conrary to all experience and empirical evidence, of
> all the crazy notions that alternative medicine has ever come up
> with.
You're spinning as usual. To see that cancer is mostly a byproduct of
man-made toxins is not to believe that people are "bad," as you imply
in your rant. The toxins that cause sickness are what's bad, and
people who engage in defense of dangerous chemotherapies, like you,
are happy to be part of the problem. Say hello to your sponsors for
me, okay?
JOHN
>
> This is a blatant fiction. WHy do alternaitve supporters lie so much?
> Hamer is a absolute nut who belieives that cancer is something that people
> bring on themselves -- the cruelist, and most stupid, and the most
> conrary to all experience and empirical evidence, of all the crazy notions
> that alternative medicine has ever come up with.
>
> PM
>
>
when you have been running a genocidal programme for years, the truth will
sound strange, as you creeps well know
but that isn't a defence
go see anyone who wants to believe an allopath about anything
http://whale.to/a/cancer_c.html
also http://whale.to/a/hoaxmed.html
as for lying, you lot should know about that, if your lips move, you are
lying http://whale.to/vaccines/ploy5.html
"They all lie, from the top man down to the bottom. If their lips are
moving, a lie is unfolding."---- WILLIAM RIVERS PITT
JOHN
>
> This is a blatant fiction. WHy do alternaitve supporters lie so much?
> Hamer is a absolute nut who belieives that cancer is something that people
> bring on themselves -- the cruelist, and most stupid, and the most
> conrary to all experience and empirical evidence, of all the crazy notions
> that alternative medicine has ever come up with.
PS, my mum took a lover, dad then got prostate cancer.
actually they spread the cancer to his bladder with a dire prognosis, then
killed him with the 'medicine'
funny how surgery is your best medicine for cancer. Surgery---hardly the
cure for cancer is it.
lets talk about YOUR medicine for a bit shall we,
how about Taxol http://whale.to/drugs/taxol_h.html
killed most of the yews on the planet and ignored 2 dozen cancer herbs used
by herbalists for cancer, for centuries
that is one little glimpse of the assholes who run your industry
Bristol Mysers Squibb, the same bunch of assholes who suppressed Laetrile so
they could kill all the yews and all the patients they put on taxol
all paid for by the taxpayer
Hawki
>
> "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> wrote in message
> news:buCdnRRHzI01VIHVnZ2dnUVZ_h2pnZ2d@internode...
>
>>
>> This is a blatant fiction. WHy do alternaitve supporters lie so much?
>> Hamer is a absolute nut who belieives that cancer is something that
>> people bring on themselves -- the cruelist, and most stupid, and the
>> most conrary to all experience and empirical evidence, of all the crazy
>> notions that alternative medicine has ever come up with.
>
>
> PS, my mum took a lover, dad then got prostate cancer.
one has nothing to do with the other....if you had said your dad got an
std...well,,,different story
>
> actually they spread the cancer to his bladder with a dire prognosis, then
> killed him with the 'medicine'
who is the "they" that spread the cancer from prostate to bladder??
actually that is the logical path of disease progression in prostate...the
medicine did not cause the "disease to spread"...it already had
>
> funny how surgery is your best medicine for cancer. Surgery---hardly the
> cure for cancer is it.
removing the primary tumor is ...usually...the first step...not a cure if
cancer has already spread...
drce...@insightbb.com
>
> funny how surgery is your best medicine for cancer. Surgery---hardly the
> cure for cancer is it.
You are sure to get some dumb replys by the Moron or Hawki the pharma
shill on this.
Somehow the phara shills cannot accept that a tumor is not the
cancer. It is a symptom of possible cancer. Additionally, the pharma
shills cannot understand that the body, the whole body, is pre-
cancerous and that a person can be ready to produce one or a thousand
and one tumors. The cancers do not metasticize. This is another con
by the pharma shills because they have no true understanding of what
cancer is.
Since the pharma shills do understand what cancer is and how it can
form they run around like chicken little yelling "Cancer, tumors,
cancer, tumors" when the truth is very different.
D. C. Sessions
> Somehow the phara shills cannot accept that a tumor is not the
> cancer. It is a symptom of possible cancer. Additionally, the pharma
> shills cannot understand that the body, the whole body, is pre-
> cancerous and that a person can be ready to produce one or a thousand
> and one tumors.
Which reminds me -- I've been asking for a while what tests can
distinguish between a supposedly "pre-cancerous body" and one that
isn't. I've asked what the proper pH is for stomach contents,
I've asked what the threshold pH is for blood, I've asked what
the threshold pH is for skin. You've never answered any of those.
> The cancers do not metasticize. This is another con
> by the pharma shills because they have no true understanding of what
> cancer is.
Except ... removal of early-stage tumors has repeatable results
in terms of long-term reduction in late-stage cancer. I realize
that you have loftier concerns, but some of us are happy to improve
the odds.
> Since the pharma shills do understand what cancer is and how it can
> form they run around like chicken little yelling "Cancer, tumors,
> cancer, tumors" when the truth is very different.
Hey, I'm sure you have Higher Truth here, but they're working with
replicable processes. Since you're not into processes or replicability
there's really no point in yelling about "six days of creation!" when
the subject is geophysics.
Citizen Jimserac
>
> > This is a blatant fiction. WHy do alternaitve supporters lie so
> > much?
>
> After reading many of your commentaries, PM, I have to conclude that
> if you say it's a lie, it *must* be the truth.
>
> > Hamer is a absolute nut who belieives that cancer is something
> > that people bring on themselves -- the cruelist, and most stupid,
> > and the most conrary to all experience and empirical evidence, of
> > all the crazy notions that alternative medicine has ever come up
> > with.
>
> You're spinning as usual.
Well, they probably see it as automatic and compulsive
"reinterpretation" of your comments - they are very good
at misinterpretations, driblling off to side issues,
or outright distortions - ANYTHING to distract
attention one of the key points which is the deleterious
effects of chemotherapy and the inadequacy of
surgery.
Citizen Jimserac