Alternative Medicine Takes on Cancer – and WinsHelke Ferrie November 1, 2010
The Audacity of Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez
“If you are an honest scientist, it doesn’t matter if it’s moondust – if it’s working, you have got to follow through… I also believe that truth always comes to the top… I have done what I have done because of the truth of it, and the truth has proven to be only truer as I’ve gotten further into … this quest, and the results have been my greatest joy. We have found the fundamental way in which nature works with cancer, and it’s extraordinary. It is the greatest reward I could ever ask for.” – Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez, MD
The keynote speaker at Whole Life Expo 2010 was Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez of New York, one of a small number of doctors whose success in treating cancer exceeded that of mainstream oncology by a wide margin. His work thereby put the lie to pharmaceutical propaganda that fuels a cancer industry bringing in hundreds of billions of dollars while fooling millions of desperate and bewildered patients. “I’ve been told drug companies know about my work but hope I get hit by a bus,” Dr. Gonzalez observes wryly.
Dr. Gonzalez is a distinguished immunologist and medical doctor who received his degrees from Columbia and Cornell universities. His mentor was none other than Dr. Robert Good, a world-famous oncologist and past director of the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. Dr. Good encouraged Gonzalez to examine the cancer treatment developed by maverick dentist Donald Kelley. Having cured himself of pancreatic cancer (just about the deadliest form that cancer can take), Kelley developed a protocol based on the earlier work of Dr. Max Gerson and the discovery made in the early 1900s by John Beard of Edinburgh University about the central importance of pancreatic enzymes to cancer prevention and treatment.
Starting in 1981, Dr. Gonzalez systematically studied 10,000 cancer cases from Dr. Kelley’s files, yet the book Gonzalez wrote on this project in 1987, One Man Alone, was stonewalled by all publishers. (It finally became available this year, and you can buy it at the KOS Publishing booth at Whole Life Expo.)
Apparently because of his excellent track record of curing cancer without drugs, Dr. Kelley was hounded throughout his life by the medical establishment, and was imprisoned and bankrupted. Similarly, Dr. Gonzalez has endured various disciplinary trials and punishments designed to short circuit his progress with curing cancer using enzyme therapy, nutrition, and detoxification protocols. When the U.S. National Institutes of Health, the American government, and various cancer organizations found themselves unable to stop Dr. Gonzalez’s success with cancer patients, they tried to interfere with his clinical trials instead. This cloak and dagger story is described in his new book, A Clinical Trial, which was reviewed in Vitality’s October issue. But unlike the tragic Dr. Kelley, Dr. Gonzalez is prevailing.
Orthodox versus Alternative Treatment for Cancer
At the heart of the battle are two opposing views on cancer. Orthodox medicine sees the cancer patient as a battlefield and embarks on what Dr. Julian Whitaker describes, in Suzanne Somers’ book Knockout, as a “search-and-destroy mission to purge the body of cancer cells… find a tumour, cut it out, poison it with chemotherapy, or obliterate it with radiation.” The result of this approach is that “for the past half century the death rate for cancer has not budged.”
All wars are extremely lucrative for the weapons’ industry and very bad for the health of those on the receiving end of that industry’s products.
The opposing view, Dr. Gonzalez told Somers, is that “tumors are not the illness, but rather the body’s way to sequester waste material… the tumor has a purpose … [it is] a sign that the body is too filled with toxins, and these can overwhelm the liver’s ability to process them, [then] confronting the body with an enormous load of toxic waste that produces tumors which are like accessory livers…” In other words, Gonzalez views cancer tumors as toxic waste dumps hastily constructed by the body to remove toxins from the bloodstream.
For Drs. Beard, Gerson, Kelley, Gonzalez, and other past and contemporary ‘alternative’ cancer doctors, the body is not a battlefield, but rather an exquisitely constructed living entity capable of perfect self-repair. It requires biologically appropriate and bio-friendly assistance in order to carry out its inherent repair process in ways it knows better than any doctor could. This sort of therapeutic dialogue with the cancer, and a body known to be capable of self-repair, is fundamentally nurturing; it also does not generate tremendous profit for any group of professionals, nor for any kind of industry.
Howard Straus (Dr. Max Gerson’s grandson working at the Gerson Institute), along with Dr. Gonzalez, observed in a recent as yet unpublished paper: “The human body is made up of about 100 trillion cells … All cells in the body are replaced at least once every year and a half. Many structures (such as the liver or the lining of the intestines) are replaced in days or weeks. When the organs are replaced, they are replaced with healthy, new cells. This replacement and repair process generates 180 billion cells per day, and also simultaneously removes exactly as many dead cells every day,” in a perfect 1:1 ratio. Toxins interfere with this process, and without proper nutrients the work of cell replacement is stopped. Then the immune system cannot work properly either. “There is no need to ‘stimulate’ the immune system, as many [pharmaceutical] immune therapies today attempt to do; the immune system is designed and optimized to repair any dysfunction on its own… Once the proper support is supplied to the immune system, it awakens and acts with a speed and power that can only be termed awesome to behold.”
This perfectly-balanced process of health maintenance can only function properly if our bodies receive healthy fuel – otherwise, cancer may begin to develop. “Everything in our bodies comes from one place: our diet,” states Dr. Gonzalez. “Nutrition is key. It’s the foundation. It’s not the end, it’s the beginning. It’s the ultimate foundation for good health. If you don’t have that, nothing else is going to work.” But, he continues, the fact is that “we treat our cars better than we treat our bodies. No one would think about putting the wrong fuel into their expensive car, but [people] go and put the biggest pile of junk into their mouths” and are shocked to find that their cancer diagnosis stems from the garbage that the food industry serves up. Indeed, so much of what we eat – often unknowingly – is outright carcinogenic. Back in the late 19th century, Sir William Osler had already observed that we “dig our graves with our knives and forks.”
In other words, Gonzalez’s alternative approach to cancer treatment is based on the premise that it’s “simple” to prevent cancer and even cure it by removing the body’s toxic load while nourishing it with nutritional medicine, instead of bombarding it with even more toxic substances like chemotherapy and radiation. But if this premise were to be accepted by mainstream medicine, “it would put an end to all the marches and research dollars, and most of all to a huge chemotherapy business [of] $200 billion a year,” observed Suzanne Somers. Well, the proof is that it is that simple, that complex, and certainly possible.
The underlying complexity of properly nourishing a body riddled with cancer is startling in its effect; any one biological substance affects multiple targets at once, and all of them interact with each other. So the notion of sending one synthetic chemical – name any cancer drug on the market – into a system in which trillions of intelligent cells communicate simultaneously with each other, and expecting to hit a target imagined to be the enemy (like some sort of smart bomb), seems ridiculous. In war, smart bombs always have collateral damage – news of which is usually suppressed to preserve the political spin of the day. In cancer therapy, devastating side effects of such “smart” drugs are equally downplayed to preserve profits. As a member of the cancer establishment said to Suzanne Somers: “The truth is, we don’t want to find a cure for cancer. It’s too big a business.”
The Truth Always Rises to the Top
Once a lie begins to become apparent and doubt arises, more and more people begin to think in different and new ways, too. On a daily basis, the internet-based medical research websites report on how wrong the cancer establishment is on just about everything once considered unquestionable. A decade ago, the American Cancer Society absolutely denied that nutrition has anything at all to do with cancer prevention or could be useful in treatment. However, the President’s Cancer Panel Report this year stated exactly the opposite. Indeed, basic research scientists are now identifying the natural chemicals found in specific foods that help the body prevent cancer, such as those found in broccoli and similar plants. And we’re now learning that exposure to toxic environmental chemicals can program the body for cancer decades later.
As well, the newly-initiated Cancer Genome Project, designed to examine a great many different cancers, will undoubtedly provide information on why the approach of Dr. Gonzalez and his past and present colleagues is working – after all, we knew that sunshine and cod liver oil prevented and cured rickets long before we knew why and how.
As for the misguided ‘battlefield’ approach to cancer patients’ bodies, it is gratifying to see how the medical establishment must time and again acknowledge that their weapons usually injure, and do not nurture or protect. The research is now in on how pharmaceutical drugs – which are intended to treat symptoms of diabetes, high blood pressure, depression and more – go on to ultimately cause cancer.
Only a couple of years ago, anyone, including myself, who dared to assert that mammograms and CAT scans are bad news and should be avoided because radiation causes cancer, was treated like an ignoramus of the most dangerous type. That, too, has changed, and the establishment even admits that it is now known exactly how these often unnecessary diagnostic or “preventive” tests cause cancer. They even admit that cancer is dangerously over-investigated through the use of these and other routine tests on people already diagnosed with cancer, further decreasing their life expectancy and quality of life.
Yet the statistical musical chairs claiming that cancer is decreasing still goes on. Recently, the statistical decrease in certain cancers was hailed as just ever-so-wonderful, but turned out to be an insignificant 1.3%. There are, however, some trends showing a decrease of certain cancers, trends which correspond with the decline in use of the birth control pill and the increasing refusal to undergo cancer-promoting mammography – women are turning more and more toward safer diagnostics such as thermography.
Best of all, the truth about the cancer industry’s underlying fraud is emerging at a rate that I find difficult to keep up with, even though I study this nauseating stuff on a daily basis. For example, there is fraud in breast cancer research, most of which is based on the use of the wrong cell lines; and then there’s the all-pervading conflicts of interest in cancer research resulting in lucrative illusions rather than real science. Research reports on the deadly nature of chemotherapy are now mainstream and found in the leading journals along with recommendations to drastically decrease its use.
Truly astounding, and strangely encouraging, is the disillusionment which oncologists themselves are voicing. In Knockout, Suzanne Somers tells of one oncologist who lamented: “I dream of the day when I no longer have to poison people.” Indeed, so do we all. Maybe in the not-too-distant future, cancer patients and their doctors will stop the war on cancer and join forces, working together with the magic and mystery of biological healing.
This year, those interested will have the opportunity to hear first hand how Dr. Gonzalez is curing cancer at his clinic in New York, and how this ‘alternative’ medicine can be nurturing instead of dangerous and destructive. His workshop is a rare opportunity to interact with a cancer doctor who is fiercely devoted to helping his patients recover from this devastating disease, as well as educating the public on how to prevent it with the best nutritional medicine.
- Somers, Suzanne. Knockout – Interviews With Doctors Who Cure Cancer, Crown, 2009
- Beard, J. The Enzyme Treatment of Cancer And Its Scientific Basis, New Spring Press, 2010 (the reprint of the 1911 book introduced by Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez)
- Gonzalez, N. & Isaacs, L. both MDs, A Clinical Trial, New Spring Press, 2010 (currently at the press)
- Gonzalez, N. & Isaacs, L. both MDs, The Trophoblast and the Origins of Cancer, New Springs Press, 2009
- Gonzalez, N. MD, One Man Alone – An Investigation of Nutrition, Cancer and William Donald Kelley, New Spring Press, (1987) 2010
- Moss, Ralph W. Questioning Chemotherapy, Equinox, 2000
- Faguet, G. B. The War on Cancer – An Anatomy of Failure, Springer, 2005
- Davis, D. L. MD, The Secret History of the War on Cancer, Basic Books, 2007
- E. M. Ward et al. Research Recommendations for Selected IARC-Classified Agents, Environmental Health Perspectives, July 2010; published simultaneously in the Journal of the American Cancer Society, July 15, 2010 under the title: Knowledge gaps for 20 carcinogens outlined. The project, on which these articles are based, was begun by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH)
- The 20 “high-priority” items that the American Cancer Society calls for to be thoroughly investigated for their ability to cause cancer are: all lead compounds, indium phosphide, cobalt with tungsten carbide, titanium dioxide, welding fumes, refractory ceramic fibres, diesel exhaust, carbon black, styrene-7, 8-oxide and styrene, propylene oxide, acetaldehyde, dichloromethane and methylene chloride (DCM), trichloroethylene (TCE), tetrachlorethylene (perc, tetra, PCE), chloroform, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). This is significant because all of these are already known to medicine to be toxic to the nervous system, but their ability to cause cancer has not been as fully studied as it should.
- Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk – What We Can Do Now – the 2009 Annual Report of the U.S. President’ Cancer Panel
- This report advocates organic food, warns against the cancer-causing properties of pharmaceutical drugs especially when found in the water supply, and re-defines cancer as an environmentally triggered disease.
- On May 29, 2010, California announced, that in the light of the overwhelming evidence that fluoride is a cancer-causing agent, it would study the carcinogenic properties of fluoride as a top priority with a view to reduce its use. See: www.oehha.ca.gov/prop65/public_meetings/cicagenda051509.html
- Environmental Health published in July 2010 the evidence supporting the cancer-causing properties of cleaning products used widely in North America. This will make it difficult for the manufacturers to hide behind the “association” myth.
- New York Times, October 21, 2009 ran an article by the chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society. He stated that mammograms are not as useful as thought to be. “The advantages of screening have been exaggerated.” The PSA test for prostate cancer was discussed in the same way – as unreliable and inappropriately overused.
- The Journal of the American Medical Association also published on October 13, 2010, that a far too large number of already diagnosed cancer patients are continuing to be screened for additional cancers which does not serve any purpose at all other than routine and profits.
- The Radiology Society of America published findings that screening for breast cancer increases the risk of breast cancer incidence and called for a drastic reduction in this sort of screening in their journal Radiology, August 24, 2010. Given it is their own business these radiologists are hurting by such findings, the information appears top be more reliable than from any other source.
- The follow-up research on the largest ever study on cancer in women, the Women’s Health Initiative once again confirmed that synthetic hormone replacement therapy (HRT) increases the risk of cancer significantly in postmenopausal women. The source for this research is the Journal of the American Medical Association, volume 304 (15) pp: 1719 ff and pp. 1684 ff., both October 2010. (Bio-identical hormones do not carry this risk.)
- First opposed by Big Pharma to the best of their ability, it is now so well understood exactly how synthetic hormones (i.e. hormone replacement therapy) cause breast cancer, that attempts are under way to prevent this in any future drug design (Helke’s personal and irreverent comment: fat chance!). See Nature, September 29, 2010, on the RANKL study which established this.
- Published on April 1, 2010, in the British Medical Journal and on April 2, 2010, in the journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine it was reported that proof is in that exposure to toxic chemicals before the age of 30 increases the risk of especially breast cancer significantly. The chemicals concerned were listed and explained in detail.
- On the much hyped cancer drug Tamoxifen which supposedly reduces the recurrence of breast cancer and has been prescribed to tens of thousands of women after a first time event of breast cancer is now clearly established as causing cancer itself: Cancer Research, July 1, volume 69, 2009 issue, which is the official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research. It discusses how this drug stimulates cellular changes in the uterus and ovaries leading eventually to cancer.
- Research from the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center presented at the American Association for Cancer Research 101st Annual Meeting showed that meat – especially if overcooked, significantly increases the risk of especially bladder cancer.
- The assertion that nutritional supplements can be used therapeutically has received important mainstream support:
- 1. The role of the mineral Selenium in decreasing bladder cancer risk was published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention on September 13, 2010.
- 2. The importance of Vitamin E in preventing and treating prostate cancer was elucidated at a conference at Queensland University of Technology on October 24, 2010.
- 3. The link between increased vegetable intake and cancer prevention was reported from Boston University Medical Centre on October 13, 2010, and published in the American Journal of Epidemiology that month.
- 4. Archives of Dermatology (one of the JAMA journals) published on October 20, 2010, vol. 146, issue 10, the finding that basal cell carcinoma is essentially a vitamin D3 deficiency responsible for more than one million cases diagnosed annually. They conclude that this is preventable and screening for D3 status should be obligatory.
- The assumption underlying the pharmaceutical industry’s approach to cancer (shared by the Cancer Establishment) that one can target cancer cells and then knock out the development of cancer for good, has been challenged in favor of cancer as a systemic disease (as viewed by Gerson, Gonzalez and others interviewed in Suzanne Somer’s book Knockout) by sophisticated basic research published in the journal Chaos; the authors are from Harvard Medical School and the American Institute of Physics: M. Imielinski & C. Belta. Deep epistasis in human metabolism, Chaos – An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, vol. 20 (2), 2010.
- The American Journal of Pathology, October 14, 2010 published a very important article by Z. Xu, A. Vonlaufen et al, Role of Pancreatic Stellate Cells in Pancreatic Cancer. It overturns the current ideas of how cancer spreads through the body. It has long been known that this happens through biopsies also (read why to avoid them in the interview with Dr. Nicholas Gonzalez by Suzanne Somers in her 2009 book Knockout).
- The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism published in their October 10, 2010 issue an article showing how common treatments for prostate cancer cause bone decay in men (and don’t work very well for the cancer either).
- The journal Lancet Oncology published in June 2010 findings by I. Sipahi et al findings indicating that common blood pressure medications are cancer promoting.
- The cause of mesothelioma, the cancer caused exclusively by asbestos (see Helke Ferrie’s article of March 2009), is finally understood and the asbestos industry can no longer claim merely “association” and get away with mining this stuff. The report on this established causality was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences in June 2010: Haining Yang et al. Programmed necrosis induced by asbestos in human mesothelial cells…”
[Editor’s note: The information in this article is not meant to replace the advice of your doctor. Please consult with your personal physician before making any adjustments to your health care routine.]
Helke Ferrie is a medical science writer with a master's degree in physical anthropology. Her specialty lies in investigative research into ethical issues in medicine and the politics of health. She started her investigative journalism career in the mid-1990s, looking at issues of medicine and environment. She has been a regular contributor to Vitality Magazine ever since. Helke has also authored books on various subjects including: "Ending Denial: The Lyme Disease Epidemic", "What Part of No! Don't They Understand: Rescuing Food and Medicine from Government Abuse", and "The Earth's Gift to Medicine".