INVISIBLE ME: WHY I AM WRITING THIS BOOK
"Today is the fifth anniversary of my diagnosis with endometrial cancer. I am officially supposed to be a Cancer Survivor.
"I am undoubtedly here, or else I wouldn’t be writing this. So I have survived, and in fact am surviving very nicely, thank you. I continue to live normally and work at my chiropractic practice, having been spared anemia, mouth sores, hair loss, immune system dysfunction, cachexia—wasting and malnutrition—and all sorts of horrible things.
"However, I doubt you’ll see me in statistics anywhere.
"Why? There are two simple reasons:
"One, I have never been treated medically for this condition. Frankly, I think that’s why I’m in such good shape.
"Two, the cancer has never been staged. Therefore, in amassing statistics, they can’t say I’m a Stage 1A, or a Stage 1B, or a Stage 1C. In order to give me any one of these labels, one of two things has to happen. Either some large piece of tissue has to be removed to be examined by a pathologist, or a CT scan or other toxic test has to be administered to determine the presence or absence of pathology outside the uterus.
"I decided not to bother with those options, so you probably won’t see me cited in any research study.
"How many others are out there like me? I suspect there are many. I meet more and more of us. One of my patients is hale and hearty after being given up on by the medical profession thirteen or so years ago “with six months to live” because she didn’t believe in surgery. Another refused surgery more than thirty years ago. Both of these women, healthy and not mutilated in any way, confirmed my feeling that the conventional medical approach to treating cancer, consisting of attempting to heal the body by almost destroying it, is not only counterintuitive, but bordering on insanity.
"Since meeting these two women, I have repeatedly seen, and sometimes been in the position of attempting to remediate, the results of medical treatment of cancer in others. Attempting to remediate the [damage done by the] treatment, I have discovered, is much more difficult than attempting to remediate the cancer itself.
"They probably aren’t in the statistics either.
"To quote Mark Twain: “There are three kinds of lies: plain lies, damn lies, and statistics.”
"I’m writing this book to shed light on the particularly dangerous lie that tells us by omission that people don’t heal themselves of cancer naturally. I’m writing to shed light on those of us whose survival stories have gone untold. It is of vital importance that the world know about those of us who survive naturally, even peacefully, and even, like me, on a budget.
"I discover in my readings that quite a few people have written about their experiences with cancer... The ones who are of more interest to me have used non-allopathic treatments, and the ones who are of the most interest are the ones who have been given up for dead by the allopaths and gone on to lead healthy and happy lives by investigating other means of regaining health.
When death is the definition
"To begin with, allopathic cancer patients receive a diagnosis of a condition that, according to the definition in Dorland’s Medical Dictionary, [is] “a cellular tumor, the natural course of which is fatal.” (Dorland’s Illustrated Medical Dictionary, 27th Edition, p.261). The patients will usually, therefore, be terrified. Fear induces stress, increasing the production of cortisol, thereby reducing immune function, and a fully functioning immune system is necessary for regaining or maintaining health. So in such a circumstance, where is hope?
"They may also be told that the cause of the cancer is unknown. Where, then, is understanding?
"The next message is that the only answer is surgery, chemotherapy or radiation. All of these have to do with tearing down. Chemotherapy, in particular, destroys white blood cells and reduces immune function. Where, then, is building up? If the only answer is surgery, chemotherapy or radiation, where is the control of their lives that they need?
Allopathy is the new kid on the block
"While this Western medical approach to cancer may be conventional and orthodox, it is not traditional. Chemotherapy and radiation, as practiced today, have been in existence for less than one hundred years. Surgery has been around for centuries, and, according to Ralph Moss, Ph.D, in The Cancer Industry, “has been practiced since the dawn of history to remove malignancies.” (p.43.) In many cases, it worked, but due to the risks of infection and the brutality of surgery on conscious patients, it only “rose from quackery to respectability in the nineteenth century mainly because of two great discoveries: anesthesia and asepsis.” (p.45).
"Probably the most truly traditional method of healing cancer is herbalism. Herbs build the body up.
"Webster’s Eleventh Collegiate Dictionary defines “Therapeutic: From the Greek therapeutikos: to attend or treat; 1) of or relating to the treatment of disease or disorders by remedial agents or methods; 2) providing or assisting in a cure.” I have heard or read many examples of treatment for breast cancer, in particular, in which the initial lumpectomy is followed by chemotherapy and/or radiation. Then, when this doesn’t work, the last resort is a bone-marrow transplant. In this case , chemo or radiation cannot be considered a therapy if it has not worked, as it does not meet the definition.
"So the term “chemotherapy” is a lie. This type of treatment is conventional and orthodox... However, the fact that it is conventional and orthodox merely means that there has been some sort of consensus declaring it as truth, not that it is in fact the best or most effective means of solving the problem.
"If they are lucky, such allopathic patients may see a doctor who has the time to discuss this life-changing diagnosis compassionately with them. However, in today’s insurance- and production-driven culture, there may not be enough time to do this sensitively, and many complain that their doctors don’t listen to them. Or do the medical doctors even know how? How frequently are allopathic patients informed of all of their options, allopathic or not?
"Once allopathic cancer patients have undergone the medical treatment, they are invariably weakened. Are they then given adequate information to figure out how to rebuild what has been torn down? In many cases, no, though some cancer “treatment” centers are promoting adjunctive “alternative medicine” protocols in an attempt to deal with this issue.
"That’s fine, as far as it goes, but it doesn’t go far enough. Is it really necessary to do all this destruction in the first place? I think not. Why not? Because the emphasis is wrong. I have found, and will demonstrate, that it may not be necessary to kill the cancer, or anything else, in order to get well.
"My friend told her doctor that I was treating my cancer by non-medical means. “She’s going to die,” the doctor said. “And so are you,” my friend responded.
"Tell me, how dead do I look to you?"
“If I had had the usual hysterectomy, I would have learned nothing and added nothing to the world’s store of knowledge. I would have lost control over my own body. I had seen that happen to Doc, and I had feared it much worse than dying.
“But now I think I know the true answer. If I had simply done what I was told, I would not have been able to teach Sara or anyone else who came after or given them the chance to improve upon my attempt to heal myself, building upon my experience. The payoff has been tremendous.
“Cancer is no longer a black box. Like other biological processes, it follows rules. It is the body’s statement that something is intolerable, but like fusion in an arthritic joint, it is the worst possible choice, a default response. The body will eagerly choose another, given half a chance.”