Posts Tagged ‘cancer’

After reading the latest article on the invasive nature of the new TSA “security measure, I decided to write my Congressman, Jason Chaffetz, a letter begging him to take notice of the problem. Previously he came out and wholeheartedly condemned the full-body scan at the airports. So I’m hoping that he’ll have an even stronger objection to this new “alternative” to the body scan, a physically invasive full body pat down.

I have no earthly idea why we can’t permit proven CURES for cancer in our nation, yet the FDA has no problem poisoning our body with the full-body scan x-rays and why the local authorities have no problem with a complete stranger patting down a 13 year old girl.  The worst part is that this is all done in the name of “security” and even worse, millions of Americans are actually ACCEPTING this!

In rereading the letter I wish that I had posed the question as to why this illegal search and seizure is acceptable in the first place.  Aren’t we assured freedoms from illegal search and seizure? Isn’t there a little something known as “probable cause”  that must be met prior to us being  violated in this manner?  A police officer can’t even stop me while traveling in my car without probable cause, and yet we are required to subject ourselves to sexual foreplay at the hands of a stranger, simply because we don’t want to be seen as scantily clad as the latest pin-up porn star for the TSA?

Anyway, I thought I’d share the letter I wrote Congressman Chaffetz. If he responds, I’ll share that information as well.

Dear Congressman,

First of all allow me to congratulate you on a solid win.  Considering how riled the American people were against incumbents, you have to be feeling pretty pleased right now.  I hope that you will take Senator Demint’s words to heart that he wrote in a letter to incoming freshmen. I feel it’s applicable to all politicians in Washington D.C.  Truly you and your wisdom and courage to do what’s right are prayed for in our family.

Next, I recognize that you have fought against the electronic body scan at the airports. I’m seriously concerned with the back lash that is now coming out though—the physically violating pat downs.  I’m not afraid to say Congressman, that if someone touched me that way in the line at the grocery store or movie theater, my first instinct would be to physically defend myself with whatever tools I had available.  I also know that if anyone ever touched my children in that manner they would be taken to jail so fast their head would spin. So why is this acceptable? It’s so Machiavellian! So degrading and completely ineffective in securing our nation. How about the intelligence community start paying attention to tips they get? Or how about they stop treating war criminals like royalty?  I’m certain that such actions would do a whole lot better to keep our nation secure than stripping a law-abiding person of their integrity.

The position that we are free to “opt out” of the body scan only to then be subjected to very vocal embarrassment is unacceptable. (see Opt Out of a Body Scan? Then Brace Yourself)

It’s not a choice. It’s a bullying tactic, I believe, fully intended to create more submission to the full body scan. This immoral and invasive pat down reminds me of the Pharoah’s knee-jerk reaction to the Israelites when he essentially said “You’re complaining about your work?  Then how about you make bricks with no straw! Then let’s see what you have to complain about.”  Seriously, Congressman, this has to stop!

I have to agree with the sentiment that I’ve been hearing lately that this is all just a ploy to “soften us up” to this kind of authoritarian rule.  It’s frightening to me on several different levels, not the least of which that our society has morally decayed to the point that some human being actually thought this was an acceptable solution.  Picking the lesser of two evils is still a choice for evil. Can you please, please help us with this?  I know that you would NEVER want to witness your children being patted down by adults in this manner. This knee-jerk reaction is simply empowering our real enemies as it requires us to subject ourselves to this violation of our sacred bodies all in the name of “security.”

Additional humiliation comes at the hands of those who conduct the pat down. They aren’t polite or honorable—without exception. They remind me of a drunk who’s just looking for a fight. They reek of ego and defiance.  At least the law enforcement officers are trained to be professional at all costs—even when facing a perp with a firearm aimed at them, they actually say “Sir, put down the gun.”  After the pat down one is then subjected to every single item that they’ve packed in their purse or carryon to a thorough hand check with no regard for maintaining the condition of the items—this check is in addition to the fact that the containers have already gone through an initial x-ray inspection. I’ve had several important items broken or ruined due to this type of inspection.  I’m certain that this new philosophy is hurting the airline industry—and yet it won’t be long before we hear of them begging for a bailout. Adding insult to injury is knowing that our tax dollars actually pay for brute squad to perform this intolerable treatment.  We have to subject ourselves to what amounts to the same dignity of a public strip search but we are unreasonable if we expect that our luggage and property will not be stolen, broken, or irreparably damaged. Property loss or damage has simply become “the norm” with no one accepting any accountability for the losses.  Please, Congressman, stop the insanity! Please protect us as you have vowed you would.


Kellene Bishop

Orem, UT

Read Full Post »

This is an article which I wrote that was published in Monetary Intelligence Magazine in March 2009.  It’s clear that the hype we receive on a great many “studies and statistics” from our government agencies is misleading at best.  As someone who has gone through her own cancer scare, this information makes me feel so abandoned by a country I love. 
History of Errors

cigaretteIn the December 1959 issue of American Medical Association Journal, an editorial was published that boldly stated there was insufficient evidence “to warrant the assumption” that cigarette smoking was the principal factor in the increase of lung cancer.  Who were the medical experts who authored such blatant falsehoods?  Dr. Ian MacDonald, a prominent cancer surgeon, and Dr. Henry Garland, an internationally recognized specialist in radiology.  These two individuals made national headlines with their claims.  In fact, Dr. Garland specifically stated that cigarette smoking was actually beneficial as a tranquilizer.  MacDonald even went on to note that smoking was a “harmless pastime”— even up to 24 cigarettes per day without consequence.  He even went so far as to suggest “a pack a day keeps the cancer away.”


vitamin-b17Fast forward to the mid 1960s and 1970s.  Doctors Garland and MacDonald were used by government and health agencies to again submit an “expert” opinion regarding the use of laetrile, aka Vitamin B-17, aka nitrilocides on cancer patients.  In spite of countless studies by renowned doctors, clinics, universities and specialists worldwide that showed the contrary, Garland and MacDonald claimed that no direct benefits were viable.  Neither Garland nor MacDonald ever tested or used laetrile themselves.  They merely compiled a mountain of other fraudulent or derelict research data and presented it as factual.  What’s interesting is how these two doctors, and countless other trusted professionals in the medical and research industry, have been used to sacrifice medical integrity and cover up information for the sole purpose of the monetary well-being and profit of the medical industry.  Unfortunately, that criminal practice continues today . . . particularly with cancer.


Who’s Hiding What?

world-without-cancer-g-edward-griffinEvidence is mounting that the FDA, the American Medical Association and the American Cancer Society are deliberately hindering American citizens from having access to laetrile, a natural substance which has a proven record to prevent, cure and minimize the effects of cancer.  Given that there are hundreds of thousands of cancer fatalities each year, it’s no wonder that expert author G. Edward Griffin calls this “an act of genocide” by the FDA and its other cohorts. 

Which begs the question: If there was an easily accessible nutrient that could aid the cure and prevention of cancer, why would such entities fight against its release to the general public?  Who would want to hide a cure for cancer and what motivation would they have for perpetrating such an act of horror?  My answer to such questions usually starts with “Follow the money.”  It always comes down to money.


pharmaceutical-profitA study conducted by USA Today shows that over 50 percent of all of the cowardly experts which have been hired to advise the government on the merits of laetrile and any other proposed medicines have heavily-involved financial relationships with the pharmaceutical industry.  In other words, their paychecks are affected by their research.  If their research were to uncover a non-patentable substance to cure a widespread disease, they would have to pound the pavement for a new job. 


In 1971, the FDA reported to an Ad Hoc Committee of Consultants for Review and Evaluation of Laetrile that laetrile could no longer be promoted, sold or even tested in the United States.  Why would the FDA treat a natural occurring substance of everyday fruits and vegetables with more alarm and restrictions than it would illegal drugs, poisons and unconventional medicines?  Simple: there is no financial or political benefit to endorsing it.


A patent for laetrile is unobtainable since it is a naturally occurring substance. Real money can only be made if you’ve got a medical patent.  So, instead of losing millions of dollars in lobbying monies, hundreds of thousands of jobs in research and medicine, our nation would rather force its citizens to flee to foreign shores to access the freedom of choice in treating their cancer without poisons, cutting or burning, and more importantly, by accessing a method that has a higher rate of success than any medical practice put forth now in the U.S. for the treatment of cancer.


drdean-burkIn some studies, cancer patients have had an 82 percent improvement rate.  There aren’t any other current “anti-cancer” methods that can boast such results, especially without doing harm elsewhere to the body of a cancer victim.  1972, Dr. Dean Burk, director of cytochemistry section of the federal governments National Cancer Institute, reported, “When we add Laetrile to a cancer culture under the microscope providing the enzyme glucosidase also is present, we can see the cancer cells dying off like flies.”  The combination of glucosidase and laetrile would occur in human beings 100 percent of the time, as glucosidase is found prevalently in the small intestines.  During his participation in the Seventh International Congress of Chemotherapy held in Prague in 1971, Dr. Burk also stated “Laetrile appears to work against many forms of cancer including lung cancer. And it is absolutely non-toxic.”


Laetrile is widely used in Mexico, Australia, Russia, Brazil, Belgium, Philippines, Costa Rica, England, Germany, Greece, Japan, Spain and Switzerland in treating cancer, just to name a few.  Are all of the medical and research teams of all of these countries wrong on their views of laetrile?  Each year, Mexico and Germany receive thousands of U.S. visitors for laetrile treatment.  Some patients are not only able to lead longer lives but are able to fully recover and lead healthy lives. 


hunza-apricots1Apricots are considered sacred and a show of wealth by the famous Hunza tribe in the Himalayan mountains.  The more apricot trees they own, the wealthier they are considered to be.  The most prized food in this tribe is the apricot seed.  This tribe has never had any known instance of cancer among them.  Their traditional diet contains over 200% more nitriloside than the American diet.


The Abkhazians which reside deep in the Caucasus Mountains also experience the same health profile as the Hunza.  Additionally the Hopi, Modoc and Navajo Indians have had a very low rate of cancer among them.  In fact, it’s believed by many medical experts who support the use of a diet rich in nitrilosides that such incidences of cancer are brought about as a result of the “civilization” of these tribes as they replace their diet with that more like the rest of America.  The Hopi and Navajo tribes were found to regularly ingest as much as 800 milligrams of nitriloside a day.  This phenomenon has continued to be observed in both tropic and arctic regions of the world.


Follow  the  Money

The average patient will spend between $5,000 and $25,000 for laetrile treatment and rarely need recurring treatment.  Compare this to the average cost for U.S. cancer treatment at $55,000 a year—without complications.  This does not include the costs for making the patient more comfortable at home.  These costs can run as much as an additional 35 percent with complications.  For some, cancer treatment costs are so high they can actually prevent any treatment.  Last year alone, over $219 billion was spent by patients just on medical costs of cancer treatment.  This does not include the nearly $300 billion that was raised and contributed for cancer research.  Yes, not curing cancer is a very profitable business for those involved in research and supposed preventative pharmaceuticals. 


doctor-drug-prescriptionThe money is so attractive that many researchers and doctors actually counterfeit studies and research in order to get some of the money.  Between 1977 and 1980 it was determined that 62 doctors had manipulated the research data which they had provided and pocketed the fees.  In 1973, a study created by the FDA itself showed that 1 out of 5 doctors would invent research data on the effect of new drugs and submit it for publication.


American drug companies pay doctors as much as $1,000 per patient to test and use their drugs on patients.  This compromises the medical integrity of a doctor treating a patient if they know there’s a big check waiting in their bank account when a certain drug is used.  This is in addition to the surgery and office fees charged by the doctors to treat patients.  What monetary incentives do doctors, scientists, cancer organizations and politicians have to promote the effective use of a naturally occurring substance such as laetrile?  None.  Not one penny. 


Cause and Effect

Even without big cash rewards on the line for not promoting a natural substance for the cure of cancer, is it any wonder there are misperceptions on laetrile among the medical and lay professionals?  With so much misinformation being invented by so-called experts, it’s no wonder that the majority of doctors think laetrile is downright quackery.  How could anyone relying strictly on hearsay and politically motivated grapevines think differently?


vitamin-b171Research shows that none of the experts who oppose the use of laetrile ever actually used it, researched it, or did more than read information which was dispensed by others who were also inexperienced in developing their professional conclusions.  Now there are generations of medical professionals misinformed on the use of laetrile—professionals viewing fiction as fact because the proper research was never performed by the FDA in the first place.


In the 1970’s, when a highly regarded scientist was actually used by the FDA to test laetrile, he came to the same conclusion as so many experts worldwide that laetrile was effective in the treatment of cancer.  However, this did not bode well with the financial motive of the FDA.  Instead they elected to make use of the high percentage of errors which can occur in the study and research of a medical treatment and chose to repeat laetrile testing again and again until their desired results could be founded.  Evidence of research error abounds as noted by Dr. Trelford of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology at Ohio State University Hospital notes.  Dr. Trelford states that “chemotherapy of gynecological tumors does not appear to have increased life expectancy except in sporadic cases.”


Additionally, a report by the Southern Research Institute based on research conducted for the National Cancer Institute stated that “most of the accepted drugs in the American Cancer Society’s ‘proven cure’ category produced cancer in laboratory animals that previously had been healthy!”  Ultimately the scientist’s whose studies supported the use of laetrile was labeled as a quack, and the tests were ordered to be repeated again and again while making unscientific changes in the doses administered, and convoluting the tracking of the subjects.  Additionally the FDA chose to use exercise an unprecedented high and unrealistic standards of success on the laetrile studies in order that it may be deemed ineffective.  Ultimately, the FDA got their studies to “show” that laetrile was “quackery”.

jason-valeSo, the question remains.  What are we to do?  Frankly, until the Laetrilegate Scandal is fully exposed, the FDA will continue to perpetuate their politically and economically charged agenda—an agenda that now comes with legal results for anyone trying to sell or promote laetrile.  National arm wrestling champion Jason Vale, who claimed that his kidney and pancreas were cured by eating apricot seeds—an organic of laetrile—was convicted in 2003 for, among other things, marketing laetrile.  The US Food and Drug Administration continues to seek jail sentences for vendors selling laetrile for cancer treatment, calling it a “highly toxic product that has not shown any effect on treating cancer.”  Yet laetrile can be found in common foods like almonds, apple seeds and black cherries.


radiation-chemotherapyHundreds of thousands of cancer patients who undergo surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy die every year, yet these treatments continue to be touted as “safe and effective” by the FDA and the medical and pharmaceutical industry at large.  Not a single death of a cancer patient has ever been attributed to the supervised use of laetrile.  In fact, there are numerous studies which have shown even the most advance forms of cancer have been able to enjoy more time even though they did not begin a laetrile treatment until they were on death’s door. 


Ultimately, the answer to the question “What are we to do” is up to you.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.
You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.  

Read Full Post »


I’ve recently read several studies which claim that heart disease and cancer are the number 2 causes of death in the United States.  Unfortunately both of these numbers have not earned their respective positions as the number one and number two killer in the U.S.  


The Institute of Medicine brought the travesty of the killings of American citizens to light.  In the 1999 report To Err is Human: Building a Safer Health System put the annual death toll due to hospital care 44,000 to 98,000. However, other reports including on study published by Jama put the deaths at 225,000!   Dr. Milt Hammerly MD assesses the annual body count at 204,000-301,000 killed by medical treatment each year. In other words, medical malpractice kills more American citizens each year than does heart disease or cancer. 

medical-malpractice3Based on the fact that most institutions under-report their errors, Hammerly believes his estimate may be conservative. The high end estimate, developed in a 2003 report led by long-time nutrition-activist Gary Null, PhD, concludes that the annual mortalities due to medical intervention are between 783,000 and 999,000. The report, based on compilations of published studies of others (in addition to those in the JAMA article), concludes that medical intervention is the Nation’s #1 killer.


Only half of NHS trusts fully comply with all the safety standards that they are expected to meet, and they do not always have effective systems in place to understand risk, properly report incidents or learn from them, the commission said.

Do you wonder why these deadly incidences aren’t improved?  It comes down to good old fashioned ego. 


Undoubtedly the healthcare industry hasn’t been able to respond as swiftly to this problem as the airline industry did when it was confronted with serious problems two decades ago. The reason is a common scenario in which a pharmacist, or a nurse, notices something problematic in a patient’s chart or prescription history. When one suggests a change, “the doctor gets huffy, indignant that the nurse or pharmacist is moving into his authority area.”


In 2003, approximately $40 billion was spent on homeland security to prevent another terrorist attack like 9/11. If even a fraction of this effort had been spent on reducing preventable medical errors in hospitals the outcome would be monumental. The reality is that there has been no national collective will to change the deadly statistics. According to the follow-up 2005 IOM report, there has been little change in reducing preventable hospital tragedies since the 1999 IOM report.  Why isn’t more done by oversight organizations to alter this deadly path?  Money and denial. 


Given the state of the economy at present, no doubt if hospitals were required to implement certain safety and management procedures additional costs would be involved.  This would undoubtedly lead to the healthcare industry requesting their own bail out money.  Yes, once again we have a situation of “we’ve screwed up, so can you pay us to undo our mess?”  On the other hand there is a sizeable force of experts who continually claim that such a problem is not significant enough to require sweeping changes to the industry.  Apparently they deem the number of deaths in ratio to the number of patients treated as a tolerable status. 


medical-malpractice-gunFunny.  You hear of one single solitary death as the result of someone misusing a gun and all of the 2nd Amendment Haters start opening their mouths and their pocket books to fight against Americans using firearms to protect themselves. (There are a total of 1500 accidental gun related deaths each year)  And yet these same haters would leave us helpless and subject to the evident lack of expertise and integrity in the medical industry. In the meantime, malpractice insurance rates go up, so medical care costs go up in an effort offset the costs, and our insurance costs go up to prohibitively large premiums.  And yet so much could be avoided if more professionals focused on mastering their chosen craft.


You have the right to protect yourself from all harm.  If any medical advice to you doesn’t sound right, clear, or logical then ask for clarification or second opinions.  Just because the doctor only planned on spending two minutes with you doesn’t mean that’s all you’re entitled to.

Copyright 2009 Kellene Bishop. All rights reserved.
You are welcome to repost this information so long as it is credited to Kellene Bishop.  

Read Full Post »