Today in our local paper, there was an article on the front page titled, “Funding The Cancer Battle“. What’s missing in this article regarding the war on cancer? Quite a bit actually and plenty that the general public should know about.

First of all, the general public aren’t told that the cancer industry has invented it’s own definitions to make sure the public keeps giving money to a losing battle. For example, the general public are  never told that a person defined as a  “cancer survivor” can still have cancer. The cancer industry also never tells the public that the patients they define as “cancer survivors” can also be dead of the original cancer or another cancer the treatment started or be dead of other factors the treatments started.

The cancer fundraising machine has invented their own definition of  “survivor” so that the fundraising looks like it’s having a positive impact. The cancer industry’s definition of “cancer survivor” is anyone who is still alive after 5 years, after being diagnosed with cancer. That’s why there’s such a massive drive for cancer screenings because the earlier you screen people, the more survivors there appear to be using their crafty definition of “survivor”.  The screenings and the treatments are the big money makers. Being cancer free isn’t included in their definitions of “survivor”.

So you could have been diagnosed as having cancer in 2004 and still have cancer in 2009…..and still be called a cancer survivor inside their statistics. You could also be dead in 2009 but be categorized in statistics as being a cancer survivor because you were alive for 5 years plus a day after your original diagnosis. The fact that you may have died from the chemotherapy itself, died from a new cancer started by the treatments or be dead from the original cancer (that was never cured) doesn’t matter. You’re a survivor and the cancer societies will beat that drum to keep the money flowing toward a solution that has never worked.

The general public are left with the idea that survivor means cured but the puiblic are never told that what’s often understood as cured can mean “still having cancer” or “having died from cancer or the cancer treatment“.

The end result of this entire magic show is a very small number of people appearing to benefit from conventional treatments (listed as 9%) and a very large group receiving no benefit or being harmed by conventional treatment (the other 91%)……….yet 100% go through a torture unlike any other. A leading doctor in the cancer field has been quoted as saying that chemotherapy and radiation are worse than death itself.

Never forget that the 9% of people who appear to benefit could also be written off as benefiting from the placbo effect, which averages 30% across all medical studies. What that means is that there is a very large chance traditional cancer treatments benefit no one and actually do harm to everyone.

You also see the abuse of statistics in this Standard Freeholder article as well. Statistics are like prisoners…………if you torture them enough they’ll say anything you want.

The general public are also never told if the statistics are relative or absolute. What that means is that maybe 1 out of 100 patients sees a positive difference without therapy. With therapy, the number may rise to 2 out of 100 during the study. That’s only a 1% absolute difference but it’s also a 100% relative difference. Guess which numbers the cancer industry likes to use when they’re raising money? That 1 person who did see a positive difference could have quit smoking, started juicing vegetables, started exercising, quit their night shift job or started taking vitamins…………………you’re never told………..all benefits are said to be a benefit of the treatment.

The cancer industry will use relative numbers with their statistics because who wants to hear about 1 extra person out of 100 patients benefiting from therapy….a 100% improvement sounds much better.  

Plus a 1% absolute difference has never qualified as statistically significant inside the scientific community. Anything less than a 30% relative difference between two studied groups is considered statistically insignificant and a failure under classic medical testing guidelines but the general public are never told about how the drug industry tortures their statistics to make a desperate picture look fantastic.

The article in the Standard Freeholder today is loaded with these potential discrepancies and all of them are intended to help the money keep flowing toward an ideology that attacks the body in an effort to make it run better.

We also see the lack of love principle in play with how a love less society describes the situation. You see the word “battle” and the most widely used phrase is “war on cancer“. The cancer and the human are not separate so when you declare a war on cancer you declare a war on yourself……………and this is just another day at the office for a society who abuses itself at every turn. 

Always look for violent images, violent treatments and voilent language as one of the first signs a person was not loved properly as a child.  In this case, an entire society has lacked love for so long that they may not even understand the love concept that I talk about in all my posts and in all my lectures.

All this information regarding statistical abuse and definition abuse, by the cancer industry, can be found inside the amazing cancer cure documentary titled, “Healing Cancer from the Inside Out“. A great documentary that tells the truth about what cancer is and how to beat it in a loving way. (as opposed to destroying yourself in the process……as is the protocol proposed by a system that lacks love at every turn)

All the cures come from helping. loving and supporting the body. As soon as someone tells you that they’re going to try and destroy your body in an effort to make it run better……..you should tip your hat to them, wish them a good day and leave the room.