Where Steve Jobs went wrong-a second look

What I Would Have Told Steve Jobs if I'd had the Chance Last September in Issue #113 I wrote about the tragic loss of Steve Jobs to pancreatic cancer. For the benefit of those who don't know, Steve Jobs was a brilliant business leader whose products revolutionized our daily lives. Just after that article, more information became available about what treatments Jobs had chosen. It turns out Jobs elected to try alternative instead of conventional treatments when he first learned he had cancer. But what alternative treatments did he try? And did he make the right decisions? Keep reading and see for yourself. . . Continued below. . . A U.S. President refused America's outdated cancer treatments — Here's where he went instead Americans would be shocked if they knew that President Reagan, while still in the White House, turned his back on American cancer treatments. He secretly sneaked off to a German clinic — and lived another 19 years. Why? Because German cancer doctors are better — thanks to breakthrough treatments that are labeled "quackery" in the U.S. (maybe because they cost a fraction of American treatments, so there's not much profit for the cancer industry). Suzanne Somers, Cher, William Holden and Anthony Quinn are among the celebrities who have gone to clinics you'll discover in the first guide to German cancer doctors and treatments ever published in English. Click here to learn more! Take a nap and wake up free of cancer Germany's top cancer doctors literally cook cancer out of your body while you nap, and you wake up pain-free! This high-tech breakthrough is banned in America, but German doctors have used it successfully on thousands of patients from all over the world — including patients American doctors gave up on. America's cancer industry ignores the latest science and goes on pushing failed therapies that cost ten times as much. It's a fact: the hellish cancer treatments Americans take for granted are now obsolete (and that's being generous — they were never any good.) Click here and see for yourself in our guide to German cancer clinics. Details about his cancer came out in Steve Jobs, a biography written by a respected author, Walter Isaacson, who enjoyed Jobs's full (or nearly full) cooperation. Isaacson not only interviewed Jobs for hours on end over a period of years, but he also interviewed just about everyone Jobs ever knew who was still alive to tell the tale. Plus he had a generous helping of "hanging out time" with Jobs and his family. Naturally the book's revelations led the press to crow that "alternative cancer treatments don't work" and Jobs was killed by quackery. A number of concerned readers wrote me to ask what I think. So let's take a look. It's a fascinating story filled with lessons for anyone who's diagnosed with cancer. As you'll see, the truth is a surprise — and very different from what the press reported AND what I thought when I first wrote about Jobs in September. Actually, very few of the book's 571 pages deal with the treatments Jobs selected. We still don't have a complete picture. But there's plenty to talk about. Vegetarianism gone haywire The biography describes Jobs as a follower of "fad diets" beginning in his early teens. His interest was in spiritual growth; he didn't have a weight problem. He was interested in Eastern religions. Generally, not eating meat is part of the program. He became a "vegan," but he was unlike any vegan or vegetarian you've ever met. For the record, a vegan is someone who goes beyond avoiding meat and abstains from all animal products including milk, eggs and honey. Many alternative cancer experts recommend that patients avoid animal protein and eat a diet rich in raw fruits and vegetables, so you can see how Jobs's lifestyle is an easy target for critics. "See, he never touched meat in his life and he died of cancer." But calling him a vegan isn't even half the story. It would be more accurate to say he had an eating disorder similar to anorexia and bulimia. As long as he was healthy, people thought this disorder was charming and eccentric -- and Jobs was nothing if not eccentric. But once he had cancer, his family realized there was nothing cute about his weird eating habits. They were killing him. No cancer expert says vegetarianism all by itself is enough to cure or prevent cancer. But put that aside and look at how Jobs actually ate. According to the biography, "When he was young, he learned that he could induce euphoria and ecstasy by fasting." He would do so often. As an adult, "He would spend weeks eating the same thing — carrot salad with lemon, or just apples — and then suddenly spurn that food and declare that he had stopped eating it." This isn't a healthy way to eat. No responsible expert would recommend living on nothing but apples for weeks at a time. You can't obtain a full range of nutrients that way. The book doesn't describe how Jobs got the protein he needed — or even if he understood this issue and knew he had to do something about it. Did drug use contribute to an eating disorder? At the same time he was discovering he could get high by fasting, he often used LSD, a drug that induces a temporary psychosis, including hallucinations. The use of the drug can result in lifelong mental illness. Some unlucky souls lose their minds the first time they use it. The drug often induces the belief that the universe is entirely a product of one's own mind — or at any rate, that it's a purely mental phenomenon that can be manipulated by thought. The late John Lennon, like Steve Jobs, was a frequent LSD user and came to hold beliefs of this sort. Throughout the book, Isaacson describes Jobs again and again as having a "reality distortion field" that led him to believe he could change the world just by thinking or willing it to change. Because he was a genius with a powerful will, this belief actually did empower Jobs to change the world. But I don't recommend it as a general way of looking at things. This is pure speculation on my part, but the combination of fasting, mind-altering drugs and powerful religious forces may have created Jobs's eating disorder. Once he had cancer, Jobs's strange attitude toward food became a galloping crisis. Cancer causes weight loss — called cachexia — a "wasting away" syndrome in which the patient becomes thinner and thinner even if he or she tries to eat. Jobs's insanely picky eating habits became fatal once he had late-stage cancer. His family could hardly get him to eat anything at all. His wife hired a gourmet chef to come in every day to prepare a whole array of vegan dishes in hopes that Jobs would nibble at just one. From what Isaacson says, quite often this didn't work. On one occasion Jobs turned down every dish but said he might like some pumpkin pie. The chef whipped up a pumpkin pie for him as fast as the thing could be done. Jobs ate one bite. I would suggest that this is not a "failure of alternative cancer treatments," but let's move on. The main lessons we can learn from Steve Jobs are still to come. A cruel irony: He should have chosen the conventional treatment Jobs was first diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in October 2003. Pancreatic cancer is almost always fatal — and quick. But Jobs was granted an incredible stroke of luck, or two, really: they caught his cancer early, and it was a rare type of pancreatic cancer that's treatable. It's called an islet cell neuroendocrine tumor. The pancreas is a vital organ and you can't live without it, nor can you receive a transplant. But a small islet cell neuroendocrine tumor CAN be removed surgically, leaving enough of the pancreas to keep the patient alive. It's said that about half of such patients will survive more than five years. This is where it gets interesting and holds a lesson for everyone. In my opinion, Jobs should have chosen the surgery — THEN turned down chemo and tried alternative treatments. Let's try to learn from this. There's a world of difference between early-stage and late-stage cancer. In late-stage cancer, the disease has spread to several sites in the body. Conventional treatments — chemotherapy, surgery, radiation — are nearly useless for late-stage cancer. The five-year survival rates are around 2 percent — two out of every 100 late-stage patients can expect to survive more than five years. The rate is higher for some types of cancer, lower for others. Conventional treatments are said to "buy time" for late-stage patients. It's a doubtful claim, although everything depends on the individual case. Some studies show that the average late-stage patient who rejects chemotherapy outlives the average patient who accepts chemo. Early stage cancer is another thing completely. Early stage cancer is confined to the organ or other site where it started. The patient's chances are much better. And — I've said this before — in some cases conventional treatments are successful for early stage cancer. Whether they succeed depends partly on the type of cancer, partly on the strength of the patient (especially the immune system), and partly on just plain luck. Surprise: Early-stage cancer poses a tougher choice In my opinion, early-stage cancer patients have a tougher decision. Should they stick to alternative treatments or just go with what the conventional doctor says? In some cases, you've got a chance with conventional treatment (I'd do a lot of research on my type of cancer, and get a second opinion. And a third. And maybe a fourth.) Late-stage patients face a world of woe, but at least they don't have to make this agonizing roll of the dice. The conventional treatments don't work. With very few exceptions, a patient should choose alternatives. No, they don't work for everyone, but we've interviewed plenty of patients who used them — and lived a long time. Early-stage prostate cancer is an example where I don't totally discount conventional treatments. I'd still try alternatives first, because prostate cancer is usually slow-growing and you've got some time to try things . Alternatives have a good record with prostate cancer. But if the alternatives didn't work after a few months to a year, I'd go for surgery. Have the thing cut out. Because some prostate cancers are aggressive, you need to monitor constantly to see whether yours is growing or declining. Aggressive prostate cancer (about one case in ten) is extremely dangerous. Jobs had a type of cancer where conventional treatment — surgery, in this case — was a reasonable choice. It's easy to say with what we know now, but he should have chosen surgery. This was exactly the quandary I mentioned a moment ago: an early stage cancer where the conventional treatment has a pretty good track record. I suspect his doctors would have wanted to follow the surgery with chemotherapy. At that point, I like to think I would have said "no," and tried alternatives instead. What Jobs did instead of surgery After rejecting surgery, Jobs followed a strict vegan diet with large quantities of fresh carrot and fruit juice (the man did have faith in carrots). According to Isaacson he also tried "acupuncture, a variety of herbal remedies, and occasionally a few other treatments found on the Internet or by consulting people around the country, including a psychic. For a while he was under the sway of a doctor who operated a natural healing clinic in southern California that stressed the use of organic herbs, juice fasts, frequent bowel cleansings, hydrotherapy and the expression of negative feelings." As you can probably tell from the tone, Jobs's biographer is dismissive of all this. So were Jobs's wife and friends. They strongly urged conventional treatments. The quote in the previous paragraph is all the biographer provides so we really can't say anything about what remedies Jobs used or what healers he went to. Some of it seems sound — the bowel cleansings, for example. Acupuncture might be useful for pain relief and general well-being. I would never, ever recommend it to someone as a principal cancer therapy. I say this having gone to acupuncturists regularly for about 30 years. It has its benefits, but it's not something that's going to cure a serious medical condition. The cancer gets out of control After about nine months of this vaguely described alternative plan, a CAT scan showed that Jobs's pancreatic tumor had grown and possibly spread. He had to admit his alternatives — whatever they were — had not worked. He agreed to have the surgery. But during the surgery three tumors were found on the liver. In other words, Jobs had late-stage cancer. The book never mentions pancreatic cancer again, so I infer the operation was a success as far as that goes. From this point it sounds like the liver was the main problem. Once he'd made the decision to accept conventional treatments, it sounds like Jobs went with them all the way. He underwent chemotherapy following the surgery. Being a man of wealth, he could afford the best, and he was one of the first twenty people in the world to have all of his cancer tumor as well as his normal DNA sequenced, at a cost of more than $100,000. The DNA sequencing allowed his medical team to match his specific type of cancer cell with the specific drugs that were most likely to kill it. This is called molecular targeted chemotherapy. Some alternative doctors practice a much less expensive version of targeting. The strategy may have bought Jobs time. He lived for about seven years following his July, 2004 pancreas surgery. He tried other experimental therapies. He flew to Basel, Switzerland to try an experimental hormone delivered radiotherapy. In the Netherlands he underwent an experimental treatment called peptide receptor radionuclide therapy. In early 2008, it became clear his cancer was spreading. After having been able to eat normally (for him, anyway) he was again finding it hard to eat. He was taking morphine for pain, and this drug reduces the appetite, adding further to the wasting disease that was devouring his body. The loss of part of his pancreas — the source of digestive enzymes -- made it harder to digest foods. In January, 2009 it was decided he needed a liver transplant. He got on the waiting list in two states — which is legal, if you meet certain conditions. In contrast to what some reporters implied, this wasn't just a case of a rich man working the system. Without a transplant, Jobs was expected to die in April, but a liver came through just in time, in late March. The liver transplant bought him about a year-and-a-half. A deadly tradeoff was that his immune system was suppressed by the drugs he had to take to keep his body from rejecting the new liver. I think long-term remission would have been next to impossible at this point. He devoted much of this precious extra time to doing the work he loved: overseeing the design of revolutionary and innovative products. Gradually, his health declined and he all but faded away. It's a familiar story if you know anything about cancer, and I don't think we can learn a great deal from the details. One interesting fact is that during the periods when he was in remission, Jobs could feel the cancer coming back months before his doctors could detect anything. He would tell them he was experiencing pain and losing appetite while their tests could find nothing. Another thing worth noting is that Jobs attributed the start of his cancer to a period of extreme stress in his life — 1997 -- when he was the CEO of two major corporations. He would arrive home at night so exhausted he couldn't speak. It's well known that stress and fatigue compromise the immune system. And many cancer therapists are firm believers that most cancer cases are triggered by a stressful event such as the death of a loved one or a divorce. The tragic irony is that when he had early-stage cancer, he rejected conventional treatments at just the point when they might have helped. And when he had late-stage cancer, he chose only conventional treatments, when they were worth little or nothing. You could say he got it exactly wrong. Even at that, the expensive conventional treatments bought him quite a bit of time. The last comment I'll make, before stepping down from the pulpit, is that no treatment — conventional or alternative — comes with a 100% guarantee. Surgery for Jobs's type of early-stage pancreatic cancer has a 50% success rate, so they say — meaning there's a 50/50 chance he would have died even if he'd made the "smart" move and elected surgery before the cancer spread. We live in a tragic world, full of hard choices. That's the reality. At least for myself, I don't worry about it too much because I don't think this is our true home. People who don't have faith have to deal with it as best they can. Jobs had faith of a sort — I respect Buddhism and Hinduism — and it did sustain him in his remarkable life. We should all hope to accomplish a tenth of what he did! One of the remedies Steve Jobs probably should have tried is laetrile, also known as amygdalin. Our last issue published some important new information about this treatment. If you missed it, scroll down and read it now. Laetrile: How Much Proof Do They Need? When I first got involved in alternative cancer treatments back in 2005, someone mentioned Laetrile. My reaction was, "You've got to be kidding. That was discredited back in the 1970s." I didn't say this as a fan of conventional medicine. No way. I'd been devoted to alternative medicine for decades and I knew a great deal about it. But I'd read somewhere or other that it had been "proven" Laetrile doesn't work. No one ever talked about it in the alternative health newsletters I read. So how did we all get fooled? Keep reading. . . Continued below. . . The secret to curing cancer: You've been throwing it in the trash! In 1921, a British doctor discovered that members of a remote native tribe were almost totally cancer-free. But when members of this tribe move away from their native land and change their diet, they get cancer just like anyone else. It's all thanks to a food most of us throw away as waste — a food that's rich in amygdalin — what most of us call Laetrile. Click here now and watch a video presentation about this cancer breakthrough. One cancer expert calls this overlooked food "the key to curing AND preventing cancer" — and you can benefit now — without going to a doctor or buying expensive supplements. This little throwaway food tastes great. Bill Clinton, of all people, eats a certain amygdalin-rich food all the time, and so can you. Click here now to watch the video! I mention this story to show just what a thorough job Big Medicine does at brainwashing the public. Well-informed people — people who have a whole cabinet full of supplements — ridicule or fear a great many alternative treatments. Not just cancer treatments, but alternative answers to all kinds of health conditions. The suppression of Laetrile has been a category five health disaster that's cost hundreds of thousands of lives — probably millions of lives. If you want to learn the truth about this valuable therapy, I suggest you get your hands on a book called Laetrile Case Histories: The Richardson Cancer Clinic Experience, by John A. Richardson, M.D. and Patricia Irving Griffin, R.N., B.S. Dr. Richardson, now deceased, was one of the Laetrile pioneers in the 1970s and paid a terrible price. He had to stand three expensive trials in California courts. All three cases against him were dismissed. Then he had to go through a longer and even more expensive trial in Federal Court in San Diego, where he was convicted of "conspiring to smuggle Laetrile" and was fined $30,000 (equal to more than $100,000 today). In due course his license to practice medicine was taken away. Notice he wasn't convicted of smuggling. He was convicted of "conspiring to smuggle" — the sure sign of a lame case. If they can't convict you of a crime they convict you of thinking about a crime. His book was written in 1975 and describes in detail 62 cases of successful recovery from cancer with the help of Laetrile. I mention it now because the book was updated in 2005, with some shocking new evidence. You see, the authors tried to locate as many of the original 62 cancer patients as they could, to see if their recoveries were long-term or just a fluke. They were able find data on 33 of these old cases from the early 1970s, and most of those people lived for years after Laetrile helped clear up their cancer. They were long-term cancer survivors and then some. I heard one of the book's authors, Patricia Griffin, speak at a cancer conference recently. She told the audience she takes Laetrile-rich apricot kernels every morning — and also Laetrile tablets — to prevent cancer. The REAL people and REAL results mainstream medicine hoped you'd never uncover! Dr. Richardson , M.D. was a general practitioner in San Francisco when an office assistant sparked his interest in Laetrile as a cancer cure. After reading the available resources on the subject, he became convinced that Laetrile—along with certain enzymes and a diet free of animal proteins—could form part of a "natural barrier against the growth of cancer." Notice that he wasn't saying Laetrile is a magic bullet all by itself. He combined it with other therapies. In Laetrile Case Histories, Dr. Richardson explains that in 1971 he began treating patients with the regimen that he called "metabolic therapy." Here are a few of the 62 case histories in his book. . . Bone cancer banished— in November 1973, doctors said a six-year-old boy with cancer of the right upper arm bone and spinal column had no more than six to nine months to live. Within a month of starting metabolic therapy with Laetrile, he was able to use his arm and remove the sling. During a checkup in January 1977, Richardson reported "the arm looked so good the radiologist could not believe the child ever had osteosarcoma." The mother confirmed in 2005 that her child had remained symptom free for 32 years! Cervical cancer clobbered—a doctor recommended a hysterectomy to a 49-year-old Iowa woman whose Pap smear revealed cervical cancer cells. She opted to ride a bus to California for metabolic therapy in July 1973. After only nine days of treatment—she received cancer-free Pap smear results! As of last contact in June 2005, the woman was still alive and well. Chronic leukemia cast out—a 53-year-old male diagnosed with lymphocytic leukemia started metabolic therapy instead of following doctors' recommendation to watch its progression for six months. Within a week he reported greater energy and more restful sleep. After a year he remained symptom free and a follow-up revealed that he lived for 29 years after the treatment! Prostate cancer pulverized—a 61-year-old man was diagnosed with inoperable prostate cancer in October 1973. After beginning Laetrile treatments the same month, he noted health improvements within 10 days! Despite being told he had little time remaining—the patient remained symptom free and lived an additional 13 years! You might think these success stories would motivate medical practitioners to take a second look at Dr. Richardson's Laetrile cases. But the reality was altogether different… Authorities raided Richardson's office and arrested him in June 1972 for violating California's Cancer Law. His conviction in the first trial was overturned on a technicality. And two subsequent trials resulted in hung juries. The legal establishment failed to stop Richardson's activities, but the medical community didn't stop harassing him. The California Board of Medical Quality Assurance revoked Richardson's California medical license in 1976. Dr. Richardson subsequently worked in a Mexican clinic and as a homeopathic practitioner in Nevada until his health deteriorated and he passed away in 1988. You need to know more about this treatment Here at Cancer Defeated, we've interviewed many, many doctors and patients who have benefited from Laetrile. The most powerful way to receive the treatments is by IV, and the easiest place to do that is at the top Mexican clinics we recommend in our Special Report Adios, Cancer. It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to get IV Laetrile therapy in the United States. But if you can't go to Mexico, you can benefit from eating foods that are rich in Laetrile, such as apricot kernels. I've seen cures reported just from eating the foods. But let me add that if you're really serious about getting well, you won't rely exclusively on Laetrile — either taken by mouth or by IV — but will use it in conjunction with other treatments and lifestyle changes. Adios, Cancer explains how to safely and legally obtain Laetrile-rich foods. My friend Ty Bollinger, author of Cancer — Step Outside the Box, is another great advocate of Laetrile. You can learn more about his book by clicking here. You may hear laetrile referred to as vitamin B17 or "amygdalin," which comes from the Greek word for almond. This name is appropriate considering that amygdalin is extracted from almonds or the pits of apricots and peaches. Laetrile is the trade name for a compound chemically related to amygdalin. In the early 1950s, Dr. Ernst Krebs, Sr. , M.D. and his son Ernst Jr. first used amygdalin to treat cancer patients. The work of the Krebs family was the main inspiration for Dr. Richardson's work. Dr. Krebs theorized that cancer cells contain an enzyme that causes amygdalin to release cyanide. The cyanide destroys the cancer cells while leaving noncancerous tissues unharmed. Healthy cells don't contain the enzyme that stimulates amygdalin to break down into cyanide and other substances; that's why healthy cells remain unharmed. According to people who have studied amygdalin, it releases the killing cyanide only when cancer cells are present. Dr. Krebs said that, in fact, healthy cells are protected by another enzyme which renders the cyanide harmless. From the 1950s through the 1970s, Laetrile became a popular alternative cancer treatment in the United States. It took ferocious attacks against practitioners like Dr. Richardson, plus an aggressive campaign of false information, to lead most people to think Laetrile is a quack remedy. Amygdalin is a naturally occurring substance that cannot be patented—which makes it a prime target for the wrath of "Big Pharma!" The big drug companies invariably try to ban cancer cures that aren't patentable and profitable. Deny, discredit and destroy In the book Alternatives in Cancer Therapy, authors Rose Pelton, R. Ph. and Lee Overholser, Ph.D. call Laetrile an "orphan drug" because it gets no love or support from the pharmaceutical industry. Pelton and Overholser said "no drug company is interested in committing money to research Laetrile's potential." But these advocates aren't willing to tuck their tail between their legs and move on… Instead, they say orthodox medicine has instituted a full-fledged campaign to: Downplay case histories of patients who've benefited from Laetrile treatments Exaggerate reports of side effects and toxicity Ruin the reputation of doctors who successfully treated patients with Laetrile Strong-arm government officials to ensure Laetrile does not receive exemption from the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) On the issue of toxicity, Pelton and Overholser said some Laetrile users reported symptoms of weakness, dizziness, nausea, and vomiting. They said these symptoms may be related to a person's inability to eliminate toxins resulting from tumor breakdown. It may also be the result of patients just plain eating too much of the Laetrile-rich foods (usually apricot kernels) and getting sick to their stomachs. The solution is simple: If the foods are making you sick, cut back. Pelton and Overholser admit there have been credible reports of muscular weakness and respiratory difficulties among Laetrile users. They believe those side effects typically result from patients taking excessively high doses without a doctor's supervision. And in some cases, children who accidentally took Laetrile tablets did experience cyanide poisoning. But the authors said these incidents cannot be compared to the results of those whose medicine is administered under the watchful care of a medical practitioner. From what we've been able to learn, it's extremely unlikely the side effects are the result of cyanide poisoning, as Laetrile's enemies would have you believe. Thousands of people have been safely and successfully treated with Laetrile — including intravenous Laetrile — without side effects. If Laetrile was a significant source of cyanide, I'm pretty confident that EVERYONE who's ever taken it by IV would be dead PDQ. Pelton and Overholser said "cyanide poisoning does not appear to be a major problem in laetrile therapy." As with other medical treatments, it should be administered with proper supervision. The Laetrile crusade continues! Richardson was no lone crusader for Laetrile. Pelton and Overholser said "some alternative cancer clinics use laetrile regularly and claim to have a steady stream of patients who respond well." And Laetrile has had other noteworthy supporters… Harold W. Manner, Ph.D., chairman of the biology department at Loyola University in Chicago, found that laetrile combined with vitamin A and pancreatic enzymes produced a very high cure rate of breast cancers. And National Cancer Institute (NCI) biochemist Dr. Dean Burke, Ph.D. performed an experiment that used Laetrile to kill a tissue culture of cancer cells. Dr. Burke was convinced that Laetrile could be an effective cancer cure, a pain reliever for terminal cancer victims, and even useful for preventing cancer1. You won't be surprised to learn the FDA has not approved Laetrile as a treatment for cancer in the United States. And the National Cancer Institute maintains its stance that Laetrile "has shown little anticancer effect in laboratory studies, animal studies, or human studies."2 Dr. Richardson pointed to a definition of appropriate therapy response, provided by the California Cancer Advisory Council, as an example of what shapes such conclusions. The definition essentially states that only a decrease in tumor size is an acceptable measure of the anti-tumor effect of a substance. Dr. Richardson believed that other criteria besides tumor shrinkage should be considered when evaluating a cancer remedy. Positive results can include pain relief, increased appetite, weight gain, and a patient's ability to be more active. Patients on Laetrile often experience these other results. For example, it's very common for such patients to report pain relief. Dr. Richardson drew a distinction between tumor shrinkage and these other effects. As long as a tumor isn't growing, it may be nothing more than a nuisance. In fact, tumor shrinkage may be a poor measure of a treatment's success or failure. Many substances shrink tumors. The shrinkage is often temporary. As we've often said in our publications, cancer is a systemic disease — it's a disease of the entire body. Treating a local problem such as a tumor is just one part of successful recovery. Richardson took a dim view of mainstream medicine's obsession with tumor shrinkage. His opinion on this matter is a fitting way to end this article. He said, in part: "As long as this sophomoric attitude is accepted by orthodox medicine, and especially as long as it is forced on the rest of us by the effect of law, tens of thousands of people will continue to die needlessly every single day, and all the million-dollar grants and all the research in the world will fail to stop it." Kindest regards, Lee Euler, Publisher Footnotes from second article: 1Wilson, B. 2004. The Rise and Fall of Laetrile. Retrieved from http://www.whale.to/cancer/quackwatch_laetrile.html 2National Cancer Institute. 2010. Laetrile factsheet. Retrieved from http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient If you’d like to comment, write me at newsletter(at)cancerdefeated.com.  Please do not write asking for personal advice about your health. I’m prohibited by law from assisting you. Editor in Chief: Lee Euler Contributing Editors: Mindy Tyson McHorse, Carol Parks, Roz Roscoe Marketing: Shane Holley Information Technology Advisor: Michelle Mato Webmaster: Steve MacLellan Fulfillment & Customer Service: Joe Ackerson and Cami Lemr Health Disclaimer: The information provided above is not intended as personal medical advice or instructions. You should not take any action affecting your health without consulting a qualified health professional. The authors and publishers of the information above are not doctors or health-caregivers. The authors and publishers believe the information to be accurate but its accuracy cannot be guaranteed. There is some risk associated with ANY cancer treatment, and the reader should not act on the information above unless he or she is willing to assume the full risk. We're an online cancer bookstore offering Outsmart Your Cancer, Cancer Step Outside the Box, Stop Cancer Before It Starts, Natural Cancer Remedies that Work, Adios-Cancer, Cancer Breakthrough USA, Missing Ingredient For Good Health, German Cancer Breakthrough, How to Cure Almost Any Cancer for $5.15 a Day and Keep Your Gallbladder!

NCAA Basketball: Bowie State Vs. St. Augustine's Recap

NO. 12 BOWIE STATE PREVAILS 75-71 OVER SAINT AUGUSTINE’S                 (RALEIGH, N.C. – January 14, 2012) Saint Augustine’s College made it very interesting down the stretch, but 12th ranked Bowie State University prevails 75-71.  The victory snapped a two-game Bulldogs losing streak and set the BSU record at 10-3 (2-2 CIAA).             A very hungry Bulldogs basketball team jumped on Saint Augustine’s from the opening tip.  Bowie State erupted for a 20-10 advantage by the 12:26 mark only to have the Falcons charge back.  A thunderous dunk by Jon Kindred cut the Bowie State led down to two at 29-27 at the 4:55 mark of the first half.             Bowie State may have been able to lead by more than 38-32 at halftime, but personal fouls hampered the Bulldogs.  Senior Darren Clark picked up three fouls in the first period while senior Travis Hyman, junior Byron Westmorland and senior Ali Djim were called for two fouls each.             Clark was whistled for his fourth foul with just under 11 minutes left in the game, sending the Bulldogs floor leader to the bench.             Back-to-back field goals by senior Jay Gavin followed by back-to-back free throws by Westmorland gave Bowie State a 12 point cushion (63-51).  The Bulldogs defense put the clamps on Saint Augustine’s between 8:16 and 5:30, only allowing a pair of free throws by Tyron Laughinhouse and a field goal by Chris Johnson.             However, just like the first half, Saint Augustine’s wouldn’t go away quietly, storming back to pull within one at 69-68 with 41 seconds left in the game courtesy of a Chris Rhodes trifecta.             Gavin drilled a jumper on BSU’s next possession to give Bowie State a little breathing room at 71-68, forcing Saint Augustine’s to call a timeout.  Clark stole the ball from SAC’s Rhodes, scored a layup and was fouled on the play by Tyquon Stroman.  Clark completed the 3-point play only to have Rhodes race down court to drain his third 3-point field goal of the game which made the score 74-71 Bulldogs with five ticks left on the clock. Gavin was fouled on the in-bounds play, strolled to the other end of Emery Gymnasium and sank a free throw to close the game out. Saint Augustine’s (8-6 / 3-1 CIAA) was led by Stroman’s 12 points and Rhodes added 11 points for the Falcons.  Saint Augustine’s outrebounded the taller Bulldogs 42-37 including 16-5 in offensive rebounds.  But the Falcons had trouble shooting over the Bulldogs, who have eight players 6-foot-7 or taller on their roster. The Falcons, who have two players over 6-7 on their roster, shot 32 percent but scored 29 points off 20 Bulldog turnovers. Gavin scored 17 points and Clark added 16 points and three steals for the Bulldogs, who shot 50 percent for the game. Junior Bryan Wilson finished with 14 points and Westmoreland scored 11 points for the Bulldogs, who outscored the Falcons 32-16 in the paint. Bowie State will take a day off before returning to the hardwood, at home, hosting the Blue Bears of Livingstone College on Monday (January 16th) at 7:30 pm. SAINT AUGUSTINE’S HOLDS OFF LADY BULLDOGS 72-60                 (RALEIGH, N.C. – January 14, 2012)  Bowie State University played with tremendous determination, but the Saint Augustine’s College Lady Falcons were just too strong down the stretch, beating the Lady Bulldogs 72-60.  The win improves the Saint Augustine’s record to 9-5 overall / 4-0 in the CIAA.             Bowie State (1-11 / 1-4 CIAA) was led by junior Cortney Baynard with a career-high 16 points.  Senior Juliette Turner finished the afternoon with 14 points and eight rebounds and fellow senior Kimberly Jones added a dozen points and seven rebounds for the Lady Bulldogs.             The Lady Falcons bolted out to an early 6-0 lead and extended that lead to a first period high of 14 points (25-11).  With Saint Augustine’s leading 28-14 with 6:59 remaining in the first half, the Lady Bulldogs went on a 9-1 run over the next minute and a half to close the gap to 29-23 after a pair of free throws by junior Jasmine Jacobs.             Bowie State knocked down 17-of-22 free throws over the first 20 minutes, but went into intermission trailing 39-31.  BSU hit 7-of-23 (30 percent) first half field goals.             Saint Augustine’s Keyona Bryant led the first half charge with 16 points on 8-of-13 shooting from the field.  The Lady Falcons made 16-of-31 (52 percent) first half field goals.             Bowie State narrowed the gap to 41-37 early in the second half following a triple by Jacobs and a conventional 3-point play by Turner.             The Lady Falcons pushed the lead back to double-digits (50-40), but the Lady Bulldogs responded with a 7-0 spurt, forcing Saint Augustine’s to burn a timeout.             What ever the SAC coaching staff said during the time-out, Keianna Evans put the team on her back at that point, scoring eight straight points.             The only Bowie State basket wedged between Evans’ outbursts was a layup by freshman Alisha Burley.             Bryant paced Saint Augustine’s with a game-high double-double of 17 points and 12 rebounds.  Williams and Evans chipped in 15 and 12 points respectively and combined for 10 rebounds.  Speaking of rebounds, Saint Augustine’s controlled the backboards, holding a 55-32 advantage on the glass.             Baynard drilled a 3-pointer and Turner followed that up with drive to the hoop for two more, trimming the Lady Bulldogs deficit to 58-52.  However, the Saint Augustine’s duo of Jolisa Williams and Evans countered with an identical five point swing to give the Lady Falcons another double-digit advantage.             A bucket by BSU’s Jones with 1:49 left to play put the score at 66-57, but the Lady Bulldogs would get no closer.             Bowie State returns home for the first time in 11 days to host the Lady Bears of Livingstone College – Monday, January 16th at 5:30 pm.

Bowie State U Hoops. Vs Shaw Recap

SHAW BEARS TOP #12 BOWIE STATE BULLDOGS 83-73 (RALEIGH, N.C. – January 12, 2012)  For the second game in a row, nationally ranked Bowie State University came up short, this time dropping an 83-73 decision at Shaw University.  Entering the game ranked #12 in the NABC Poll, the Bulldogs setback puts the Bowie State record at 9-3 overall (1-2 CIAA). “Tonight we played a true CIAA Championship contender and NCAA Tournament participant who are very good in (C.C. Spaulding) in that building … this was a great atmosphere”, said a relatively satisfied Bowie State head coach Darrell Brooks.  “Shaw had a few more key moments than we did and turnovers (17) hurt us.” The Bears struggled out of the gate and trailed by as much as 11 points, but found an up-tempo rhythm in the second half.  Shaw, the league’s leader in shooting percentage, sank only 39 percent of their shots, but roared back in the final period, hitting 53 percent.  They finished the night 30-of-65 (46 percent).  In contrast, the Bulldogs hit over 40 percent each half, finishing the game 25-of-60 42 percent. In the first half, the Bulldogs had the advantage early.  In less than four minutes, Bowie State built a 16-5 lead over the Bears with senior Travis Hyman scoring 11 of the BSU points.    With 10:39 left in the first, junior transfer Dameatric Scott hit a three pointer that gave Bowie State the 23-12 lead.  Shaw then made their first real offensive run of the night.  Devon Mclendon hit four straight points to spark what would become an eight-point run that cut the Bulldog lead to three, 23-20, with 8:12 left. Bowie spent the next three minutes rebuilding their lead and with 3:49 left, senior Jay Gavin hit a jumper to extend the Bulldogs lead to nine. As the half closed, though, Shaw fought back.  With 1:12 left, Curtis Hines took a pass from Malik Alvin on the fastbreak and sank the layup to pull the Bears within two.  BSU closed out the half with a layup by junior Bryan Wilson to take a 33-29 lead into the half. The Bears opened the second with a 10-2 run, turning the four-point deficit into a four-point lead in two and a half minutes.  When Karron Johnson set the crowd on fire with a thundering dunk, Shaw took a 39-35 lead.  Junior Byron Westmoreland hit a layup to end the Bear scoring run and cut the Shaw lead to two, but the Bulldogs would not get as close the rest of the game. With 4:22 left in the game, senior Darren Clark hit a pair of free throws for the Bulldogs, trimming the Shaw lead to 62-59.  In the next minute, the Bears would score seven straight - including a three from Alvin, who had 19 points in the second half alone.  With Alvin's three, the Bears took a 69-59 lead. Shaw (11-2 / 3-0 CIAA) was led by Alvin’s game-high 21 points and added six assists.  Mclendon came up one rebound short of a double-double, tallying 20 points and a game-high nine rebounds. Westmoreland finished the night with 20 points for the Bulldogs, while Hyman tossed in 18 and Scott had ten.  Hyman, Clark, and Westmoreland had six rebounds apiece to pace Bowie State.  Clark led BSU with seven assists.               When Brooks was asked if Bowie State was too focused on the nationally rankings, he quickly responded, “The rankings have not been our focus all year … We’re a work in progress, but still a very good team!”             Bowie State will look to snap their two-game skid on Saturday (January 14th) at Saint Augustine’s College.          (RALEIGH, N.C. – January 12, 2012)  The defending CIAA Champion Lady Bears of Shaw University controlled from beginning to end, rolling to a dominating 87-48 victory over Bowie State University.  The loss drops the Lady Bulldogs record to 1-10 overall (1-3 CIAA). Shaw controlled all aspects of the game.  The Lady Bears shot 43 percent (32-of-75) compared to a season-low 21 percent (12-of-58) for the Lady Bulldogs.  Shaw dominated on the glass as well, out-rebounding the Bowie State 67-43. Bowie State broke on top early in the first, scoring the first six points of the game, but the Lady Bears then roared back, outscoring BSU 27-3 in the ensuing 11 minutes.  With 6:16 left in the first, Brittney Spencer hit a jumper to give the Lady Bears a 27-9 lead.  The Lady Bulldogs then found some offensive footing, scoring the next four points and trimming the Shaw lead to 14 when Kimberly Jones hit a layup off the fastbreak.  With 50 seconds remaining in the half, Jasmine Jacobs hit a jumper to again trim the Shaw lead to 14 at 32-18.  Brittany Ransom and Buford then combined to score five straight points to close out the half and make the score 37-18 at the half. The Lady Bears scored nine points to open the second half and never looked back.  The Lady Bulldogs did not get closer than 23 points the rest of the game. With 7:24 left in the game, Brittney Spencer hit two free throws to put the lead over 30 and begin a ten-point scoring run that culminated with an Aslea Williams tip in that made the score 74-34 with 5:20 showing on the clock. The Lady Bears would lead by as many as 42, but a jumper by Bowie State senior Juliette Turner with 20 seconds left on the clock cut the final margin to 39, 87-48.             Turner and sophomore Brooke Miles scored 15 and 12 points respectively for Bowie State.  Turner and Miles accounted for 21 of Bowie State 31 total free throws.  Turner knocked down 8-of-10 while Miles made 7-of-11 from the charity stripe.  Miles also led the Lady Bulldogs on the glass, grabbing a team-high seven rebounds.             The Lady Bears were paced by Sequoyah Griffin with 19 points to go along with eight rebounds.  Kyria Buford recorded a double-double of 17 points and 10 rebounds and Shaw’s Crystal Harris just missed a double-double, contributing nine points and a game-high 12 rebounds.             The Lady Bulldogs will wrap up a week long southern road swing – Saturday (January 14th) at Saint Augustine’s College.  BSU and the Lady Falcons will begin the conference doubleheader at 5:30 pm.

All Inclusive Ads Proves Its Metal With Clients

We take a moment from sports, health and fitness news to bring you this exciting development from the world of Business on the Internet. If you do any business on the web, it is more than worth checking out:


FAQ's From All Inclusive Ads





Question: What exactly is All Inclusive Ads?

Answer:  All Inclusive Ads is an advertising service.  Our team of professional media buyers spend over  $40,000/month promoting up to 10 of your links via dozens of different advertising methods.

Question:  What do I have to do to make it work?

Answer: .  All you have to do is save your link on the "My Links" page and your site(s) will being to receive traffic within 5-10 minutes.

Question:  Do I have to promote All Inclusive Ads to make this work?



Answer:  Absolutely not.  Although promoting AIA is a great way to earn a solid residual income, it is not required to make the service work.  You also don't have to click any ads, surf for credits or read emails.  Simply ad your links to the "My Links" page and you're set!

Question:  What kind of links can I promote with AIA?



Answer:  Outside of porn, hate or warez sites, you can promote almost any type of site, including: affiliate links, replicated links, doorway pages, capture pages, websites you own or distrubutor websites that you don't own.  You can also promote location specific sites as well as non-English sites.

Question:  What methods of advertising are being used to advertise my site(s)?

Answer:  We are spending over $40,000/month promoting your site via:



- Google Adwords / Yahoo PPC (multiple thousands spent monthly)
- Newspaper Advertising (in over 5,000 North American Newspapers)
- Banner Advertising (bulk ads purchased on a network of thousands of websites)
- Expired Domain Name traffic (traffic shared from 1000's of expired domain names)
- Popup/Popunder traffic (pop traffic from a network of hundreds of websites)
- You Tube Videos (traffic on hundreds of unique You Tube videos)
- Social Bookmarking (traffic from links on 125 of the top social bookmarks sites)
- Articles (from links on thousands of search engine indexed articles)
- Press Releases (traffic from links on 100 search engine indexed press releases)


- Blog posts (traffic from links on over 250 high traffic blogs)
- And much MORE!

Laetrile: How Much Proof Do They Need?

Laetrile: How Much Proof Do They Need? When I first got involved in alternative cancer treatments back in 2005, someone mentioned Laetrile. My reaction was, "You've got to be kidding. That was discredited back in the 1970s." I didn't say this as a fan of conventional medicine. No way. I'd been devoted to alternative medicine for decades and I knew a great deal about it. But I'd read somewhere or other that it had been "proven" Laetrile doesn't work. No one ever talked about it in the alternative health newsletters I read. So how did we all get fooled? Keep reading. . . Continued below. . . The secret to curing cancer: You've been throwing it in the trash! In 1921, a British doctor discovered that members of a remote native tribe were almost totally cancer-free. But when members of this tribe move away from their native land and change their diet, they get cancer just like anyone else. It's all thanks to a food most of us throw away as waste — a food that's rich in amygdalin — what most of us call Laetrile. Click here now and watch a video presentation about this cancer breakthrough. One cancer expert calls this overlooked food "the key to curing AND preventing cancer" — and you can benefit now — without going to a doctor or buying expensive supplements. This little throwaway food tastes great. Bill Clinton, of all people, eats a certain amygdalin-rich food all the time, and so can you. Click here now to watch the video! I mention this story to show just what a thorough job Big Medicine does at brainwashing the public. Well-informed people — people who have a whole cabinet full of supplements — ridicule or fear a great many alternative treatments. Not just cancer treatments, but alternative answers to all kinds of health conditions. The suppression of Laetrile has been a category five health disaster that's cost hundreds of thousands of lives — probably millions of lives. If you want to learn the truth about this valuable therapy, I suggest you get your hands on a book called Laetrile Case Histories: The Richardson Cancer Clinic Experience, by John A. Richardson, M.D. and Patricia Irving Griffin, R.N., B.S. Dr. Richardson, now deceased, was one of the Laetrile pioneers in the 1970s and paid a terrible price. He had to stand three expensive trials in California courts. All three cases against him were dismissed. Then he had to go through a longer and even more expensive trial in Federal Court in San Diego, where he was convicted of "conspiring to smuggle Laetrile" and was fined $30,000 (equal to more than $100,000 today). In due course his license to practice medicine was taken away. Notice he wasn't convicted of smuggling. He was convicted of "conspiring to smuggle" — the sure sign of a lame case. If they can't convict you of a crime they convict you of thinking about a crime. His book was written in 1975 and describes in detail 62 cases of successful recovery from cancer with the help of Laetrile. I mention it now because the book was updated in 2005, with some shocking new evidence. You see, the authors tried to locate as many of the original 62 cancer patients as they could, to see if their recoveries were long-term or just a fluke. They were able find data on 33 of these old cases from the early 1970s, and most of those people lived for years after Laetrile helped clear up their cancer. They were long-term cancer survivors and then some. I heard one of the book's authors, Patricia Griffin, speak at a cancer conference recently. She told the audience she takes Laetrile-rich apricot kernels every morning — and also Laetrile tablets — to prevent cancer. The REAL people and REAL results mainstream medicine hoped you'd never uncover! Dr. Richardson , M.D. was a general practitioner in San Francisco when an office assistant sparked his interest in Laetrile as a cancer cure. After reading the available resources on the subject, he became convinced that Laetrile—along with certain enzymes and a diet free of animal proteins—could form part of a "natural barrier against the growth of cancer." Notice that he wasn't saying Laetrile is a magic bullet all by itself. He combined it with other therapies. In Laetrile Case Histories, Dr. Richardson explains that in 1971 he began treating patients with the regimen that he called "metabolic therapy." Here are a few of the 62 case histories in his book. . . Bone cancer banished— in November 1973, doctors said a six-year-old boy with cancer of the right upper arm bone and spinal column had no more than six to nine months to live. Within a month of starting metabolic therapy with Laetrile, he was able to use his arm and remove the sling. During a checkup in January 1977, Richardson reported "the arm looked so good the radiologist could not believe the child ever had osteosarcoma." The mother confirmed in 2005 that her child had remained symptom free for 32 years! Cervical cancer clobbered—a doctor recommended a hysterectomy to a 49-year-old Iowa woman whose Pap smear revealed cervical cancer cells. She opted to ride a bus to California for metabolic therapy in July 1973. After only nine days of treatment—she received cancer-free Pap smear results! As of last contact in June 2005, the woman was still alive and well. Chronic leukemia cast out—a 53-year-old male diagnosed with lymphocytic leukemia started metabolic therapy instead of following doctors' recommendation to watch its progression for six months. Within a week he reported greater energy and more restful sleep. After a year he remained symptom free and a follow-up revealed that he lived for 29 years after the treatment! Prostate cancer pulverized—a 61-year-old man was diagnosed with inoperable prostate cancer in October 1973. After beginning Laetrile treatments the same month, he noted health improvements within 10 days! Despite being told he had little time remaining—the patient remained symptom free and lived an additional 13 years! You might think these success stories would motivate medical practitioners to take a second look at Dr. Richardson's Laetrile cases. But the reality was altogether different… Authorities raided Richardson's office and arrested him in June 1972 for violating California's Cancer Law. His conviction in the first trial was overturned on a technicality. And two subsequent trials resulted in hung juries. The legal establishment failed to stop Richardson's activities, but the medical community didn't stop harassing him. The California Board of Medical Quality Assurance revoked Richardson's California medical license in 1976. Dr. Richardson subsequently worked in a Mexican clinic and as a homeopathic practitioner in Nevada until his health deteriorated and he passed away in 1988. You need to know more about this treatment Here at Cancer Defeated, we've interviewed many, many doctors and patients who have benefited from Laetrile. The most powerful way to receive the treatments is by IV, and the easiest place to do that is at the top Mexican clinics we recommend in our Special Report Adios, Cancer. It's extremely difficult, if not impossible, to get IV Laetrile therapy in the United States. But if you can't go to Mexico, you can benefit from eating foods that are rich in Laetrile, such as apricot kernels. I've seen cures reported just from eating the foods. But let me add that if you're really serious about getting well, you won't rely exclusively on Laetrile — either taken by mouth or by IV — but will use it in conjunction with other treatments and lifestyle changes. Adios, Cancer explains how to safely and legally obtain Laetrile-rich foods. My friend Ty Bollinger, author of Cancer — Step Outside the Box, is another great advocate of Laetrile. You can learn more about his book by clicking here. You may hear laetrile referred to as vitamin B17 or "amygdalin," which comes from the Greek word for almond. This name is appropriate considering that amygdalin is extracted from almonds or the pits of apricots and peaches. Laetrile is the trade name for a compound chemically related to amygdalin. In the early 1950s, Dr. Ernst Krebs, Sr. , M.D. and his son Ernst Jr. first used amygdalin to treat cancer patients. The work of the Krebs family was the main inspiration for Dr. Richardson's work. Dr. Krebs theorized that cancer cells contain an enzyme that causes amygdalin to release cyanide. The cyanide destroys the cancer cells while leaving noncancerous tissues unharmed. Healthy cells don't contain the enzyme that stimulates amygdalin to break down into cyanide and other substances; that's why healthy cells remain unharmed. According to people who have studied amygdalin, it releases the killing cyanide only when cancer cells are present. Dr. Krebs said that, in fact, healthy cells are protected by another enzyme which renders the cyanide harmless. From the 1950s through the 1970s, Laetrile became a popular alternative cancer treatment in the United States. It took ferocious attacks against practitioners like Dr. Richardson, plus an aggressive campaign of false information, to lead most people to think Laetrile is a quack remedy. Amygdalin is a naturally occurring substance that cannot be patented—which makes it a prime target for the wrath of "Big Pharma!" The big drug companies invariably try to ban cancer cures that aren't patentable and profitable. Deny, discredit and destroy In the book Alternatives in Cancer Therapy, authors Rose Pelton, R. Ph. and Lee Overholser, Ph.D. call Laetrile an "orphan drug" because it gets no love or support from the pharmaceutical industry. Pelton and Overholser said "no drug company is interested in committing money to research Laetrile's potential." But these advocates aren't willing to tuck their tail between their legs and move on… Instead, they say orthodox medicine has instituted a full-fledged campaign to: Downplay case histories of patients who've benefited from Laetrile treatments Exaggerate reports of side effects and toxicity Ruin the reputation of doctors who successfully treated patients with Laetrile Strong-arm government officials to ensure Laetrile does not receive exemption from the jurisdiction of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) On the issue of toxicity, Pelton and Overholser said some Laetrile users reported symptoms of weakness, dizziness, nausea, and vomiting. They said these symptoms may be related to a person's inability to eliminate toxins resulting from tumor breakdown. It may also be the result of patients just plain eating too much of the Laetrile-rich foods (usually apricot kernels) and getting sick to their stomachs. The solution is simple: If the foods are making you sick, cut back. Pelton and Overholser admit there have been credible reports of muscular weakness and respiratory difficulties among Laetrile users. They believe those side effects typically result from patients taking excessively high doses without a doctor's supervision. And in some cases, children who accidentally took Laetrile tablets did experience cyanide poisoning. But the authors said these incidents cannot be compared to the results of those whose medicine is administered under the watchful care of a medical practitioner. From what we've been able to learn, it's extremely unlikely the side effects are the result of cyanide poisoning, as Laetrile's enemies would have you believe. Thousands of people have been safely and successfully treated with Laetrile — including intravenous Laetrile — without side effects. If Laetrile was a significant source of cyanide, I'm pretty confident that EVERYONE who's ever taken it by IV would be dead PDQ. Pelton and Overholser said "cyanide poisoning does not appear to be a major problem in laetrile therapy." As with other medical treatments, it should be administered with proper supervision. The Laetrile crusade continues! Richardson was no lone crusader for Laetrile. Pelton and Overholser said "some alternative cancer clinics use laetrile regularly and claim to have a steady stream of patients who respond well." And Laetrile has had other noteworthy supporters… Harold W. Manner, Ph.D., chairman of the biology department at Loyola University in Chicago, found that laetrile combined with vitamin A and pancreatic enzymes produced a very high cure rate of breast cancers. And National Cancer Institute (NCI) biochemist Dr. Dean Burke, Ph.D. performed an experiment that used Laetrile to kill a tissue culture of cancer cells. Dr. Burke was convinced that Laetrile could be an effective cancer cure, a pain reliever for terminal cancer victims, and even useful for preventing cancer1. You won't be surprised to learn the FDA has not approved Laetrile as a treatment for cancer in the United States. And the National Cancer Institute maintains its stance that Laetrile "has shown little anticancer effect in laboratory studies, animal studies, or human studies."2 Dr. Richardson pointed to a definition of appropriate therapy response, provided by the California Cancer Advisory Council, as an example of what shapes such conclusions. The definition essentially states that only a decrease in tumor size is an acceptable measure of the anti-tumor effect of a substance. Dr. Richardson believed that other criteria besides tumor shrinkage should be considered when evaluating a cancer remedy. Positive results can include pain relief, increased appetite, weight gain, and a patient's ability to be more active. Patients on Laetrile often experience these other results. For example, it's very common for such patients to report pain relief. Dr. Richardson drew a distinction between tumor shrinkage and these other effects. As long as a tumor isn't growing, it may be nothing more than a nuisance. In fact, tumor shrinkage may be a poor measure of a treatment's success or failure. Many substances shrink tumors. The shrinkage is often temporary. As we've often said in our publications, cancer is a systemic disease — it's a disease of the entire body. Treating a local problem such as a tumor is just one part of successful recovery. Richardson took a dim view of mainstream medicine's obsession with tumor shrinkage. His opinion on this matter is a fitting way to end this article. He said, in part: "As long as this sophomoric attitude is accepted by orthodox medicine, and especially as long as it is forced on the rest of us by the effect of law, tens of thousands of people will continue to die needlessly every single day, and all the million-dollar grants and all the research in the world will fail to stop it."

Washington D.C. Area Sports Update 01/10/2012

WINSTON-SALEM STATE EDGES BOWIE STATE LADY BULLDOGS 59-52

WINSTON-SALEM STATE EDGES BOWIE STATE LADY BULLDOGS 59-52 (WINSTON-SALEM, N.C. – January 9, 2012) Junior Cortney Baynard and sophomore Brooke Miles scored 10 points each and senior Kimberly Jones recorded eight points and a game-high eight rebounds, but Winston-Salem State edges Bowie State 59-52. Both teams started the game very slow, as neither team reached double-digits until Winston-Salem held a 10-8 advantage with 13:57 left in the first half. The Lady Rams maintained a lead most of the first half, but Bowie State went into the locker room with a slim 22-21 lead at the break. Bowie State (1-9 / 1-2 CIAA) hit just 7-of 29 (24 percent) from the field in the first 20 minutes. Winston-Salem State was just as cold, making only 7-of-25 (28 percent) from the field. The Lady Bulldogs’ largest lead of the night (48-39) came at the six minute mark of the second half. Winston-Salem State erased that deficit on a 14-2, capped off by a 3-pointer by WSSU’s Taneisha White that gave the Lady Rams the lead for good. To make matters worse for Bowie State, a Miles layup with one minute left to play was the only Lady Bulldogs field goal over the final six minutes. Courtney Medley led the Lady Rams with 15 points (six rebounds) and Jovanah Graham chipped in 13 points and a team-high seven rebounds. Bowie State senior Juliette Turner contributed nine points and five rebounds before fouling out late in the game. In terms of team stats, Winston-Salem State (8-5 / 3-0 CIAA) wrapped up the game shooting 35 percent from the floor (19-of-55) and 61 percent from the charity stripe (17-of-28). In comparison, Bowie State ended the contest with a shooting percentage of 32 percent (17-of-53) and made 12-of-16 (75 percent) from the free throw line. Turnovers were plentiful for both squads as BSU committed 27 and WSSU 22. The Lady Bulldogs return to action – Thursday (January 12) facing the defending CIAA Champions of Shaw University in the Lady Bears’ C.C. Spaulding Gymnasium.

How government "okays" carcinogens

Government Won't Protect You from Environmental Poisons Air pollutants from vehicles… pesticides… radiation… military waste sites… Most people realize these all-too-familiar carcinogens pose a threat to our health. And even though the government knows it, too—these and many other toxins continue to spread throughout the environment due to neglect by the giant government bureaucracies that "protect" us. Continued below. . . The Secret of Enzymes Plus an Odd Fact: Most Health Foods are a Waste of Money By Lee Euler You can take vitamins, minerals and antioxidants by the handful and still suffer poor health. Now we know why. Our diets lack a vital food — a type of nutrient that even some alternative doctors don't know about. I'm talking about enzymes. Thanks to enzyme supplements, a mother's lifelong migraines disappeared, and a man with "terminal" kidney cancer was alive and well 15 years later. In fact, a great many cancer patients beat the disease and are still alive today thanks to enzymes. Enzymes are a key part of most alternative cancer treatment plans. More important: Even if you're healthy today, taking enzymes is something you can and should do now to prevent not only cancer, but also heart disease, pain and diabetes and many other ailments. Enzyme supplements are among the top-selling pain-relievers in Germany and they're even used by the German Olympic team. As for us older folks, research indicates that enzymes improve circulation and can outperform blood-clot and blood-thinning drugs. (Good-bye, warfarin!) They've even helped 9 out of 10 autistic children. A few months back I received a letter from a mother whose 7-year-old autistic son was almost completely cured after she read my Special Report called The Missing Ingredient, and then started giving him enzymes. This letter came to me out of the blue. The mother wrote, "He has basically been nonverbal until summer 2009, he started talking one day and has never stopped!!" She adds, "The enzymes have kept my 3-year-old son, Noah's eczema AWAY! We are truly blessed, and I believe our Lord led me to you and your book." How can ONE supplement possibly do all this? Just ask yourself: What if you were getting NO vitamins in your diet? You'd be very sick. This nutrient is just as important, and you're getting almost none, if you're like the typical American. Click here to learn more. In a May 2010 report titled "Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk: What We Can Do Now", the President's Cancer Panel expressed deep concerns that the threat from environmental contaminants is being "grossly underestimated." The group denounces government rules that place a greater burden on the American public to prove that environmental exposure to various contaminants is harmful! The rules require overwhelming proof of harm to humans before any corrective action begins. Lest you think this is merely a partisan issue, please note the panel was formed by President George W. Bush to serve a three-year term. Their report didn't come out until well into the Obama Administration. You have NO idea what you may be eating, drinking and breathing! Believe it or not, "the entire U.S. population is exposed on a daily basis to numerous agricultural chemicals," the report authors stated. Many of these chemicals are known carcinogens. The report mentioned that "40 chemicals classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) as known, probable, or possible human carcinogens" are approved for use as EPA-registered pesticides. When dangerous chemical pesticides and fertilizers find their way into air, soil and groundwater, they can do some serious health damage. Farm workers, crop duster pilots and even pesticide manufacturers have been found to have high rates of prostate cancer, skin cancers, and even cancer of the lip. Exposure to approved pesticide chemicals also has been linked to a variety of cancers affecting body parts including the: Brain/central nervous system Breast Colon Lung Ovaries (of female spouses of exposed workers) Pancreas Testicles The report cited xylene as an example of an inert ingredient in almost 900 pesticides. This one chemical has been associated with increased risk of brain tumors, leukemia and rectal cancer! But you can be sure pesticides aren't the only cancerous chemicals spewing into the air, soil and water… The high price of modern conveniences… The President's Cancer Panel received expert testimony from members representing industrial and manufacturing interests. Although the list of known or suspect chemicals was too extensive to cover in one report, the panel said numerous chemicals and substances tied to industrial and manufacturing processes are persistent in the environment. The list includes some familiar villains such as: Asbestos—used to make brake linings, cement pipe, acoustical and thermal insulation; inhaling asbestos can cause mesothelioma, a rare cancer of the mesothelium membrane covering most of your internal organs Chromium—used in leather tanning, wood preservation, steel production and other process; exposure to chromium is known to cause lung, nasal, and nasopharyngeal cancers (chromium is needed in small amounts in the diet, but you don't want to breathe it) Perchloroethylene (PCE) and Trichloroethylene (TCE)—both PCE and TCE are solvents used in the dry cleaning industry. TCE is now used to manufacture adhesives, paint removers, varnishes, paints and lacquers. The report noted that high levels of PCE in drinking water have been associated with elevated breast cancer risk. And TCE has the dubious distinction of being "the most frequently detected organic solvent in groundwater." This is BAD news considering its possible link to kidney, liver, biliary and cervical cancers! The report also highlights hazards presented by medical contaminants such as radiation… modern lifestyle toxins such as tobacco smoke and wireless devices… and military hazards such as Agent Orange and nuclear weapons. If you're a regular reader of this newsletter or our books and reports, you already know the dangers of many of the substances I've mentioned. So what's the news? The news is that this is the government pointing the finger at itself. It's one thing when we fringe crazies try to tell people that food, water, workplace environments, detergents, dry cleaned clothes, and cosmetics are loaded with officially-approved poisons. It's something else when a panel appointed by the President announces the same thing. The report leveled sharp criticism at efforts to regulate contaminants in four key areas: Agricultural Indoor and outdoor air and water pollution Industrial Nuclear fallout, radiation, and electromagnetic fields The panel said government regulatory efforts are far more "reactionary rather than precautionary" — the Feds wait until considerable damage is done before taking action. Even more alarming is the panel's assertion that only a few hundred of the 80,000+ chemicals used in the United States have been tested for safety! The regulatory system is flawed and failing… The President's Cancer Panel was headed up by Dr. LaSalle D. Lefall, Jr., a professor of surgery at Howard University and Margaret Kripke, a professor at University of Texas' M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. The 2010 report concluded that government agencies are "failing to carry out their responsibilities" and made recommendations for overhauling the nation's flawed chemicals management system. The group identified these five major problems that make regulation of environmental contaminants ineffective: Excessively complex regulations Fragmented and overlapping authorities along with decentralized enforcement Inadequate funding and insufficient staffing Undue industry influence Weak laws and regulations Lefall and Kripke said these problems cause agency dysfunction and make it difficult to identify and remove hazards. My private view: There's a fatal flaw in the whole concept that the government is somehow more fair, more virtuous, and more honest — that it somehow stands independently above the fray and renders impartial judgments while it's only the private sector that is self-seeking and corrupt. Government is just another player in the game. It's not going to look out for you. You have to educate yourself and look out for yourself. The biggest mistake you can make is to outsource your health and safety to the government and the various entities (like the medical profession and the drug companies) that enjoy official approval. I think the average person walks into a supermarket believing that all the products and all their ingredients have been studied, tested and government-approved. Most people think, "Surely the government wouldn't let companies sell us foods and personal products that are harmful." Oh, yes they would. The public's fatal belief that everything is being taken care of — actually supports bad practices and makes them possible. It's provided cover for a massive proliferation of tens of thousands of chemicals without anyone asking questions. Without this touching, naïve faith in regulation, consumers would be more alert and ask more questions. The day the FDA is abolished (soon, I hope) everyone will realize they have to check out things for themselves, or select health advisors they personally know and trust. In the alternative health field, most of us do that anyway. What's the big deal? Meanwhile, with such a variety of toxins bombarding you every day, you might be wondering… What should be done about environmental carcinogens? The President's panel thinks government regulation can somehow be fixed, if everyone tries real hard. The panel made several recommendations for actions that government entities could take to reduce exposure to environmental contaminants. They recommended first that the President, Congress and responsible agencies such as the EPA adopt a new national cancer prevention strategy focused on primary prevention. Lefall and Kripke said the new approach should set tangible goals for eliminating environmental toxins that can cause cancer. The group made several other recommendations, including adoption of new workplace chemical exposure assessments, stronger cooperation among agencies, and speedier development of measurement and assessment tools. As for what YOU can do to reduce your exposure to environmental toxins—the panel suggested these practical actions: Check home radon levels (see Issue #117) Choose foods grown without pesticides or chemical fertilizers Drink filtered home, tap or well water (see Issue #85) Remove shoes before entering your home Use a headset with your cell phone and keep calls brief (see Issue #90) You'll find a full list of the panel's recommendations for government, industry and private citizens regarding environmental toxins by accessing the report at http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp/annualReports/pcp08-09rpt/PCP_Report_08-09_508.pdf.

Pumping Iron Greatly Reduces Severe Football Injuries

Lifting weights may be the key to preventing severe injuries to football players, according to a three-year study of high school athletes in Florida.

The study found 78% of severe injuries to the upper body, especially shoulder separations, occurred among football players not involved in a strength-training program of controlled weight lifting. In addition, 64% of those with severe injuries to the lower body, including knee injuries, also were athletes not involved in the training program.

"These are very significant numbers," said Dr. MaryBeth Horodyski, assistant professor of exercise and sports sciences at the University of Florida in Gainesville, Florida. "The bottom line is, those kids who did strength training typically did not have as severe injuries. They more often had mild or moderate injuries."

The study involving teams at 13 high schools turned up 887 injuries among football players. Mild injuries were defined as those which kept players out of practice or a game for seven days or less. Downtime for moderate injuries was 7 to 21 days, and severe injuries included those that kept players out of action for more than 21 days.

Roughly one third of the players in the study sustained injuries. However, Horodyski said that she and the team of athletic trainers and doctors assigned to the study were not surprised by that figure. According to national statistics, some type of injuries occur in 25% to 50% of athletes playing football during a given year, she points out.

The Florida study found defensive linemen are the most frequently injured players, and the most common type of injury for all positions is a sprain.

Fewer injuries were recorded during spring football, probably because it is less intense than fall play, the researcher said.

"The take-home message for coaches is, they need to implement a well-structured strength-training program for their players throughout the entire season," Horodyski stated. "It won't cut down on the total number of injuries, but time-loss goes down drastically if the injuries are not severe."

Source: Stroke (1997;28:1908-1912)