Doctors who prescribe chemo don't tell you this

If you think cancer "experts" are hiding something...you're right!     Cancer researchers pride themselves on making great strides toward finding the causes and treatments for cancer.     And as they're supposed to in professional medical journals, they publish details about the problems they're addressing… the methodologies they use… the type of people who take part in the studies… the conclusions they reach…     Or do they? Continued below... Drink This and Cancer Comes Pouring Out of Your Body     "If I could pick only one treatment to cure my cancer, this would be it," says a top expert on alternative cancer treatments.     Research conducted by a scientist at the Detroit Institute of Cancer Research showed this is one of the world's most powerful cancer cures. Even the mainstream National Cancer Institute confirmed that this do-it-yourself treatment kills cancer cells. Then they buried the research.     Personally, I've been writing about cancer treatments for almost seven years. Out of nearly 400 that I've investigated, I haven't found an at-home treatment that's better.     It worked for Robert, age 54, who had late stage stomach cancer. His doctors told him he didn't have chance. The most they could do was buy him a little time, using four aggressive chemotherapy drugs PLUS radiation — a deadly, toxic, last-ditch treatment.     INSTEAD Robert used this non-toxic liquid and was completely cancer-free within months. The amazed doctor was forced to admit Robert's cancer was "in remission." Two years later, he was still cancer-free.     Click the link below to watch an important video presentation about this discovery... Click here and watch an important video presentation about this discovery.     When it comes to investigating chemotherapy treatments, one group of researchers doesn't think so.     This new finding comes from Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto, Canada. A team led by Ian F. Tannock, MD, FRCPC, PhD, scoured 164 journal articles published over 16 years and made this startling discovery: The researchers were hiding information about chemotherapy drug side effects!     The group published their results on Jan. 9, 2013 on the Annals of Oncology website. According to their research, not even one-third of reports on clinical trials for breast cancer chemotherapy medications contained detailed data on side effects and adverse drug events.     I don't know about you… but I don't believe for one second that any chemo cocktail could have been THAT good!     Not only were these breast cancer drug researchers underreporting side effects—but they also went out of their way to report more positive treatment outcomes.     In other words, these studies aren't valid scientific reports. They're disguised sales pieces for chemo drugs.     Think about what this means for cancer doctors and their patients… Did someone call for a spin doctor?     Doctors are busy, just like most people. To stay current on the latest research, they don't read entire journal articles. They tend to read abstracts - brief summaries provided at the top of the articles -- to get the gist of the findings.     Dr. Tannock's group found that two-thirds of the drug studies they examined don't mention serious side effects in these summaries. This held true not only for chemotherapy studies but for cancer studies involving surgery and radiation as well.     The Canadian researchers found similar omissions in the discussion sections and results tables.     This means most doctors prescribing treatments are not aware of the full range of potential side effects. (Actually, the problem goes well beyond cancer drugs. Doctors spend little time educating patients about side effects for ANY prescription drug. It's up to you to find out for yourself.) The corrupt world of peer-reviewed journals     Dr. Tannock told Reuters about another disturbing trend they noticed in the studies they reviewed: Researchers for these breast cancer drug studies had a tendency to change the definition of success.     Specifically, Dr. Tannock said if a treatment didn't produce stellar results, some researchers just choose a different set of results to report—regardless of whether the study was designed to test them.     Just so we're clear… drug companies often provide the money to study the cancer concoctions they intend to market. So researchers are under pressure to produce glowing reports, or risk seeing research dollars disappear. Some may try to hang on to their virginity, but it seems the drug companies have no trouble finding scientists for sale.     I recently had a behind-the-scenes look at this world of peer-reviewed published research. Sometimes a big-name doctor's name is listed among the authors even though he or she didn't really do anything. A well-known doctor can supplement his income by lending his name to companies trying to get a scientific seal of approval on their products.     And lesser known, working scientists want their studies published in prestigious journals. If they frame their research in a positive light, it increases their chances for publication, additional grants, career promotion and tenure.     But this win-win deal for drug companies and the researchers who do their bidding is a sure loser for cancer patients who are kept in the dark about drug side effects. One rotten egg that made it to market…     You've probably heard drug commercials that spend maybe 55 seconds describing the benefits—then in the last five seconds a fast-talking motor-mouth comes on, the volume is turned down, and they rattle off a quick list of warnings and side effects.     These are just the dangers that are so common they feel required to tell you about them. Imagine how long the commercial would be if they included unreported side effects!     The practice of underreporting bad effects helps explain how the drug Avastin® could have made its way to pharmacies.     In February 2008, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) gave an accelerated approval to use Avastin in combination with the cancer drug paclitaxel to treat metastatic breast cancer.     Adding Avastin supposedly prevented angiogenesis -- blood vessels growing on tumors to nourish them.     An FDA news release said the speedy approval was based on promising results from one study that suggested Avastin could extend a cancer patient's life.     Avastin's maker, Genentech, completed two additional clinical trials after the drug was approved and submitted data from those studies to the FDA. What did these results show? Minimal effect on tumor growth No evidence that patients lived any longer No indication that quality of life improved when compared to taking standard chemotherapy     In the end, the agency revoked Avastin's approval for breast cancer treatment less than three years after approving it for that use.     FDA Commissioner Dr. Margaret A. Hamburg said, "After reviewing the available studies it is clear that women who take Avastin for metastatic breast cancer risk potentially life-threatening side effects without proof that the use of Avastin will provide a benefit in terms of delay in tumor growth that would justify those risks."     And get a load of the side effects some women experienced during the time the drug was approved for use as a breast cancer treatment… Bleeding and hemorrhaging Heart attack and heart failure High blood pressure (severe) Perforations in the nose, stomach, intestines and other body parts     Before you think warm and fuzzy thoughts about the agency revoking its use as breast cancer treatment—remember it's still on the market to treat other cancers.     What's more, Dr. Hamburg actually invited Avastin's drugmaker to TRY AGAIN stating, "I encourage Genentech to consider additional studies to identify if there are select subgroups of women suffering from breast cancer who might benefit from this drug."