20 Medical Studies That Prove Cannabis Can Cure Cancer

 

cannabis

 

Cannabis has been making a lot of noise lately. Multiple states across the United States and countries around the world have successfully legalized medical Marijuana, and the Uruguay parliament recently voted to create the world’s first legal marijuana market. This is good news as the health benefits of Cannabis are vast, with multiple medical and scientific studies that confirm them. On the other hand, arguments against the use of marijuana is usually published in Psychiatric journals, which show no scientific evidence that Cannabis is harmful to human health. All psychological evaluations from the intake of cannabis are largely based on assumptions, suggestions and observations (1). When we look at the actual science behind Cannabis, the health benefits can be overwhelming. So what does one who opposes the use of cannabis base their belief on? Nothing, not scientific evidence anyways. The negative stigmatism attached to marijuana is due to it’s supposed psychotropic effects, yet again, there is no scientific evidence to show that marijuana has any psychotropic effects. Nonetheless, cannabis has recently been the focus of medical research and considered as a potential therapeutic treatment and cure for cancer.

Cannabis is a great example of how the human mind is programmed and conditioned to believe something. Growing up, we are told drugs are bad, which is very true, however not all substances that have been labelled as “drugs” by the government are harmful. Multiple substances are labelled as a “drug” in order to protect corporate interests. One example is the automobile and energy industry, a car made from hemp is stronger than steel, and can be fuelled from hemp alone. Henry Ford demonstrated this many years ago. Hemp actually has over 50,000 uses!

Let’s take a look at the science behind Cannabis and Cancer. Although Cannabis has been proven to be effective for a large range of ailments, this article will focus mainly on it’s effectiveness in the treatment of cancer. Cannabinoids may very well be one of the best disease and cancer fighting treatments out there. Cannabinoids refer to any of a group of related compounds that include cannabinol and the active constituents of cannabis. They activate cannabinoid receptors in the body. The body itself produces compounds called endocannabinoids and they play a role in many processes within the body that help to create a healthy environment. Cannabinoids also play a role in immune system generation and re-generation. The body regenerates best when it’s saturated with Phyto-Cannabinoids. Cannabinoids can also be found in Cannabis. It is important to note that the cannabinoids are plentiful in both hemp and cannabis. One of the main differentiations between hemp and cannabis is simply that hemp only contains 0.3% THC while cannabis is 0.4% THC or higher. (Technically they are both strains of Cannabis Sativa.)  Cannabinoids have been proven to reduce cancer cells as they have a great impact on the rebuilding of the immune system. While not every strain of cannabis has the same effect, more and more patients are seeing success in cancer reduction in a short period of time by using cannabis.

While taking a look at these studies, keep in mind that cannabis can be much more effective for medicinal purposes when we eat it rather than smoking it. Below are 20 medical studies that prove cannabis can be an effective treatment and possible cure for cancer. Please keep in mind that this is a very short list of studies that support the use of medicinal marijuana. Please feel free to further your research, hopefully this is a good starting point.

Brain Cancer

1.  A study published in the British Journal of Cancerconducted by the Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology at Complutense University in Madrid, this study determined that Tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) and other cannabinoids inhibit tumour growth. They were responsible for the first clinical study aimed at assessing cannabinoid antitumoral action. Cannabinoid delivery was safe and was achieved with zero psychoactive effects. THC was found to decrease tumour cells in two out of the nine patients.

2. A study published in The Journal of Neuroscience examined the biochemical events in both acute neuronal damage and in slowly progressive, neurodegenerative diseases. They conducted a magnetic resonance imaging study that looked at THC (the main active compound in marijuana) and found that it reduced neuronal injury in rats. The results of this study provide evidence that the cannabinoid system can serve to protect the brain against neurodegeneration.

3. A study published in The Journal of Pharmacology And Experimental Therapeutics already acknowledged the fact that cannabinoids have been shown to possess antitumor properties. This study examined the effect of cannabidiol (CBD, non psychoactive cannabinoid compound) on human glioma cell lines. The addition of cannabidiol led to a dramatic drop in the viability of glioma cells. Glioma is the word used to describe brain tumour.  The study concluded that cannabidiol was able to produce a significant antitumor activity.

4. A study published in the journal Molecular Cancer Therapeutics outlines how brain tumours are highly resistant to current anticancer treatments, which makes it crucial to find new therapeutic strategies aimed at improving the poor prognosis of patients suffering from this disease. This study also demonstrated the reversal of tumour activity in Glioblastoma multiforme.

Breast Cancer

5. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine, conducted by the California Pacific Medical Centre determined that cannabidiol (CBD) inhibits human breast cancer cell proliferation and invasion. They also demonstrated that CBD significantly reduces tumour mass.

6. A study published in The Journal of Pharmacology and Experimental Therapeutics determined that THC as well as cannabidiol dramatically reduced breast cancer cell growth. They confirmed the potency and effectiveness of these compounds.

7. A study published in the Journal Molecular Cancer showed that THC reduced tumour growth and tumour numbers. They determined that cannabinoids inhibit cancer cell proliferation, induce cancer cell apoptosis and impair tumour angiogenesis (all good things). This study provides strong evidence for the use of cannabinoid based therapies for the management of breast cancer.

8. A study published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS) determined that cannabinoids inhibit human breast cancer cell proliferation.

Lung Cancer

9. A study published in the journal Oncogeneby Harvard Medical Schools Experimental Medicine Department determined that THC inhibits epithelial growth factor induced lung cancer cell migration and more. They go on to state that THC should be explored as novel therapeutic molecules in controlling the growth and metastasis of certain lung cancers.

10. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine by the Institute of Toxicology and Pharmacology, from the Department of General Surgery in Germany determined that cannabinoids inhibit cancer cell invasion. Effects were confirmed in primary tumour cells from a lung cancer patient.  Overall, data indicated that cannabinoids decrease cancer cell invasiveness.

11. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine, conducted by Harvard Medical School investigated the role of cannabinoid receptors in lung cancer cells. They determined its effectiveness and suggested that it should be used for treatment against lung cancer cells.

Prostate Cancer

12. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine illustrates a decrease in prostatic cancer cells by acting through cannabinoid receptors.

13. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine outlined multiple studies proving the effectiveness of cannabis on prostate cancer.

14. Another study published by the US National Library of Medicine determined that clinical testing of CBD against prostate carcinoma is a must. That cannabinoid receptor activation induces prostate carcinoma cell apoptosis. They determined that cannabidiol significantly inhibited cell viability. 

Blood Cancer

15. A study published in the journal Molecular Pharmacology recently showed that cannabinoids induce growth inhibition and apoptosis in matle cell lymphoma. The study was supported by grants from the Swedish Cancer Society, The Swedish Research Council and the Cancer Society in Stockholm.

16. A study published in the International Journal of Cancer also determined and illustrated that cannabinoids exert antiproliferative and proapoptotic effects in various types of cancer and in mantle cell lymphoma.

17. A study published in the US National Library of Medicine conducted by the Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology by Virginia Commonwealth University determined that cannabinoids induce apoptosis in leukemia cells.

Oral Cancer

18. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine results show cannabinoids are potent inhibitors of cellular respiration and are toxic to highly malignant oral Tumours.

Liver Cancer

19. A study published by the US National Library of Medicine determined that that THC reduces the viability of human HCC cell lines (Human hepatocellular liver carcinoma cell line) and reduced the growth.

Pancreatic Cancer

20. A study published in The American Journal of Cancer determined that cannabinoid receptors are expressed in human pancreatic tumor cell lines and tumour biopsies at much higher levels than in normal pancreatic tissue. Results showed that cannabinoid administration induced apoptosis. They also reduced the growth of tumour cells, and inhibited the spreading of pancreatic tumour cells.

Sources:

All sources highlighted throughout article. Click on the highlighted parts of the article to view them.

1)http://bjp.rcpsych.org/content/178/2/116.full

Cancer Near death 74 year old Man Healed by wheatgrass: Defying the advice of conventional doctors could save your life

wheatgrass-tray

Allan’s ordeal began when he noticed a two-inch lump in his abdomen last ­February. He was sent for a scan and told he had colon cancer.

A surgeon removed a nine-inch section of his colon last September. He then began a three-month course of ­chemo. In April this year he was told the cancer had spread to his small intestine. “I just went on the internet and tapped in ‘colon cancer cures’,” he says.

“I examined all the evidence and took advice from my local health food store.”

Allan, from Middlesbrough, decided to radically alter his diet, replacing red meat and dairy products with 10 portions of raw fruit and veg each day.

But he believes that one of the crucial ingredients in curing his cancer was a teaspoon of powdered barley grass in hot water every morning and night.

“There is no q­uestion in my mind that my diet saved my life,” he says. “And all it cost was £30 a week.”

When conventional doctors told 74-year-old Danny McDonald of Dunaff, Ireland, that he had stomach cancer so severe that it would likely kill him within three months, he decided to ignore their advice to undergo toxic chemotherapy treatments and instead embrace a nutritional approach to healing. Four years later and Danny is doing great, thanks to daily protocol he adopted that involves juicing and drinking wheatgrass, a nutrient-dense “superfood” with a variety of amazing health benefits.According to Sunday World, Danny became aware of his condition when an ulcer suddenly burst inside his abdomen one day. After being rushed to a hospital from the farmhouse where he lives, doctors struggled to contain the bleeding, only to discover that Danny actually had a severe form of stomach cancer that had spread throughout his body. They warned him that the only way to get rid of it, in their opinion, was to undergo conventional chemotherapy treatment.Allan Taylor, age 78 beats cancer by taking herbal remediesUnlike most people, Danny decided to think for himself by researching other methods of treatment. He later notified his doctors, to their chagrin, that he would be opting for his own homemade treatments involving wheatgrass rather than the poison. Not surprisingly, they were quite angry with his decision, insisting that he would be “dead in a matter of weeks” if he refused to comply with their advice. But Danny stood his ground and chose the wheatgrass instead.

“I told the doctors I wasn’t prepared to undergo the course of treatments they had suggested,” Danny is quoted as saying by Sunday World. “I knew it would kill me. They were furious I had come to that conclusion. The consultant warned me I’d be dead in three months.”

Defying the advice of conventional doctors could save your life

Far from being a rushed or uninformed decision, Danny’s choice to use wheatgrass as treatment for his cancer was based on numerous accounts he had heard from a friend about the amazing healing capacity of wheatgrass. Over time, Danny became increasingly more convinced that wheatgrass is capable of healing all sorts of health conditions, including cancer. So he decided to put his 60 years’ worth of farming experience to task by growing his own wheatgrass.

“I didn’t know what to expect, but I was determined to give it a go,” recalls Danny. “Within seven days the burning sensation I had in my side was gone and I was beginning to feel a lot better. I stopped taking the tablets which had been prescribed and I haven’t taken one since. A month later the pain had completely disappeared and I knew I was on the mend. The wheatgrass was working. I had made the right decision to reject the advice of the doctors.”

Learn more: 

Colon Cancer Reduced with Antioxidants

Colon cancer is the second leading cancer killer in the U.S.  In fact, in 2009, 136,717 people were diagnosed with colon cancer and 51,849 died from it.(1)  Colonoscopies are one of the most common medical procedures done today.  A colonoscopy is performed in order to identify a growth or a polyp at an early stage so that it can be removed it before it becomes cancerous.  Colonoscopies are one of the few preventive procedures in conventional medicine that actually improve mortality.

It is well known that patients who have colonic polyps removed at an increased risk of recurrence.  A recent study looked at the efficacy of using antioxidants to prevent recurrent colonic polyps in patients who have undergone colonoscopic removal of polyps.(2)

The scientists conducted a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial which began in 1988.  411 subjects were randomized to receive either a placebo or an active compound—taken daily–containing selenium (200ug), zinc (30mg), vitamin A (2mg), vitamin C (180mg), and vitamin E (30mg).

The authors found that the 15-year cumulative incidence of recurrent polyps in the antioxidant group was 39% reduced as compared to the placebo group.

Comments:  This is an important study as colon cancer affects too many people.   Simply taking an antioxidant supplement significantly reduced the recurrence of pre-cancerous lesions in the colon. Antioxidant therapy is inexpensive and has little side effects.  It makes sense to ensure that you eat food high in antioxidants—fruits and vegetables.  Avoid food that depletes the body of antioxidants such as refined carbohydrates—bread, pasta, and cereal made from refined sources.

The results of this study are not surprising to me.  I have seen the positive results patients experience when they correct nutrient imbalances.  I suggest supplementing with a good multivitamin that has natural sources of nutrients.  Biomultiplus from Biotics Research is one such product.  A health care practitioner knowledgeable about natural products can help you choose a product that is optimal for your personal biochemistry.

 

(1)    CDC.  http://www.cdc.gov/cancer/colorectal/

(2)    J. of Gastroent.  2013;48(6):698-705

Man With Stage 3 Colon Cancer Refuses Chemotherapy & Cures Himself With Vegan Diet

Chris Wark shares his short and powerful testimony of how he refused chemotherapy and survived stage 3 colon cancer. We often hear of alternative methods and treatments for cancer, but rarely are they used and implemented by individuals primarily due to the fear factor. Those diagnosed with cancer are heavily encouraged by doctors, family and peers to seek mainstream treatments like chemotherapy. 

 

Granted, cancer is a multi-billion dollar industry which would make it hard for one to market studies that go against traditional treatments like chemotherapy. There was a study published in August 2003 that revealed of adult cancer in the USA and Australia, the use of chemotherapy only provided a cure 2.1 % of the time.  The study undertook a literature search for randomized clinical trials which saw a 5-year survival rate that was attributed solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy in adult malignancies. The data was taken from the cancer registry in Australia and from the Surveillance Epidemiology and End Results data in the USA for 1998. As stated, the final results show that the overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA. You can take a look at that here.

Alternative treatments can range from baking soda, cannabis, hemp oil and much more. There are a number of studies that prove the validity of alternative cancer treatments. Often, we receive comments on our articles concerning cancer from people who fail to research prior to commenting.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20463368

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19914218

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22198381

It has been shown that a plant based diet can prevent over 60% of chronic disease deaths.

The University of Alberta, Canada also recently discovered a cure for cancer. It’s called dichloroacetate, and it’s receiving zero attention from the medical industry due to its inability to generate a profit.

Good little clip here with lots of truth

probiotics may save your life from chemotherapy.

If you or someone you love is facing the possibility of cancer or chemotherapy, make sure they read this story. Breakthrough new science conducted at the University of Michigan and about to be published in the journal Nature reveals that intestinal health is the key to surviving chemotherapy.
chemo
The study itself is very difficult for laypeople to parse, however, so I’m going to translate into everyday language while also offering additional interpretations of the research that the original study author is likely unable to state due to the nutritional censorship of medical journals and universities, both of which have an anti-nutrition bias.

The upshot is this: A clinical study gave mice lethal injections of chemotherapy that would, pound for pound, kill most adult human beings, too. The study authors openly admit: “All tumors from different tissues and organs can be killed by high doses of chemotherapy and radiation, but the current challenge for treating the later-staged metastasized cancer is that you actually kill the [patient] before you kill the tumor.” (See sources below.)

Chemotherapy is deadly. It is the No. 1 cause of death for cancer patients in America, and the No. 1 side effect of chemo is more cancer. But certain mice in the study managed to survive the lethal doses of chemo. How did they do that? They were injected with a molecule that your own body produces naturally. It’s production is engineered right into your genes, and given the right gene expression in an environment of good nutrition (meaning the cellular environment), you can generate this substance all by yourself, 24 hours a day.

The substance is called “Rspo1” or “R-spondon1.” It activates stem cell production within your own intestinal walls, and these stem cells are like super tissue regeneration machines that rebuild damaged tissues faster than the chemotherapy can destroy them, thereby allowing the patient to survive an otherwise deadly does of chemo poison.

As the study showed, 50 – 75 percent of the mice who were given R-spondon1 survived the fatal chemotherapy dose!

Learn more:

Chlorella protects against cadmium poisoning: NaturalNews Science

chlorella

One of the most powerful cleansing and detoxifying “superfoods” known to man, chlorella is a fascinating single-celled algae variety that offers a plethora of unique benefits for human health and nutrition. And one such benefit, as illustrated in a 2008 study published in the Journal of Medicinal Food, is its ability to expel toxic cadmium from the body and prevent it from poisoning the liver and other vital organs.

Researchers from South Korea’s Hanyang University learned this after testing the effects of chlorella on groups of Sprague-Dawley rats exposed to cadmium (Cd). The team divided 40 rats into four groups, three of which were exposed to 10 parts per million (ppm) of cadmium. The first of the three groups was given no chlorella (Cd-0C), while the second and third were given five percent chlorella (Cd-5C) and 10 percent chlorella (Cd-10C), respectively. The fourth group was assigned as a control.

After evaluating the health of the rats after eight weeks — all rats had unmitigated access to water during this time — the team observed that the Cd-0C group, which was given no chlorella, had the lowest overall body and liver weight, a clear indicator of poor health. This same group of untreated rats was also observed to have significantly higher hepatic concentrations, or concentrations of poison in the liver.

Conversely, cadmium-exposed rats given chlorella had much lower levels of poison in their livers compared to the Cd-0C group, illustrating the power of chlorella to protect this vital organ from damage. Chlorella was also shown to stimulate the expression of metallothioneins, or MTs, which bind with metallic compounds like chlorella and help remove them from the body.

“[T]his study suggests that C. vulgaris (chlorella) has a protective effect against Cd-induced liver damage by reducing Cd accumulation and stimulating the expression of MT II in (the) liver,” wrote the authors in their abstract.

You can read the full study abstract at NaturalNews Science:
http://science.naturalnews.com

A similar study published in the journal, Annals of Nutrition & Metabolism, in 2009 found that chlorella also helps to reduce the oxidative stress caused by Cd poisoning. Researchers from Ewha Womans University, also in South Korea, discovered that CD-poisoned rats treated with chlorella fared better than untreated rats in terms of lipid peroxide concentration, superoxide radical generation, and xanthine oxidase activity.

You can read the results of this study here:
http://science.naturalnews.com

Chlorella can also help improve insulin resistance, lipid metabolism

Among its many other benefits, chlorella has also been shown by credible science to help improve both insulin resistance and lipid metabolism. Rats fed a high fat diet along with chlorella were shown in the first instance to better process and metabolize these fats, while rats in the latter instance handled sugar intake better when also supplemented with chlorella.

“The cell wall of chlorella is generally considered the thing that just grabs on to almost any toxin in the body, whether it is heavy metals, pesticides, organic chemicals,” said Dr. Hank Liers, chief formulator of products sold by Health Products Distributors, Inc., in a 2007 interview with Mike Adams, the Health Ranger. “I think there are more research papers on chlorella than any substance known.”

You can learn more about this substance by visiting the NaturalNews Science page on chlorella, which contains hundreds of scientific studies on the benefits of chlorella:
http://science.naturalnews.com

Learn more:

Hidden Dangers of Mammograms Every Woman Should Know About

mammogram

Millions of women undergo them annually, but few are even remotely aware of just how many dangers they are exposing themselves to in the name of prevention, not the least of which are misdiagnosis, overdiagnosis and the promotion of breast cancer itself. 

A new study published in the Annals of Family Medicine titled, Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography, brings to the forefront a major under-reported harm of breast screening programs: the very real and lasting trauma associated with a false-positive diagnosis of breast cancer.[1]

The study found that women with false-positive diagnoses of breast cancer, even three years after being declared free of cancer, “consistently reported greater negative psychosocial consequences compared with women who had normal findings in all 12 psychosocial outcomes.”

The psychosocial and existential parameters adversely affected were:

  • Sense of dejection
  • Anxiety
  • Negative impact on behavior
  • Negative impact on sleep
  • Degree of breast self-examination
  • Negative impact on sexuality
  • Feeling of attractiveness
  • Ability to keep ‘mind off things’
  • Worries about breast cancer
  • Inner calm
  • Social network
  • Existential values

What is even more concerning is that “six months after final diagnosis, women with false-positive findings reported changes in existential values and inner calmness as great as those reported by women with a diagnosis of breast cancer.”

In other words, even after being “cleared of cancer,” the measurable adverse psychospiritual effects of the trauma of diagnosis were equivalent to actually having breast cancer.

Given that the cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography is at least 50%,[2] this is an issue that will affect the health of millions of women undergoing routine breast screening.

The Curse of False Diagnosis and ‘Bone-Pointing’

Also, we must be cognizant of the fact that these observed ‘psychosocial’ and ‘existential’ adverse effects don’t just cause some vaguely defined ‘mental anguish,’ but translate into objectively quantifiable physiological consequences of a dire nature.

For instance, last year, a groundbreaking study was published in the New England Journal of Medicineshowing that, based on data on more than 6 million Swedes aged 30 and older, the risk of suicide was found to be up to 16 times higher and the risk of heart-related death up to 26.9 times higher during the first week following a positive versus a negative cancer diagnosis.[3]

This was the first study of its kind to confirm that the trauma of diagnosis can result in, as the etymology of the Greek word trauma reveals, a “physical wound.” In the same way as Aboriginal cultures had a ‘ritual executioner’ or ‘bone pointer’ (known as a Kurdaitcha) who by pointing a bone at a victim with the intention of cursing him to death resulted in the actual self-willed death of the accursed, so too does the modern ritual of medicine reenact ancient belief systems and power differentials, with the modern physician – whether he likes it or not – a ‘priest of the body’.

We must only look to the well-known dialectic of the placebo and nocebo effects to see these powerful, “irrational” processes still operative.

Millions Harmed by Breast Screening Despite Assurances to the Contrary

Research of this kind clearly indicates that the conventional screening process carries health risks, both to body and mind, which may outstrip the very dangers the medical surveillance believes itself responsible for, and effective at, mitigating.

For instance, according to a groundbreaking study published last November in New England Journal of Medicine, 1.3 million US women were overdiagnosed and overtreated over the past 30 years.[4] These are the ‘false positives’ that were never caught, resulting in the unnecessary irradiation, chemotherapy poisoning and surgery of approximately 43,000 women each year. Now, when you add to this dismal statistic the millions of ‘false positives’ that while being caught nevertheless resulted in producing traumas within those women, breast screening begins to look like a veritable nightmare of iatrogenesis.

And this does not even account for the radiobiological dangers of the x-ray mammography screening process itself, which may be causing an epidemic of mostly unacknowledged radiation-induced breast cancers in exposed populations.

For instance, in 2006, a paper published in the British Journal of Radiobiology, titled “Enhanced biological effectiveness of low energy X-rays and implications for the UK breast screening programme,” revealed the type of radiation used in x-ray-based breast screenings is much more carcinogenic than previously believed:

Recent radiobiological studies have provided compelling evidence that the low energy X-rays as used in mammography are approximately four times – but possibly as much as six times – more effective in causing mutational damage than higher energy X-rays. Since current radiation risk estimates are based on the effects of high energy gamma radiation, this implies that the risks of radiation-induced breast cancers for mammography X-rays are underestimated by the same factor.[5]

Even the breast cancer treatment protocols themselves have recently been found to contribute to enhancing cancer malignancy and increasing mortality. Chemotherapy and radiation both appear toenrich the cancer stem cell populations, which are at the root of breast cancer malignancy and invasiveness.

Last year, in fact, the prestigious journal Cancer, a publication of the American Cancer Society, published a study performed by researchers from the Department of Radiation Oncology at the UCLA Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center showing that even when radiation kills half of the tumor cells treated, the surviving cells which are resistant to treatment, known as induced breast cancer stem cells (iBCSCs), were up to 30 times more likely to form tumors than the non-irradiated breast cancer cells. In other words, the radiation treatment regresses the total population of cancer cells, generating the false appearance that the treatment is working, but actually increases the ratio of highly malignant to benign cells within that tumor, eventually leading to the iatrogenic (treatment-induced) death of the patient.[6]

What we are increasingly bearing witness to in the biomedical literature itself is that the conventional breast cancer prevention and treatment strategy and protocols are bankrupt. Or, from the perspective of the more cynical observer, it is immensely successful, owing to the fact that it is driving billions of dollars or revenue by producing more of what it claims to be fighting.

The time has come for a radical transformation in the way that we understand, screen for, prevent and treat cancer. It used to be that natural medical advocates didn’t have the so-called peer-reviewed ‘evidence’ to back up their intuitive and/or anecdotal understanding of how to keep the human body in health and balance. That time has passed. GreenMedInfo.com, for instance, has over 20,000 abstracts indexed in support of a return to a medical model where the ‘alternative’ is synthetic, invasive, emergency-modeled medicine, and the norm is using food, herbs, minerals, vitamins and lifestyle changes to maintain, promote and regain optimal health.

Resources:

[1] John Brodersen, Volkert Dirk Siersma. Long-term psychosocial consequences of false-positive screening mammography. Ann Fam Med. 2013 Mar-Apr;11(2):106-15. PMID: 23508596

[2] Rebecca A Hubbard, Karla Kerlikowske, Chris I Flowers, Bonnie C Yankaskas, Weiwei Zhu, Diana L Miglioretti. Cumulative probability of false-positive recall or biopsy recommendation after 10 years of screening mammography: a cohort study. Ann Intern Med. 2011 Oct 18 ;155(8):481-92. PMID: 22007042

[3] Research: Come Diagnoses Kill You Quicker Than The Cancer, April 2012

[4] 30 Years of Breast Screening: 1.3 Million Women Wrongly Treated, Nov. 2012

[5] GreenMedInfo.com, How X-Ray Mammography Is Accelerating the Epidemic of Breast Cancer, June 2012

[6] GreenMedInfo.com, Study: Radiation Therapy Can Make Cancers 30x More Malignant, June 201

Every Cancer Can be Cured in Weeks explains Dr. Leonard Coldwell

Dr. Leonard Coldwell states that every cancer can be cured within 16 weeks. Dr. Coldwell states how that’s possible in this video. He recommends using natural cancer cures as opposed to traditional cancer treatments.

WEBSITE: http://www.ihealthtube.com
FACEBOOK: http://www.facebook.com/ihealthtube
Dr. Leonard Coldwell states that every cancer can be cured within 16 weeks. Dr. Coldwell states how that’s possible in this video. He recommends using natural cancer cures as opposed to traditional cancer treatments.

This is the Healthiest Water to Drink