Sign up for periodic reports and bulletins
FREE access; FREE of commercials; FREE to use
Posted December 9, 2016: by Bill Sardi
The shocking study was published in LANCET ONCOLOGY in September of this year and was reported by a limited number of news sources. Guardian Aug 30, 2016] Most were obscure online portals. [ChristianTruther.com Aug 7, 2016; The Free Thought Project Sept 3, 2016; Opposing Views Sept 6, 2016; What Doctors Don’t Tell You Sept 6, 2016] But alternate news sources were apparently drowned out by the recent Presidential election in the USA. Absent were CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, Reuters, The Associated Press — the major news media.
Posted April 11, 2016: by Bill Sardi
Despite its unconvincing history and its blunt but cursory dismissal by modern medicine, vitamin C therapy for cancer may (finally) be undergoing an unexpected resurgence and it isn’t being led by a bunch of naturopaths and vitamin wackos.
Scientific investigators from 13 different countries operating at 28 universities and established clinics have published 37 papers in the past four years on the need to produce more evidence of vitamin C’s safety and efficacy for cancer treatment. In other words, vitamin C therapy is not dead and buried 37 years after it was first introduced by Nobel Laureate Linus Pauling and Scottish physician Ewan Cameron.
Posted April 8, 2016: by Bill Sardi
A modern reanalysis reveals there are ways to optimize vitamin C therapy and significantly prolong the lives of cancer patients.
In 1978 Dr. Ewan Cameron and Nobel Laureate Linus Pauling published a study that reported long-term survival of cancer patients who had undergone intravenous + oral mega-dose (10,000 milligrams) vitamin C therapy. Vitamin C-treated cancer patients lived 20 times longer than a control group. While most patients succumbed to their cancer, intravenous vitamin C therapy outperformed conventional cancer therapy. By comparison, 0.4% of cancer patients who did not undergo vitamin C therapy survived 1-year versus 22% who had undergone intravenous vitamin C therapy. [Proceedings National Academy Science 1978]
Posted April 23, 2015: by Bill Sardi
News headlines say a new study reveals high-dose vitamins, in particular folic acid, may increase the risk for cancer. [ABC News April 20, 2015; Science Daily April 20, 2015] But wait. There was no new study. It was just Tim Byers, an MD at the University of Colorado Cancer Center mouthing off once again against vitamin supplements in a forum at the American Association for Cancer Research. [Colorado Cancer Blogs]
Dr. Byers has been on this vendetta against dietary supplements for some time now. [Journal National Cancer Institute May 16, 2012]
Dr. Byers fails to note the many contrary studies, including the largest analysis among nearly 50,000 individuals that concluded there was no significant increase or decrease in the risk for cancer as blood levels of folic acid rose. [Lancet March 23, 2013] Even 40 milligrams/day of folic acid over a period of 3.2 year did not produce an increased risk for cancer. [Journal American Medical Assn. Sept 12, 2007]
Posted March 15, 2015: by Bill Sardi
I knew when I accepted the invitation to speak at the National Health Federation’s 60th annual awards dinner on January 31st, 2015, that I faced a challenge. The point of my speech that night would take only a single sentence: sugar causes cancer. But what surrounds that statement would either make my speech convincing or not. After all, you have to think about the preconceptions of your audience before you attempt persuasion.
And with that in mind, I would have to overcome my audience’s prevalent but mistaken belief that alkaline diets cure cancer. As you will learn below, I failed to totally dispel that idea.
Posted February 2, 2015: by Bill Sardi
Delivered at the Sixtieth Annual Awards Dinner, National Health Federation
Woodland Hills, California, January 31, 2015
Public speaking coaches suggest you size up your audience before you deliver a speech. I’m told there are three ways to segment an audience; those who already embrace what I have to say; those who stand in the middle and need further convincing and those who oppose or disagree with what I have to say. I’m told those who oppose or disagree will not move all the way to embracing my thoughts, that the best I can expect is for them to move towards the middle and those in the middle move towards what I am going to suggest here tonight.
Posted October 23, 2014: by Bill Sardi
Oh no, not another cure for cancer. It’s not another laetrile is it?
It was April Fools’ Day 2007 and an op-ed article published by The New York Times entitled “Patents Over Patients” by Ralph Moss, noted critic of the cancer industry. But there was no fooling about what Mr. Moss wrote about. He chastised the cancer industry for ignoring an off-the-shelf molecule initially produced in the 1940s called 3-bromopyruvate (3-BP) that had been found to dramatically reduce the growth of human tumors implanted in animals and has produced remarkable cures in a small number of human cases but had yet to be tested in a human trial. That was seven years ago. The initial animal lab discovery was published in 2004. That was 10 years ago.
Posted May 8, 2014: by Bill Sardi
In all the years of saying most men die with but not of prostate cancer, no one comes to the fore to explain why 30,000 men DO succumb to this disease annually. While the most common type of prostate cancer is slow growing and not life threatening [Group Health], men live in fear they will be among the 30,000.
There are an estimated 2.5 million men in the U.S. living with diagnosed prostate cancer, whatever that means. About 233,000 new cases will be diagnosed and ~30,000 will die of the disease annually according to the American Cancer Society. [American Cancer Society]
Posted April 25, 2014: by Bill Sardi
Geneticists have made a stunning breakthrough, at least in their own minds. Though not quite ready for human application, they have “edited” DNA to cure a disease in an adult animal.
News reports don’t quite put this development into perspective. It is one thing to insert a new gene in animal eggs so the next generation can benefit but quite another to do this in a fully developed adult with full-blown disease. What this means is that single-gene mutation diseases humans were born with can possibly be cured today, not just corrected in the next generation.
Posted April 18, 2014: by Bill Sardi
A New England Journal of Medicine report is the latest to condemn mammography. Its title (Abolishing Mammography Screening Programs) suggests it’s time to close up breast cancer screening centers altogether.
Cited as evidence is a 25-year study among thousands of women detected just 484 cancers and 22% of them were unnecessarily treated with surgery, radiation or other therapies.
Also cited was a larger trial of over a half-million women that showed no evidence that mammography screening reduces over-all mortality. The report is even more sobering. For every breast-cancer death prevented in the U.S. prevented by annual screening beginning at age 50, 460-670 women are likely to have a false positive mammogram with repeat examination; 70-100 a needless biopsy and 3 to 14 an over-diagnosed case of cancer that would never be life threatening.