Nexus - 0501 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

decades of failure behind them but excel- lent marketing and publicity, with daily announcements of breakthroughs and assurances of imminent success, with bil- lions raised within this format, could the cancer industry not also be accused of the same? Yesterday's heroes fade into obliv- ion and new hopeful contenders are found to blaze in glory for a time, then fail. They may fail in living up to therapeutic expecta- tion but always succeed in maintaining the illusion of dynamic progress and in raising phenomenal income. Interferon was showing initial remark- able activity in several cancer types; most importantly, and repeatedly, cases of advanced multiple myeloma were shown recovering with this new therapy. My father's hospital had announced that it would investigate its efficacy in the treat- ment of multiple myeloma. A dream come true, a hope reignited! My father was a doctor. He had worked at the Peter McCallum Cancer Institute and was on first-name basis with most of the specialists there. He was also one of few long-term survivors of multiple myeloma at that hospital, so surely he would be one of those enrolled in the trial now that all other therapies were failing him. Reality hardly ever fulfils all your dreams and prayers. It is also not usually as needlessly cruel as it was to my father. Following months of anticipation and plan- ning into what had seemed a bleak future, we awaited notification of the interferon trial. My father was not accepted. In medical trials, patient selection is often optimised for demonstrating good results. The healthier the patient, the more likely they are to survive the trial (no point investing in someone who may die prior to accumulation of data), and the more likely they are to make the product look good. My father was a risk. Death loomed closer; cancer laughed and marched on, its progress accelerated by a weary body and a spirit shattered not by disease but by hope that was taken away. If the above passage alluded to a sinister, manipulative arm to the industry, it is because I believe it to be inherent in this field. Interferon, hailed as the new champi- on in the 1970s, had actually been discov- ered at least 50 years previously and then shelved. Why turn to it now unless the above were true? Public manipulation and public gullibility are extreme in many areas; cancer, however, leads the field. STOLEN HOPE The interferon onslaught was savage. Newspapers, magazines, television and radio programs were at saturation levels with details of miraculous cures. Like a well-oiled machine, the Cancer Institute announced it would commence interferon trials; then, soon after, hospital fundraising events were commenced. This 'dance' of announcing breakthroughs, then a program for implementation followed by appeals for public donation, was monotonous and obvious, year after year. Many controversial figures have been accused of preying on desperate victims and profiting from false hope. With Editor's Note: We will continue this story next issue with detailed coverage of Dr Sam Chachoua's Induced Remission Therapy. VaneaAn avan ante. VIDEOS AVAILABLE: Two videos on Dr Chachoua's work are now available. Contact your nearest NEXUS office, or order from the web page: www.peg.apc.org/~nexus/chachoua.html 82 - NEXUS — Induced Remission Therapy — Continued from page 34 DECEMBER 1997 - JANUARY 1998