/Nexus - 0504 - New Times Magazine/pages/0040/image.png)
Page Content (OCR)
and fungal organisms—being the cause of cancer. But, as tech- nology gets more and more advanced, we have to reject what's obvious; and when we reject what's obvious, the truth becomes very hard to find. So how could I prove to these people that these organisms are actually intricately involved in the cancer process or in the AIDS process? The first thing to do is to grow a bunch of them out of some cancer cells, inject them into a few animals and see how many animals get cancer—and a lot of them do. Because the bug does not kill the animal, the animal develops cancer. In a strange way, it actually appears that developing the cancer makes the animal live longer. Now, let me warp your minds a little bit here. Believe me, what I'm about to say to you is just a theory, and it has no bearing at all on the efficacy of the therapy, but what if these bugs can't entice an immune response? They are contained in the middle of the cancer; the body is not doing anything to fight them, and yet they're not spreading. What's containing them? What if cancer isn't really the enemy? What if it's the body's last-chance attempt at getting these bugs and localising them in an area so they don't spread and kill us in a hurry? What if cancer is actually doing us a favour? Is that why every time we fry a cancer lesion with radiotherapy and chemotherapy, the whole thing then comes back and explodes all over the place because we're actually releasing the cause from its entrapment? Just a theory! This therapy at the very least can control the disease, and at best can cause dramatic, rapid improvement. There are many cases of cancer tumour reducing to half its size within a week or two. For example, fig. 1a shows the mammogram of a breast cancer in a 65-year-old woman. After 10 days of treatment, the breast is normal (fig. 1b). Fig. 2a shows a case of non-Hodgkin's lym- phoma in a 32-year-old woman. After two weeks of treatment, her lymphoma was considerably reduced in size (fig. 2b). It's unheard of to be able to do that and not have significant die- off or toxic effects—and yet they don't exist with this treatment. When you follow nature and follow the guidelines of what hap- pens in spontaneous remission, Induced Remission Therapy can achieve cures with minimal side effects. today. Please understand me: I would much rather be addressing medical practitioners, peers, and getting this out not as an alternative therapy but as a conventional therapy. I've spent 12 years trying to get my research published in the conven- tional literature, and 12 years going from hospital to hospital and being treated like something they'd stepped in. In light of what I read in the paper today—somebody wrote an article condemning this conference—it appears that the message being sent by that person is that if the conventional medical estab- lishment in all its holiness doesn't agree with a concept or a thera- py, then the public is just too stupid to be able to understand it fully and evaluate it for themselves. The attitude is that the public is just so dumb that they shouldn't be given the opportunity. Well, my apologies to the author, but the greatest fool I know is a blind fool who'll say opinions about things he hasn't even bothered experiencing or investigating himself. In this "Kevorkian age", as I call it, where people champion the concept of death with dignity when faced with suffering, pain and disease, I'm offering a technology that can end suffering, pain and disease; and I pray that the emphasis will shift now from trying to support death with dignity to championing life with dignity. [es choose the public forum to come here and speak to you Fig. 3a: Electron microscope photograph shows the fragmenting cell full of HIV particles. Fig. 3b: Photograph shows the same cell three days later. JUNE - JULY 1998 NEXUS - 39