Healing Cancer from Inside Out

Let us talk to the person who has just rewritten the war on cancer and see what are our misconceptions in the war that's been going on, Mike, and what do we do to change things? Yeah, well, one big misconception is in the phrase there, a war on cancer. It's like having a war on the body, and that's not good for the body. We slash and burn and do all kinds of things to it, and people keep dying from cancer. And, you know, I think that's one and do all kinds of things to it and people keep dying from cancer and you know one good indicator uh of how conventional treatments have failed is that people are scared of cancer when they get a cancer diagnosis they're scared people think that's a death sentence when they hear exactly exactly and usually it is if you go the conventional route and uh this is one of the things you you know we're conducting a war on cancer a war on cancer a war on the body and just the opposite needs to happen we need to heal the body and and that's like dietary approaches are much more effective than conventional treatments are. And one of the misconceptions is that conventional treatments work. And in fact, they don't work. What happens is that they are manipulating statistics on these drugs. A lot of the research money for these drugs is raised by the American Cancer Society, Susan G. Komen Foundation, and so forth. And most of the money goes into researching for drugs, and they enrich the drug companies this way. And if you look at the drugs like tamoxifen, the manufacturer claims it's got a 49% effective rate, a relative effective rate in reducing the recurrence of breast cancers. That's a relative number. What you have to do is, it's complicated, but I'll try and simplify it. What you have to do is say it's a relative number. Well, relative to what or compared to what? Usually, what that means is that it's relative to, say, a previous treatment, so that it's 49% better than a previous treatment is. But in fact, what you have to do is look at what's called the absolute number, say a real percentage, one out of 100 people. How effective is that? And with tamoxifen, it would be less than 2%. two percent of the people out of a hundred people not 49 people but two people would would perhaps benefit from that drug and what all the drugs across the board that are used in cancer treatments have these kinds of low percentages absolute terms and this is one huge misconception and oncologists repeat these statistics this is the lingua franca of the cancer industry because most of the studies are conducted by drug companies they will give the doctors the summary sheets and they will say yes it has a relative effectiveness of 49 59 75 99. And in fact, that's relative to a previous treatment. Compared to what? Compared to previous failures. Yeah, exactly. So if you had a drug that was only 1% effective and the new drug is 99% effective, well, that's not very effective at all. And it's 99% effective compared to the old drug that was only one percent effective so this is a massive misunderstanding and and this by the way is not just for cancer drugs this is across the board any any drug that doesn't work will go into the relative number business and you get drugs for osteoporosis vox to max for example and they'll claim you know whereas, in fact, it's only 4% effective. And what you have to do is say, well, it's generally accepted that a placebo is more or less 30% effective. It'll affect 30% of the people, a third. So these drugs aren't even as effective as a placebo. And yet, and they manipulate statistics, they'll go into five-year survival rates and this sort of thing, you know, an early detection. And, of course, the earlier you detect a cancer, the more likely you are to survive for five years. And American Cancer Society will come out and they'll make these bold statements and say, well, with stage one breast cancer example we've got a 99 survival rate well bob you can do that you can get that same rate too you can put a shingle out on your office and say stage one breast cancer patients come here and they come into your office and you say two words to them say do nothing and i'll get i'll get that i'll get 99% survival rate for five years because stage one cancers, breast cancers, very slow growing cancer, they're going to live anyway. I don't know why they didn't get 100%. Maybe the treatments go over 1%. Holy cow, this is an amazing manipulation of numbers. I mean, that's really shocking right from the start. And for people who don't believe me, go to the American Cancer Society site, download their Facts and Figures booklet. It's a PDF you can download. And then search for one word of absolute. That's an absolute statistic. You won't find one. And then search for relative. They're all over the place. And, in fact, every statistic in the American Cancer Society's Facts and Figures book is a relative statistic. And of course, they don't say what, they explain the term relative, but they don't say what it's relative to. So everybody's trying to heal cancer from outside in, you say heal cancer from inside out. Right. And what you, by the way, I just wanted to finish one thing uh what people have to do is not look at five-year survival rates but what is never mentioned in the cancer industry is long-term survival rates and they haven't budged since the 70s for most of the cancers so much ones that have uh are the result of result of changes in food additives and changes in dietary habits. It's a long-term survival that you have to look at, and that hasn't really improved. It's amazing. The same percentage of Americans are dying of cancer as they did in 1975. But so many billions and trillions have been spent on the system yeah and yet you you have a cure well I don't like the word cure legally I can get in trouble for that you have you have you have healing in mind yes healing right I mean you have to say you got a tumor and and the traditional approach is okay let's let's attack the tumor. Let's get rid of the tumor, and they go on and cut it out or blast it out or whatever, but if you want to stump your oncologist, say, well, what caused the tumor? And, you know, they shake their heads and they don't know, but that's exactly what we are addressing. What caused the tumor. There are certain conditions in the body. The body is screwed up because of our diet, and that encourages cancer cells to grow. Cancer cells like a non-normal, an abnormal environment, and they just flourish in such an environment. There are six or seven major factors, alkalinity, acidity, glucose levels, cholesterol levels, a number of other factors that go into it that make a perfect environment for cancer cells and they love it, they bathe in it. And what diet does is fundamentally change the biochemistry of your body and make it hostile to cancer cells so they can't grow. If you take out a tumor and the oncologist says, well, we can't detect the cancer so it must be gone. Well, they're lying to you because it's already spread and it was already in your body in the first place. It just cannot be detected by current technology. And so the cancer is still there. And we are talking today to Mike Anderson who has given us a book and DVD, Healing Cancer from Inside Out. You can go to his website which is ravediet.com, R-A-V-E-D-I-E-T.com and also check out Eating, that DVD also, I think itís one of the greatest contributions to knowledge and now I donít know why you arenít testifying in front of Congress on health care, Mike, when weíre hearing some amazing information from you.