"Together we will beat cancer"
This is the very successful, long-time slogan of Cancer Research UK, a charity that has been in operation for over 120 years, and just one of hundreds of health charities around the world. It's website says.
"Cancer is relentless. But so are we. Whether you fundraise, pledge to leave a gift in your will or donate. Every part supports life-saving research. Play your part and together we will beat cancer."
And many millions of people have played their part - organising events, making donations, getting sponsored for swimming, walking running, cycling, et al. The charity has raised £trillions in this way. Their strategy, they say, is to focus on making discoveries, driving progress, and bringing hope to those affected by cancer.
So how successful has this strategy been?
The problem is that, despite all this charitable effort, by Cancer Research UK and others, is that cancer levels have continued to increase to epidemic levels, particularly during the last 100 years.
And in a recent report, Cancer Research UK has told us, clearly and unequivocally, that the cancer epidemic will continue to grow.
"The number of people in the UK who will be diagnosed with cancer will increase by a third by 2040, according to new figures.
"This will take the number of new cases every year to more than half a million, rising from 384,000 per year now to 506,000 in 2040.
The chief executive states that “today’s analysis provides a stark reminder of the challenges the NHS in England is set to face in years to come. Cancer patients are already facing unacceptably long waits for diagnosis and treatment, and staff in cancer services are working very hard”.
The charities chief clinician stated that "the NHS risks being overwhelmed by the sheer volume of new cancer diagnoses” unless the government takes action”.
So why have these charitable efforts to "beat cancer" been such a clear and obvious failure? My submission is that one of the main reasons for this failure is that one of the main causes of cancer is being totally ignored - pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines.
Over time I have read many articles that outline "the causes of cancer", many describing the causes of cancer under the headings (i) toxins, (ii) infections, and (iii) biological factors. According to the medical research company American Medical Research, toxins are responsible for 70-75% of cases, infections about 20-25%, whilst genetics cause less that 5%.
Obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption, lack of exercise, an unhealthy diet, air pollution, the ageing process, ultraviolet and ionising radiation, and viral and bacterial infection, are all regular mentioned.
Obesity, smoking, alcohol consumption, lack of exercise, an unhealthy diet, air pollution, the ageing process, ultraviolet and ionising radiation, and viral and bacterial infections are all usually mentioned on these lists.
Yet when it comes to toxic chemicals, or carcinogens, pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines are rarely mentioned. Iatrogenic causes of cancer, or anything concerned with conventional medicine, are ignored!
Yet there is ample evidence to identify iatrogenic causes, particularly pharmaceutical drugs, as a major cause of cancer? So if Cancer Research UK cannot accurately identify a major cause of cancer, how can they expect to overcome it, and find treatment that can successfully treat it?
The evidence that implicates pharmaceutical drugs is overwhelming, and I have written about this in more detail here. The list of drugs known to cause cancer is a long one; and all the evidence is contained within conventional medical literature itself. So Cancer Research UK should be fully aware of the association between the following drugs and cancer. They are all widely prescribed by doctors, and have been for decades.
- benzodiazepines, and other hypnotic drugs,
- amphetamines, and other stimulant drugs,
- anticonvulsant drugs,
- HRT (Hormone Replacement)
- the Contraceptive Pill,
- proton pump inhibitors,
- ACE inhibitors,
- and many, many others, outlined here.
Cancer can also be caused by many other treatments provided by conventional medicine, including some creams, breast implants, X-ray and scanning technology.
There is strong circumstantial evidence too. Cancer has grown to epidemic levels, and continues to grow, and it does so alongside the massive growth in the consumption of pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines over the last 100 years.
So why does Cancer Research UK ignore one of the main causes of cancer? Why do they never mention it? In fairness they are not the only charity that does not do so. Most other medical charities and patient support groups do likewise when they deal with the illness/disease on which they focus.
And Big Pharma has no interest in pointing a finger at themselves. They do not want the safety of their drugs and vaccines assessed. They are happy to look at anything else; but everything else is probably a less significant cause of cancer.
There will be, and can be, no diminution in the incidence of cancer as long as there is no recognition of one of the main causes of cancer - for which there is an easy and obvious cure: avoid taking the pharmaceutical drugs and vaccines known to cause it!