In a research article published in the peer-reviewed Science Translational Medicine, the group led by George S. Karagiannis has found that “several types of chemotherapy can increase the amounts of TMEM complexes and circulating tumor cells in the bloodstream.”
According to the paper’s ABSTRACT:
Breast cancer cells disseminate through TIE2/MENACalc/MENAINV-dependent cancer cell intravasation sites, called tumor microenvironment of metastasis (TMEM), which are clinically validated as prognostic markers of metastasis in breast cancer patients.
Using fixed tissue and intravital imaging of a PyMT murine model and patient-derived xenografts, we show that chemotherapy increases the density and activity of TMEM sites and Mena expression and promotes distant metastasis.
Moreover, in the residual breast cancers of patients treated with neoadjuvant paclitaxel after doxorubicin plus cyclophosphamide, TMEM score and its mechanistically connected MENAINV isoform expression pattern were both increased, suggesting that chemotherapy, despite decreasing tumor size, increases the risk of metastatic dissemination.” – https://stm.sciencemag.org/content/9/397/eaan0026
As usual, the literature is loaded with expert’s gobbledygook that requires ordinary mortals like most of us with some layman’s definition:
- Metastasis – the development of secondary malignant growths at a distance from a primary site of cancer;
- Intravasation – the invasion of cancer cells through the basal membrane into a blood or lymphatic vessel. Intravasation is one of several carcinogenic events that initiate the escape of cancerous cells from their primary sites;
- Intravital microscopy – a form of microscopy that allows observing biological processes in live animals (in vivo) at a high resolution that makes distinguishing between individual cells of a tissue possible;
- MMTV-PyMT is the model of breast cancer metastasis, in which MMTV-LTR is used to drive the expression of mammary gland specific polyomavirus middle T-antigen, leading to a rapid development of highly metastatic tumors. MMTV-PyMT is the most commonly used model for the study of mammary tumor progression and metastasis;
- Neoadjuvant therapy is the administration of therapeutic agents before a main treatment. One example is neoadjuvant hormone therapy prior to radical radiotherapy for adenocarcinoma of the prostate;
- Paclitaxel is a chemotherapy drug used to treat ovarian, breast and non-small cell lung cancer. It may also be used to treat other cancers such as stomach cancer. Paclitaxel is given into a vein.
What this study recognizes is the fact that chemotherapy is not the safest treatment for cancer there is, nor its cousin microwave radiotherapy. Both methods will just break down the tumor into smaller pieces that are then carried away through the bloodstream.
In the UK alone, chemotherapy is killing 50% of cancer patients, according to CancerResearch UK.
In a first-of-its-kind study, researchers dug deeper into cancer patients who died within 30 days of beginning their treatment, indicating that the treatment caused the death, not the cancer.
Across the nation, they found that 8.4 percent of those undergoing treatment for lung cancer, and 2.4 percent of those being treated for breast cancer, died within a month of beginning treatment. Results varied greatly based on the hospital however, as an alarming 50.9 percent of those in Milton Keynes Hospital beginning chemotherapy treatment for lung cancer died within 30 days. Researchers noted that the total number of patients treated at the hospital was much smaller than the norm, but the numbers remain eye-opening.
“The statistics don’t suggest bad practice overall but there are some outliers,” said Professor David Dodwell, Institute of Oncology at St. James Hospital in Leeds, one of the researchers behind the study. “It could be data problems, and figures skewed because of just a few deaths, but nevertheless it could also be down to problems with clinical practice.”
One particularly important finding in the study revealed that there were significant differences in fatality based on patient age and health. Researchers now suggest not to opt for chemotherapy if patients are in poor health or are weak, as the invasive treatment can do more harm than good.
Now, how many people ask their MD questions about chemotherapy?
Have you ever wondered how such a toxic substance (so toxic that those who administer it must wear gowns and gloves) became the “standard of care” for cancer? The truth of its origin is as far away from a scientific laboratory as one could imagine!
In August of 1943, President Roosevelt approved the shipment of chemical munitions containing mustard gas to the Mediterranean theater. Two thousand mustard bombs were loaded onto the USS John Harvey. The ship was waiting to unload in Bari, Italy when German planes attacked on December 2, 1943. The Geneva Protocol of 1925 prohibited the use of chemical and biological weapons. The Allies didn’t trust the Germans and both sides were secretly stockpiling mustard gas to prepare for retaliation.
Imagine the Allies surprise when the Luftwaffe (believed to be stretched too thin to attack) blew up the USS John Harvey, releasing 2000 mustard gas bombs (120,000 pounds) into the air and the bay, indiscriminately killing soldiers and civilians. Hundreds of sailors who had jumped into the water to escape the sinking ship were covered with an oily, garlic smelling residue that blistered and burned their skin and caused many to lose their eyesight. The Top Brass knew exactly what was causing the symptoms. But they had been ordered to keep quiet.
Lt. Colonel Stewart Francis Alexander was flown to the scene after a short briefing. Alexander was trained to treat the effects of chemical warfare. He instantly recognized the symptoms: garlic-like odor, burning skin, and blindness. It had to be mustard gas. Alexander was able to begin treatment immediately and saved many people. However, when he briefed the commanders, he was told to treat the patients and keep his mouth shut. It was clear to him it was a cover-up. No one wanted the Luftwaffe to know they had blown up a ship filled with mustard gas. Though it would be years before the truth came out, Alexander took tissue samples back to the U.S. to be analyzed immediately.
As the doctors began analyzing tissue samples they saw a distinctly consistent pattern. All the samples showed a marked depletion of white blood cells within the lymph nodes and bone marrow—exactly the tissues that become filled with lymphoma. With the help of two Yale pharmacologists, Louis Goodman and Alfred Gilman—they began a series of experiments on mice. Their hypothesis was confirmed: the mustard compound (nitrogen mustard) showed a significant decrease in the size of lymphoid tumors in mice. The two pharmacologists persuaded a thoracic surgeon (Gustaf Lindskog) to give nitrogen mustard to an advanced lymphoma patient with no other options. The patient’s tumors regressed. Other patients had the same results. The research trio was excited to share their incredible findings with the medical community and the world. They would have to wait until 1946 because of the secrecy surrounding the military war gas program.
There was much excitement surrounding the publication of their research. Up until now, the only treatment for cancer was surgery or radiation for solid tumors. If the cancer spread—surgery and radiation were useless. The possibility of circulating a drug throughout the body to fight the cancer where it occurred captivated scientists around the world. This development ushered in a new age in oncology.
How ironic that this “breakthrough” came from a substance designed to kill our “enemies.”
The most basic question right now is, why take the risk?
75% Physicians Won’t Take Chemotherapy
The great lack of trust is evident even amongst doctors. Polls and questionnaires show that three doctors out of four (75 per cent) would refuse any chemotherapy because of its ineffectiveness against the disease and its devastating effects on the entire human organism. This is what many doctors and scientists have to say about chemotherapy:
“The majority of the cancer patients in this country die because of chemotherapy, which does not cure breast, colon or lung cancer. This has been documented for over a decade and nevertheless doctors still utilize chemotherapy to fight these tumors.”
(Allen Levin, MD, UCSF, “The Healing of Cancer”, Marcus Books, 1990).
“If I were to contract cancer, I would never turn to a certain standard for the therapy of this disease. Cancer patients who stay away from these centers have some chance to make it.”
(Prof. Gorge Mathe, “Scientific Medicine Stymied”, Medicines Nouvelles, Paris, 1989)
“Dr. Hardin Jones, lecturer at the University of California, after having analyzed for many decades statistics on cancer survival, has come to this conclusion: ‘… when not treated, the patients do not get worse or they even get better’. The unsettling conclusions of Dr. Jones have never been refuted.”
(Walter Last, “The Ecologist”, Vol. 28, no. 2, March-April 1998)
“Many oncologists recommend chemotherapy for almost any type of cancer, with a faith that is unshaken by the almost constant failures.”
(Albert Braverman, MD, “Medical Oncology in the 90s”, Lancet, 1991, Vol. 337, p. 901)
“Our most efficacious regimens are loaded with risks, side effects and practical problems; and after all the patients we have treated have paid the toll, only a miniscule percentage of them is paid off with an ephemeral period of tumoral regression and generally a partial one.”
(Edward G. Griffin “World Without Cancer”, American Media Publications, 1996)
“After all, and for the overwhelming majority of the cases, there is no proof whatsoever that chemotherapy prolongs survival expectations. And this is the great lie about this therapy, that there is a correlation between the reduction of cancer and the extension of the life of the patient.”
(Philip Day, “Cancer: Why we’re still dying to know the truth”, Credence Publications, 2000)
“Several full-time scientists at the McGill Cancer Center sent to 118 doctors, all experts on lung cancer, a questionnaire to determine the level of trust they had in the therapies they were applying; they were asked to imagine that they themselves had contracted the disease and which of the six current experimental therapies they would choose.
79 doctors answered, 64 of them said that they would not consent to undergo any treatment containing cis-platinum – one of the common chemotherapy drugs they used – while 58 out of 79 believed that all the experimental therapies above were not accepted because of the ineffectiveness and the elevated level of toxicity of chemotherapy.”
(Philip Day, “Cancer: Why we’re still dying to know the truth”, Credence Publications, 2000)
“Doctor Ulrich Able, a German epidemiologist of the Heidelberg Mannheim Tumor Clinic, has exhaustively analyzed and reviewed all the main studies and clinical experiments ever performed on chemotherapy …. Able discovered that the comprehensive world rate of positive outcomes because of chemotherapy was frightening, because, simply, nowhere was scientific evidence available demonstrating that chemotherapy is able to ‘prolong in any appreciable way the life of patients affected by the most common type of organ cancer.’
Able highlights that rarely can chemotherapy improve the quality of life, and he describes it as a scientific squalor while maintaining that at least 80 per cent of chemotherapy administered in the world is worthless. Even if there is no scientific proof whatsoever that chemotherapy works, neither doctors nor patients are prepared to give it up (Lancet, Aug. 10, 1991). None of the main media has ever mentioned this exhaustive study: it has been completely buried.”
(Tim O’Shea, “Chemotherapy – An Unproven Procedure”)
“According to medical associations, the notorious and dangerous side effects of drugs have become the fourth main cause of death after infarction, cancer, and apoplexy.”
( Journal of the American Medical Association, April 15, 1998)
Cancer can be eradicated by simply removing the root causes of a defeated autoimmune and regenerative system, i.e. persistent parasitic infections, heavy chemical intoxication and energy depletion. These factors must be eliminated all at the same time.
That is where the use of chemical-based protocols are so illogical as they further aggravate the chemical intoxication of the body. How can the remaining healthy cells protect themselves from the adversaries when they are being intoxicated, too, with chemotherapy?
Worst of all, we still call these oncologists as the “expert” for prescribing so.