
The Number One Cause of Cancer
By Don Bennett,
DAS
If
I asked you to name a cause of cancer, the list that I would compile
would be long. I'd hear processed meats, cigarettes, pesticides,
an acid-forming diet, environmental toxins, chemicals in our water,
alcohol, being sedentary, radiation from cell phones and mammograms,
too many sunburns, and hopefully, not enough nutrition. But I
contend that the number one cause of all cancers the main
reason there is so much cancer is... misinformation.
In
this category are such gems as...
"We
don't know what causes cancer"
(but we're fundraising like crazy to find the cure)
"The
body can't heal from cancer"
"The
best protection is early detection"
"We're
winning the war on cancer"
"Your
best chance for survival is surgery, chemo, and radiation"
"Cell
phones don't cause cancer"
"Bras
don't contribute to cancer"
"All
you need to do to prevent cancer or to heal from it
is to eat a fruit and vegetable diet"
Let's
explore these popular but untrue notions.
"We
don't know what causes cancer"

Yes we do; the causes of cancer are known, they are just not
common knowledge. And they are not common knowledge for a very
good reason. If more people knew how to prevent cancer, this would
be devastating to those for-profit industries that make trillions
of dollars from people getting cancer. So they have a vested interest
in the causes (and natural cures) not becoming common knowledge.
"The
body can't heal from cancer"

Yes,
it can. It's always trying to. In fact, it's always trying to
prevent cancerous cells from becoming "cancer" as we
know it today. Most people are simply doing too much of what creates
cancerous cells and not enough of the things that support the
body's ability to manage cancerous cells.
"The
best protection is early detection"

No,
the best protection (against breast cancer in this case) is not
doing the things that contribute to breast cancer in the first
place, and doing those things that support the body's "anti-cancer"
processes. Again, it is known what they are, but it is not common
knowledge.
"We're
winning the war on cancer"

The
official war on cancer was declared in 1972 by then-President
Richard Nixon. How we're doing with this war is determined by
the "Five-Year Survival Rate." When a person is diagnosed
with cancer, the timer starts, and the number of people who are
still alive after five years is the barometer for how we're doing
with the war on cancer. But thanks to improvements in detection
technology, and thus earlier detection, today's timers are being
started earlier than they were back in 1972. So more people are
still alive after five years than back then, and therefore it's
thought that thanks to the medical and pharma industries
we're winning the war on cancer. But when you adjust that
Five-Year Survival Rate for the earlier detection factor, the
Five-Year Survival Rate is unchanged. Unchanged!
So, catching cancer a little earlier is not allowing for more
permanent "remissions"; it's simply skewing the Five-Year
Survival Rate, and making it appear as though we're winning the
war, when clearly we're not. And since actually winning the war
on cancer would severely injure the medical and pharma industries,
you can be sure that big business is not actually trying to win
this war, even though the public perception is that there is a
huge effort to do so. Watch the documentary What the Health
for details and to see why all the pink ribbons and "pink-washing"
are, at best, disingenuous, and at worst, a sham. (Yes, I said
it, and that's because I hate seeing people being taken advantage
of, for the sake of money, at the expense of their health.)
"Your
best chance for survival is surgery, chemo, and radiation"

Really? When you compare the results of the conventional treatments
to the so-called alternative treatments, you see quite a different
story. Because these non-medical treatments are non-toxic (don't
tank the immune system), and they have a far better outcome than
conventional therapies (95% effective for soft-tissue cancers
vs. 5% effective with conventional treatments), this info will
not only not be made known by the establishment media, efforts
will be made to smear and even quash this info and those practitioners
who make it available (affecting both livelihoods and even the
lives of those who really do care about helping cancer victims
get rid of it). The truth is out there, you just have to find
it... and you can't turn to the for-profit cancer industry for
the truth about cancer.
"Cell
phones don't cause cancer"

Yes,
and the Earth is flat and only 6,000 years old. Let's deal with
this issue using science. See the articles listed at the end of
this article for some facts.
"Bras
don't contribute to cancer"

And
we never landed on the moon. See the articles at the end of this
article to find out how and why bras do contribute
to breast cancer. (I know, you don't want to hear this if you're
a woman, but do you want to avoid breast cancer or do you want
to roll the dice?)
"All
you need to do to prevent cancer or to heal from it is to eat
a fruit and vegetable diet"

I've
saved my biggest pet peeve till last. The pieces of inaccurate
information above are understandable being that there is so much
profit at stake. With tons of money on the line, you can be sure
there will be tons of mis- and dis-info and boatloads of miseducated
doctors. But you'd think that those practitioners and educators
who sincerely want to help people avoid cancer or heal from it
would do the due diligence required to uncover the truth about
cancer, and naturally they'd be open to hearing new things about
how to prevent it and heal from it. And they wouldn't allow their
own preferences or biases to color their otherwise good judgment.
And they'd actually want to peer-to-peer with those like-minded
educators and practitioners for the good for those they counsel
and educate. But sadly this is not the norm, and you shouldn't
assume that it is.
Say
what you will about the conventional medical model, but at least
there is some standardization of the info that's given to the
public, and standard-of-care protocols that MDs follow. What would
the public think of doctors if all docs did their own thing; some
surgeons washing their hands before surgery and some not (because
they don't think they need to). You'd have to do a lot of researching
before picking a doctor or surgeon to see. Well, as it turns out,
if you want the best odds of never getting cancer, or the best
odds of getting rid of it, you must also do a lot of vetting of
both info and educator. Why? Because, for example, some educators
who promote the healthiest of diets maintain that, regarding diet,
all you need to do is to switch to a raw vegan diet and eat fruit
and greens, and you'll have the best odds of never getting a diagnosis
of cancer, and you'll have the best chance of getting rid of it
if you already have it. That may sound good on paper because of
what is known about the differences in diets as to their general
health outcomes, but there is more to know than just "eat
fruits and veggies."
As
it turns out, the foods of the diet you eat are really nothing
more than transportation vehicles for the elements the body requires
for optimal health: vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients, trace
elements, carbs, fats, protein, water, fiber, hormones (plant-based),
and enzymes. So the obvious question then becomes: Do the foods
that you're eating contain "enough of all"? A very long
time ago, when we gathered our foods from Nature, the answer was
obviously 'Yes'.
Today,
for most people, our foods are being grown for us by us (by a
for-profit industry), and not for us by Nature. So anyone who
thinks that the nutritional quality of today's fruits and greens
are the same as they were many millennia ago is getting their
info from the wrong source. And when you also take into consideration
today's demand side of the Supply & Demand
issue, our bodies are not being supported in their efforts to
keep us cancer-free for a lifetime.
So
even though a raw vegan diet is the diet we're biologically and
anatomically adapted to, and therefore it's the best diet to eat
if you want the best odds of never getting a diagnosis of something
serious (or getting rid of some malady that you already have),
if a raw vegan educator tells you, "Once you start eating
enough fruits and vegetables you don't have to worry about nutrition"
or "You don't need any nutritional supplements to have
the best odds of preventing cancer or healing from it"
this should be seen as a red flag because of what the science
reveals. Yes, the person telling you this may truly be a sincere
person who honestly cares about the people they teach, but their
information can still be inaccurate. (And then there are those
educators who appear honest and sincere but in reality
aren't because they want to sell an easy-peasy program and want
your money going to them and not to worthwhile nutritional complements
to your diet). Sad, but a reality.
Now
let's also consider the health issue this article is addressing:
cancer. Although cancer is natural (no one is running around injecting
people with cancer cells, we develop cancer), the way cancer
manifests in our society today is unnatural, meaning, we wouldn't
have been experiencing cancer like we do today 100,000 years ago.
Indeed, cancer did not become common until very recently on our
timeline, so our body has not had nearly enough time to evolve
a more effective cancer-fighting system. We do have
such a system though, because everyone gets cancerous cells from
time to time, but that system evolved to deal with a very occasional
occurrence of a cell malfunctioning in such a way so that it replicates
too much and too fast. Today we have a lot more things that create
cancerous cells, and our present cancerous cell fighting system
is not suited to deal with such an unnatural onslaught.
So
it stands to reason that something equally unnatural would be
called for to deal with the unnatural cancers that plague us today;
and I'm not talking about chemo and radiation therapies. Yes,
they are certainly unnatural, but there are non-toxic and highly
effective therapies available, but since they are seen as "unnatural",
those health educators mentioned above who are of the belief that
all someone needs to do, if they receive a diagnosis of cancer,
is to do natural things, like eat a natural diet, get a natural
amount of sleep, etc. While these practices would certainly help
a person not develop cancerous cells in the first place, and would
also help the body's immune system stomp out these cells as they
form, once a person gets to an unnatural stage of cancer development,
merely adopting healthful lifestyle practices may not be enough
to totally resolve the cancer.
So
if a health educator recommends that someone who has been diagnosed
with cancer should simply adopt healthful lifestyle habits and
they will be fine, this advice should be seen as a red flag and
not as a "magic bullet." There are other things that
the person should be doing, and one of them is working with a
health educator whose recommendations are grounded in reality
as opposed to being based on firmly held doctrinal beliefs that
don't square with the world we're living in today.
So,
if you want the best odds of not getting cancer, or of getting
rid of it, you need to be able to recognize the misinformation
concerning cancer. This requires education, and not just from
one person... multi-source education is best so that you can come
across conflicting information such as the nutritional issue mentioned
above.
Knowledge
is power, but only when it is enough, and is understood. So learn
as a researcher and not as a student if you truly want the best
odds of avoiding a degenerative disease such as cancer... a student
is taught things, a researcher learns about disease looking at
more than just the conventional information, employing the ethos
of science.
Don Bennett
is an insightful, reality-based author, and health creation counselor
who uses the tools in his toolbox logic, common sense,
critical thinking, and independent thought to figure out
how to live so we can have the best odds of being optimally healthy.
Recommended
Reading
The
Ethos of Science
Do
Cell Phones Cause Cancer?
Bras
and Cancer
The
must-see documentary What the Health
Holistic
Doctors Being Silenced, Permanently (not for the faint
of heart)
|