Table of Contents[Hide][Show]
The world lost a true visionary yesterday with the passing of Steve Jobs, former CEO of Apple. I remember back in the late 80’s when I was a young computer programmer/designer fresh out of grad school using the (Apple) MacIntosh computer for the very first time.
The MacIntosh user interface was so intuitive and such a leap ahead of the predominant Microsoft DOS operating system (remember? type commands at the green screen prompt) that I thought I had died and gone to heaven.
This new and emerging user interface in the 1980s that is taken for granted today rocketed the task of computer design light years ahead and allowed the development of computer systems to at last be something users could be involved in and easily understand.
There is no doubt that Steve Jobs’ passing at 56 years old was premature. He had much more to contribute to the world and I for one feel the world has been cheated now that he is gone.
Pictures of him in his final days showed a frail, shockingly thin frame consistent with a person who had undergone chemotherapy treatments for cancer.
While every single detail of Mr. Jobs’ cancer treatments over the years are not publicly known, one can’t help but wonder if his chemotherapy and radiation treatments contributed to his demise.
Just a few weeks ago, Kara Kennedy, daughter of the late Senator Edward Kennedy died at age 51 from a heart attack. Her brother, Patrick Kennedy said that her many years of chemotherapy to treat lung cancer took a severe toll on her health and weakened her physically to the point where “her heart just gave out.”
Is Conventional Treatment for Cancer Worse Than the Disease?
It seems that chemotherapy/radiation treatments causing death rather than preserving life are becoming more common.
Radiation in particular ups the risk of heart problems in women undergoing conventional treatment for breast cancer. The May 2000 issue of The Lancet reported that women who had undergone radiation for breast cancer increased their odds of dying from other causes, usually heart related, by 21% compared with women who had not undergone radiation with the 20 year survival rate for breast cancer improving by only 1%.
Does that seem worth it to you? It sure doesn’t to me.
Chemotherapy is another conventional treatment for cancer that seems to hasten people’s death. The National Confidential Enquiry into Patient Outcome and Death in the UK reported that its review of 600 cancer patients who died within 30 days of treatment revealed that over one quarter had in fact been killed by the chemo and not cancer.
The extreme toxicity of chemo treatments is what causes the rapid demise, usually infections such as the very serious neutropenic sepsis.
In the case of Mr. Jobs, this appears to be what happened. According to reports from multiple sources, he had received chemotherapy treatments in recent months at the Stanford Cancer Center in Palo Alto California and his devastating physical deterioration from these treatments almost certainly contributed to his quick passing.
Would You Ever Use Chemo or Radiation to Treat Cancer?
If you received a cancer diagnosis, would you ever agree to chemotherapy or radiation treatments or would you explore nontoxic alternative therapies?
I, for one, would not consider conventional cancer treatment as such an approach to disease seems more than a little misguided. How can use of toxic chemicals and/or radiation possibly be beneficial when both of these treatments actually have been shown to cause cancer in the long run?
It seems that a more holistic approach to cancer would be wiser than the slash and burn approach of conventional cancer treatments.
In his article A Holistic Approach To Cancer, Dr. Tom Cowan MD writes:
“… the job of the doctor is to distinguish between the therapy and the illness. What I mean by that is if you get a splinter in your finger, and then your body makes pus to get the splinter out, is the pus the therapy or the disease? We know that pus indicates infection and the presence of microorganisms, and we learned in medical school that doctors should kill the pus. But I don’t think it is that far of a stretch to see that if you have a splinter in your finger, the pus is the therapy for the splinter. If you don’t take the splinter out, the pus will do it for you. If you mistakenly think that the pus is the disease and you destroy the pus, the splinter will stay and your body will attempt this process again. If you destroy the pus again, your body might repeat this process three or four more times. Then you have a chronic infection as the body keeps trying to remove the splinter. Eventually it will either succeed, or it will encapsulate the splinter, which is a tumor, a new growth. It is not a cancerous tumor but a benign cystic tumor of the splinter. The understanding that the pus is the therapy allows you to predict what is going to happen in the future.
Now think of this example. Joe Bloke is a smoker. In other words, he puts a bunch of splinters in his lungs every day. Twice a year Joe gets cough, fever, mucus–all to get the splinters out of his lungs. I prefer to say “cough, fever, mucus” rather than “bronchitis” because the word “bronchitis” separates you from the reality of the situation. His body is producing an inflammatory response–it is making a mucus-pus-fever response to cleanse his lungs of splinters. If Joe goes to a doctor who makes the mistake of thinking that the response is the problem, he will give drugs to stop the bronchitis–which is actually the medicine. So Joe will be left with the splinters. That scenario will happen twice a year for thirty years and then Joe has a big bag of splinters in his lungs, and we call that lung cancer.”
Holistic approaches to cancer help resolve whatever caused the cancer in the first place. Conventional chemo/radiation treat only the “pus” of the cancer as described by Dr. Cowan.
Stopping cancer symptoms by “killing” the cancer cells with chemo or radiation is not in any way a cure as Mr. Jobs tragically discovered in his long running quest to regain his health.
Sarah, TheHealthyHomeEconomist.com
Source: Doctors Rely on Chemo Too Much
This is so offensive. What kind of person would to try to capitalize on the death of an amazing visionary to drive page views and promote their own dubious agenda? What a negative light this casts on the WAPF.
She is not the only one making light of chemotherapy/radiation after his passing. This is VERY serious, people need to know the scams in the cancer industry, maybe it is a bit too soon, but I agree that the word needs to get out, and it is very timely for people to read about his death and wonder why he died so young.
It’s a discussion. That is all.
Agreed. I think that his passing makes the article even more timely. Seeing a prominent figure pass away from cancer brings it to the forefront of people’s minds…wondering what we would do personally if we were diagnosed. I think it’s good that Sarah is giving people alternatives to consider. We are all responsible for making our own decisions about our health, and how can we make the best possible decision if we don’t view the issue from all sides?
Prove to me that the “cancer industry” runs scams. Not based on speculation. Not based on what you know in your “heart”. Prove it.
Prove that chemotherapy has killed more bad (sick) cells than good (healthy) cells. The traditional medical industry makes $$$$$ from chemotherapy. They can’t make money off recommending eating healthy food. This is why all “natural cures” are forbidden and suppressed. I’ve always wondered why many doctors said they wouldn’t go through chemotherapy for themselves or their family if they had cancer. Doesn’t make sense to me.
What billion should I use to prove it. Private industry (drug and processed food companies like Bayer and Tyson)can spend billions to pay members of the FDA to vote in there favor. These same companies can then pull out a few billion more to prove how alternative treatments are not going to work. Use your head, if alternative treatment does work what would happen to the the drug and food industry? So tell me Sr. how should we prove it? Can I borrow some cash because I’ve got to tell you that my civil engineering salary just ain’t going to cut it.
Foods and drinks are the cause of pretty much any ailment westerners face today. I’ve cured all my pain (arthritis, disc herniations) with antioxidants and omega 3). DOCTORS only recommended pain meds and surgery. I cured my daughters bed wetting through eliminating caffeine. Doctors could not solve this problem. They suspected diabetes. Thank God I researched the issue myself or she could be on medication for the rest of her life. My girlfriend was diagnosed with bipolar when her anger was due to
to caffeine exposure. she stopped taking caffeine and her mood was stable. This is because stimulants pick you up and drop you down. Pretty obvious to me why didn’t her doc think of this. I had prostatis that was caused by a loss of vitamins and minerals in the semen, along with over use of the prostate muscle. Doctors could not figure out the cause. I went through horrible tests and took numerous antibiotics that fixed nothing. Finally the doctor said the pain must be in my head lol. I was referred to pain management. That’s western medicine. Just to be fair its not the doctors its the schools there trained in. these schools use books written by pharmaceutical companies. This is why private industry should not control healthcare. There in it for profit.
I have had this discussion with my mother. The practice seems so barbaric, to ravage the entire body like that. However, there isn’t really an aggressive alternative, is there? Though I think they have found a way to localize the radiation treatments to just the cancer sites, but I’d have to look up where I read that to make sure I read it correctly.
Yes, it is called Proton Beam radiation–my father in law had it done for prostate cancer. The benefit is that the radiation only hits the specific (very specific) area it is programmed to hit, but spares the surrounding tissue. Also, because it is directed at a far smaller area, they are able to use a much stronger radiation. It is now used for a variety of types of cancers, including certain brain tumors. It is interesting technology, but I surely think that even if a person opts for conventional treatment, they really need to complement it with natural, immune system supporting natural treatments as well. Unfortunately, sometimes (as is the case with a friend’s sister in law) a Dr. will refuse to treat a patient who is using ANY alternative therapy in conjunction with the conventional treatment! How tragic–just when a person’s body needs every boost it can get too.
I like some of his achievements and contributions.. but I must say he was also a deadbeat dad, whose child was on welfare, he cheated his early partners out of money .. and a host of other really bizare character flaws.. he entertained us yes.. was he a role model.. a Nobel laurette was he really important to humanity ??? NO . I am sad he is gone… but people are treating him like he cured cancer or something. Meanwhile we have real people who really helped humanity die recently and they barely get noticed.. very sad where our priorities are.
Not relevant, or helpful.
Do you actually know what you are talking about??
No, i already lost my mom to chemo… (not cancer) 😉 ive seen people using alternative treatments last a longer and happier life…
I’ve read many times that doctors would not put their own relatives thru chemo or radiation treatments…so why do they recommend it to patients??? I’ve seen too many people who don’t last too long after these treatments…
I think you would have to be in the situation, and it also depends on the kind of cancer you have, your mental/emotional state and support system. If it is a child do you have a choice for treatment??
Adult or child – doesn’t matter. The choices are either go to a traditional M.D. in a traditional hospital (where they will do chemotherapy), or to do research into eating raw foods. I’ve looked into this to come to my own conclusion of what I would do if I had cancer. Even without cancer, I’m eating much better and know my body is better for it.
How so? The article acknowledges his achievements and his contributions to the world. What is so terrible about discussing this subject now (soon after his death)? There are plenty of people today who are suffering from cancer and more importantly from cancer treatments who could read this article and reconsider their choices. I lost a very very dear person in my life who died from cancer treatment too. The decision of whether or not to use conventional treatment is a real quandary and one that grapples a lot of families. So I understand and appreciate the struggle and yet, I believe that people should be made aware of their choices for treatment, not be badgered into chemo and radiation out of fear. Fear (which is what all oncologists I know employ while talking to potential patients) should not be the basis of these decisions, reason and rationality should be.
I agree – No one here so far has disrespected him personally in any way that I can tell. He was a public figure. We, as humans, have an interest in his well-being, and that of our own. Life, death, and health are subjects of interest to all. I believe he, and anyone for that matter, would be glad that in the wake of their passing, a discussion was had that aired fears, taught, comforted and expressed ideas. He was a man of idea and invention after all. We are all just people, learning from other people. It’s a worthy discussion.
That’s a tough one. At my age, 62, I’ve seen it all with family and friends. After what I’ve seen, I’d say it’s a personal choice and depends on your age and what type of cancer. Lost a dear friend at age 58 to cancer that began as a stage 2 lump in her breast and she ended up dying after 4 1/2 years of surgeries, radiation, chemo and every alternative thing you could think of, and did I throw in going to shamans and faith healers? Bottom line here, we think she didn’t treat it aggressively in the beginning. Another friend, about the same age, but with stage four colon cancer that had spread to her lung and liver, hit it quickly and with everything mentioned above. She is alive today after 8 years and her doctors consider her a miracle. Bottom line, she hit it hard and with everything. Soooo, I’d say, yes, I would do the traditional treatments we have now and a whole lot of alternative, at least in my 60’s. Into my later years, maybe not, but it’s a personal call for an individual and family and I am so sorry for anyone who has to go through cancer.
I agree with you Mikki, it depends on your age and what type of cancer. I am a mother of eight children and I am 42 years old. If it were me who was diagnosed, that’s one thing. But my son who was 8 years old when he was diagnosed with leukemia just finished receiving three and a half years of treatment. We have watched many children go through many things, ….. all cancers are different. During his treatment, I did everything I could to educate myself on traditional foods and different eating theories so that I could support his body as best as I could. He is now cancer free and we are working every day to feed him and his siblings a nourishing diet of whole foods. (That’s what got me to this site.) *We are a success story, for now, we get that. But we also know that regardless of what treatment plan you choose, God is in control. We just have to do what we feel is best individually.
Sarah, thank you for giving us information. I think it’s our personal responsibility to learn all we can so that we can make educated decisions in order to be good stewards of the one body we have been given.
answer from me .. NO my dad refused them after cancer surgery and lived 30 more years
My Mom is living her last days on earth after battling brain cancer and I do NOT think the chemo or radiation was benefical. She was constantly ill nor did her quality of life improve. I think she was pressured into conventional treatment but who am I to question her decisions.
Blessings to you and your family as you go through this difficult time.
Wow…maybe a bit disrespectful considering he just died YESTERDAY.
I agree to a certain extent; however, I had a friend who recently tied of cancer and I couldn’t help but wonder if the treatment added to his early death. I felt horrible for having the thought, but I can see where Sarah is coming from, and I think our treatments should be questioned.
What’s wrong with having a conversation about it.? She praised him in several ways. I don’t get what the problem is, in using this as a catalyst for conversation about a very serious subject. I really don’t think the guy would mind, given what I’ve read about him.