Re: Difference between conventional and natural or alternative cancer treatments


bifwkbryearr@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
To a conventional physician, the tumor is the enemy.
Cancer is viewed as a local disease, namely the tumor. By cutting out
the tumor, irradiating it, or flooding the body with toxic (and often
carcinogenic) drugs, the conventional physician hopes to destroy the
tumor and restore the patient to health.
But all too often, the cancer is still present and has metastasized, or
re-occurs.
In contrast, the alternative physician regards cancer as one that
involves the whole body.
The tumor is merely a symptom and the cancer treatment aims to correct
the root causes of disease in the whole body.
Dr. Josef Issels, who successfully treated many "incurable" cancer
patients, stated:
.. those who believe cancer is a local disease [that is, conventional
physicians] think that the tumor comes first and only afterwards
follows the generalised illness; those who think it is a generalised
disease of the body [alternative physicians] believe that first comes
the illness, and only afterwards the tumor... from this basically
different way of looking at cancer, [the two types of physicians] take
separate paths towards the solution to cancer.
Cancer is a general disease of the whole body from the outset.
The tumor is a symptom of that illness.
It is my contention, based on twenty-five years of clinical experience
with over eight thousand cancer patients, that only by recognising the
disease is, and always has been, one affecting the whole body from the
outset, can it be more effectively arrested. By adopting that
principle, the statistics of survival can be improved from the present
grim position where eight out of every ten patients die having received
all possible surgery, radiotherapy and chemotherapy."
http://cancertreatmentqi.blogspot.com/#

Do I have to die to get the promised "100% refund"?

-jc

PS. This is not physics

.

Relevant Pages