Skip to main content

Together we are beating cancer

Donate now

Cancer News

The latest news, analysis and opinion from Cancer Research UK

  • Health & Medicine

Don’t believe the hype – 10 persistent cancer myths debunked

by Oliver Childs | Analysis

24 March 2014

343 comments 343 comments

facebook icon twitter icon linkedin icon

Google ‘cancer’ and you’ll be faced with millions of web pages. And the number of YouTube videos you find if you look up ‘cancer cure’ is similarly vast.

The problem is that much of the information out there is at best inaccurate, or at worst dangerously misleading. There are plenty of evidence-based, easy to understand pages about cancer, but there are just as many, if not more, pages spreading myths.

And it can be hard to distinguish fact from fiction, as much of the inaccurate information looks and sounds perfectly plausible. But if you scratch the surface and look at the evidence, many continually perpetuated ‘truths’ become unstuck.

In this post, we want to set the record straight on 10 cancer myths we regularly encounter. Driven by the evidence, not by rhetoric or anecdote, we describe what the reality of research actually shows to be true.

Myth 1: Cancer is a man-made, modern disease

It might be more prominent in the public consciousness now than in times gone by, but cancer isn’t just a ‘modern’, man-made disease of Western society. Cancer has existed as long as humans have. It was described thousands of years ago by Egyptian and Greek physicians, and researchers have discovered tell-tale signs of cancer in a 3,000-year-old skeleton. It’s even been discovered in dinosaur bones.

While it’s certainly true that global lifestyle-related diseases like cancer are on the rise, the biggest risk factor for cancer is age.

The simple fact is that more people are living long enough to develop cancer because of our success in tackling infectious diseases and other historical causes of death such as malnutrition. It’s perfectly normal for DNA damage in our cells to build up as we age, and such damage can lead to cancer developing.

We’re also now able to diagnose cancers more accurately, thanks to advances in screening, imaging and pathology.

Yes, lifestyle, diet and other things like air pollution collectively have a huge impact on our risk of cancer – smoking for instance is behind a quarter of all cancer deaths in the UK – but that’s not the same as saying it’s entirely a modern, man-made disease. There are plenty of natural causes of cancer – for example, one in six worldwide cancers is caused by viruses and bacteria.

Myth 2: Superfoods prevent cancer

Blueberries, beetroot, broccoli, garlic, green tea… the list goes on. Despite thousands of websites claiming otherwise, there’s no such thing as a ‘superfood’. It’s a marketing term used to sell products and has no scientific basis.

That’s not to say you shouldn’t think about what you eat. Some foods are clearly healthier than others. The odd blueberry or mug of green tea certainly could be part of a healthy, balanced diet. Stocking up on fruits and veg is a great idea, and eating a range of different veg is helpful too, but the specific vegetables you choose doesn’t really matter.

Our bodies are complex and cancer is too, so it’s gross oversimplification to say that any one food, on its own, could have a major influence over your chance of developing cancer.

We’ve also written extensively on the scientific evidence about anti-oxidants and cancer in these posts – part one,  part two and part three. [Added 28/03/14 KA]

The steady accumulation of evidence over several decades points to a simple, but not very newsworthy fact that the best way to reduce your risk of cancer is by a series of long-term healthy behaviours such as not smoking, keeping active, keeping a healthy body weight and cutting back on alcohol.

Myth 3: ‘Acidic’ diets cause cancer

Some myths about cancer are surprisingly persistent, despite flying in the face of basic biology. One such idea is that overly ‘acidic’ diets cause your blood to become ‘too acidic’, which can increase your risk of cancer. Their proposed answer: increase your intake of healthier ‘alkaline’ foods like green vegetables and fruits (including, paradoxically, lemons).

This is biological nonsense. True, cancer cells can’t live in an overly alkaline environment, but neither can any of the other cells in your body.

Blood is usually slightly alkaline. This is tightly regulated by the kidneys within a very narrow and perfectly healthy range. It can’t be changed for any meaningful amount of time by what you eat, and any extra acid or alkali is simply peed out in urine.
To maintain the correct balance within the body, your urine can and does change pH, depending on what you’ve eaten (explained in detail in this post). This can be seen by testing urine pH (acidity) after eating different foods and is the basis of the mistaken belief that diet can “make the body alkaline”. But that’s all you’re changing, and anyone who claims otherwise simply doesn’t understand how the body works. [Edited for clarity and extra links, KA 08/08/14]

While eating lots of green veg is certainly healthy, that’s not because of any effect on how acid or alkaline your body is.

There is something called acidosis. This is a physiological condition that happens when your kidneys and lungs can’t keep your body’s pH (a measure of acidity) in balance. It is often the result of serious illness or poisoning. It can be life-threatening and needs urgent medical attention, but it’s not down to overly acidic diets.

We know that the immediate environment around cancer cells (the microenvironment) can become acidic. This is due to differences in the way that tumours create energy and use oxygen compared with healthy tissue. Researchers are working hard to understand how this happens, in order to develop more effective cancer treatments.

But there’s no good evidence to prove that diet can manipulate whole body pH, or that it has an impact on cancer.

Myth 4: Cancer has a sweet tooth

Another idea we see a lot is that sugar apparently ‘feeds cancer cells’, suggesting that it should be completely banished from a patient’s diet.

This is an unhelpful oversimplification of a highly complex area that we’re only just starting to understand.

‘Sugar’ is a catch-all term. It refers to a range of molecules including simple sugars found in plants, glucose and fructose. The white stuff in the bowl on your table is called sucrose and is made from glucose and fructose stuck together. All sugars are carbohydrates, commonly known as carbs – molecules made from carbon, hydrogen and oxygen.

Carbs – whether from cake or a carrot – get broken down in our digestive system to release glucose and fructose. These get absorbed into the bloodstream to provide energy for us to live.

All our cells, cancerous or not, use glucose for energy. Because cancer cells are usually growing very fast compared with healthy cells, they have a particularly high demand for this fuel. There’s also evidence that they use glucose and produce energy in a different way from healthy cells.

Researchers are working to understand the differences in energy usage in cancers compared with healthy cells, and trying to exploit them to develop better treatments (including the interesting but far from proven drug DCA).

But all this doesn’t mean that sugar from cakes, sweets and other sugary foods specifically feeds cancer cells, as opposed to any other type of carbohydrate. Our body doesn’t pick and choose which cells get what fuel. It converts pretty much all the carbs we eat to glucose, fructose and other simple sugars, and they get taken up by tissues when they need energy.

While it’s very sensible to limit sugary foods as part of an overall healthy diet and to avoid putting on weight, that’s a far cry from saying that sugary foods specifically feed cancer cells.

Both the ‘acidic diet’ and ‘sugar feeds cancer’ myths distort sensible dietary advice – of course, nobody is saying that eating a healthy diet doesn’t matter when it comes to cancer. You can read about the scientific evidence on diet and cancer on our website.

But dietary advice must be based on nutritional and scientific fact. When it comes to offering diet tips to reduce cancer risk, research shows that the same boring healthy eating advice still holds true. Fruit, vegetables, fibre, white meat and fish are good. Too much fat, salt, sugar, red or processed meat and alcohol are less so.

Also, this post, “What should you eat while you’re being treated for cancer“, is packed with links to evidence-based advice from our CancerHelp UK website. And this post, from the Junkfood Science blog, explores the science behind sugar and cancer in more detail.

[Edited to add more information and links KA 28/03/14]

Myth 5: Cancer is a fungus – and sodium bicarbonate is the cure

This ‘theory’ comes from the not-very-observant observation that “cancer is always white”.

One obvious problem with this idea – apart from the fact that cancer cells are clearly not fungal in origin – is that cancer isn’t always white. Some tumours are. But some aren’t. Ask any pathologist or cancer surgeon, or have a look on Google Image search (but maybe not after lunch…).

Proponents of this theory say that cancer is caused by infection by the fungus candida, and that tumours are actually the body’s attempt at protecting itself from this infection.

But there’s no evidence to show that this is true (and plenty of evidence – going back at least as far as 1902 – that it starts from faults our own cells).

Furthermore, plenty of perfectly healthy people can be infected with candida – it’s part of the very normal array of microbes that live in (and on) all of us. Usually our immune system keeps candida in check, but infections can get more serious in people with compromised immune systems, such as those who are HIV-positive.

The ‘simple solution’ is apparently to inject tumours with baking soda (sodium bicarbonate). This isn’t even the treatment used to treat proven fungal infections, let alone cancer. On the contrary, there’s good evidence that high doses of sodium bicarbonate can lead to serious – even fatal – consequences.

Some studies suggest that sodium bicarbonate can affect cancers transplanted into mice or cells grown in the lab, by neutralising the acidity in the microenvironment immediately around a tumour. And researchers in the US are running a small clinical trial investigating whether sodium bicarbonate capsules can help to reduce cancer pain and to find the maximum dose that can be tolerated, rather than testing whether it has any effect on tumours.

As far as we are aware, there have been no published clinical trials of sodium bicarbonate as a treatment for cancer.

It’s also worth pointing out that it’s not clear whether it’s possible to give doses of sodium bicarbonate that can achieve any kind of meaningful effect on cancer in humans, although it’s something that researchers are investigating.

Because the body strongly resists attempts to change its pH, usually by getting rid of bicarbonate through the kidneys, there’s a risk that doses large enough to significantly affect the pH around a tumour might cause a serious condition known as alkalosis.

One estimate suggests that a dose of around 12 grams of baking soda per day (based on a 65 kg adult) would only be able to counteract the acid produced by a tumour roughly one cubic millimetre in size. But doses of more than about 30 grams per day are likely to cause severe health problems – you do the maths.

Myth 6: There’s a miracle cancer cure…

From cannabis to coffee enemas, the internet is awash with videos and personal anecdotes about ‘natural’ ‘miracle’ cures for cancer.

But extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence – YouTube videos and Facebook posts are emphatically not scientific evidence and aren’t the same as good-quality, peer-reviewed evidence.

In many cases it’s impossible to tell whether patients featured in such anecdotal sources have been ‘cured’ by any particular alternative treatment or not. We know nothing about their medical diagnosis, stage of disease or outlook, or even if they actually had cancer in the first place. For instance, we don’t know what other cancer treatments they had.

And we only hear about the success stories – what about the people who have tried it and have not survived? The dead can’t speak, and often people who make bold claims for ‘miracle’ cures only pick their best cases, without presenting the full picture.

This highlights the importance of publishing data from peer-reviewed, scientifically rigorous lab research and clinical trials. Firstly, because conducting proper clinical studies enables researchers to prove that a prospective cancer treatment is safe and effective. And secondly, because publishing these data allows doctors around the world to judge for themselves and use it for the benefit of their patients.

This is the standard to which all cancer treatments should be held.

That’s not to say the natural world isn’t a source of potential treatments, from aspirin (willow bark) to penicillin (mould). For example, the cancer drug taxol was first extracted from the bark and needles of the Pacific Yew tree.

But that’s a far cry from saying you should chew bark to combat a tumour. It’s an effective treatment because the active ingredient has been purified and tested in clinical trials. So we know that it’s safe and effective, and what dose to prescribe.

Of course people with cancer want to beat their disease by any means possible. And it’s completely understandable to be searching high and low for potential cures. But our advice is to be wary of anything labelled a ‘miracle cure’, especially if people are trying to sell it to you.

Wikipedia has this excellent list of ineffective cancer treatments that are often touted as miracle cures, which is worth a browse.

If you want to know about the scientific evidence about cannabis, cannabinoids and cancer – a topic we’re often asked about – please take a look at our extensive blog post on the subject, including information about the clinical trials we’re helping to fund.

And if you’ve seen links to article about scientists in Canada “curing cancer but nobody notices”, these refer to an interesting but currently unproven drug called DCA, which we’ve also written about before.  [Added KA 28/03/14]

Myth 7: … and Big Pharma are suppressing it

Hand in hand with the idea that there is a cornucopia of ‘miracle cures’ is the idea that governments, the pharmaceutical industry and even charities are colluding to hide the cure for cancer because they make so much money out of existing treatments.

Whatever the particular ‘cure’ being touted, the logic is usually the same: it’s readily available, cheap and can’t be patented, so the medical establishment is suppressing it in order to line its own pockets. But, as we’ve written before, there’s no conspiracy – sometimes it just doesn’t work.

There’s no doubt that the pharmaceutical industry has a number of issues with transparency and clinical trials that it needs to address (the book Bad Pharma by Ben Goldacre is a handy primer). We push regulators and pharmaceutical companies hard to make sure that effective drugs are made available at a fair price to the NHS – although it’s important to remember that developing and trialling new drugs costs a lot of money, which companies need to recoup.

Problems with conventional medicine don’t automatically prove that alternative ‘cures’ work. To use a metaphor, just because cars sometimes crash doesn’t mean that flying carpets are a viable transport option.

It simply doesn’t make sense that pharmaceutical companies would want to suppress a potential cure. Finding a highly effective therapy would guarantee huge worldwide sales.

And the argument that treatments can’t be patented doesn’t hold up. Pharma companies are not stupid, and they are quick to jump on promising avenues for effective therapies. There are always ways to repackage and patent molecules, which would give them a return on the investment required to develop and test them in clinical trials (a cost that can run into many millions) if the treatment turns out to work.

It’s also worth pointing out that charities such as Cancer Research UK and government-funded scientists are free to investigate promising treatments without a profit motive. And it’s hard to understand why NHS doctors – who often prescribe generic, off-patent drugs – wouldn’t use cheap treatments if they’d been shown to be effective in clinical trials.

For example, we’re funding large-scale trials of aspirin – a drug first made in 1897, and now one of the most widely-used off-patent drugs in the world. We’re researching whether it can prevent bowel cancer in people at high risk, reduce the side effects of chemotherapy, and even prevent cancer coming back and improve survival.

Finally, it’s worth remembering that we are all human – even politicians and Big Pharma executives – and cancer can affect anyone. People in pharmaceutical companies, governments, charities and the wider ‘medical establishment’ all can and do die of cancer too.

Here at Cancer Research UK we have seen loved ones and colleagues go through cancer. Many of them have survived. Many have not. To suggest that we are – collectively and individually – hiding ‘the cure’ is not only absurd, it’s offensive to the global community of dedicated scientists, to the staff and supporters of cancer research organisations such as Cancer Research UK and, most importantly, to cancer patients and their families.

Myth 8: Cancer treatment kills more than it cures

Let’s be clear, cancer treatment – whether chemotherapy, radiotherapy or surgery – is no walk in the park. The side effects can be tough. After all, treatments that are designed to kill cancer cells will inevitably affect healthy cells too.

And sometimes, sadly, treatment doesn’t work. We know that it’s very difficult to treat late-stage cancer that has spread throughout the body, and while treatment can provide relief from symptoms and prolong life, it’s not going to be a cure for very advanced cancers.

Surgery is still the most effective treatment we have for cancer, provided it’s diagnosed early enough for an operation to be done. And radiotherapy helps cure more people than cancer drugs. Yet chemotherapy and other cancer drugs have a very important part to play in cancer treatment – in some cases helping to cure the disease, and in others helping to prolong survival.

The claims on the internet that chemotherapy is “only 3 per cent effective” are highly misleading and outdated, and are explored in more depth in these two posts from the Science Based Medicine blog.

We also wrote this post in response to concerns that chemotherapy might “encourage cancer”.

It important to point out that in an increasing number of cases, the drugs do work. For example, more than 96 per cent of all men are now cured of testicular cancer, compared to fewer than 70 per cent in the 1970s thanks in part to a drug we helped to develop called cisplatin. And three-quarters of children with cancer are now cured, compared with around a quarter in the late 1960s – most of them are alive today directly thanks to chemotherapy.

We know that we still have a long way to go until we have effective, kinder treatments for all types of cancer. And it’s important that doctors, patients and their families are realistic and honest about the best options for treatment, especially when cancer is very advanced.

It may be better to opt for treatment aimed at reducing pain and symptoms rather than attempting to cure the disease (palliative care). Balancing quality and quantity of life is always going to be an issue in cancer treatment, and it’s one that each patient must decide for themselves.

Myth 9: We’ve made no progress in fighting cancer

This simply isn’t true. Thanks to advances in research, survival from cancer has doubled in the UK over the past 40 years, and death rates have fallen by 10 per cent over the past decade alone. In fact, half of all patients now survive at least ten years.

This article by our chief clinician, Professor Peter Johnson, outlines some of the key facts.

By definition, these figures relate to people treated at least 10 years ago. It’s likely that the patients being diagnosed and treated today have an even better chance of survival.

To see how the picture has changed, make yourself a cuppa and settle down to watch this hour-long documentary we helped to make – The Enemy Within: 50 years of fighting cancer. From the early days of chemotherapy in the 50s and 60s to the latest ‘smart’ drugs and pinpoint-accurate radiotherapy, it highlights how far we’ve come over the years.

There’s still a long way to go. There are some cancers where progress has been much slower – such as lung, brain, pancreatic and oesophageal cancers. And when you lose someone you love to cancer, it can feel as though no progress has been made at all.

That’s why we’re working so hard to beat cancer sooner, to make sure that nobody loses their life prematurely to the disease.

Myth 10: Sharks don’t get cancer

Yes they do.

This excellent article goes into why the myth about the cancer-free shark has been so persistent.

Olly and Kat

Useful links


    Comments

  • Modern Medical Quacks
    21 September 2014

    The grand masters of cancer and disease profits literally using disinformation and fraud to brainwash the gullible and naive masses with commercial brand filled with toxic ingredients that causes cancer and diseases, promoting and profiting from fraudulent tv advertised products and increasing disease disinformation from all natural alternative healing. Maintaining the $1 trillion dollar annual industry of mega profits from intentionally created ever more newer and deadlier diseases. WAKE UP PEOPLE! It’s known as Iatrogenics and Eugenics.

  • stephen
    19 September 2014

    The general public are waking up. We need to spend hours every week spreading the truth about natural cancer cures and exposing the criminals in big pharma who are suppressing these cures. We need to get the information out because the criminals who own the system are now trying to ban these natural cures to make sure people in the future won’t be able to get hold of them. People are waking up in large numbers, we just need to keep getting the information out and take back our power that these criminals don’t want us to have.

  • Gloria canziani
    18 September 2014

    you obviously are funder by BIG pharma! I could go on but I won’t.!

  • Al
    14 September 2014

    Gully – That’s short for ‘Gullible’, right? Clearly you have internet access so please use it to educate yourself. Maybe once you’re awake you’ll see that it’s the article that is ridiculous, not the comments!

  • Scott
    13 September 2014

    Gully – Why don’t you site some credible references yourself instead of just branding other peoples comments ridiculous.

  • Gully
    11 September 2014

    The author has made a good effort in explaining these MYTHS (they are myths) unfortunately he hasn’t given enough further reading or even a bibliography. A few of the hyper-links lead to random sites with articles that are not quite reliable. Next time i suggest you add credible journals, so you don’t get subjected to these ridiculous comments.. (significant typo’s in the last post, soz)

  • Gully
    11 September 2014

    The author has made a good effort in explaining these MYTHS well (they are myths) unfortunately he hasn’t given enough further reading for even a bibliography and few hyperlinks here and there but leading to random site with articles that are not reliable. Next time i suggest you add credible journals, so don’t get subjected to these ridiculous comments..

  • Per
    10 September 2014

    Dumbest thing Ive ever read!

  • Per
    10 September 2014

    Nobel prize winner in medicine 1931 was a fraud you say?

  • Dorin
    10 September 2014

    I’m not buying it.
    Very black and white, you know the world is actually rainbow-coloured? We are not simple.

  • Gian
    10 September 2014

    An elegant slalom around truth here… where “myths” 4, 6, 7 and 9 are the poles. I found this type of half truth in a huge number of pharma and main institutional sites. Unfortunately these half truth, often are vehicle to half lies and there is really no “debunking” taking place here…. Maybe one day I’ll post here some details for the sake of a honest discussion.

  • sarah
    10 September 2014

    I want to update you all on the good news that have just happen in my life i that i never believe because i own my bank a lot of money that i use in building my house here in USA i tried many online loan lender’s but non work out for me then i have to sell off one of my kidney and A friend of my directed me to Mr max an agent who help me to sell my kidney and the operation was successful and now i and my family are happy again as i have been able to pay back all my bills that i own If any is in need of help you can contact him on his email: [email protected]

  • sam smajic
    9 September 2014

    Your 10 myths are actually 10 lies that you think we will swallow.
    The question is, whether your organization would continue to exist if it finds the cure for cancer?

  • brian
    9 September 2014

    You did all that work and you are completely wrong and misinformed about pH balance and the effects of acid promoting diets. Take the time to do the research or don’t bother confusing people with completely wrong info!!

  • a546434
    7 September 2014

    People who have cancer, adults and children, should be given an extensive questionnaire that may help prevent more cancer. Adults may be given the child’s questionnaire to answer for the child. The answers to the questionnaires would be filed into a huge database to help compile data and statistics from the answers. The compiled data would be available on the internet for people to see. A computer could be programmed to compile statistics from the data. The questionnaire data statistics may help show possible cancer causes. *** Types of questionnaire questions must be varied and expansive in scope. For example types of questionnaire questions: (1) What is your occupation, ( and spouse occupation )( for a child ask parents occupation.)
    (2) How many hours each week do you drive ( or are a passenger ) in a motor vehicle.
    ( same question for a child.)
    ETC… ( ABOUT 100 – 200 types of questions should be asked of different types… )
    ( many people should be involved in the creation of the types of questions asked on the questionnaire… )

  • Judy
    7 September 2014

    I would also like to state another fact… My cousin was diagnosed with breast cancer. Scared out of her mind she had both breast removed and consented to weeks of chemo. She lost all of her hair and suffered unimaginal pain. Once through all that and just when she thought she could put it behind her she finds out that the chemo has damaged her heart and yes they told her it was the chemo that damaged her heart. Her prognosis isn’t good and you still try to push that crap? You can take your poisons and shove them where the sun don’t shine. If rather die than take your poisons.

  • JUDY Gagnon
    7 September 2014

    I see you think we are all stupid and incapable of seeing through the lies. You are part of the conspiracy to kill off millions of people in whatever way you can. There have been natural cures that work all along but those were suppressed because they couldn’t be patented and would kill big pharma profit. Doctors lost their right to practice because they saw through the farce being perpetuated on human beings. We don’t want your poisons and as human beings we have the right to choose not to accept them.

  • jaynie
    6 September 2014

    This article should have been called.. 10 lies we want you to believe!
    There is a cure for cancer.. and it has nothing to do with the pharma industry. All natural and costs a pittance! Would put doctors and pharma companies out of business quick smart! You people must be part of the illuminati!
    You talk RUBBISH!!

  • a56948559
    5 September 2014

    there needs to be a published source of people’s thoughts on what he or she BELIEVES caused there cancer ( or child’s cancer ) YES I KNOW that what we believe what caused the cancer is just a belief ( BUT sometimes our belief is correct.) For example, if your child has cancer and you believe that living upstairs from a dry-cleaning store caused your child’s cancer I WANT TO KNOW WHAT you believe. *** FROM our thoughts on what caused our cancer or our child’s cancer we can dissect fact, fiction and POSSIBLE.
    PEOPLE NEED to know IF YOU HAVE ANY INKLING about a cause.
    YOU COULD help other parents NOT live above a dry cleaner store (AS an example )
    YOUR thoughts could HELP prevent MORE cancers from developing!!!!!!!
    I DO want to know these thoughts. **If someone thinks that there child got cancer because they took vitamin pills while being pregnat ( I WANT TO KNOW THIS !! ) ( I want to know –even if this is just a belief **** later people can sift through fact, fiction and POSSIBLE…
    Do you believe your child got cancer because you put pesicides on your lawn on a regular basis ( I WANT TO know what you believe….)
    ****PEOPLE let us know WHAT you believe caused your cancer or your child’s cancer
    (BLOG it ) PEOPLE LIKE ME WILL respond!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • bill Smith
    4 September 2014

    What a patronising article.

  • John Hot Dog
    3 September 2014

    There are no published clinical trials…There are no published clinical trials…There are no published clinical trials….

    Of course not. Double blind, long term clinical trials on humans is expensive. All the funding for these trials go into drugs, surgery and other procedures, where the money can be made. Doctors, Hospitals and the Health Care Industry don’t make money keeping you healthy.

  • Billy Bob
    2 September 2014

    Maybe its not the money they make from treatments but how much they make out of donations. And maybe theyre choosing to ignore trying to find a cure.

  • rich
    2 September 2014

    It’s not a conspiracy that corporations are corrupt, It is their legal obligation to make as much money as they can for their shareholders. Any loss through fines for illegal or underhand practices is a drop in the ocean compared to the profit. I find it quite alarming that you dispute this.

  • Shawn
    29 August 2014

    I don’t believe a word of this. You haven’t debunked anything. Just more parroting of the big Pharmas. You can’t even attach your name to the article. What a joke.

  • jack
    29 August 2014

    There is no doubt in any free thinking humans mind that cancer, it’s research, it’s treatment and the reason to try to debunk myths…. Money a trillion dollar industry, people have woken up.. Keeping searching, keep on with the killing g of people do what you feel is best, but please don’t insult us any more by ‘trying ‘ to cure it, cancer is like war they never want it to end, no profit no fear ,

  • Scott Miller
    28 August 2014

    I also agree that urine pH is not a useful indication of anything, but that does not debunk the acid/alkaline theory either in part for the reasons I just mentioned.

  • Scott Miller
    28 August 2014

    Trying to reply, but my messages are being moderated or just not published :-/

  • Scott
    28 August 2014

    LEH – Please look up Dichloroacetic acid, often abbreviated DCA. (Works by neutralising acid, and extremely effective against several types of cancer)

    Negative PR or misinformation campaigns, and people that misinterpret results, take the consistent pH of blood and apply this to every cell in the body…the fact is cellular pH is very different to blood pH, and many areas of the body have a different pH to blood. Theoretically every individual cell in the body could have its own pH and all require a higher concentration inside the cell than outside in order to be nourished aka osmosis.

    Cancer cells are known to be acidic compared to healthy cells, neutralising this cellular acidic environment appears to disrupt the cancer to the point of causing an apopostic effect or cell death.

    Sodium bi-carb or any alkaline minerals found in abundance in a healthy alkaline diet nourish our cells, and will naturally effect the individual pH of that cell.

  • CuredItAlready
    27 August 2014

    Where is your evidence? Your facts? This is a lousy dodge of an article. A search of the pubmed database with any knowledge will make you look uneducated. Give some facts/stats to back your dribble. I’ll be happy to reply.

  • Gail Harrison
    26 August 2014

    I have been diagnosed with stage 3 HER2 breast cancer. I had six chemo and 18 radiation treatments.
    I went for a mammogram every two years since I was in my forties. I am soon to be sixty. Well I had lumps on the side of my right breast as far back as my twenties. About four years ago I developed a lump under my right armpit. I was never called for biopsies even though the Breast Clinic new about the lumps. Then I believe the mammogram and diagnostic mammogram squished the cancer Tumors. 22 out of 24 lymph nodes were also removed from armpit, down right arm and chest. Cancer was on the outside of lymph nodes as well.
    The chemo Onocologist apologized that this shouldn’t have happened.
    Well I went the Conventuals ways and it failed. Hopefully the rest will be good.
    I feel that with all the money that has gone into research there should be a cure.
    I think it would be wise for Cancer Research to take Canabis Oil and do extensive research. Also baking soda and the other methods. Why not.

  • Beth Baumgartner
    26 August 2014

    If someone is diagnosed with Thyroid cancer what’s the wurst that could happen with no treatment? Just wondering

  • danar
    24 August 2014

    (lung – liver – pancreatic – stomach – colon – breast – kidney – Ovarian – prostate ) cancer, Leukemia and Non-Hodgkin lymphoma will never cure what progress have you done in all these years your best treatments are chemo and surgery and you ask people to do screening to find if they have cancer and catch cancer in early stage but does early stage make big difference in lung cancer stage 1 will live 5 years (in pain) as maximum but stage 4 will live for 1 year or 8 months (in pain). None of your scanning technology will find single cancer cell in the body instead they can detect only a tumor billion of cancerous cells. I hope I will die by ebola instead of cancer because it is faster than better than going through chemo radiation to die at the end. so please stop your treatment and allow people to die peacefully.

  • Moppo
    24 August 2014

    Ok..sorry for my bad english, I`m not from a country where they speak engish. But in short terms. Last year I lost my brother, my friend and my cousin in cancer. They were all around 30 year of age, and they all used chemotherapy and radiation. I had contact with a woman, the longest living human in Norway with my brother`s disease, and she said “never do what the doctors says”. But of course, in our days, the doctors is regarded as God, and we want to trust and believe them, and they adviced my brother to use the evil chemotherapy and radiation. And of course, my brother, my friend and my cousin passed away. Sorry, and it`s not a conspiratory, in my opinion, you people in the cancer-industry are some brain-washed and cynical humans. You perfectly know that your threatment doesn`t work in many cases, but you advice us to use it. Personally, this two years have showed me this world is cruel, and the power and the money speaks, and decide single perons destiny. I hope, and I know that chemotherapy and radiation too, will be a big, big shame in the future. The human nature can`t be threat like a machine.

  • Moppo
    24 August 2014

    d

  • Boo
    23 August 2014

    Some valid, some not valid.

  • Elizabeth
    22 August 2014

    I read your article with interest and agreed with a lot of what was said.Its true that many more people are surviving with cancer, but it still seems to be an incurable disease, or collection of diseases and will often recur. The thinking now seems to be shifting towards making cancer something the sufferer can live with, rather than a disease to be eradicated. The main problems with the chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery, are that the side effects can be intolerable, to such an extent that they greatly reduce the quality of life for those undertaking these treatments. That plus the fact it is now realised that cancer is not just one disease, but comprises different diseases, there will be no cure-all for the different cancers, all of which have varying outcomes. There is now talk of tailoring treatments to a person’s genetic make up but I am sure this would way too expensive to implement for the majority of cancer patients and their physicians. .

  • Stephen
    22 August 2014

    Phil, who said that an all natural diet will cure or prevent cancer? And since when has organic meat ajd natural cows milk been healthy? Just because something is organic doesn’t mean it’s healthy. Mental and emotional stress can also cause cancer. In fact, Dr Leonard Coldwell said that about half of his cancer patients started to recover as soon as they managed to reduce their stress levels in their lives. There are also many natural treatments that killcancer cells without side effects. But I guess poisioning your body with chemotherpay is more logical to you. I guess some sheep never wake up.

  • Experience is better than "fact".
    20 August 2014

    Totally drops the ball on issue # 7 of big pharma trying to the hide cure.

    A cure is not something that you would have to take for the rest of your life or for a long period of time so the argument that the cure would be just as profitable as the treatments we currently have is very intellectually lazy.

    Sure you might make as much profits initially but once everyone is eventually cured where are your profits then going to come from? There’s a reason car companies do not make cars that last forever. They want returning customers. Just like the cancer industry wants returning customers.

    See what happened to the profits of the polio industry when polio was cured. Sorry, I’ll give you a d for effort on this article.

  • John
    20 August 2014

    your treatment is pathetic, but does have a definition Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    Albert Einstein

  • LEH
    20 August 2014

    Scott – I can easily debunk the acid theory. The alkaline diet is based on urine tests. The kidneys are SUPPOSED to remove excess acid from the diet.

    If you do a urine test of the blood and not just the urine, you will find that urine pH is all over the board but blood pH is not.

    The value of the alkaline diet is the nutritional value of lots of vegetables, not how it affects blood chemistry. It is things like the alkaline diet, which does not hold up to actual scientific review, that lets writers like this dismiss all alternative medicine.

  • peter
    20 August 2014

    How can you ignore peer reviewed science and government owned patents? I see nothigng debunked what a pathetic exuce of journalism ive just had to bare and to the imbeciles who say stop looking at the internet for your information (the place where 90% of RELIABLE information comes from) . Peer reviewed science and government owned patents means even if there was no internet. It would still be a well documented fact that hundreds of doctors have physically proven. Debunk that

  • Steve
    20 August 2014

    Yeah , I went to the Cancer Research UK site and all I can say that I got from it is DONATE! DONATE! DONATE!.
    Shameful

  • Steve
    20 August 2014

    CRAP . Go to the NCBI site and do some research and it will blow holes in many of these so called ” myth” explanations

  • Scott
    18 August 2014

    This article goes a long way to NOT dispel these so-called myths. Instead just rambles around the subjects, like somehow they are an authority…News flash! you’re losing the battle. I’ll listen to the folks that have just successfully beat cancer with Gerson Therapy or canbabis oil thanks.

    My favourite is the body perfectly regulates PH, unless you’re really ill and then you can get acidosis, but diet can’t help that. Err, we’re talking about Cancer, that’s pretty ill in my view. Plus, Acidosis is treated in hospitals with IV bi-carb, usually necessary after too much chemo ironically. And cancer surrounds itself with acid (and thrives) but can’t be anything to do with ph…Really?!

    The research that has really helped change the tide in the cancer war is nutritional and lifestyle based.. By all means try and make less lethal cancer drugs, but don’t tell me that somehow a drug company can patent or profit from something that isn’t a drug, a drastic dietary or lifestyle change etc. because they can’t. Especially when this jeopardises on average 80% of their profits.

    If you want to research something useful, go and ask what thousands of so-called “spontaneous remission” survivors did differently…the ones that didn’t use conventional therapy but all got better…warning: the answers are unlikely to be profitable or make people go fundraising.

    Charity is a business too, especially ones that fund raise for the biggest most profitable industry in the world..no conspiracy, just fact!

    Dispel this!!

  • hansel
    18 August 2014

    cancer is perfect for the wa$$street

  • Kelly
    16 August 2014

    sounds like the drug makers…. helped right the B.S.

  • Jason
    15 August 2014

    This article is full of shot I can’t believe I read it

  • Serena
    14 August 2014

    Hi Kat, thanks for your reply,
    Reading my original post will tell you that I am aware of the difference between the metabolism of a cancerous cell and a normal cell. I find it interesting how conventional cancer treatments use the word “not proven” and not “disproved”. The fact is they CANT use “disproved” because it hasn’t been so. Two points about that: it IS proven by many published studies the effects, both positive and negative, of diet on cancer. I suggest you visit http://www.nutritionfacts.org to access this information, as well as reading “The China Study” by Dr. T. Colin Campbell, a Cornell professor. Second point: WHY do you think it is “not proven”? A question to answer that is HOW do you prove a medical treatment? Millions of dollars are spend on a research in order to prove medical treatments. When these millions are spend on drugs developed in a laboratory, they can be patented and made a profit on. Can you patent an apple? NO! Can you patent a healthy lifestyle? OF COARSE NOT! There is your answer on why it is “not proven”. However, there are testimonials on curing cancer with alternative treatments. I suggest you visit http://www.chrisbeatcancer.com to access that information.

    Are pharmaceuticals this apathetic about the survival of the sick? In 2005 Nexavar was FDA approved for the treatment of late stage liver/kidney cancer. This treatment had a cost of $69,000 minimum per year. India has a law which allows for patented drugs to be manufactured in within the country if the Western price tag is too high. The CEO of Bayer replied by saying “We did not develop this medicine for Indians, we developed it for Western patients who can afford it.” Big Pharma in a nutshell. These are the type of people who you are so dearly defending, Kat.

    My mother is a PharmD pharmacist with over 10 years’ experience of managing a pharmaceuticals company. A few years ago when I first learned about cancer in high school, I asked my mom to explain it to me in more detail. Once she was done, I asked “well how do you cure it?” she told me that you can never cure it unless it is found in an early stage,and even then, it will most likely come back. Also, that the chemotherapy available may only extend your life. She went on to tell me that if she were to (God forbid) ever get cancer, If its not at a very early stage, she will just go on with her life until the cancer kills her. I asked her why and she said “I rather have 2 or 3 years of normal living than 5 years of living in torture from the side effects of chemotherapy”. My mom, being the professional that she is, keeps this personal belief to herself and does not advise anyone based on it. My mom holds this belief because she KNOWS better than anyone what chemotherapy is.

    I would like to explain to you why I am greatly against chemotherapy. A very extensive Australian study was published on the effectiveness of chemotherapy. The results were 2.some odd number effective. THAT’S A SHAME! Even if you get completely cured, your body will be DESTROYED! The chance of the cancer reoccurring or secondary cancer is high, you may become infertile and you may enter menopause early. Let me make this perfectly clear, I DO NOT believe in a miracle cure like “cut sugar out of your diet” I never said such a thing, it was you who mentioned it. Cancer is very complex. It is not just relevant to diet but exposure to environmental toxins, stress and negative emotions, trauma, and the list goes on. Alternative treatments aim to strengthen the immune system and detoxify the body. How is this NOT a common sense approach? EVERYBODY creates at least one cancer cell EVERYDAY! Your immune system takes care of it, because your body is wise and knows how to heal itself, if given the right conditions. It is only when the immune system is weakened, or the body is over toxic that problems occur.

  • Jean Myhill
    12 August 2014

    I think this article was very enlightening

  • Phil
    9 August 2014

    You rock for writing this. I’m tired of reading all of the garbage about miracle cures and prevention techniques. My grandparents grew up on an “all natural” diet – veggies and fruits from the garden (no money for pesticides), meat came from cows and chickens (again no money for steroids etc…), eggs from chickens, no pasteurized milk, etc…. Yet we have had cancer, heart disease, diabetes, rheumatory arthritis, etc… I agree that a good diet is a great thing, but eat as healthy as you want and then try to explain what happened when you get one of these diseases. Try to explain cancer in a 3 year old who was breast fed and ate organic baby food – that’s my world. Medicines, chemo, radiation and surgeries have in turn prolonged many of my family members lives as painless as possible (my grandmother had arthritis and had literally every replaceable joint replaced – both hips, knees, shoulders, etc…) My mother also as rheumatory arthritis, less of a natural diet and more stress, and thanks to advancements in medicine, she has had zero surgeries and is able to get around normally. My grandmother lost her license around age 45 and by 60 was pretty much wheelchair only.

    People – stop reading the Internet and look around at actual circumstances where everything from a diet standpoint is pretty good, yet these horrible diseases still prevail. Rely on facts (real life) not blogs.

  • nyree
    9 August 2014

    there is no conspiracy huh! yeah right only because of these we can believe you are sooo legit!

  • Serena
    8 August 2014

    So sugar doesn’t feed cancer? This is a VERY strange idea coming from a legitimate cancer research organization which MUST know about diagnosis methods for cancer. Let me explain to you one of most popular methods of determining the existence of cancer as well as a method used to determine the stage of cancer: a PET scan. Radioactive glucose is injected to the patient then they are scanned. Since cancer uses MANY times MORE GLUCOSE for metabolism, cancer cells ingest this and the areas which you may have cancer in your body light up on the screen. Normal cells need oxygen as a vital component of their metabolism and survival, but cancer cells rely almost solely on glucose. Does every carb eventually get turned into glucose? YES! But it is the metabolism of the sugar which either raises your blood sugar, feeding the cancer, or metabolize correctly, providing NUTRITION to your body. An example is the sweetest fruit on earth: the date. CLINICAL RESEARCH EVIDENCE proves that this super sweet fruit does NOT cause a spike in your blood sugar at all! I could do a whole 9 other comments like this one explaining how they are FALSE! But for now, I would like to congratulate Big Pharma for robing people blind with their scare tactics of “What other way? There is no other way! Let us poison you BACK TO HEALTH!” I don’t mean robing people blind by simply taking BILLIONS of dollars per year from poor, terrified, hopeless victims, but robbing husbands and wives blind of their spouses, mothers of their parents, parents of their children, and friends of their loved ones, WAY TO GO!

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    11 August 2014

    Hi Serena,
    We’re fully aware of how PET scans work, as we explain in more detail here: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2013/07/09/chocolate-detects-cancer-headlines-are-misleading/
    As we make clear in our post above, all our cells, cancerous or not, use glucose for energy. Because cancer cells are usually growing very fast compared with healthy cells, they have a particularly high demand for this fuel. There’s also evidence that they use glucose and produce energy in a different way from healthy cells. We are certainly not saying that eating a healthy diet doesn’t matter when it comes to cancer. While it’s very sensible to limit sugary foods as part of an overall healthy diet and to avoid putting on weight, that’s a far cry from saying that sugary foods specifically feed cancer cells (they feed all cells, but cancer cells have a higher demand for energy overall), or that cutting out sugar completely from the diet will cure cancer (there’s no evidence that it does) – these are oversimplifications of the current state of research in a complex and poorly-understood area.
    Kat

  • halley (again)
    5 August 2014

    I have just read through lots of the comments and noted the numbers of ‘thumbs up’ and ‘thumbs down’ votes.
    I just want to say that I am so happy to see that so many people realise that Cancer Research is biased and close minded.
    BigPharma must be shown up for what it is – a moneymaking game. Even drug companies admit most of their drugs only help 7% of the people who use them. And that means it’s probably 3%. And of course the so-called ‘side-effects’ often cause such harm that they outweigh any possible small benefit.
    I am disgusted with Cancer Research UK. DO SOME RESEARCH instead of promoting mustard gas treatment (chemotherapy) and warding people off of exploring a range of possible safe solutions.
    Who on earth is Oliver Childs?
    EVERYBODY with more than one brain cell realises these days that every chronic disease is a result of inflammation. Caused by acidity. Caused mainly by diet and pollution.

    QUOTE Myth 3: “Their proposed answer: increase your intake of healthier ‘alkaline’ foods like green vegetables and fruits (including, paradoxically, lemons).”
    Paradoxically? Does Oliver Childs who wrote this REALLY know so little that he doesn’t know that lemons may be acid in taste but are alkalising in the body (pH9 thicko).
    MY brother left you idiot £10k in his will. You are using it to keep us in the 20th century.

  • halley
    5 August 2014

    You call yourselves Cancer Research?! Yet you only are interested in research that suits your limited views. You are living in the past. There is so much research out there now that offers an understanding of how cancer develops and what enables it to thrive. And also information about what you can do to prevent it from thriving and spreading. I can only conclude that you are in cahoots with BigPharma. My brother left you £10k in his will. So misguided given his doctors had no idea how to help him and let him die in extraordinary pain.

  • paul smith
    5 August 2014

    Some times you have to be brave in live when facing cancer and be brave enough to find out the answer to your prayers your self.Cures do seem to be out that claim to cure cancer, research for reviews on people who say this worked for them.Think where the Item is sold or might be online with feedback from people who have used it I have found various comments are available on the internet .Interesting search I did scientists and doctors opinion worldwide would they have chemo or consider alternative treatment, From science we know what can cure scurvy ,What may cure cancer could be just as simple who knows for sure but when all else fails where cancer is concerned what is the alternative to give up NO ,Find a natural cure many claim to have, read and research where the lowest cancer rates are in the worlds countries WHY? , To live we have to eat ,we are what we eat,when was the last time you read the full list of all the added chemicals in your food in a week,not much natural in our diets like years ago ,Do not see much hope reading the above ..

  • stephen j zets
    1 August 2014

    I think tat there always hope for a cure===I was hit by bladder cancer 27 months ago– was clean for 27 months — back again. the process is operation etc is nasty. I might have to go through it again in three months, iam looliking for something , but your information depresses me —thank you

  • kfo
    1 August 2014

    these guys, whoever pays them, use ‘quackwatch’ as a ‘reference’, by a certain dr. who has never seen a patient, has a psychiatry degree from a paper mill, and has been banned from ‘testifying’ in california courts forever, something that he did for as long as he was able to get away with…get lost, grow up…8,000,000 die worldwide of cancer each yr and climbing, 1/2 of all deaths in the US are from cancer now, the biggest #1 killer surpassing stroke, royal academy australian study shows chemo is 2.1% effective, close to nothing…who are you kidding ?!!…yourself for sure, besides being cynical and despicable….

  • Hsjjs
    31 July 2014

    Illuminati control everything

  • Stephen
    31 July 2014

    There will never be any evidence for natural cures as long as big pharma are funding the studies. I judge by results. When you have multiple alternative doctors and multiple people claiming how they were cured using natural cures, this is good enough for me, because at the end of the day the human body is designed to heal itself. What sense does it make to poison your way back to health? Cancer is one of the easiest diseases to cure, but the powers that be are using useful idiots to spread lies on the internet to make people doubt these natural cures

  • Jo
    29 July 2014

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks…

  • Christine Wyndham-Thomas
    29 July 2014

    Has any site been set up documenting people being cured of cancer (and other chronic diseases) using natural foods, herbs etc? I am fully in favour of the natural approach but one needs the right info. For eg., there are so many natural foods that are said to cure cancer and other chronic illnesses, but we’re only told that. We don’t know how much of this food we can eat. We don’t know whether we’re supposed to have it every day. We don’t know whether certain foods are better for certain types of cancers to others etc. etc. This is the information that is lacking.

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    29 July 2014

    Hi Christine,

    That’s a great question, and you’re right to be skeptical of claims made about particular foods or supplements. The information you’re after is exactly the sort of thing that can be shown through scientific research in the lab and clinical trials. The results of these studies are published in papers in scientific journals for doctors and scientists everywhere to read and build on – these are collated by a website called PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed This includes all kinds of studies on aspects of diet, herbal preparations and so on, as well as conventional cancer therapies.

    There may be all kinds of claims on the internet about how to use various foods and supplements – including anecdotes and testimonials from users – but the problem is that usually there have been no well-conducted published studies to show that they actually work in patients, or how best to use them. Sometimes there is information from studies on cancer cells grown in the lab or in animals, but without data from clinical trials it’s very difficult for any doctors to reliably know whether it will be an effective and safe treatment for patients. We’ve summarised some of these problems in a comment on our post about cannabis and cancer, but the points relate to any kind of cancer treatment: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/07/25/cannabis-cannabinoids-and-cancer-the-evidence-so-far/comment-page-1/#comment-36791

    As another example, there are several websites claiming that the soursop fruit (graviola) is a “cure for cancer”, but only five research studies have been published (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=graviola+cancer) and all of these were done using cancer cells grown in the lab rather than in patients. We’ve used this information to write our page on graviola, which we feel is a fair summary of the current scientific evidence around it: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-help/about-cancer/cancer-questions/can-graviola-cure-cancer

    We’ve also written a bit more about what to eat when being treated for cancer: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2011/11/01/what-should-you-eat-while-youre-being-treated-for-cancer/ as well as about misleading claims in the media: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/12/07/alternative-cancer-treatment-claims-in-the-media-are-damaging-and-misleading/ and miracle cures: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2013/09/13/miracle-cancer-cures-ask-for-evidence/

    I hope you find this information useful, Kat

  • Stephen
    28 July 2014

    seeet’s ignore ignore common sense. Let’s ignore the mountain of testimonies out there of people curing their cancer naturally. Let’s ignore the fact that the body is designed to heal itself. Let’s ignore all the alternative doctors who’ve had great success curing their patients. Let’s just all be sheep and believe everything the medical profession tell us. Ha, yer right!

  • RH
    22 July 2014

    Are you being serious? These are not even reasons!… you just say what is what- and that is it.
    Where the hell does all the money go and get wasted on for the so called research? Is it all just pumped into the chemotherapy side of things?

    You could have lots of data for these alternative methods to prove them wrong instead of JUST disregarding them because YOU say so. Yes even that would be a slow process of elimination, but hey least we could take your word for it. Because you could have discredited all the mis leading information and could back up your own statements. I see no evidence here.

    If these so called scam cures have no evidence to back it up then hey disprove it.

    Do something positive or stop asking for people to donate! This site installs no hope what so ever.

    I ask again whats the money spent on? Just slowing down cancer? Thought you were here to cure it. Notice your slogan change these last few years. Why is that?

    There are loads of natural cures all across the globe for different deceases, in that fact alone proves that there would be people conspiring in companies to make a profit on un-necessary medicine.

    Why?- Because there is such a vast array of products on our shelves today that contain beneficial components that we can find actually naturally in plant matter and nature. We are just not taught this in school. If something is found in nature it means it is free and there is no need to sell it. Understand this. Not everyone has to live and love by your world of monopoly.

    Education leads us into spirals of compartmentalized institutions that don’t communicate properly with each other. You so called professions should study every aspect of life as well as consciousness before trying to find cures like cancer. You have no idea of energy flow or how the body works.

    So don’t patronize people and make absurd claims.

    It is common sense that governments profit out of sickness, its not all just conspiracy crazy talk, its a fact of life, competition and strive for profit between peers society and then power hungry corporations. ( none of it interests me,corrupt)

    Although there is a lot of nonsense out there regarding cancer cure , false claims, you can not prove some of your claims you are also making either. You are a laughing stock.

    Never read such a negative site in my life that has the word research in it.

    What you seem to have researched is that there is only one way to kill cancer by killing off the human being too, slowly through radiation, then spent tons more money on it over the years, became content with this idea and then repeated it it some more.. horayyy!. Thus wasting more money on pretend research.

    Re-search= re search through a different mediums thoroughly to prove or disprove possible theories / investigate using data and reports,eyewitness accounts/experiences. Conduct your own experiments.

    NOT! re(turn) search back to your bubble size concept of cancer cures.

    Pathetic. People have it sussed. Its too late cancer.

  • Joey B.
    21 July 2014

    This article is just ridiculous. Of caurse there hasnt been any evidence scientifically that natural cures work, its because money isnt in the cure and if money isnt being made then theres no interest. There are money hoarding greedy rich white people out there that are hiding in the shadows of the media while making a fortune off of the sick. There are definitely natural cures for cancer but u wont find the recipe anywhere for and it wont be revealed in the news anytime soon. Just do your own research and try to experiment safely until you find it. Look to other countries other the USA for guidence. Good luck :)

  • Chris Petersen
    21 July 2014

    So many comments, mine probably won’t be read. I know there are many cures for cancer, and there are natural remedies that work. Many of them. The Doctors don’t know because they haven’t been taught in medical school. Why? Because the medical schools are controlled by the AMA and they teach what they want them to believe. If they were in the business of making you well, they wouldn’t be “practicing” medicine to see what work on you, while they get a kickback on what drugs they prescribe. They would be learning all they can about what cures or treats the cause of the problem and not trying to just treat the symptoms. That’s why I don’t believe in doctors for treating disease. They have their place in treating injuries, and that sort of thing, but when it comes to disease, they really are clueless. If you want a cure to cancer, just look for them online…there are many. If someone tries to tell you that natural methods don’t work. they are lying and they don’t know what they are talking about.

  • AndyG
    20 July 2014

    Thanks – your article helps separating the wheat from the chaff. If I wanted false hope I’d go to my local (or virtual) shaman. But I’d prefer a combination of proven knowledge with personal positivism, to find a path through this partially known and partially unknown labyrinth. While I agree with Rita below that hope (even false hope) helps, as well as all the other good things like the right diet, enough activity, avoiding known carcinogens including smoke, and that chemicals are lousy, sometimes all the good things together are not enough but the lousy chemical can help, and other times we just don’t know quite enough to figure out how we can beat this complicated family of diseases. While I have been lucky so far, people that I care for haven’t. Please keep up the good work.

  • rita
    20 July 2014

    your site kills hope!!!!Hope and positive thoughts do help! Not chemical concoctions that are totally unnatural and weaken the body! And I have been a contributor to cancer research for the last 10 years! Where are the answers to the cure!?

  • Fidel Carter
    16 July 2014

    From the line,” Researchers are working to understand the differences in energy usage in cancers compared with healthy cells” I deduce an admission that these so-called scientist are not sure. Keep in mind that the silver back gorilla was a “myth” as well, until it’s existence was confirmed by purported “authorities”. If we can sight as evidence, the reports of ancient Greeks and Egyptians, why summarily dismiss the reports of thousands of people who are alive and well today and able to defend their claims or have them proven or disproven with medical records. If we can interview a thousand individuals who make each of these claims, or even a hundred of each, and prove or disprove their claim, then this series of articles would be more scientific and less of an opinion editorial (op-ed).

  • Rita Kiehl
    12 July 2014

    I know 2 women who have the bracca 1 gene. Is there anything that can be done for them?

  • D.Charles Kenny
    11 July 2014

    why don’t you examine what people eat when buying from the supermarkets
    Diet causes most diease

  • Frank
    9 July 2014

    This is a typical dismissive and ignorant article, once again taking the “evidence” offerred by the holy allopathic model, full swing arrogance and all. It’s really quite an article, as it gathers the primary, so called Scientific, explanations for cancer and the alternatives to slash and burn and puts the AMA’s doctrine around this industry in a clear and concise form.

  • Frinak Bolla
    7 July 2014

    In my opinion, there should special diet plan for all the cancer patients. It should not be a routine plain diet, but a diet which would help to build the immunity system of the body. With respect to this, we should be give them olive leaf extract. It helps to increase the immunity growth percentage.

  • Jake
    6 July 2014

    In my own experience, I have personally known 23 people who had different cancers, all had chemotherapy, all dead within 5 years, probably poisoned by the crap you pump through them.
    I would go with alternative treatment any day …

  • Rosemary
    2 July 2014

    You don’t know it all. Science is not a God and there is more to life than just having everything proven. Your whole aim is to disprove what holistic therapists have been saying for years…therefore you are biased. There is no proof in what you say either. Some time you just ‘know’ it but of course that would be too unscientific for you.

  • Millie
    30 June 2014

    This article is utter BS. There’s one helluva lot of ever-mounting, solid evidence to the contrary of pretty much everything stated here, which you’ll find if you’re willing to do a little bit of research for yourself.

    Sad, it really is all about the money…

  • Christine Wyndham-Thomas
    30 June 2014

    I was going to read this article with a pinch of salt, because I fully favour natural healing, and every time I’ve seen an article from Natural Cures not Medicine I have always shared them. However, the article is very well written and highlights those myths well, as you see it.

    Patients certainly don’t want to feel they are victims of the pharmaceutical companies, which have definitely received bad publicity over the years, perhaps quite justifiably as there is no smoke without fire.

    When patients start losing faith in the medicines they’re taking because of what they read, one needs to analyse the reasons for this and in my opinion, this article helps restore the balance by putting across valid points worth bearing in mind.

  • Researcher
    27 June 2014

    This article nicely sums up why cannabis is not, and won’t ever be, a miracle cure for all cancers. All backed up with scientific evidence.

    It gives a great overview of how the scientific process works for those who aren’t in the know.

    Please read before jumping to conclusions, CRUK is doing so much good, I can’t believe the negativity I see against them.

    http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/marijuana-cancer-what-facts-smoke/

  • Johnk770
    26 June 2014

    I have not checked in here for a while since I thought it was getting boring, but the last few posts are good quality so I guess I’ll add you back to my daily bloglist. You deserve it my friend kcfdaadckeka

  • hbpattskyn
    25 June 2014

    Great article. I wasn’t aware of all of these myths, but it was good to see them all addressed in one place.

  • Oscar
    25 June 2014

    Myth 7: … and Big Pharma are suppressing it

    Big Pharma is actually hiding the cure because it wont make them rich.

    What a joke of article

  • Mr Ambrose (again)
    22 June 2014

    Incredible – so you let someone through who claims that ‘only god has the cure’ yet censor mine. I suppose this is part of your religious tolerance policy – goodness what a disgrace!

  • Christopher
    22 June 2014

    Perhaps Cancer Research and it’s counter-parts should spend a bit more time trying to prevent cancer, than trying to cure it. If its prevented, there’s nothing to cure.

  • owenna mckenna
    21 June 2014

    Very interesting

  • Robson Grant
    20 June 2014

    I agree with J Ievolo, “There are other cures and you shoud spend more time researching them ! instead of promoting Poison and difficult cures as you state on your sight difficult cures should inspire you to look with an open mind and awareness about other alternative cancer cure options — the law of relativity – would have never been discovered with out the pathway of an open mind !”

  • Renee
    19 June 2014

    This article is a lot of nonsense. GOD has the cure, not man, not science. God’s nature contains everything man needs for cures and prevention. Man has found some good help for problems, but making chemical and toxic drugs, and putting them in the body, only hurts the body in the long run. Use God’s nature to both prevent and treat health problems.

  • Tony Spencer
    19 June 2014

    Well thought out. Amazed at all the pseudoscience believers!

    Good results for CAM eh, such as Steve Jobs, George Harrison, Linda McCartney, Farrah Fawcett – the lust is endless.

    http://edzardernst.com/2013/04/cancer-patients-who-use-alternative-medicine-die-sooner/

  • Delia
    19 June 2014

    What a completely ignorant article, from start to finish. Clearly the writer is living in the dark ages and has absolutely no current stats and facts near at hand. I thought to humour myself and read this just to see if there was perhaps any truth in any of what was said. But honestly, it is downright foolish and totally incorrect!! Suggestion to writer, be certain before you stick your neck out.

  • trevis
    19 June 2014

    this sht deserves no comment,it’s quite obvious who is behind it.allopathy came late on the scene(gate-crashed),now it’s dictating to everybody!!!try to fck nature,you get scrwd!

  • J Ievolo
    15 June 2014

    you are creating propaganda to support the Powerfull lobby of the international Drug companies !!! your website promotes the drug companies cures only and designed to use internet to convince the public that there are no alternate cures for CANCER other than what the drug companies provide. But there are other cures !! that work and people will find them no matter how hard you try to block or confuse or attack or alterntive methods from the public gaining knowledge of other cancer cures! Suggesting alternative methods and doctors are Quacks ? Doctors who are researching other wayd to fight cancer with aternative approaches
    I doubt you will post this comment because this whole website is designed to persuade people into believing Chemicals and drugs produced by international drug companies are the only way to cure cancer ! Propaganda Supported by the Drug lobby ! There are other cures and you shoud spend more time researching them ! instead of promoting Poison and difficult cures as you state on your sight difficult cures should inspire you to look with an open mind and awareness about other alternative cancer cure options — the law of relativity – would have never been discovered with out the pathway of an open mind !

  • eroll
    13 June 2014

    There is no scientific evidence that e-cigarettes are not a safe substitute for traditional cigarettes. Look http://goo.gl/qhfY4y

  • electronic-cigarette
    13 June 2014

    Thanks for the link Kat. I m copying your comment onto my fb page. Hope you don’t mind. Good point.

  • AnotherWorthlessArticle
    12 June 2014

    Your article only shows your ignorance. There are many trials that have worked in lab rats but governments will not allow human trials EVEN on terminal patients. Go do some research on mitochondrial reactivation through DCA before you spread anymore cluess information

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    12 June 2014

    We’ve written about DCA in detail here on the blog before, with an update on the latest studies including work by our own scientists. Read it here:

  • mh447
    12 June 2014

    my husband has both primary liver cancer and non-invasive bladder cancer and is not a candidate for any further treatment. I am doing my best to make his life relaxed and comfortable and healthy as possible on a 24hours basis so read all the information out there and extract those parts that I think will be helpful. it is called a balanced approach and keeping up to speed on what is going round us in the help and fight against cancer or be able to deal with the illness.

  • Nancy
    10 June 2014

    haha this is a cancer FUND Raising company for research -of course, who is behind this FUND raising company?!!! wow…who actually listens to this …it reminds me when “they” said cigarettes were safe…and you were crazy to think otherwise because doctors smoked them…lol

  • Max
    10 June 2014

    Wow, this is very incredibly reckless, insulting and arrogent article.

    Who on earth is Oilver Childs to make such counter claims against real Scientists who are conducting crucial research into the cancer killing properties of THC.

    Well one day the truth will be out on a much wider scale. Let’s hope CR do not have the audactiy to claim they were helping to support it.

  • Bryant
    10 June 2014

    I agree with most of this, with one notable exception. Just as there are clear correlations between smoking and several forms of cancer, and excess alcohol consumption and certain forms of cancer, there is overwhelming evidence that diet has a great deal to do with rates of many cancers, although there are certainly many factors that come into play, including environmental, genetic, social, and habitual factors. There have been a number of well documented and well funded scientific studies that show clearly that diet plays a factor in a large number of diseases, including cancer.

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    10 June 2014

    Hi Bryant,
    We absolutely agree that diet is important when it comes to reducing the risk of cancer – that’s why it’s something we’ve highlighted several times in this post. For example:
    “Both the ‘acidic diet’ and ‘sugar feeds cancer’ myths distort sensible dietary advice – of course, nobody is saying that eating a healthy diet doesn’t matter when it comes to cancer. You can read about the scientific evidence on diet and cancer on our website.

    But dietary advice must be based on nutritional and scientific fact. When it comes to offering diet tips to reduce cancer risk, research shows that the same boring healthy eating advice still holds true. Fruit, vegetables, fibre, white meat and fish are good. Too much fat, salt, sugar, red or processed meat and alcohol are less so.”

    We also have much more extensive information on our website about diet and cancer, which we linked to several times in our post – you can read more here: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/healthyliving/dietandhealthyeating/

    Kat

  • JK
    9 June 2014

    Incredible arrogance on display here. You may herald yourself as a non-profit organisation, but by proxy you represent the interests of one of the biggest profiteers on the planet, which is big pharmacy. To deny their interest shows how far you are willing to cover for them.

    Really, you cannot expect people to be so naive in this day and age, or are you just scared that they might be able to break free from the perpetual maze of fear and ignorance you have created for them? Its a crime of egos, you could not stand the fact that the answer could be so simple, that such things could be outside the clutches of patents, (that lovely little terms which keeps the rich getting richer.)

    Yes, in regards to THC, testimony and scientific evidence can be found on places like youtube, because guess what, – some groups do not have the huge funds available to buy ‘mainstream’ tv or science, in your view, this somehow relegates it to the realm of mythology or (gasp) conspiracy. As you can see, people are just not buying these paid up official views any longer.

  • emms
    9 June 2014

    One last point….the fact is..if there is a ‘Natural’ cure that occurs in plant life or natural food sources it cannot be ‘patented’ because it hasn’t been developed in a lab or man made. After all man cannot patent a source that is in nature, that is free for all & something we in effect can produce ourselves that God has created (my belief;-) Something that cannot be patented cannot be released as a ‘cure’ or ‘treatment’ by a government or health organisation & certainly not Big Pharma. I mean lets face it…if the cure for cancer is lying right there at our fingertips, free of charge, at our disposal then not only would Big Pharma probably go out of business (near enough) but all you guys, researchers & medics would look pretty dumb! So let’s make everyone else look stupid!

  • emms
    9 June 2014

    Myth No 11…it should say below!! Naive if you think Big Corporations & Governments aren’t hiding herding the sheeple….we are just pawns in a big game….& all done in ‘plain sight’. Cancer Research spends 70% of it’s donations on Charity Activities!!! Money spent on research is going down the drain. Treatment is the same as it was in the 50’s, there has been no advancement & little improvement on survival rates. More children are getting cancer than before & you have the audacity to say that eating a healthy diet of veg & fruits can’t help. What planet are you on? Cancer Research….mmm maybe you need to re-phrase that!!!!!

  • emms
    9 June 2014

    And Myth No 10 is…..Don’t be sucked into blogs written by someone who ia clearly a fan of Big Pharma!!

  • Kim
    9 June 2014

    Pure, close minded, lack of experience point of reference!

  • LOL
    8 June 2014

    Money makes the world go ’round. And cancer makes the money go ’round. Very likely that this website would try and debunk the baking soda cure as a myth, no? Of all the testimonials advocating the use of baking soda to cure cancer (and there are quite a few), tell me this: what motive would people have in saying that baking soda really works, if it doesn’t?? Baking Soda companies? I don’t think so. What motive would an Oncologist have in saying that the baking soda cure is a myth? Money, and a lot of it.

  • Universal Wisdom
    6 June 2014

    Cancer research can only exist with money. This keeps people in jobs and the ability to provide an income. It all starts on an energetic level before it physically manifests like cloud starts as vapour before rain. Stress and negative consequences through actions resulting in negative consequences. The biggest hype of all is don’t fall for drugs companies who like the church prey on the uneducated and unintuitive public. Great people like Royal Rife and Wilhelm Reich suffered at the hands of greedy profitiers.

  • Yeaj
    6 June 2014

    This article is pathetic …

  • Chris
    6 June 2014

    I personally know two ppl who cured their cancer with Backing soda. No question about that. Its a fact that the backing soda/ maple sirup method is not only save it simply REMOVED the cancer. Now I was reading this and dont believe anything the author has written.

  • Saab
    5 June 2014

    There’s a lot unsure about cancer. We cannot yell all kind of things about cancer if we’re not sure. People are naive, naturally, and it’s all fear mongering. People are scared very fast.

  • JoJo
    5 June 2014

    Actually I agree with the majority of other comments here. I myself have independently scoured through over one-thousand hours of bio-chemical research on nutrients, supplements/vitamins, disease, and numerous medical studies proving the information in this article is corrupt. (There are also tens of thousands of medical studies showing the efficacies of natural medicinal supplementations that treat and/or cure cancers. Meanwhile traditional cancer treatments are venomous poisons that rob people quality of life, also creating new and more aggressive cancers, and only offer a short time of survival; while, a cancer patient that does next to nothing will survive just as long but with a longer existing quality of life, and also has the chance to completely recover if they make the right choices in their own personal healthcare. Once one does Chemotherapy they can pretty much look forward to a painful death; either sooner or later. Radiation isn‘t any better, and can you imagine the two – as typically prescribed – being taken in treatment! (Isn’t it something how so many proven treatments to cure cancers have either been outlawed in the U.S. or that Insurance Companies won’t cover them; because otherwise they would have no wealth at all, and thus no power to manipulate and control politics.) Where in the world does this author get off trying to route people away from the truth?!) Some of the information here is accurate; like the obvious with lifestyle choices and prevention, but perpetual stress in combination of the innumerable toxic chemicals in most foods, and one’s environment, is the culprit. (The best thing one can do for themselves before buying and using different supplementations is finding out about the Liver & Gallbladder flush, and yes it is even more important if one has had their Gallbladder removed; which, that in itself is a criminal enterprise to say the least. Disease is a buildup of toxins in either fat and/or muscle tissue; unable to be removed while storing up because the Gallbladder and Liver are obstructed from doing their jobs; eventually the cells in those tissues change into cancerous cells. Both the Liver and Gallbladder have stones (as you know so do the Kidneys), but doctors are either largely ignorant of this with the Liver, or simply would rather you be; they sure don’t advise patients on how to cleanse these stones out of the Gallbladder either.. now do they! In doing these flushes you can remove up to thousands of stones from both the Liver and Gallbladder, and yes.. I said thousands! After performing the flushes and removing the stones the enzymes in your intestines will be able to actually route the nutrients, and re-route the toxins, to where they need to be; instead of retaining the toxins and routing the nutrients into the toilet; our systems actually act in reversal when we’re unable to properly digest foods. Bile in the Gallbladder becomes better restored as we do the flushes and remove the stones to breakdown and digest food, and those without a Gallbladder unfortunately will never have adequate bile, because the bile is constantly dripping into the intestine, so when it’s needed there is not enough there to adequately breakdown and digest food (though there should be some improvement yet with digestion), but the flushes are still a great improvement to remove stones and built up waste from the liver. Someone without a Gallbladder should do them the same as one with a Gallbladder – every 4 to 6 weeks for 12 months, but unlike one with their Gallbladder who stops after the last two flushes prove to show no stones and then resumes one annual flush per year; it’s probably best for one without a Gallbladder to perform 2 to 3 per year thereafter to maintain a clean liver.

    Find and read the book, The Amazing Liver and Gallbladder Flush, by Andreas Moritz. Andreas’ philosophies in life can be considered ‘new age’ and not everything he informs people of is accurate, but most things are; every individual thing should be cross-referenced and researched first by oneself anyway (like eating meat as he is against; it is still healthy if organic and grass-fed, but only at 2 to 3oz. per day, or I’m more inclined to believe every other day to few days for someone already healthy, and far less than that to none if having cancer, because meat is acidic, and that only promotes the growth of cancer instead of getting healthier). As to his philosophies.. well Yahweh (God) uses evil for good, and knowledge is power. I will say though that this is in itself is vital information to learn about; however, one should order and read the book before even thinking of doing this (find it on Amazon it’s cheaper). People on medications shouldn’t do this – unless it’s safe to be off the meds at least for one twenty-four period of time for the actual flush (though you can be on thyroid medication). It’s a six-day preparation and you’ll have to know what things to do and not to do; as well as knowing what you can eat and can’t eat during the six days for actual success, and then this is repeated once every 4 to 6 weeks for 12 months. This flush isn’t a game and shouldn’t be taken lightly or without serious commitment to oneself; it is otherwise very inexpensive. (Depending on the medication/s one uses it is my advice to stick to your ‘guns’ and workout something with your doctor so you can find/plan a way to do this. Also there are supplements and/or nutrients out there that in time would take one off almost any medication; including heart medications. (Note: anything that purports to alleviate the need for medications should first only be given consideration after your own rigorous research, sticking to your guns, consulting with your doctor (switching meds if need be to allow for whatever supplement or nutrient you want to take), and never going off of your medications until tests show you’re no longer in need of them. If you‘re on Cholesterol lowering drugs.. Get OFF of them, but first find out what to do to stay healthy without them, because there are numerous things you can do (you won‘t even have to do numerous things, but you should choose at least a couple to a few), and very cheaply and easily; I don‘t think you need to talk to your doctor about this one; they‘re all making out like bandits with the $$ and will always advise you to stay on them. However, make sure after you’ve researched and made your changes that you do go in for testing, and if need be change doctors, or even pay out of pocket for independent lab work; there are independent labs in most cities/towns that do this for almost any test you want. These drugs – as with most – are extremely debilitating to many functions biologically; including that cholesterol drugs are known to cause bladder, and other, cancers.)

    Once one has Cancer there are many natural medicinal ways to treat and cure it, but it will not come from one ‘thing’ alone. I think the most rewarding lifestyle benefit to living healthy aside from what we put into our mouths is being physically active; period! Oh, and learning to reprogram the way we deal with circumstances instead of remaining enslaved to perpetual stress. One has to otherwise really find it in themselves to invest their time and efforts to research/study and cross-reference information; separating the legitimate from the illegitimate; this takes a lot of time and patience; however, if you’re already motivated to live as healthy as possible it’s much easier and more rewarding.

    Personally I also find for myself that Yahweh (God) – if you have Yahshua (Christ our Messiah) as your Lord & Savior, and have faith and belief in Yahweh’s will to heal you, then He either will heal someone instantaneously or lead one into and through a physical healing process. Also with Yahweh – if you read the Bible for yourself – you’ll come to know, and be able to live in, complete peace even in the midst of what otherwise is still miserable or intense misery; I’m living proof of this!

    In conclusion I’ll just further say America is known for the biggest healthcare system in the world, but many do not wonder why, but rather have been brainwashed to be proud of it! We’re the most unhealthy nation of people, and everything in our medical industry is a perpetual revolving door only creating profound wealth for Big Pharma, Hospitals/Clinics, Insurance Companies, Food Manufacture’s, all different facets of Advertising, and Politicians.. treating symptoms instead of treating and curing the root causes; these are the reasons we’re the biggest healthcare system.. oh I mean scam in the world. I should add Monsanto to the list of greedy criminals, too. When it came to Obamanocare I never heard one network analyst or everyday person – Not One – talk about if we sanctioned the outrageous criminal costs of medical supplies alone – Alone – we could afford healthcare very easily, and easily pay for those without it; easily! Anywhere from nine to twenty-five dollars or more per aspirin in a hospital, three-hundred dollars and more for something that costs fifty cents, thousands of dollars for something just a few hundred dollars, hundreds of dollars for a five minute overview from a doctor and you’re done, and this is the usual way of business! Healthcare costs were actually at a five-year low before Obamanocare, and now they’ll be more than we dreamed they could ever be here in America! Meanwhile everyone in America has had the ability to get healthcare even when not employed; for decades in every city there have been programs setup just for this. Last year I received a letter from the Obama Administration.. that until Obamanocare becomes available I can use any program – choosing from quite a few in my county and state – that have already been available for years!

    The sad truth of health and our society is that most people – even when faced with life threatening debilitating health issues – won’t advocate for themselves; not even when you passionately try to share and inform them of things they can do for themselves on their own; they believe in their doctors, and it could be even more than that that they’re just too lazy to know more (not that they‘re lazy people overall), or defeated, to do anything but reach around for the prescription bottle; so sad.. so sad. We need large numbers of people, and lobbyists, to advocate for the natural aids that have been outlawed, and restore them to us; maybe then with that, and coverage, these people will actually have a real chance at real health. Three-hundred and thirty-million plus citizens in the U.S. and maybe one-million care enough to take their healthcare into their own hands; the internet will never change that unfortunately.

    My brother sent me three articles, this was number two, and before pasting my comment here I opened the third e-mail; which, proves to be interesting to what I‘ve been sharing; remember though.. research and cross-reference away: https://wausaunews.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/big-hospital-finally-telling-the-truth-about-cancer-johns-hopkins/

    This is just one of innumerable articles, but also go to John Hopkins and find out info, and look into the thousands of medical studies as well from differing medical institutions and medical journals. Also even a tad of common sense is mighty powerful, overall, too!

  • Just see WHO finances this "blog". Big Pharma all over it.
    5 June 2014

    This blog has BIG PHARMA written all over it. Dot ORG suggest this is an organization financed by someone/something. We all know who finances these organizations and the medical schools… and who tries to brainwash people into popping pills by the bucket to just kick the can down the road (and enrich those companies in the process), when the cure is just outside, in the nature.

  • Alastair Leith
    5 June 2014

    The response to Myth 2 is a bit misleading. There is evidence around antioxidants and to pretend otherwise is strange. Of course clinical trials are not the complete story and neither are large epidemiological studies but they are the best tools we have to do scientific trials is complex areas of health.

    How can you mention leading cause factors for cancer and not mention animal protein? Professor T Colin Campbell had teams studying the link for years and the links were unequivocal. They were able to not only turn cancerous growth on and off in rats by feeding them casein as 10% of diet, they could *reverse* stage III cancers by removing casein from the rats feed. Read about it in The China Study which also documents the largest epidemiological study into population health ever conducted and the evidence for links between animal proteins and cancers could not be more stark.

    The China Study

  • john chapman
    4 June 2014

    Food Chemistry, January 2009
    “The antiproliferative and antioxidant activities of common vegetables: A comparative study”

    Read this and Chris Wark’s blog.

  • Alastair Leith
    4 June 2014

    The responce to Myth 1 is a bit misleading. Saying the biggest risk factor for cancer is aging is like saying the biggest risk factor for car accidents is driving a car.

    As we age cancer’s become more likely to become obvious with symptoms. Okay got that, what next? Lifestyle, lifestyle, & did I mention lifestyle? That’s what makes cancers notationally ‘modern’ or ‘man-made’ diseases. Remove consumption of animal fats and proteins and your risk improves dramatically. Get fit and hydrate, in addition to removing animal foods, even better.

  • Patrick McVeigh
    4 June 2014

    This article contradicts itself and buried within are the solution to the causes of Cancer-
    eat a healthy mostly plant based diet -fruits, vegetables, do not smoke, greatly reduce alcohol consumption, >>drink mainly water and plenty of it,< < exercise (walking is the best form), avoid or reduce sun exposure. Also have a general medical check-up and preventative cancer screenings. These simple rules will reduce and almost eliminate
    90% of cancers. It is not brain surgery – just common sense.

  • Elizabeth Forbes Bryson
    3 June 2014

    I think laterally. Cancer is a huge business. There is greed and kudos causing interference with clear thinking with this condition. Arguments say cancer is cell development avoiding the checks to halt this within our immune system and poisons are the answer,

    BUT isn’t it about the stress that is placed upon the body to keep churning out perfection day after day despite the complicated lives that cause individuals to neglect
    themselves or take up the latest trends.

    And when we are told about a cancer developing we willing let the stress continue and allow our cells to be stripped out, poisoned and burned.

    In a 100 years our current techniques will be recognised as barbaric as making our ancestors drink mercury . Our NHS is brainwashed – even America recognises that natural medicine is more beneficial.

  • Ryley Michalak
    3 June 2014

    Awful article so many ideas in this are bias, unproven, and frankly incorrect.

  • kalina
    3 June 2014

    what about deodorant? i heard that it causes cancer

  • Lou
    2 June 2014

    I’m heartened to see from the comments that people aren’t swallowing this bunkum any more. Of course pharma don’t want the 80 to 90% profit directly from cancer drugs threatened, it would be ridiculous to believe that they would embrace a treatment that people could administer without paying them a fortune, either directly or through the taxes they’ve paid. Cancer Research UK wouldn’t exist if people realised their best chance was via alternative treatments, so you’re hardly in an unbiased position. You’d be on the dole queue. I’m a very well educated person, and can recognise misleading statements presented as facts very clearly when I see them, as can most. This article just shows how scared this industry is that people are getting clued up. We don’t need you any more.

  • Nuncia Trifilo
    2 June 2014

    Your sight is typical of traditional medicine not understanding nutrition and then debunking all the “myths” that alternative treatments use. I’m sick of the ignorance of traditional medicine regarding natural vs. allopathic medicine. Medical schools are built and supported by Big Pharma – and so, most of the education is around which drug works to eliminate which symptom. Good nutrition
    does the same thing – only it doesn’t pollute the system while addressing the problem.

  • Wendy
    1 June 2014

    I think whoever wrote this article is an idiot…that’s what I think!

  • carolina alvarez
    31 May 2014

    It’s obvious that you guys are not looking for a cure but for money instead…sadly

  • Mike
    31 May 2014

    And why are these ‘myths’ so persistent? Spoiler: they’re facts! Knowledge of which may hurt Cancer Research UK’s income…

    Be sure to do your own research. You owe it to yourself.

  • Steve Michaels
    31 May 2014

    The two largest sectors of profit for pharmaceutical companies are cancer and vaccines. The CDC has already admitted that at least one vaccine (polio) has been directly linked to the increases in cancer rates via SV40 which was also admitted by the most prolific vaccine developer in history, the late Maurice Hillemann. Where is the statement on that one CRUK?

    Cancer Research is merely another funding vehicle for the pharmaceutical industry. Donation that actually go to “research” (a small amount after admin and marketing costs) ONLY go to industry approved researchers, i.e. looking at pharma treatments instead of prevention or non-patentable natural treatments.

    The very notion that cancer is “age related” due to us living longer is so ludicrous as to justify completely ignoring any other claims made in this article. In the early 1900’s. cancer rates were around 1 in 10,000, 30 years ago they were around 1 in 1,000 today we are told that 2 in 3 should expect to get cancer at some point. Life expectancies are virtually unchanged over that period if you factor out under 5 mortality rates. Yes, life expectancy was lower overall 100 years ago, but that was due to high childhood mortality. Of those who survived childhood, life expectancy was still into the 70,s even 100 years ago. Cancer Research is a joke!

  • Tony DeAngelis
    31 May 2014

    This article does show that medical treatments are not as dismal as some want you to think but there are more half-truths and misrepresentations than are disputable in the room allotted here. Using scientific facts out of context to show a viewpoint is a common trick used by the seemingly educated to convey an idea to the uneducated.

  • Curedofcancer
    30 May 2014

    What a load of *%#$@* Good luck trying to debunk all the natural cures. Starting to hurt huh?

  • Sean Gilder
    30 May 2014

    If there are so many people claiming similar results from some of these “myths”, would it not be prudent for the institutions to follow up on them and check the case files, etc before claiming out of hand that they are not real?
    To claim them as myth without any proof is of no use to anybody and fuels the general thoughts of many that the industry and “big pharma” etc are are trying to keep the truth and effectiveness about alternative treatments under cover, and not promote them as beneficial. People with cancer are desperate and vulnerable, and deserve better than what they get from “traditional” or institutional sources and treatments. It should be part of “public service” of these institutions to follow up on interesting cases, especially where for example oncologist reports and case histories are available.

  • coco
    30 May 2014

    just very quick response : as long as people can cure THEIR cancer with alternative or unorthodox therapies scientists should take it serious and work on evidence.
    The only EVIDENCE people have is their own cure what is amazing already.
    Even your “Myths” descriptions lack of evidence in some cases. And if we want to talk about nonsense Myths we are sitting here a few weeks.
    Cancer patients have no chance to play around, what they decide is right or wrong for THEM, nothing inbetween. You cure your cancer or you die. That simple.
    I am a cancer patient advocate and surviver since 14 years. I denied the chemotherapy and all orthodox medicine. I have NO EVIDENCE that my path is the blueprint for others.
    But I survived, I am healthy and happy since then, I don’t care about EVIDENCE.

  • Estelle
    30 May 2014

    Unlike you ignorant conspiracy theorists, I have actually GOT cancer. And I am placing my trust in science. Good luck with the green tea LOL

  • Jasmine
    30 May 2014

    Grasping at straws now aren’t we CRUK? Anything to keep the cash flowing in…
    The truth will prevail; it’s only a matter of time.

  • Karen Wilt
    30 May 2014

    I wonder what drug company put this out. Aside from No. 5 & 10, I’ve heard them all and boy….what crap this one is!

  • Holly Hallowell
    30 May 2014

    There are many seemingly “miracle” cancer cures available. Period. But the Allopath’s have us all believing that cutting, poisoning, and frying are the only options. That is the number one cancer myth. Get a clue guys! They stand to loose billions if we start healing ourselves with remedies already available. I am sure one of them was paid to support the biggest myth of all (that cancer can’t be cured!) is hoping you all fall for these “myths” supposedly debunked. Worst than the Holocaust this is. All these innocent people dying each year because they buy into the fear-based ridiculousness when other affordable, and real cures exist. It’s only going to be a bit longer before people realize there are holistic options that work. And, that the products we use have changed. The toxins we blindly put into your bodies is ridiculous. All in the name of lowering prices. Praying for a speedy realization.

  • Katie
    30 May 2014

    For those of you giving the Johns Hopkins link to “cancer cures,” this is the very reason this article was written. It’s a hoax. you can find it in five seconds on snopes, but you want to believe it because it makes you feel better about the possibility of an “easy” cure. I think an individual has every right to choose what kind of treatment they have. I’m not going to laugh at one of my patients that has stage IV cancer and wants to try alternative medicine instead of enduring chemo that probably won’t help at that point. But chemo and radiation are so far the best treatments because we’ve seen the greatest results from them so far. Maybe one day we’ll have a more specific cure, that would be awesome. But you copying and pasting a link to a fake article that can be completely debunked by actual science is not going to help.

  • wak
    30 May 2014

    so how do you enjoy life with cancer, and jd rock e fell a didnt make synthetic meds because he wanted us well no he just gave all the unis millions from his tax free foundation and made them agree to trash true natural cures for meds made from crude oil and then said theres no cures only management plans, all to control us like in the zoo

  • wak
    30 May 2014

    well youll get cancer if you litsen to these dribblers

  • me
    30 May 2014

    lolz

  • sarah
    30 May 2014

    How biased. You say information on Google is incorrect yet you tell people to look up proof of something on wiki. People have had cancer cured without chemotherapy and it is people’s FREE will to believe and treat their illnesses how they choose. If they die in the process or not is no ones business.

  • Taraveah
    29 May 2014

    Thank you for a rational article that debunks the BS circulating so widely everywhere it seems these days that makes so many people paranoid and shifts so much of our focus from enjoying life. Instead of becoming so fanatical about what we eat, for example, I think better advice is to just live. Live each day to the fullest. You never know which day will be your last regardless.

  • Rebecca
    29 May 2014

    People want to believe whatever fluffy myths they hear, and no amount of evidence or research will dissuade them. The facts are too hard for people. It’s easier to say “sugar” than it is to remember all those pesky -ose words like sucrose and glucose. It’s easier to say “your body” than it is to specify an organ, a haemoglobin, a synapse, and so on. An aunt can feel smart when she tells her nephew to eat “superfoods” even though she actually has no idea what effect that food has on “the body”. People are lazy and stupid, which is why we’ll always have myths, quacks, superfoods, and silly facebook articles. I applaud the author for trying, but if people wanted the facts, they would have looked for them.

  • Lucy
    29 May 2014

    Susan I posted a comment before you did, and it still hasn’t posted….talk about censorship! Do we really live in a “free” country?

  • Susan
    29 May 2014

    Big Hospital Finally telling the truth about Cancer, Johns Hopkins
    https://wausaunews.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/big-hospital-finally-telling-the-truth-about-cancer-johns-hopkins/
    A bit contradictory I would say

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    30 May 2014

    That story is a hoax and has been refuted by Johns Hopkins – more details here:
    http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cancerupdate.asp
    and here:
    http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/kimmel_cancer_center/news_events/featured/cancer_update_email_it_is_a_hoax.html

  • Lucy
    29 May 2014

    Censorship! I commented on this article and it was censored!!

  • patty
    29 May 2014

    Really hate this article…if it was up to you we would all eat really bad and depend on terrible treatments of which most people die…What are the hospitals afraid they are going to lose big money??? This tells me that by us trying to get healthy it scares the hell out of all the people that depend on cancer business….find another way …other than destroying people’s lives with the treatments and ruining families financially while you sit and condemn!!!!!

  • Maria
    28 May 2014

    A food’s acid or alkaline forming tendency in the body has nothing to do with the actual pH of the food itself. For example, lemons are very acidic, however the end products they produce after digestion and assimilation are very alkaline so, lemons are alkaline forming in the body. Likewise, meat will test alkaline before digestion, but it leaves very acidic residue in the body so, like nearly all animal products, meat is very acid forming.

  • Katter
    28 May 2014

    disinformation masquerading as sound scientific and reasonable arguments…
    i am sure the author believes what they wrote, but what they don’t want to admit is how much they are bought into a paradigm that is very limited and demeaning to people who have experience with cancer but draw very different conclusions.

  • Tonya
    28 May 2014

    When I read your article, my first thought was “are you also an Atheist?”

    Why? because when you say “Not scientifically proven”, God is real and really the only people I hear saying this is Atheist.

    Things don’t always have to be scientifically proven to know the work or are real, and because of doubt and unbelief some are not healed or helped.

  • Ben
    28 May 2014

    The amount of ignorance in this comment thread is mind-boggling.

    This is a clearly written, well cited and well supported article. Every point is backed up with several links to peer-reviewed studies and hard evidence. The authors even posted, in response to several questions, a direct link to all their financial backing information. Which apparently nobody has bothered to read.

    My favorite post by far was the one that linked the “Hospital finally tells truth about cancer” site. “All lies, all lies! Look at this website! It has the truth! Things that I agree with!” The linked website had ZERO sources.

    The authors are not denying a link between diet and cancer. On the contrary, they post links to several articles on the subject. A well-balanced, nutritional diet will go a long way towards keeping your immune system healthy.

  • christina
    28 May 2014

    To begin with I would like to give a reprimand to Kim that are telling Rachel she is wrong – there is no right and wrong in defeating cancer. I know people that have died and some have survived what ever method they have used. In first Place its a matter of what you Believe will cure you and that no one else can say or push on Another. The best thing is just to make your self informed and pick the method YOU Think is the best and stick to it! The mind is a powerful tool. And I do Think Rachel have had 100 of friends telling her the best way to do it – everyone have their ways and beliefs. Now she have choosen one and she should be encouraged and given hope, not be knocked down! Rachel I hope the best for you and the treatment you are doing I do know many that have won the same battle you are fighting so go for it girl go for it and live a wonderful Life! Another tought Kim, is the escalation on cancer a measure on that it have escalated or that we have become better on finding it? Is there any good statistics on this that you can refere too? as Phil said cure is not the Word due to that we all have cancer cells in our bodies they are most of the time not growing in high speed so we do not “have cancer” this was not a common known fact for 20 years ago either. Also Kim are you telling people to belive in your God and that everyone else is stupid not doing so also???? its the same thing……. I do know our enviroment and food is getting worse and worse but our bodies is also adjusting to enviroment even if it takes time ( I understand its not that fun to be the mid generation that have to suffer…) The human body is an Amazing Creation.

  • Phil
    28 May 2014

    Kim, I don’t know of any cancer survivor who was told he/she was “cured”. Tumors can be removed, cancer can be in remission, but “cure” is not in an oncologist’s lexicon.

    Are we ingesting things that could be dangerous? Yes. BPA and other chemicals are indeed in the food supply and that does concern me. However that doesn’t mean that the treatment for cancer is simply changing diet. That’s like saying since sun exposure can cause skin cancer, then the “cure” is to stay indoors.

  • Kim
    28 May 2014

    Rachel, you have been brainwashed like the rest of us. “Hard science” has an objective and is financially backed for a known profit and end result. If you get results from conventional chemo & radiation you will find later you will get another cancer from those treatments-despite being told you may be cured. It does not take a doctor or a scientist to realize what needs to be done to cure cancer. The incidence of cancer is higher now than 20 years ago??? Our food supply has been compromised. Going back to basics is your chance. Raw, unadulterated foods our grandparents would recognize. The author of this article is obviously closely affiliated with conventional medicine. There are a number of inconsistencies in her refuting these myths and to say it is not about greed and profit is completely naive. It is all about both. We have been lied to and lead down a path in the name of profit for some one else. Scientific studies are only performed where the end result will support a profit. You will not obtain financial backing otherwise. You really should keep an open mind and research extensively before you settle for what we have been brainwashed into thinking is the only way. There are other, more viable options.

  • Rachel
    28 May 2014

    For those whom have had luck with alternative/nutritional therapies, there is a phenomenon of spontaneous remission. It does happen. Also alternative therapies may be a better option for some populations – those that are older, very weak, cancer is a later stage, yadda yadda. I was diagnosed with stage 1B2 cervical cancer and do I want to just try to radically change my diet (with no hard numbers behind it no matter where I look the science is really sketchy, sorry) or use conventional treatments (chemo and radiation) which yes, have some harsh side effects but nothing my 39 year old body can’t take and has a 70-80% cure rate? Sorry but I really want to live so I’m banking on hard science. If this course of treatment doesn’t work, then maybe I’ll try something else. It’s easy for those who aren’t directly dealing with the potential of losing their own life to tell others that are what to do, but until you’ve walked a mile in my shoes, please STFU!

  • Nick Gayton
    28 May 2014

    Your outlook is different when you personally know people who have had cancer and gone through hell with conventional treatment, “beaten” it only to have it return a few years later. Then not willing to go through the same treatment they try an alkaline diet and raw juicing and it works for them. They keep it up and years go by and they are still cancer free. Some anecdotal testimonials may be exaggerated or outright fakes but many of your so called myths have some validity. Feel free to keep your head in the sand. Chemo may have acceptable results with a couple of types of cancer but there are definitely safer more effective treatments out there

  • Scott Lara
    28 May 2014

    12 years ago my wife Marty was diagnosed with stage IIB lung cancer in her left lung. Her entire lung was removed, followed by 8 weeks of radiation. 12 years later she remains cancer free.

  • www.NaturopathicKnights.com
    28 May 2014

    Cancer is a process. The the tumor is the pathology which is seen after so much time has passed. Everyone has cancer cells! Not everyone develops a tumor. Big difference. Everyone has cancer cells, because it is just natural law to have them, but the healthy body kills cancer cells. It is only when there is persistent imbalance that cancer cells flourish.

    Since cancer is a process and the end result is a tumor, cutting out the tumor in no way cures the cancer, it removes the pathology (many cancer cells lumped together). And the process by which it was caused? Do you cut that out with a knife, too? Of course not. Thinking you can cut out cancer is a stupid mans thinking.

    Also, testicular cancer is just one form of cancer. Hanging you hat on that as a means to justify radiating cancers is more absurdity. Furthermore, stating that more than half the people who get treated for cancer live past 10 years is a blatant lie. Articles like this are completely unethical.

  • Lou
    28 May 2014

    I would like to know if the cancer research this writer is affiliated with is supported by the sales of chemotherapy drugs. That would say a lot. However, I couldn’t find much on the author. AS the church lady says, :how conveeeenient!”.

  • Henry Scowcroft
    28 May 2014

    As you can see, people have been leaving a large number of comments on this post that disagree, sometimes rather rudely, with the evidence-based arguments we’ve made above. We thought readers might be interested to know that almost all of these people seem to have arrived at our blog from US-based alternative medicine Facebook pages. We leave you to make up your own mind as to whether you think their opinions, anecdotes and arguments – while no doubt sincere and heartfelt – constitute an objective, unbiased source of information.

    We’d also like to reiterate that our research is funded entirely by the generosity of the public (you can see our annual reports and accounts here).

    And finally, we would like to highlight another article we’ve written, entitled “There’s no conspiracy – sometimes it just doesn’t work“.

    Henry Scowcroft
    Cancer Research UK

  • Sue
    28 May 2014

    If Cancer Research UK reserves the right to edit, remove, delete my comments … really … what’s the point in commenting at all?

  • Frederic Burnett
    28 May 2014

    Thank you for debunking the myth that all sharks are free of cancer cells. The “cures” are out there. Change is just slow in coming.

  • anon
    28 May 2014

    This article and whoever wrote it is so wrong and completely manipulative. You talk about these super foods and how food companies are just trying to sell the product… are you serious?! Because it seems like you’re encouraging chemotherapy and surgery and drugs which is WAY worse! Fruits, vegetables, these super foods as some may call them have been on this planet way longer than all these man made drugs filled with chemicals and chemo as well that will only further destroy your insides… Two people in my family got diagnosed with cancer within the past few years. Sadly only one of them survived. The one that survived was diagnosed with stage 3 liver and pancreatic cancer. He never did chemotherapy or surgery. He refused to do these things and instead opted for natural remedies (a very strict but healthy diet with supplements). My other family member which passed away was diagnosed with breast cancer however it wasn’t the cancer that killed her but the chemotherapy that only weakened her immune system day by day. This is no coincidence. The body is a very interesting machine made to heal itself if you care for it correctly. This article is so full of crap and it needs to be reported and taken down. STOP BRAINWASHING PEOPLE!

  • mro
    28 May 2014

    yeah right, that’s why you see a nation of people recoverying after chemo, holding their grandchildren in their arms. Rather common I would say.

  • ANON
    28 May 2014

    This article is extremely harmful and biased. Yet again more propaganda spun by ‘cancer research’. After all if you start promoting things that actually work there won’t be a need for your organisation and for people to donate lots of money to you will there.

  • Northern
    28 May 2014

    Fact 10 lol.

  • John Doe
    28 May 2014

    What about Dr. Burzynski’s findings?….Why did the FDA, the AMA, and the American Cancer Institute not want to help him further his studies after his clinical trials were showing promise without the side effects that Chemotherapy does to people??? Dr. Burzynski is helping people beat cancer…why are his breakthroughs not more publicized?

  • Kate
    28 May 2014

    Having so far survived a Gene mutation which has given me terminal lung cancer, and having spent 6 years researching the correlation between cancer and food. I can honestly say this is the most disgraceful, harmful, outrageous & downright irresponsible article I have ever read.
    Disgusted. Utterly furious.
    I have a string of oncologist, professors & doctors who have said ‘why are you still alive? whatever it is you are doing, keep doing it.’
    So ok, they are not interested in the details, but they clearly acknowledge it’s keeping me alive.

  • Fauz
    28 May 2014

    This article is TOTAL BS… and as you can see by the comments below, no one intelligent is stupid enough to buy it. It’s nice to see that the average intelligence is rapidly increasing on these matters allow society to see through this crap. This article needs to be burned.

  • sam starr
    28 May 2014

    LIARS! SHAME ON YOU FOR LYING. WHO PAYS YOU TO LIE? HERE IS THE TRUTH: https://wausaunews.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/big-hospital-finally-telling-the-truth-about-cancer-johns-hopkins/

  • Grace A Bell, JP
    28 May 2014

    Whoa re the criminal who penned this article. and I agree with you ‘youareaniditotobeleivethis. Too late, too many of of us in the general population are no longer fooled by Big Pharma; we are doing our own research on the hundreds of protocols that we can turn to when ‘the text book cures don’t work’ You can fool some of the people some of the times, but you won’t fool all of the people all of the time! SHAME ON YOU

  • youreanidiotifyoubelievethis
    28 May 2014

    Whoever wrote this article must be employed by Monsanto. You should be ashamed of yourself.

  • Jimi
    28 May 2014

    There are no “miracle cures”… the only miracle is how many of you would rather die than believe that you’ve been lied to by every government sponsored faction.

  • Jimi
    28 May 2014

    This whole post is a big joke…. but the worst part is the entries about the miracle cures and the truth being suppressed. It’s written for brainwashed idiots. No person with any reasonable level of common sense would believe any of this.

  • Julie
    27 May 2014

    You are wrong!! I completely got rid of my skin cancer by using coconut oil and bicarbonate soda. Many other people have tried this also with success!! Even my doctors have told me that the proper diet and nutrition can work just as well if not better than chemo on many kinds of cancers.

  • vince
    27 May 2014

    I had stage 3 ewings sarcoma, an agressive cancer. I abided by most of those “myths” mid-way through my chemo treatment. I had 30 days of straight radiation then 14 months of chemo. I am now 5 years cancer free. Myth or not I’m still going living by those rules.

  • AG
    27 May 2014

    To all the comments posting correlational studies that “disprove” what this article is saying:

    CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION.

    A recent “correlational” study found a high correlation between women wearing bras and getting breast cancer…but considering that most women wear bras, this information is somehow not that shocking. Yet they tried to use it as “evidence” for a causal link between bras and breast cancer, a link that has not been proven experimentally.

    If something has not been proven experimentally, you cannot and should not alter your lifestyle around it because there is no causal link. You don’t know what you’re doing to your body.

  • Adam
    27 May 2014

    To ‘J’: Considering this piece cites research piece after research piece for its claims, I can’t tell what you are basing your comment on, other than a kind of zealous denial… they clearly have done their ‘own research’ in covering the literature to produce this. Perhaps it would make more sense for YOU, since you have the information readily to hand it seems, to show the reliable, peer reviewed science that proves efficacious cures for cancer. And also maybe ask yourself why an entire world of competing, unrelated academic institutions, research facilities, doctors, hospitals, biomedical scientists that wouldn’t mind recieving the Nobel prize – why all these parties, all with a vested interest in spotting each other’s errors, exposing each other’s bad methodologies and importantly, discovering world-changing medical breakthroughs – are ignoring the evidence you seem to state is there for the world to see?

    As for the next point, the article explicitly DOESN’T ‘completely exclude nutrition and its link to cancer’ – it is as if you didn’t even read the body, just the subsection titles and then guessed what they might say. The article states the overly sensational links between foods and cancer as grossly oversimplified. Which is correct, and it backs that up with evidence. I think any reasonable person reading the article would agree that it actually goes very much out of its way, to a level that seems quite sympathetic and generous to some of the ridiculous tabloid claims that it may be referring to, to state that there may well be links. And it suggests what some of the links may be, and how they work biologically. It does not ‘make out that they are not linked at all’ – or not to me, and I presume, most people that read the article.

    Finally, even though I don’t think they denied the correlation anyway – be careful about treating correlation as important. Not only because *CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION* – but also because there are correlations all over the place between totally unrelated things, just by chance. There is a correlation between the colour of my laptop, and the colour of coal. My laptop is probably not made of coal, and you wouldn’t think it worth treating that as a serious assertion until somebody disproves it… but there is a correlation. And many laptops will also share that.

    Small correlations might also be what we reasonable scientists call statistically insignificant. Now, there is a whole world of fierce debate over the importance and lack thereof of statistical inference in drawing conclusions from data, but like I said, correlations pop up all the time between unrelated things by chance – so perhaps these small correlations you speak of are just that. But that is why we do research, and the article cites research articles throughout for all it’s claims, whereas you just made a number of seemingly baseless arguments and didn’t back them up with anything other than your rather livid and hostile rhetoric.

    I know if I have to so basically spell out to you how unreasonable your point is, that you aren’t very likely to be reasonable enough to either accept or refute what I’m saying in an intelligent and scientific way, but I just bit onto this a bit and couldn’t help it.

    Having read your comment, I remain pretty confident that CRUK do their research, that this article’s authors have done their research (because they flippin’ cite it throughout) and that you don’t really have the evidence you say exists that proves what you say it proves, and are just either in denial or showing insufferable contrariety.

  • J
    26 May 2014

    Instead of labeling all these things as Myths and taking an incredibly biased view when writing this article, Cancer Research, why don’t you do your own research where you will find a large number of scientific studies detailing a number of cures that have been proven to work in a large number of cases. You should moreover, not completely exclude nutrition and its link to cancer. You make out that they are not linked at all. Of course there is some correlation, even if small. Do your research! And you call yourself Cancer Research, good one!!

  • Jose Castro
    26 May 2014

    “According to the classical view, the principal cells respond to systemic hormones like aldosterone and vasopressin to modulate transport of salt, water, and K+, while intercalated cells can excrete either H+ (type A cells) or HCO3– (type B cells), depending on the body’s acid-base status (1).”

    Quoted from “Mitochondrial TCA cycle intermediates regulate body fluid and acid-base balance”

  • José Castro
    26 May 2014

    About sugar and cancer.
    (And how it’s criminal to deny the link.)

    Dietary glycemic index and glycemic load and breast cancer risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC).

    High glycemic diet and breast cancer occurrence in the Italian EPIC cohort.

    Glycemic index, glycemic load and cancer risk.

    Dietary glycemic index, glycemic load, and risk of breast cancer: meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.

    Title only, no links allowed in this discussion.

  • José Castro
    26 May 2014

    Semin Dial. 2000 Jul-Aug;13(4):221-6.
    Influence of diet on acid-base balance.
    Remer T.
    Author information

    Abstract
    It is well established that diet and certain food components have a clear impact on acid-base balance. For adults, the following factors are involved: 1) the chemical composition of foods (i.e., their content of protein, chloride, phosphorus, sodium, potassium, calcium, and magnesium), 2) the different intestinal absorption rates of the relevant nutrients, 3) the metabolic generation of sulfate from sulfur-containing amino acids, 4) the grade of dissociation of phosphorus at the physiologic pH of 7.4, and 5) the ionic valence of calcium and magnesium. All these factors allow us to estimate the potential renal acid load (PRAL) of any given food or diet. The PRAL (calculated for a 24-hour period), together with a relatively constant daily amount of urinary excreted organic acids (in healthy subjects proportional to body surface area or body weight), yields the daily net acid excretion. This article provides an overview of the current concepts of diet influences on acid-base balance and also focuses on the underlying physiologic and biochemical basis as well as on relevant clinical implications.

  • Robin
    26 May 2014

    Who is funding this cherry picked nonsense? I stopped subscribing to you guys years ago when your chief exec laughed at the innovative evidence-based work work being done at the Pine Street Foundation in San Francisco – on dogs aiding cancer diagnosis. My old man died of cancer and I wish I knew then what I’ve seen with my own eyes of nutritional approaches – and unsympathetic doctors dismissing this approach when it’s successful as ‘idiomatic spontaneous remission”. Lets have some real evidence based debate if you want to convince the public, not hand picked web bytes from those with eye watering vested interests. Lets start with an answer to why docs are given next to no nutritional training. Where on earth do we get the building blocks of all those intricate chemical pathways? From the phamaceuticals we somehow lack?

  • José Castro
    26 May 2014

    I posted a comment with links but that wasn’t approved.

    “Generally a sensible article. Though I must point out some disagreements. Debunking is not always an easy task and one can over do it.

”the specific vegetables you choose doesn’t really matter”

While it is true that for basic prevention is probably good enough just to eat a good bunch of a random variety of fresh vegetables, some vegetables have specifics properties that can help in prevention in general (for example for antiangiogenesis) or in specific types of cancer for example the cabbage family (cruciferous plants) for lung cancer prevention in smokers (no link allowed in comments sorry).


    
”there’s no good evidence to prove that diet can manipulate whole body pH”
    
This is an amazingly ignorant statment. You just need a pH indicator paper to verify very easily how diet can influence urine pH. It’s a very straight-forward indicator of whole body acidity.

By the way people who defend this thesis don’t claim it’s the blood pH you should try to influence. The blood pH is very stable because of a whole set fo mechanisms that make it within a very short range of acidity. But the rest of the body don’t have the same defenses so you can expect a greater range of which the urine pH is the simplest indicator.

    Why don’t you check it out yourself? Have a fast-food meal, pizza, coke, and an icecream. Measure your next urine pH. Next day eat only vegetables, some whole rice and beans, lots of fruits and kale. Measure your urine pH. Unless your body pH is chronically low, you should notice a very large difference.


    
”that’s a far cry from saying that sugary foods specifically feed cancer cells”

Agree that is probably not exactly correct. But… there is a huge difference between consuming refined or processed sugar (like in Coke) or to do it in the form of a piece of fruit (like an apple). These forms of consumption of foods must be clearly differenciated, as they are by the scientific community. There is huge evidence linking high blood sugar (as after eating sugary foods, but also in diabetes type I uncontrolled) and cancer.

    Sugar in the refined form is poison, very different effect from that found in fruits for example. I advice checking out this talk on youtube: sugar the bitter truth.


    “Cancer treatment kills more than it cures”
Agree this is not so. But there is evidence some kinds of chemotherapy may actually create microconditions for tumour development. (no link allowed in comments sorry).

  • gth
    26 May 2014

    Appreciate the effort to put together all the links and knowledge and blast away some of the tripe.

    Families thrust into dealing with cancer who don’t have medical expertise are bombarded by doctors trying to help – and they need to absorb and understand that knowledge as fast as possible.

    Unfortunately the panic, despair and fear also makes them ripe targets for untested, unproven (or in the case of the shark stuff, specifically disproven) “alternative therapies”. As the Tim Minchin song says, if a therapy is scientifically proven to work… it is then called medicine.

    If only the asshats were as serious as citing their sources and doing peer reviews as the scientific community is.

  • Usizael
    25 May 2014

    This article and the sites this crap comes from are written by a funded trolls (as well as people that can’t see passed their nose!) All of this is crap information and mostly false. Yes, people got cancer a looooong time ago as well, but due to nutritional deficiencies…just like today. But one thing i can tell you for sure, the statistics were nowhere near 1 in 3 people get cancer. More like 1 every several thousand. It’s just like institutions consumed in greed to forget their founding fathers’ words (thus the state of our country as well, USA and others.) “Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food.” If you don’t know these words’ origin then you shouldn’t EVER talk about the state of “modern” medicine, because you don’t even know its foundations, nor would you have any idea how far it has strayed from its foundation due to greed.

  • Allan Johnson
    25 May 2014

    If cancer flourishes in an acidic environment and doesn’t in an alkaline one, then I choose an alkaline one. Less acidic causing foods and more alkaline.

    I would like someone to spend more time and money on determining the cause rather than the current focus on treatment after you have already got cancer.

    There is a well known Dr. In Italy who treats certain tumors with sodium bicarbonate directly on the tumor. He is very successful with his treatments with almost no side effects.

    I suggest everyone do there own research and go with those solutions you believe to work. We are being deceived by many groups, so don’t believe everything you are told because it’s scientific. There much science can ‘t explain.

  • Leann
    25 May 2014

    Leann is still waiting for this moderation?

  • Leann
    25 May 2014

    What kind of moderation? Did I hit a nerve?

  • Leann
    25 May 2014

    I absolutely believe that the pharmaceutical co’s will suffer severely if they turn out all the cures they have for cancer, not to mention other ailments. Am I suppose to just read & believe? Do not insult the majority of the people on this planet. I am entitled to my opinion.

  • Linda
    25 May 2014

    Looks like Cancer Research is terrified that it might go out of business. This amuses me greatly. There are huge numbers of people now with proof that some alternative therapies work, especially the ones mentioned here!

  • elena
    25 May 2014

    who is funding you?????

  • Angie
    25 May 2014

    Hello, everyone. I would like to translate this excellent science article into spanish. Could you give me your permission? I will add every reference and, also, link the translation with this original post.

    Thank you!

  • Luke
    22 May 2014

    quote: It simply doesn’t make sense that pharmaceutical companies would want to suppress a potential cure. Finding a highly effective therapy would guarantee huge worldwide sales.
    If worldwide sales are their aim then if eating a product like coconut oil imstead of consuming their useless alzheimers drugs will never pronoted because the sales of coconut oil wont make them money.

  • Marco Esquandolas
    21 May 2014

    Debunking sites are funny. No one ever questions the source of the debunkers because they claim science as their proof. Just like Nivlac said, this was probably funded and created by big pharma or one of their shills. No surprise.

  • Nivlac
    21 May 2014

    Ok, some might call this left field, but this article sounds like one of two things. Either propaganda paid for by big pharma to mislead Americans who are waking up to the truth, or the author really has not done their research. Cancer cures have been around for years. They just keep getting squashed. But don’t take my word for it. Do your own research.

  • Thijs
    20 May 2014

    This is a good article, hopefully people will stop with those not scientifically proven “cures”.

  • Arnas
    19 May 2014

    What about naked mole rat species? They don’t get cancer, do they?

  • Gerhard
    19 May 2014

    I can not help it, I do not believe you.

  • Tammy Vires
    17 May 2014

    I seriously hope you are wrong. My husband was just diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer and we are trying most of the treatments you “debunked” in your article and a few others besides.

  • Andrew
    16 May 2014

    I cannot believe this article appears on the Cancer Research website.

    Glucose is not the only energy source the body utilises. What about ketones? Cancer cells cannot process any form of energy other than glucose.

    So is it not possible that if you cut off the supply of glucose, you can hurt the cancer cells?

  • Ana
    16 May 2014

    Howcome the food you put into your system and, therefore, works into you and goes into your organs DO NOT AFFECT the way you develop or not CANCER

    Is like sayiny it doesnt matter what you put to your car, diesel, water or gasoline, it still will run through….

    Im not even going to discuss every point….

  • Tony
    16 May 2014

    Your sodium evaluation is dead wrong …… I am living proof of that!!!

  • Adrian
    10 May 2014

    As I started to read those “myths”, I was hoping someone in the comments section would point out what blatant bullsh!t this article is… And I wasn’t disappointed.
    Seems the world is waking up to the lies.

  • danar
    9 May 2014

    I think this website is lying there is no doubt any one can get cancer but the risk factors have increased by human (business) like smoking, fast(junk) food and pollution stop these factors and then cancer rate will decrease.

  • Chillax
    8 May 2014

    You know one major cause of cancer? Stress. So how ’bout we all just chill out and stop stressing so much about what causes cancer, what cures cancer, conspiracies, and myths. Just relax, man.

  • @Olushky
    8 May 2014

    And this article just proves that cancer is big business… So who do u like to trust… and what this article tells us?
    That cancer is incurable.
    http://on.rt.com/4w1jwb
    With all respect to the taxpayer… patient .

  • Joseph S
    8 May 2014

    Well I forgot to mention the cure for cancer… just simply because there is not any single miracle cure… the cure consists of plenty small things u have to do to get rid of it…
    The reason why I am writing here is simple… My mother last year developed cancer… quite serious they had to remove her womb. I told her to try couple of things before the surgery… So it might not be needed… The resistance which came from my mothers side was astonishing… She didn’t wanted to try anything what I suggested… After a month of trying to talk to her that she needs to give up smoking and get on a special diet I gave up. 4 weeks before the surgery she went for last check which turned out very bad, her cancer started spreading rapidly… The doctor set her surgery 2 weeks earlier. After she came from her doctor she rang me… I told her what I found and tried. She changed her diet for alkaline and started drinking sodium bicarbonate and gave up smoking… and sugar… she did some parasitic cleanse, heavy metals detox, chlorophyll,hydrogen peroxide, lemons with sea salt, epsom salts. The tumor shrank about 30% in less then 2 weeks. She still had the surgery…because her doctor said she needs to, ignoring that she wanted another test. What this experience gave to me and to my family?
    It gave us a new hope and a far distant view to what we know from media about cancer and other well known unsolvable mystery diseases.
    We are grateful for everything what doctors are doing… to us.

  • Joseph S
    7 May 2014

    Hi, this article is very informative to everybody who doesn’t care about cancer because simply they don’t have it. Once u get the disease u will change your mind in a split of a second, and u will be desperate to find anything to change your not so bright looking future… (chemo, radiation, surgery, deadlines for how much time u have left)
    U listing these myths… well there is this freedom to write anything… yes
    Let me tell u the story I am living in for past years.
    Since I developed type 1 diabetes, now 4 years ago, I used to be ill plenty times per year. The last time I was very ill, feeling like I was very close to pass from this life… not been able to get out of the house and being depressed like never before. After several sleepless nights searching for some answers I was so desperate for… how to improve my health with my diabetes related complications which my doctor said are “normal” for people with diabetes… hmm not very bright… I thought
    I still not believe what hidden world of cures there is.
    I started taking sodium bicarbonate 3-6 times everyday, what happened next is just out of this world… After 2 days on sodium bicarbonate treatment I was out and about walking in the park with plenty of energy… most important my lungs became mucus free after expelling huge quantities of dark brown and green mucus for about 3 days. I could breathe again… after nearly two weeks of pneumonia with high temperature… I have changed my diet to alkaline within short period of time after. Well I do the sodium bicarbonate ever since… and guess what…? I haven’t been seriously ill for a year and 5 months… I don’t know… must be a miracle, don’t u think?

  • Richie
    6 May 2014

    “Myth 8: Cancer treatment kills more than it cures” = Lies. It does kill more than it cures. And horribly too. Just walk into any office administering chemo. No one is smiling. It’s grueling, painful and it KILLS. What the pharma “cancer industry” calls ‘cures’ is equal to “not dying within 5 years of treatment”. There is no data kept after that. When cancer returns to the individual after 5 years, it’s a new case.

  • Zumaman
    5 May 2014

    Cancer Research UK is sponsored by Big Pharma so i wouldn’t take anything they say seriously. Big Pharma wants to profit and treating cancer with their useless drugs is far more lucrative than offering or developing a cure. They will say that there is no evidence to any of the above but they continue to ignore the testimonies of those who have been cured by such and alternative treatments like DCA and DMSO. The answer is simple. Because they can’t patent something, they don’t profit. Profiteering comes first you see, humanity second. They want you to buy their expensive drugs that offer you a lottery of a chance and take their deadly treatments that do actually kill than cure more people. But killing is their business remember. All the wars they wage on this planet is about profit and population control. We live in a sick and twisted world where the banksters run the show. As long as they’re in power they will take your charity and offer no cure. Makes you wonder why the Royals all live to well into their 80s and don’t tell me its in the genes please, i’m not that stupid and nor are people. We can put a probe on Mars but can’t find a cure for cancer?? Something is wrong, something is very wrong! Cancer, like war is big big business!

  • Mr Alfred Tidey
    2 May 2014

    I have had prostate cancer and gratefully I am cured of it by having radiotherapy treatment. Oddly, I was never worried about it when it was diagnosed two years ago because I knew I had a good chance of a cure. The damage caused to some healthy tissue near to the prostate gland is unfortunate and I hope something could be done to prevent this happening.

  • Peter Shotton
    2 May 2014

    Very interesting article. Have passed it to several friends.
    I notice that no mention has been made regarding the benefits of turmeric – which is a very strong anti-oxidant. It is known that the incidence of cancers, particularly stomach, liver and bowel cancers in India is less than in Europe. Suggest: take a teaspoonful of turmeric in fruit juice every day.

  • John atkins
    2 May 2014

    As someone who has recently beaten bowel cancer and secondary liver cancer I am fairly certain that a low carb diet or ketogenic diet is beneficial in fighting cancer. The science is as the author says uncertain at the present time but i do not hesitate to recommend the ketogenic diet to someone diagnosed with cancer who is willing and able to fight this disease by what is a fairly difficult dietary regime in support of chemo and surgery and whatever else the medics can offer. You will lose weight which is not always helpful but with care the diet is healthy and sustainable for most people.

  • James
    30 April 2014

    My comment is regarding a cure for cancer being hidden. You argue that any drug company that found a cure would make huge profits worldwide. My concern is what would happen to the multimillion pound research programmes that are operating around the world keeping thousands of peolple in work and generating millions of dollars or pounds. Surely these operations would all cease ‘overnight’ making all concerned redundant? So is it in some drug companies interest to withold the cure?

  • Colbert
    30 April 2014

    We know a lot about cancer, but not as much as we should know. Everybody keeps saying something else about it. But I think we are all so afraid of getting cancer that we try to abandon everything out of our lives that can cause cancer.. The problem is, we don’t know for sure wat causes it. This text shows us that in a good, clear way. There are a lot of myths about this horrible disease we have to deny.

  • Adriaan Heyns u14017157
    29 April 2014

    The increase in cancer is it due to the increase in the average life expectancy or is it mainly caused by our modern lifestyle? What is it about our modern lifestyle that has caused this sudden increase in cancer prevalence?

  • Kelly Smith
    28 April 2014

    This site is so full of disinformation. Billions of dollars thrown at breast cancer research alone and we are no closer to a cure than we were 40 years ago. More people make a living from cancer than die from it. One of the side effects of chemo is cancer and they are still using chemo drugs from the 1950s. There is no oversight of cancer research to make sure one research facility is not doing an experiment that failed at another one. 10% decrease in deaths in 10 years is so small as to be negligible. The phony cut, burn, and poison treatments are a crude way of dealing with a disease and are designed to kill you so you can’t see the cancer doctors for murder and mayhem.

  • Kaz
    25 April 2014

    http://www.ted.com/talks/william_li?language=en

  • Guest
    24 April 2014

    In relation to Myth 8: If you read Knockout by Suzanne Sommers she mentions that there are three type of cancers that respond well to chemo, testicular cancer being one of them. Lets see some statistics for other cancers that do not respond well to Chemo at all.

  • Guest
    24 April 2014

    lmaoooooooooooo This article was a long time coming… I figured big pharma and the gov’t would begin fighting back…. You will only confuse the people on the fence, the rest of us know the truth… This article us complete satire, thanks for the early morning laugh

  • Judith Bradshaw
    24 April 2014

    Excellent article. Beautifully written and very informative.

  • Michael Chomsky
    24 April 2014

    Total disinformation B.S.

  • Armando
    23 April 2014

    Yes, let us reject all scientific and non-scientific studies performed by Doctors that you are trying to debunk, and only follow your propaganda. Let us not hear from those who have been cured, or have cured them selves by alternative natural methods. This posting is so one sided it belongs in an Opinion blog. I notice you did not reach out to the alternative healing side for a rebuttal for a fair and balanced posting. I am sure you do not want to see the evidence.

  • Geraldine
    23 April 2014

    I agree with this, but there is one more thing. If there was a cheap cure, big Insurance who pays for most treatments would never let the Bid Pharmaceuticals hid it. They would fight tooth and nail to get it out there.

  • Nikki
    23 April 2014

    You forgot to add ” PS Keep sending the cheques” What a load of unsubstantiated twaddle!

  • martre66
    20 April 2014

    Treating cancer is BIG business in America . In fact, it’s a $200 billion a year business. Yet 98 percent of conventional cancer treatments not only FAIL miserably, but are also almost guaranteed to make cancer patients sicker.What’s worse: The powers are suppressing natural cancer cures that could help tens of thousands of people get well and live cancer free with little or no dependence on drugs, surgery and chemotherapy.

    .

  • Emma Mead
    19 April 2014

    In relation to your feedback on myth 3 an acidic diet causes cancer I would like to know more about why you believe this is the case. Here are some of the facts that make be believe than an alkaline diet is beneficial
    1. Otto Warburg was awarded the Nobel Prize for his work on the effects of acid and alkaline solutions on cell health. Warburg’s research showed that a low pH environment killed healthy calls or caused them to mutate into cancerous cells
    2. The majority of our cells and organs we thrive when the pH is at alkaline at @ 7.4. In fact our blood needs to be in a range of 7.35 to 7.45. Our body is designed to jealously guard the pH of our blood as moving outside of that range is not compatible with life ie fatal. So whilst it would be incorrect to say that our blood becomes acidic due to our diet, our bodies still need to neutralise any acid load caused by diet/cells metabolism which they do via our bodies buffers which are replenished from by drawing down on your reserves of ‘calcium phosphate’, which are stored within your bones (there is very strong research indicating the link between an acidic diet and osteoporosis). However my understanding is that if the buffers don’t work fast enough then your body will need to eliminate the acid load into surrounding tissues and organs to be stored, thereby causing low grade acidosis. I believe that Robert Young and Susan Brown have linked this low level of acidosis with many chronic diseases including cancer.
    3. In contrast to acidic foods, alkaline plant based diet replenishes those buffers that keeps your blood at the pH level compatible with life.
    4. My understanding from the research I have reviewed is that when our pH is unbalanced then we have an increased level of free radicals and the antioxidant enzymes which act as our cells shields from these free radicals start to fail when our pH is unbalanced ie when we have a low grade acidosis. This leads to the premature death of healthy cells and almost all diseases are are caused by the premature death of healthy cells for example its the premature death of beta cells in our pancreas that leads to diabetes.
    5. Not only do our cells become damaged by those hostile free radicals but the acidic environment impacts our cells electrical charge and that impacts their ability to send and receive messages. It’s like when you you are in a poor signal area with your mobile and your phone keeps cutting out or there is lots of static, not everything you are saying is heard. When effective communication between cells break down it means that cells such as cancer cells, which our body should kill off are left to continue to divide

    For me these are 5 very powerful reasons why we SHOULD ensure we get the right acid:alkaline balance in our diet. Why would you not want to encourage those touched by cancer to do this? I am not saying that an acid diet causes cancer however it is evident that there is a lot to be gained from eating a plant rich diet surely we shoud be doing everything we can to improve people’s health, why would an alkaline diet not be a good idea to encourage? Your article does not achieve this end

    There is significant evidence in the impact of eating meat (which is acidic) on cancer. The world health organisation has concluded that dietary factors account for 30% of all cancers in the western world. Large studies in England and Germany showed that vegetarians were about 40 percent less likely to develop cancer compared to meat eaters so why would you want to declare something a ‘myth’ that has actually been shown to lower your cancer risk? Even though it may not be the alkaline vs acidic nature of foods that are the underlying driver, I know for example that meat and dairy foods are high fat and that fat causes a woman’s body to make more estrogens, which encourage cancer cell growth in the breast. I also know that items that are deemed alkaline ie plant based don’t have the same effect. Research has shown that amount of estradiol (a principal estrogen) in their blood dropped by 30 percent for those girls that switched their diet by reducing animal based protein and increasing plant based protein. That is a significant result – why would you not want to communicate this clearly to people as the action they should take – encouraging An alkaline diet would achieve this. Two themes consistently emerge from studies of cancer from many sites: vegetables and fruits help to reduce risk, while meat, animal products, and other fatty foods are frequently found to increase risk.

    I look forward to understanding exactly which scientific studies you reviewed to come to the conclusion that encouraging people not to eat an alkaline diet would be good advice

  • evelyn mhande
    14 April 2014

    Thanks for the information.it sounds very positive.

  • Jane
    11 April 2014

    I am hoping someone can help me find an answer to a question. I am strung out with anxiety and do not have an appointment with a Hemotologist until the 21st. I have seen two doctors who have been trying to diagnose my neuropathy. In doing so they have run a TON of blood tests. One test “Cryoglobulin Quantitative” has come back listed as “trace” when it should be negative. 3 more tests were ordered — 2 of which were fine but the third “Protein Immunofixation Serum” shows an abnormality. The IGG, IGA and IGM are all within normal limits but the Immunofixation ELP has a note that says: Monoclonal IgM immunoglobulin of lambda light chain type. Pathological significance requires clinical correlation. I paniced and sent a note to the ordering doc since everything I put in to google tells me I have multiple mylomea. He sent me a note back that says the test results are consistent to someone who does NOT have cancer but he wants me to see a hemotologist/oncologist “just to be certain”. Does ANYONE on here have any background on these types of tests and if I should be concerned?

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    12 April 2014

    Hi Jane,
    I appreciate this must be a worrying time for you. If you’d like to speak to someone and you’re in the UK, give our Cancer Information Nurses a call – you can reach them on freephone 0808 800 4040 (9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday).
    Best wishes,
    Kat

  • Wiggers99
    11 April 2014

    You say, “All our cells, cancerous or not, use glucose for energy” (Myth 4) but in fact “ATP can be produced by redox reactions using simple and complex sugars (carbohydrates) or lipids as an energy source.” There are strong arguments from the correlation between the rise in consumption of processed food rich in carbohydrates and rise of cancer rates. Myth 1 mentions Egyptian and Greek physicians, but it is around then that agriculture and the consumption of carbs began to take off. Before then as hunter gatherers we were eating mainly red meat, berries, nuts, etc. As I understand it, most of the studies condemning red meat and fat have been confounded by a lack of control for carbs, mainly starches (polysaccharides) in legumes and root vegetables. (I.e. steak, chips and peas.)

  • MC Rob Mont
    9 April 2014

    This is what i found about the author’s background:

    Oliver Childs studied Natural Sciences at Bath University. After graduating, he then spent several years working in science publishing in various editorial roles, including as Copy Editor of Nature Reviews Cancer and Managing Editor at International Medical Press. He’s also worked as a freelance medical and healthcare copywriter.

    He joined the Science Communications team at Cancer Research UK in January 2009, working on their annual publications. He now works as part of the News and Multimedia team, helping to manage the charity’s blog and news feed.

    Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/oliver-childs

  • L.Hibbert
    7 April 2014

    Treatment using mistletoe instead of chemotherapy is used in other European countries and has been proved successful as well as causing far fewer side effects and yet I can find nothing about it on your website. I still think that the money for research is too focused on treatments that make a lot of money. And I was shocked at the quality and type of food given to people when in hospital. Surely this is a chance for the nhs to remind people what they should be eating to stay healthy.

  • Mrs Christine Williamson
    7 April 2014

    Great article, very informative, keep up the good work, thank you :)

  • Pan Pantziarka
    7 April 2014

    The idea of miracle cures is one that just doesn’t go away. It’s often driven by desperation and used by the unscrupulous to fleece people who need help.

    http://www.anticancer.org.uk/2011/06/miracle-cures.html

  • http://www.removemykidneystones.com/
    6 April 2014

    Some might be true and some could be true myths. What’s the point if shark don’t get cancer anyway? Maybe finding some cure of typical cancers and chronic diseases like kidney stone is much better though.

  • AS
    6 April 2014

    Who are you, stupid person who wrote this article??? Those are not myths and chemotherapy is the worst thing you can do to your body. It seems that you work for Big Pharma. You debunked those “myths” without providing evidence. So stupid. And those people actually believe you. Human body is a perfectly designed machine made to repair itself if you give it the right fuel – food made by God, not man. You need a strong immune system to cure cancer or prevent it. And only the right food can give you that, not those barbaric chemo or radiation treatments. I am shocked at you ignorant article.

  • Naresh Lathia
    6 April 2014

    Read this elsewhere on the Cancer Research (UK) website

    “There is strong evidence that eating a lot of red meat and processed meats increases bowel cancer risk. In 2011, it was estimated that around 1 in 5 bowel cancers were linked to eating these types of meat. Red meats include lamb, pork, veal and beef. Processed meats include sausages, salami, ham, bacon, paté and tinned meat. ”
    Cancer Research (UK) will make much more progress in prevention of 1 in 5 bowel cancer if it breaks its friendship with the Meat Marketing!

  • The Sultana
    6 April 2014

    Would have liked more information on the effects of alcohol and cancer!

  • Moira
    6 April 2014

    Very helpful, summary article. Thank you

  • Terence Richards
    5 April 2014

    Are you saying that Canceractive.com and Chris Woollams M.A. (Oxon) are just a load of rubbish? because that is what you are implying in your article.

  • Angela Maguire
    4 April 2014

    Thank you for a sensible, thought provoking article.

  • Shirley Denwood
    4 April 2014

    Thank you for that fascinating article. I hadn’t heard some of those myths before; it just shows what a lot of twaddle gets spread around. Most people can’t tell what’s true and what’s not, so thank goodness for people like you who can tell us the facts.

  • Sam
    4 April 2014

    This is a great review of common myths surrounding Cancer and I would like to thank Cancer Research UK for posting it. I sympathize with anyone who is going through this ordeal and I cannot imagine how it must feel. Many people, as has already been pointed out, turn to natural cures or complementary alternative medicine solutions in their darkest hour. Sourcing a second opinion is never a bad idea, but turning to an unproven method of treatment may not only be ineffective but combined with the potential for false hope this generates, could be devastating for the patent and family if treatments fail. I find the conspiracy theories surrounding this matter extremely disrespectful to the patients and the doctors who treat them. It is good to see that cancer research U.K. have discussed the’ big pharma’ and patenting conspiracy by providing insight into their own research on aspirin, a cheap and readily available drug. I look forward to reading the literature on that.
    My approach is clearly a science based medicine approach, and everyone is of course welcome to their own opinions with regards to their own treatment. I would like to thank Cancer research and I will continue to support CRUK to hopefully cure Cancer.

  • Samantha Kelleher
    4 April 2014

    Thanks for this interesting article. I donate in the memory of my father Michael Arthur Pryces, a keen cyclist, who died of Non-Hodgekins Lymphoma, aged 50 in 1992. I know progress has been made in the treatment of this cancer in the last 20 years. Thank you to all the dedicated people involved in cancer research and treatment.

  • Tomas
    4 April 2014

    why has my comment not been posted please?

  • Lorraine
    4 April 2014

    My young cousin Koray died from Cancer, Please god you find a cure before any more of my family and friends die from it.

  • Tomas
    4 April 2014

    Very enlightening article. Only thing I would disagree with is that people who claim conspiracy theories against pharmaceutical giants are being offensive to victims and families. They most certainly are not. Money tends to be the root of most evil and large pharmaceutical companies are some of the least transparent and ethically questionable bodies in the world. The book you suggested highlights these issues well (misuse of data, negative trial data omissions). I’m not suggesting there is a cover up for a single cancer cure. But I do think it is healthy for people to challenge and question non- transparent companies which wield incredible power, make huge profits and have numerous lobbyists.

  • Albert Henderson
    4 April 2014

    Excellent article, Cancer Research is doing great work. My wife died with pancreatic cancer and I will not forget the attention and help she received from our local hospice during her final hours.

  • Zahid Malik
    4 April 2014

    Cancer has a cure in cancer, only one link is missing

  • kat
    4 April 2014

    I donate to you and have done for a number of years
    To quote you “Problems with conventional medicine don’t automatically prove that alternative ‘cures’ work. To use a metaphor, just because cars sometimes crash doesn’t mean that flying carpets are a viable transport option.”
    Not sure you chose the right metaphor here, as flying carpets don’t exist and never have and its not a fair picture to paint. Alternative medicine has helped people over centuries…even if its just to help support the body deal with what its going through when taking conventional medicine. Be nice if we can just partner up conventional medicine with alternative and just let the individual person decide what works for them, instead of saying one way is right and the other wrong. Also just wanted what cancer research thinks of the following article… http://www.bbc.com/news/health-26038460
    kindest regards

  • Simon
    4 April 2014

    Why is this item helpful? An item advising what might ‘help’ rather than what doesn’t would be more appropriate.

  • James
    4 April 2014

    Very good and clear. I hope that you can persuade the tone of this article to be included in biology lessons in schools so that the young can learn not to believe the veracity of non scientific sources.

  • Mrs Lorna Bailey
    4 April 2014

    thanks for all your helpful information – it does seem to the relatives of loved ones that they have lost that cancer is becoming more and more prevalent and taking more lives as it takes a hold on the human race. That is why it is encouraging to read all about the research that is taking place all the time. Having lost my husband 3 years ago suffering from bowel cancer also my eldest daughter has had breast cancer and is now fit and getting on with her life – my interest in the medical steps that are taking place all the time is ongoing!!! Please continue to keep all of us up to date!!!

  • H Hardy
    4 April 2014

    Interesting to read

  • Pauline Whiteley
    4 April 2014

    Brilliant article

  • K Craig
    4 April 2014

    Thank you for the highly informative information. I lost a parent to cancer when I was young and I always take great interest in the hard work and dedication that cancer research does for all our benefit. This contained lots of informative links too and good health advice that we can all follow. Thank you for all your hard work.

  • Anna
    4 April 2014

    Really informative article, well researched and not too scientific to put off the non scientific. Thank you.

  • Sandra Hall
    4 April 2014

    Thank you so much for all this information. I found it all very interesting and encouraging

  • Manohar V. Rakhe
    4 April 2014

    Sir, this is an excellent article. As my knowledge of medical matters is extremely limited, I found the article dispelling the myths about cancer, very easy to understand. But I still do not understand, the difference between Chemotherapy & a GP prescribing a medicine to treat say migraine headaches. Is there any way, you can explain it to me? Thank you for the excellent article.

  • Martin
    3 April 2014

    food for thought. Why are have there been no new anti biotics developed for over 20 years?
    Not because the pharma’s can’t develop one.It is because they won’t as it is not financially viable( over £1,000,000,000 to develop one single anti-biotic). It will become viable once it becomes an epidemic and thousands or even millions die. Then and only then will it be developed. Money not humans are the important factor in all this. Please do not rubbish a cure just because no individual has the money to prove it’s benefits. pharma will not research it as it is not in their interest to prove it’s benefits as most of them are natural and free to everybody.
    Manage your own life and your own cancer and don’t let anybody control either other than yourself and those closest to you who have genuine interest in your well being.

  • Carol Cain
    3 April 2014

    What an excellent and informative article. Cancer Research UK is a very worthy organisation giving us hope for cures in the future. Thank you

  • Tony Meacock
    3 April 2014

    A very useful email, which I will file for reference.

  • Narotam Lathia
    3 April 2014

    I will not cancel the Direct Debit for the donations I regularly make to Cancer Research. I am aware Cancer Research is under a great deal of pressure from Big Pharma. But to call these methods, of prevention and even cure, simply MYTHS is to throw the baby with the bath water. The biggest issue here is that these natural methods do not produce profits for Big Pharma as they are not patentable. They have been handed down from generation to generation for centuries! Did I hear you say cancer was not so widespread then? Yes, it was not widespread only due to USE OF such methods. Yes! a close friend of my family has lost 2 members of the family in a year in spite of HOSPITAL treatment using all the methods Cancer Research supports.

  • Narotam Lathia
    3 April 2014

    Myth 3: ‘Acidic’ diets cause cancer

    You say:- But there’s no good evidence to prove that diet can manipulate whole body pH, or that it has an impact on cancer.
    My comment:-Studies have revealed that lemon extract can successfully destroy malignant cells in a wide range of cancers, including breast cancer, colon cancer, and lung cancer. Several research studies also make the claim that lemons can destroy cancer much more effectively than chemotherapy, and in a safer and healthier manner. Additionally, the studies also show that lemon extract therapy only affects malignant cells, leaving healthy cells unharmed.
    Additional health benefits of lemons include:
    It is antibacterial
    It is antiviral
    It aids in digestion
    It can be used to treat acne
    It helps to regulate blood pressure
    It fights against parasites and worms
    It possesses antidepressant qualities
    It helps to reduce stress and anxiety

  • Narotam Lathia
    3 April 2014

    Myth 2: Superfoods prevent cancer

    You say:- Blueberries, beetroot, broccoli, garlic, green tea… there’s no such thing as a ‘superfood’. It’s a marketing term used to sell products and has no scientific basis.

    My comment:- What scientific research has been ALLOWED by Big Parma on these NON Patentable means of prevention and often cures?

  • Narotam Lathia
    3 April 2014

    Myth 1: Cancer is a man-made, modern disease

    You say:- Yes, lifestyle, diet other things like air pollution collectively have a huge impact on our risk of cancer – smoking for instance is behind a quarter of all cancer deaths in the UK – but that’s not the same as saying it’s entirely a modern, man-made disease. There are plenty of natural causes of cancer – for example, one in six worldwide cancers is caused by viruses and bacteria.
    My comment:- We humans can live with the NON MAN MADE CANCER! We do not need to CAUSE cancer. e.g. by the MASS MARKETING of tobacco. Major cause of bowel cancer is meat eating. When will Cancer Research UK Science tell the general public about this instead of hiding it behind a single hypelinked word –‘diet’?

  • Gemma broom
    3 April 2014

    Great read! Helped a lot.thank you

  • Tricia Woodgate
    3 April 2014

    What a brilliant article! Informative, reassuring and authorative. Thank you very much.

  • Derek
    3 April 2014

    It is said that Sodium Bicarbonate does not increase blood alkalinity but i have always used this for hangovers, 1/3 teaspoon in warm water and within half an hour hangover is gone and alcohol breath test is negative, i have tested this so i know it works. As for working in cancer i have no idea.
    Just thought i would post as it is always said that you cannot get rid of alcohol out of your body any faster than it is possible for the body to rid itself of the alcohol.
    I truly believe the cause of most/all ills are a combination of lack of oxygen, lack of nutrients,pathogens and too much gut bacteria.

  • Lucia
    3 April 2014

    Thank you for this informative article! I’m surprised at the ignorance still surrounding this (cancer caused by fungus?? really?) and I also cringe when I hear conspiracy theories about pharmaceutical companies ,,,,

  • MargaretKT
    3 April 2014

    Excellent article. Thank you. The myths need to be dispelled as they have the potential to divert people’s attention from the good work that is being done. Personal comment: taxotere is evil – but I thAnk you all for the fact that it was available to me.

  • Ivor
    3 April 2014

    naked mole rats don’t get cancer, due to a complex sugar.

    http://news.sciencemag.org/health/2013/06/why-naked-mole-rats-dont-get-cancer

  • Shaun
    3 April 2014

    It’s great to have it broken down like this, I cringe when I hear people shouting ‘conspiracy theory’ about how a full on cure for cancer is out there but being held back. Hopefully people will start seeing the truth; most people shouting this are trying to sell you a cure and line their own pockets! Sad but true. So thank you for this great article.

  • Dave Hurst
    3 April 2014

    thanks for busting a few myths

  • Martin Dillon
    3 April 2014

    This is a terrible article which proves a great deal about a vast number of cancer charities.
    Charities are not independent and are linked to the Pharma industry and the finances behind them. I am a firm believer in juiced wheatgrass and the only reason it is not proven or disproved is because there is no financial gain to do so.
    Nobody least of all pharma industry or government will spend the money because it would cause their own downfall if found to be proven cure which they cannot control and make a profit from. Anything that cannot be patented and controlled is of no gain to nobody. Philanthropists should research more of these so called cures.
    Shame on you for discounting natural cures for people in a dark place with little hope. For the record Chemo I was given had no effect on my tumours and my new chemo has only about a 10% chance of success (how is this proven?). Please don’t knock cures or remedies just because the rich will, and don’t want to research them in case they do work.

  • Joanne Moore
    3 April 2014

    Do the results of your research go towards helping treat animal cancers too?

  • Mr.Brian James MacKintosh
    3 April 2014

    I found this article very interesting and easy to understand,thank you.

  • m wright
    3 April 2014

    My God, there are some sick and stupid people out there. (Since being re-diagnosed with cancer, I’m afraid I have become more critical of really silly people with no education and a fondness for conspiracy theories. Has the age of the internet increased them, or were they always there? No doubt someone will tell me they hope I die soon!!) Do you REALLY think if there was a cure someone wouldn’t want to clean up?? All the quacks out there peddling miracle cures did it since man first walked the earth!! Credible and easily-influenced people have always given their monies away that way. All I will say is, watch a film called Idiocracy. It will tell you all you need to know about how stupidity is on the increase. Cancer Research, you keep going. You may not be able to save me, but you saved my daughter – she would have died had she been born 20 years earlier. And the rest of you – don’t talk about what you don’t know anything about.

  • Angel
    3 April 2014

    I have read many of the comments here and wanted to say was diagnosed with Hodgkins Lymphoma in 2009 and underwent 6 months of chemo. I have been in remission since then. I have adjusted my lifestyle doing what i can to eat healthier and to exercise a lot more to prevent it returning as well as keeping my faith in God. I am appalled at the negative comments around chemotherapy. I am someone who is against taking any form of drug and by the grace of God I don’t have to take any medication now. In the meantime I have lost a friend who when diagnosed with cancer opted for the ‘natural treatment’ he is now no longer here to tell the tail.

    Chemo works for some people and has worked for me so far. I get regular check ups and so far so good. so please people stop being ignorant about the treatment. I have not met anyone who was treated for Cancer with natural remedies that is still alive but know a few people who are following chemo (myself included). So if there is anyone out there who was treated naturally and are still alive 5 years later I would love to know.

  • J. Kmiecik
    3 April 2014

    Excellent. Clear and easy to understand. Thanks.

  • Yanni
    3 April 2014

    To the cancer researcher not only should you and your colleagues should feel insultated but looking at your performance you should be embarrassed with your chase your tail performance that keeps you employed for as long as possible without a cure.

  • Yanni
    3 April 2014

    We would support cancer research if they looked at all possible cures and not only the money making ones that pharma choose to persue and this.article proves just that.

  • Geraldine Campbell
    2 April 2014

    We all need to support Cancer Research. Without it there’s no hope of finding a cure.m

  • Kees
    2 April 2014

    Please view this documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWLrfNJICeM

  • Chris
    2 April 2014

    Myth 1: “Yes, lifestyle, DIET and other things like air pollution collectively have a huge impact on our risk of cancer.”

    Myth 2: Diet won’t really impact risk of cancer.

    Hmm…

  • To the killer who wrot this article
    2 April 2014

    Do you seriously think this article is going to stop the truth movement , you have blood on your hands you are sick beyond words !

  • Nicole
    2 April 2014

    As a cancer researcher I think for the most part that this blog is a pretty good argument against some common myths. Especially the myths that persist regarding miracle cures and the industry hiding cures. For one thing there are different types of cancers, which will/do require different types of treatments to cure them. I work for a non-profit institute, but we do collaborate with big pharma companies. Trust me, there are millions of dollars spent each year from a myriad of sources on cancer research. To say we are hiding a cure is an insult to me and my colleagues. There is no reason to hide an effective treatment/cure. However, I must state that as a professional scientist, I wish there were more citations/references to peer-reivewed research to back up the claims stated.

  • Guy G
    1 April 2014

    This is a very poor example on how an uneducated mind sees cancer.

    The fact that they compared sugar from a carrot to a cake is ridiculous.

    REFINED SUGAR – Is the cause of MANY diseases – not simply glucose or sucrose.

    But, leave it to an uneducated mind to decipher what people are talking about when they say ‘sugar causes cancer’

    Do your research on REFINED SUGAR – and you will see when it was introduced, why, how it affects the body, and how it changes a body to crave it.

    Not saying refined sugar is the cause of all cancer – but it’s what should be discussed, not a general “sugar”

  • AndyS
    1 April 2014

    I will be straight, many people commenting on this article must have some severe intellectural deficiencies. You make claims that you seem to pull straight out of your asses, make firm judgments based on documentaries/one article that has no rigorous scientific testing whatsoever, and are paranoid whenever big pharma is involved. Everything said here is true, anyone with 1-2 years of education in any life sciences would agree. And where did you see him advocating for big pharmas or suppressing innovation? Please do not interpret articles aimed at providing sound general knowledge with your own personal bias.

    Basic biology: Cancer is just normal body sell proliferating at an abnormal rate due to initial insult and eventually attaining metastasis. These cells have basically the same cellular composition as their normal counterparts, and claiming any drug that can completely ‘cure’ cancer without harming other parts of your body is just an insult to anyone with introductory expertise to pharmacology.

  • fred
    1 April 2014

    I know Dr.s that get kick backs for pushing drugs big pharmas meds.So don’t try and tell me it’s not first and for most about the money and not our well being. Look up Bayer and tainted meds for hemofilac patients. My cousin died of this drug they knew aas tainted. We stoped using tthem in the US and sold them to France and Germany killing thousands. In France and Germany the people involved are in prison. In the US not one has seen a court room.

  • Iloveepi
    1 April 2014

    DOCTOR Schwartz, why don’t you leave Epidemiology to the Epidemiologists? Please stop using our discipline to advance your personal political opinions and shutting out people’s attempt for innovation.

  • Frank Sabine
    1 April 2014

    Where is all of the research links that make this article true? Just more internet bull, don’t knock a new cure until you try it! Of all the billions of dollars people empty out of their pockets and sink into cancer research you think there would be a cure by now! Look into the populations that have the lowest rates of cancer, see where they live and what their diet is and there’s your cure…or prevention! If there was a cause to donate money for a cancer cure I would surely donate.. but cancer research..ya right!!!

  • WL
    1 April 2014

    The comment section is the new fad of society-withholding crazy that plagues the current generation; this especially referring to those who think that cancer research institutes are money-making farms. It’s extremely offensive and insulting for those working overtime, overnight without rest on their research (myself included) aiming to contribute to the pool of knowledge and progressing the enterprise of knowledge and process for humankind, while science-deniers slouch around in the very convenience built upon by generations of the same scientific process they are denouncing. It’s downright embarrassing for the party making these claims. Sometimes you do wonder if any of them ever bothered to pick up a textbook, converse with an actual scientist or step into an actual laboratory beyond envisaging science labs and scientists as depicted in sci-fi horror and popular media. I’m glad groups for the public understanding of science are blossoming in response for the next generation, but I fear we might need more than that.

  • NH
    1 April 2014

    This is very misleading:

    Using the word “cure” when you mean “treatment.”

    Using the word “survival” when cancer orgs know they define survival differently then us common folk.

    Using the word “cause” when you mean potentially “increasing risk” or a “contributing factor.”

    Not fair; not nice.

    Also, I couldn’t find any author bio nor does your about us link work, so I’m not sure who is specifically behind this article.

    Can you understand how we everyday people come to mistrust the medical establishment when you dissemble (intentionally or unintentionally) on basic concepts?

  • R.w.Foster
    1 April 2014

    It’s scary how many crazy things people will believe. Chelation? Homeopathy? Naturopathy? Those of us who say we follow the scientific method, and dismiss stuff like this are labeled as “Big Pharma Shills.” The irony is they are unpaid “Big Naturo shills.”

  • harry
    31 March 2014

    excellent article, but missing mention of a variety of herbs that are cancer preventive. the peer reviewed research you mention is necessary to validate these claims are available at the memorial slone kettering website mskcc.org. this is a cancer research hospital in ny. at the site search herbs. look at turmeric or boswilla for example. there you will find the peer reviewed studies you mention. stage 2 burkitts survivor here and take some of these herbs every day.

  • Peter B
    29 March 2014

    A message to all of the people criticising this article.
    A close relative was diagnosed with cancer too late for a chance of any form of cure.
    He searched the internet for the sort of alternative remedies that many people posting here seem to be keen on and tried many of them.
    Sadly, they had no effect and he died.
    What’s the harm in trying alternative therapies?
    My relative believed the hype, and was in denial about his fate until he went into a coma shortly before dying. He never allowed his family to go through the processes of coming to terms with a husband/father/brother/son having a terminal disease – we all had to be positive and believe that the many ‘cures’ he was trying would save him. His family were devastated when he died, because they had never had the chance to say things that should have been said, or to grab some precious moments whilst he was still well enough to go out.
    That is all bad enough.
    But none of the alternative cures come cheap, and he bankrupted his family in the desperate search for a ‘cure’. They’re now having to move out of the family home and into rented accommodation, have lost savings and capital invested over the years and still face a prolonged period of paying off debts.
    I don’t think that the ‘alternative’ market is benign or altruistic – my relative was fleeced by crooks and charlatans selling cheap sounding remedies at massive prices to feather their own nests. I hope the worst of them rot in hell for what they did to him and his family.

  • Vasile
    29 March 2014

    I have discovered treatment for skin cancer i want 9 million euro for it

  • Tania
    29 March 2014

    Whoever wrote this obviously was paid by Big Pharma!
    Get your facts straight and stop making money on lives of innocent people.
    Cancer is a cash-cow. Cancer Institutes are not interested in curing people. They are only interested in extending their lives for a year or two during which cancer patients and their insurance companies will be paying for expensive “treatment” which has no intention to cure.
    Please watch “Forbidden Cures”, this documentary says it all

  • Jeri
    29 March 2014

    I completely agree with Justin. At first I thought this was a satire piece ! Luckily more and more people are learning from experience that alternatives DO work, and given that chemo has a 97-98% FAILURE rate, it’s a good thing that people are taking their health into their own hands , because conventional methods are failing miserably .

  • Bruce
    28 March 2014

    Myth 1: Cancer is a man-made, modern disease.

    I think the issues about man-made are mostly related to the production of foods, drugs and environmental pollution. Business is always about profit no matter what the negative outcome could be. But when it comes to health, profit must be included, but not where it will hurt others.

    We have already seen a huge changes in manufacturing of healthy food by the same manufactures who designed the obvious bad foods. We have seen dramatic improvements in health among the people who chose to shop at Wholefoods or other health food stores. Even Kaiser Permanente recognizes eating better will change your health.

    So with that being said, it’s up to each person to choose the best way to live for their health, and that alone will slowly change society to make healthier foods, less pollution and safer drugs.

    It is modern societies that see more cases cancer vs the rest of the world that see very little cancer or diseases in general.

    Man most likely does not make cancer, but he is without a doubt part of the manufactured problem.

  • Justin
    28 March 2014

    This is the most disinformation I’ve seen in one spot, impressive must of took some time. Everyone of your claims have medical and lab tested finding providing the exact opposite conclusions, with credible sources not just an opinion. Fact! You should honestly not have children and let your bloodline die with you.

  • Bruce
    28 March 2014

    Hi Oliver Childs:

    Who is Dr. Florey? He is not in the UK registry.
    I forgot to ask, where are your references for each myth? All good articles have reliable references.

    Bruce

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    28 March 2014

    Hi Bruce,
    We have provided links to references and referenced sources throughout the text – these hyperlinks are coloured blue, but they can be a bit difficult to see.
    Kat

  • Bruce
    28 March 2014

    Hi Oliver Childs:

    If you ever get cancer and modern medicine can’t help you or the treatments fail, email me. The truth always prevails!!

  • Bob
    28 March 2014

    What a load of crap. Your a paid debunker.

  • Emmanuel Yannikakis
    28 March 2014

    But when we supply Dr Simoncini’s site you block it, but allow your version through. You ask a question and when we answer you filter the information for you sposors benefit, what a mockery to freedom of speech and a equal oppurtunity to debate this subject does not exist here. Your actions show your true colours and you are not here for the interest of the cancer patients but for your sponsors only!!!

  • no name
    28 March 2014

    Go here and see for yourself uspatent6630507.com

  • no name
    28 March 2014

    I think that you re all a bunch of liars. Stop lying to people.
    Cannabis oil cures cancer. That is a fact.

  • Jack Hu
    28 March 2014

    @Adam – RE: Cannabinoids (i.e., Cannabis)

    It’s not a myth, and it’s mentioned a few times in this article.

    Read: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/07/25/cannabis-cannabinoids-and-cancer-the-evidence-so-far/

    Some research looks quite promising, and again, it’s not a myth. There have been literally hundreds of medical journals written about it.

  • Smarter than the guy who wrote this article
    28 March 2014

    The word your looking for is Oncologist. Where are your cites? I see no factual evidence backing any claims that were made. I know that you can say whatever you want on the internet, but if you want people to take you seriously; have a little professionalism. There are literally NO cited information… Also, almost no fruits are considered to be alkaline on the pH scale. Honestly, you started this article with a statement about other articles being nothing, but hype and hot air. How is your different???

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    28 March 2014

    Hi “Smarter than the guy who wrote this article”,
    There are plenty of links to the scientific evidence in this article – they’re provided in the hyperlinks, which link through to primary papers and review resources that cite the scientific literature on different topics. They’re coloured blue in the text so can be a bit hard to see.

    Also we are discussing the claims we have seen made by others that some fruits are “alkaline” or can “alkalinise” the body, which are not factually correct – we are not claiming ourselves that this is true.
    Kat

  • Jack Hu
    28 March 2014

    They euthanised the shark, and upon dissection they found no evidence of metastasis.

    Charming.

    Bet the shark was happy.

  • Dug
    28 March 2014

    This isn’t debunking. Where are your references to scientific peer reviewed studies?

    This is just you saying things. You’re no better that gillian mckeif.

    What about the overwhelming evidence that a diet rich in saturated fats and omega 3 reduces cancer causing inflammation? Cancer is very largely caused by the diet of bull shit that we’re fed by the pharma companies that you’re defending. I’m not saying that they have a magic cure but they certainly want us to take the meds!

  • Yanni
    28 March 2014

    They are blocking what does not agree with their sponsors big pharma !!!!

  • Yanni
    28 March 2014

    I just wrote a article which showed the truth which proves the article here is a lot of nonsense and has been blocked Debunked !!!! Emmanuel I had to use a alias

  • Frank Smith
    28 March 2014

    Michael (Gregory) as you are one of the same person. You are clearly sick in the head if you believe you own hype. Stop trolling the internet, remove your hand for your trousers and do something useful with your life.

  • Adam
    28 March 2014

    What about the myth that cannabis cures cancer?

  • Michael
    28 March 2014

    This article proves the Big Cancer Industry machine is following the cancer forums and trying to debunk realistic alternatives to cancer treatments. Instead of fighting for continued orthodox toxic and nerve damaging treatments. The cancer industry should see other perspectives in cancer protocol. Not so, when the more patients with cancer the more revenue source. And the less cancer cure incentive. People are becoming better informed and more savvy in consumer fraud, especially cancer patients. This is not a tit for tat this is life or death. And greed and profiteering have no ethics or soul.

  • Michael Gregory
    28 March 2014

    Well at least half of these ‘myths’ are in fact true. Seems keeping people in the dark regarding cancer could be benefiting this charity?

  • Neil thompson
    27 March 2014

    Thanks for this post guys. Seeing the comments on every facebook post, how ‘cures’ are being surpressed and cannabis this, cannabis that, was getting a bit much. Great post! :)

  • sb1970
    27 March 2014

    Leading Cancer hospitals in the US like MD Anderson have integrative programmes to improve chances of survival and extend lives. Fact. These programmes encourage and support patients in making lifestyle and dietary changes to compliment conventional therapies to improve their chances. I don’t support the far fetched treatments which holds no evidence and lots of false promises however the UK can certainly benefit with expanding its approach to Cancer treatments outside of the traditional medical box it’s stuffed into. My husband passed away a few months ago at 32 years of age. If I had to describe the reckless administration of drugs he was given access to for ‘Palliative Care’ you wouldn’t believe it. If we had access to some of the more progressive Cancer Hospitals outside of the UK I believe he would have lived out his 2/3 year prognosis and not the 9 months he spent fighting side effects of his Palliative care.

  • Sisn
    27 March 2014

    Thank you cancer research for publishing evidence based facts that may help people currently living with cancer who sometimes get conflicting information.

  • Elaine Allen
    27 March 2014

    Why have you chosen now to publish this information, you have just as much evidence that this all true as the alternative therapies have to back up their theories. I fear your article will do far more damage than good and is just tit for tat against the alternative and holistic approaches out there. Today I joined race for life for the 8th time, I have raised over £10,000 for your Charity, but this article has given me serious doubts as to your intentions.

  • Yasmin
    27 March 2014

    I’ve also heard people say you get cancer from:
    Bananas, peanut butter, the white stuff inside oranges, it’s stupid!

  • JP
    27 March 2014

    A great example of Cancer that MAY have been curable is Steve Jobs Pancreatic cancer.
    Hi Official biography tells how he tried to treat it with diet and by the time he came round to accepting the advice of the medical profession it was too far advanced

  • Amy
    27 March 2014

    I just wish more people would see the sense you’ve written – I’m a cancer surgeon and there’s nothing worse than a patient refusing conventional treatment, going off to be ‘healed’ at vast expense by some charlatan, to then come back asking for treatment as things are getting worse… and finding that their cancer that was initially early and likely curable has now spread and is inoperable. It makes me so sad, and ANGRY at these alternative healers. By all means follow these as COMPLEMENTARY means, it helps people a lot to follow a healthy diet, meditate etc – it can give a valuable feeling of power and control over the situation – but these must only be use alongside evidence based, proven treatments that WORK. I have read Ben Goldacres books and absolutely know that big pharma has improvements to make, but thats why doctors are trained to assess the evidence, and we’re lucky that the NHS only uses treatments that work, not those that we’re paid to use.

  • Kim
    27 March 2014

    It just doesn’t make any sense to me that radiation and chemo are our only answer to helping cancer victims prolong their life. Reading up on Zoopharmacognosy made me wonder about many things, alternative ways to “naturally” reduce our chances of getting cancer, if not cure it.

  • Tom
    27 March 2014

    Watch the TED talk with William Li on anti-angiogenesis. Food can in fact limit the blood supply cancer receives.

  • Kmac720
    27 March 2014

    I would argue with #9. The majority of survival rate improvement has come from early detection, not treatment. Look at the rates of survival for people with Stage 3 cancer, it hasn’t improved all that much.

  • Open your Eyes
    27 March 2014

    Alternative treatments work every time if the right regimen is followed. I’v done hours of research on Max Gerson. He has treated hundreds of cancer patients with 100% success rate. His theory goes like this, the human body has evolved to take the best of the food we eat that the Planet, not the “plant” gives us and we can be practically resistant to any and all disease and virus. Which if you read more in detail about this theory it makes complete sense. You wont hear of success stories where people dont make a 100% commitment to a life change, in other words you cant have one foot stepping out of the change. You cant drink soda or have a drink or a cheeseburger while on alternative treatment it will never work. Gerson did a test on several patients while the nurse snuck in brownies at night 0% success, tried again on a strict special diet 100% success. Do the research, these “Foundations” that collect money for research are a joke, Gerson and hundreds of doctors around world have cured Cancer, Muscular Dystrophy, Diabetes, Tuberculosis and many more harmful and deadly diseases for a very long time now. Remember we live in the U.S. the only thing that matters to our politicians is money, it would be tragic if people found out they could grow one of the many cures in your back yard. Google Max Gerson

  • Claire
    27 March 2014

    As to cancer research charities not wanting to find a cure because they’ll be out of business – WTF? Does it follow that the RSPCA want people to continue to be cruel to animals, NSPCC loves child cruelty, Fawcett want women to continue to earn less than men, women’s aid love it when men beat up their partners etc etc.
    Foolish thought.
    If there was a ‘cure for cancer’ (just the one presumably which works on all varieties!) there’d still be other diseases one presumes…

  • Claire
    27 March 2014

    Love it when people start talking about things having ‘chemicals’ in them. Everything is chemicals! Water is H2O – a chemical. Only place there are no chemicals is in a vacuum.
    I’m sure you mean dangerous chemicals, Geoffrey but that’s not what you said!

  • celia
    27 March 2014

    Of course cancer has always been around but we are not being told the truth about the causes. Cancer is a massive money maker. . We all know cancer is a huge killer .Why would the drug companies want to find a cure when they can come up with expensive treatments

  • Emmanuel Yannikakis
    27 March 2014

    The last kicks of a failing money generating industry and the self serving so called charities, as long as no cure is found this circus will carry on and on. You are wrong that the drugs the big pharma cure cancer, they are cellular poisons, stupid, they cannot differentiate between healthy and cancerous cells, first World War Mastard gas slightly reduced in potency. This stupid drugs are killing everyday and it is time a proper register with the true picture is publish for all to see !!!! The Dr Simoncini method that you degrade so readily and yet will not allow any trials that will prove you wrong is been succesfully applied in Switzerland, without removing womens breast they cure breast cancer in a few days. Stop this madness now. I myself I am with Leukemia and have reversed it with very high intake of Vitamin D (high 25(OH)D3) while friends of mine all over the world are dying with your stupid promotion of this drugs. It is time this stopped we are not going to be your test lab rats while you pull the wool over peoples eyes and your money making self serving industry flourises. Oh I must add my method of Vitamin D and the hormone producesed by it 1,25(OH)D3 but with a 11 times more potent version has had amazing results in France on my CLL and on prostate cancer so do not even try and play it down. https://www.euronext.com/sites/europeanequities.nyx.com/files/Connect_pr_hasselt-cll_update_final_uk.pdf

  • nox
    26 March 2014

    This is fantastic. Once you start studying biology academically, the first thing you’ll notice is how many people actually talk absolute nonsense (and scarily enough, they’re very confident while doing so). Science education should be mandatory throughout elementary and secondary schools in order to help people understand concepts and actions which affect the quality of life on this planet (for all species).

  • Sherry Routledge
    26 March 2014

    “there’s no such thing as a ‘superfood’. It’s a marketing term used to sell products and has no scientific basis.” The term superfood if you had googled it lists foods high in certain scientific categories; such as orac value, nutritional profile, vitamin, mineral, and protein completeness. I am sure you can agree that those are scientific? In it’s simplest definition-superfoods are just ways of optimizing nutrition. If you think blueberry growers are spending millions of “marketing dollars” on pushing their products as superfoods you may not be watching television-no blueberry commercials EVER!
    “Our bodies are complex and cancer is too, so it’s gross oversimplification to say that any one food, on its own, could have a major influence over your chance of developing cancer.” Each of us just needs to make the best choices possible everyday, no one could argue that a cheeseburger is a better choice over an apple.

  • David Salter
    26 March 2014

    Yes, the survival statistics show that more people are surviving cancer – but these stats only look at the 5 year survival. If a cancer sufferer dies 5 years and one day after first diagnosis, then this is still recorded as a “survival”. So, with all the emphasis on early detection, the earlier the cancer is discovered, the more likely the person will survive past 5 years. It has little to do with how successful the treatments are – and lets face it, there has been 10’s of billions of $$$ thrown at cancer research since the 60s, and yet still more people get cancer than ever. This doesn’t sound to me like the war is being won, but does sound like the goal posts are being moved every time the pharma industry wants a new headline.

    More and more people are coming to realise that cancer prevention, in the hands of a profit-centred industry, will always be a conflict of interest, and a perpetual, never changing cycle of lies, obfuscation and distortion of truth.

  • reply
    Oliver Childs
    26 March 2014

    Hi David,

    Thanks for your comment. You are obviously passionate about cancer prevention, as are we. As well as looking into new ways to treat cancer, we fund lots of research into ways to prevent cancer – you can see some of the projects here.

    You may also be interested in this post we wrote about work by our scientists to look at the causes of cancer people can control. More than 4 in 10 cancers could be prevented by lifestyle changes, so we are keen for people to understand the things they can do to reduce their risk of disease.

    The survival statistics we quote are based on 10-year survival rates. Also, as we point out in the above article, cancer death rates – a pretty definitive measurement and one that the ‘industry’ can’t really move the goal posts on – have fallen by 10 percent in the past decade too. Clearly we can’t be complacent though, as survival rates for some cancers such as lung and oesophageal cancer have remained stubbornly low.

    We very much agree with some of the sentiment of your comment – that prevention is better than cure – and that’s why much of our research is on new ways to prevent cancer or diagnose it earlier, when treatment is more likely to be successful. But I’m afraid we disagree with your view that treatments have no part to play in our quest to beat cancer, or that the pharma industry isn’t incentivised to help us beat cancer. Cancer is more than 200 different diseases, and against a backdrop of an aging population, we’ll need to tackle these diseases from multiple angles – prevention, diagnosis and treatment all have a part to play.

  • David Salter
    26 March 2014

    Myth No.11 Cancer charities give money to the already super wealthy pharma industry, for researching new drugs which they then SELL back to us. There is no significant research into the prevention of cancer, because their objective is to find patentable, therefore profitable drugs. No-one is going to spend millions researching natural cures for anything, because there is no profit. This is why there is so little evidence for natural cures – it has nothing to do with whether or not they are effective.

  • Geoffrey Docherty from Sunderland.
    25 March 2014

    Every day when people drink water they are unaware that it contains up to 18 chemicals, non organic beer contains up to 15 chemicals,. Table salt contains magnesium carbonate. White cardboard cartons contain bleach in order to make them white as paper pulp is usually brown. Plastic containers contain chemicals that leak in to whatever it contains. Marks and Spencers organic wholemeal stoneground bread,contains a flour treatment agent,(Check the Label) As far as I’m concerned white bread is virtually a poison in as much as it has little or no nutritional value Doctors reccomend 8 hours sleep a night. however, once late drinking hours were introduced, young people stay out late and sacrifice their sleep which when the kidneys are manfully struggling to cleanse the blood of these toxins. I could go on for ever but I’m convinced they’ll never cure cancer until we eliminate these chemicals with which we are being attacked on a daily basis. Nature does prevent anti oxidants but far too many people are eating vegetables that have been grown with the help of pesticides.

  • George Kuchanny
    25 March 2014

    Well written clarification.

  • Kate
    25 March 2014

    Hooray sense promoted! I find it very sad when I see people spending vast sums and spending time away from family and loved ones for a miracle cure.

  • Peter
    25 March 2014

    Thank you so much for this excellent article. I have known several people waste time and money chasing some of these quack cures, leaving them poorer and robbed of precious time that could have been spent with their loved ones.

  • Dan
    25 March 2014

    Ian: “And if CRUK told you they had a cure why would they tell you. Guess what they would no longer exist.”

    This is quite the most boneheaded idiocy. Vague hand-wavey conspiracy theories like this are childish nonsense. You’re implying CRUK exist to perpetuate their own income and would actively supress a cure for cancer to keep their organisation going.

    Not only is that profoundly insulting to anyone working within CRUK, it also implies there is one cure for cancer, a condition most notable for being so varied in type, a single cure for cancer is basically a holy grail held by a pink unicorn on a rainbow.

    Re-read your idiotic screed and consider growing up to face a world which is a bit more complicated than the one you think you inhabit.

    “Look into history cancer has gone up massively since the 40s may be before”

    Of course that can’t have anything to do with better diagnosis and a population that lives longer (thanks to – hey! – medical advances) and are more susceptible to cancer the older they get. Can it?

  • David Brown
    25 March 2014

    The “Cancer has a sweet tooth” section is a pretty superficial treatment of the subject matter. I suggest this article by Fred and Alice Ottoboni: http://ketopia.com/a-biochemical-outline-of-a-cure-for-cancer/ Excerpt:

    “Ascorbic acid has been demonstrated to be a very efficient method for selectively killing cancer cells. The biochemical mechanism by which ascorbic acid kills malignant cells has been discovered and described. The mechanism in brief is as follows:

    When ascorbic acid enters the oxidizing environment of a cancer, it is oxidized to dehydroascorbic acid. Because of structural similarity between dehydroascorbic acid and glucose (cancer’s preferred energy source), cancer cells cannot distinguish between the two. Thus, when dehydroascorbic acid is present in high concentrations it competes effectively with glucose for active transport into cancer cells by glucose pumps. Once inside, dehydroascorbic acid generates hydrogen peroxide and other oxidants that the cancer cells cannot counter. The very high levels of hydrogen peroxide cause either apoptosis (programmed cell death) or necrosis of cancer cells. Normal cells are protected by catalase, which destroys peroxide. Cancer cells do not contain catalase.

    These data on the effectiveness of ascorbic acid in cancer treatment have been either rejected or ignored by the medical establishment.”

  • Gillian McMahon
    25 March 2014

    A really brilliant and useful article. As a cancer sufferer I am sick of hearing about ‘snake oil’ cures and ideas. It gets me down no end. The people who tout these ideas/cures pray on the vulnerable. I close my eyes/ears to such nonsense.

  • Ian
    25 March 2014

    And if CRUK told you they had a cure why would they tell you. Guess what they would no longer exist. Not saying There is a cure As there are so many different types of cancer.
    but polio only had a few different strains and was on the decrees before we started injecting everyone with the anti virus now there are a lot of different strains of polio but people like CRUK covered it up and called the other types of polio something completely different. in fact because of your cover up 98% of the people who contracted polio after the anti virus got the infection from the virus you injected into them. good job… Look into history cancer has gone up massively since the 40s may be before. and this all started when certain foods got taken from our selfs. and when they started spraying food with toxic chemicals. radio waves there are so many reasons why cancer is on the up. these people know why its happening. but the money lost and how fare back in time we would go eradicating all the inhibitors of cancer cells. we do not get sick because we have cancer, we are sick and this is why we get cancer. Good clean food will keep you health simple as that.
    and we will not get this kind of food at a supermarket. I wish i was wrong but i Seen why to many thing now in my life to no its all about the money.. These people don’t care about you.. They just guilt use into thinking they do.

  • judy
    25 March 2014

    this is crap

  • Liberum
    24 March 2014

    Using animal testing to extrapolate results to a potential cancer cure for human is pseudoscience as you have yourself so succesfully demonstrated in “This excellent article goes into why the myth about the cancer-free shark has been so persistent” The article states that the myth was born on frankenstein alike animal experimentation where Brem and Folkman had inserted cartilage from baby rabbits alongside tumors in experimental animals. You have debunked yourself by demonstrating that you were not any more scientifically evolved than in 1975. Animal experimentation has 0.01% success rate and is responsible for tens of thousands deaths due to secondary effects per year. Animals can simply not serve as appropriate model:
    to a complex desease such as cancer (caused by environnemental factors and genetic factors)
    – methods used to induce cancer in animals do not mimic the same type of biochemical reactions as in humans.
    – inter-species differences (presence/absence of biomarkers) lead to false negatives + drugs efficiency physiological assessment to false positives
    – mice and rats used as models have a large phenotypic and genotypic variability (there are hundreds of inbred strains some rendered more responsive to cancer cures then others by gene knockouts)
    If you are not capable of putting your means and methods in question for the love of science and respect for your patients and their loved ones your organization would rightly deserve a Myth 1 position

  • Lindiloo
    24 March 2014

    Excellent article thank you , far too many myths and quack theories regarding cancer online sadly putting cancer patients lives in danger, well done CRUK ,keep up the good work in getting the message out there too many people get brainwashed with all this nonsense sadly .

  • Jon
    24 March 2014

    This is absolutely brilliant stuff, thanks guys. My mum died from advanced ovarian cancer just before Christmas. She went with absolute courage and dignity, politely shooing away offers of cannabis extract (she might’ve had a spliff if she’d felt up to it, but not for it’s “cancer-curing” properties), colour therapy and various other quacky-duck ludicrousness. She would’ve loved this. Thanks for your efforts. I can imagine you take quite a lot of grief for speaking the truth on these matters, but some of us are really grateful.

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    24 March 2014

    Hi Jon,
    We’re so sorry to hear about your mum. Thanks so much for your feedback – we really appreciate it.
    Kat

Highlighted content

Related topics

    Comments

  • Modern Medical Quacks
    21 September 2014

    The grand masters of cancer and disease profits literally using disinformation and fraud to brainwash the gullible and naive masses with commercial brand filled with toxic ingredients that causes cancer and diseases, promoting and profiting from fraudulent tv advertised products and increasing disease disinformation from all natural alternative healing. Maintaining the $1 trillion dollar annual industry of mega profits from intentionally created ever more newer and deadlier diseases. WAKE UP PEOPLE! It’s known as Iatrogenics and Eugenics.

  • stephen
    19 September 2014

    The general public are waking up. We need to spend hours every week spreading the truth about natural cancer cures and exposing the criminals in big pharma who are suppressing these cures. We need to get the information out because the criminals who own the system are now trying to ban these natural cures to make sure people in the future won’t be able to get hold of them. People are waking up in large numbers, we just need to keep getting the information out and take back our power that these criminals don’t want us to have.

  • Gloria canziani
    18 September 2014

    you obviously are funder by BIG pharma! I could go on but I won’t.!

  • Al
    14 September 2014

    Gully – That’s short for ‘Gullible’, right? Clearly you have internet access so please use it to educate yourself. Maybe once you’re awake you’ll see that it’s the article that is ridiculous, not the comments!

  • Scott
    13 September 2014

    Gully – Why don’t you site some credible references yourself instead of just branding other peoples comments ridiculous.

  • Gully
    11 September 2014

    The author has made a good effort in explaining these MYTHS (they are myths) unfortunately he hasn’t given enough further reading or even a bibliography. A few of the hyper-links lead to random sites with articles that are not quite reliable. Next time i suggest you add credible journals, so you don’t get subjected to these ridiculous comments.. (significant typo’s in the last post, soz)

  • Gully
    11 September 2014

    The author has made a good effort in explaining these MYTHS well (they are myths) unfortunately he hasn’t given enough further reading for even a bibliography and few hyperlinks here and there but leading to random site with articles that are not reliable. Next time i suggest you add credible journals, so don’t get subjected to these ridiculous comments..

  • Per
    10 September 2014

    Dumbest thing Ive ever read!

  • Per
    10 September 2014

    Nobel prize winner in medicine 1931 was a fraud you say?

  • Dorin
    10 September 2014

    I’m not buying it.
    Very black and white, you know the world is actually rainbow-coloured? We are not simple.

  • Gian
    10 September 2014

    An elegant slalom around truth here… where “myths” 4, 6, 7 and 9 are the poles. I found this type of half truth in a huge number of pharma and main institutional sites. Unfortunately these half truth, often are vehicle to half lies and there is really no “debunking” taking place here…. Maybe one day I’ll post here some details for the sake of a honest discussion.

  • sarah
    10 September 2014

    I want to update you all on the good news that have just happen in my life i that i never believe because i own my bank a lot of money that i use in building my house here in USA i tried many online loan lender’s but non work out for me then i have to sell off one of my kidney and A friend of my directed me to Mr max an agent who help me to sell my kidney and the operation was successful and now i and my family are happy again as i have been able to pay back all my bills that i own If any is in need of help you can contact him on his email: [email protected]

  • sam smajic
    9 September 2014

    Your 10 myths are actually 10 lies that you think we will swallow.
    The question is, whether your organization would continue to exist if it finds the cure for cancer?

  • brian
    9 September 2014

    You did all that work and you are completely wrong and misinformed about pH balance and the effects of acid promoting diets. Take the time to do the research or don’t bother confusing people with completely wrong info!!

  • a546434
    7 September 2014

    People who have cancer, adults and children, should be given an extensive questionnaire that may help prevent more cancer. Adults may be given the child’s questionnaire to answer for the child. The answers to the questionnaires would be filed into a huge database to help compile data and statistics from the answers. The compiled data would be available on the internet for people to see. A computer could be programmed to compile statistics from the data. The questionnaire data statistics may help show possible cancer causes. *** Types of questionnaire questions must be varied and expansive in scope. For example types of questionnaire questions: (1) What is your occupation, ( and spouse occupation )( for a child ask parents occupation.)
    (2) How many hours each week do you drive ( or are a passenger ) in a motor vehicle.
    ( same question for a child.)
    ETC… ( ABOUT 100 – 200 types of questions should be asked of different types… )
    ( many people should be involved in the creation of the types of questions asked on the questionnaire… )

  • Judy
    7 September 2014

    I would also like to state another fact… My cousin was diagnosed with breast cancer. Scared out of her mind she had both breast removed and consented to weeks of chemo. She lost all of her hair and suffered unimaginal pain. Once through all that and just when she thought she could put it behind her she finds out that the chemo has damaged her heart and yes they told her it was the chemo that damaged her heart. Her prognosis isn’t good and you still try to push that crap? You can take your poisons and shove them where the sun don’t shine. If rather die than take your poisons.

  • JUDY Gagnon
    7 September 2014

    I see you think we are all stupid and incapable of seeing through the lies. You are part of the conspiracy to kill off millions of people in whatever way you can. There have been natural cures that work all along but those were suppressed because they couldn’t be patented and would kill big pharma profit. Doctors lost their right to practice because they saw through the farce being perpetuated on human beings. We don’t want your poisons and as human beings we have the right to choose not to accept them.

  • jaynie
    6 September 2014

    This article should have been called.. 10 lies we want you to believe!
    There is a cure for cancer.. and it has nothing to do with the pharma industry. All natural and costs a pittance! Would put doctors and pharma companies out of business quick smart! You people must be part of the illuminati!
    You talk RUBBISH!!

  • a56948559
    5 September 2014

    there needs to be a published source of people’s thoughts on what he or she BELIEVES caused there cancer ( or child’s cancer ) YES I KNOW that what we believe what caused the cancer is just a belief ( BUT sometimes our belief is correct.) For example, if your child has cancer and you believe that living upstairs from a dry-cleaning store caused your child’s cancer I WANT TO KNOW WHAT you believe. *** FROM our thoughts on what caused our cancer or our child’s cancer we can dissect fact, fiction and POSSIBLE.
    PEOPLE NEED to know IF YOU HAVE ANY INKLING about a cause.
    YOU COULD help other parents NOT live above a dry cleaner store (AS an example )
    YOUR thoughts could HELP prevent MORE cancers from developing!!!!!!!
    I DO want to know these thoughts. **If someone thinks that there child got cancer because they took vitamin pills while being pregnat ( I WANT TO KNOW THIS !! ) ( I want to know –even if this is just a belief **** later people can sift through fact, fiction and POSSIBLE…
    Do you believe your child got cancer because you put pesicides on your lawn on a regular basis ( I WANT TO know what you believe….)
    ****PEOPLE let us know WHAT you believe caused your cancer or your child’s cancer
    (BLOG it ) PEOPLE LIKE ME WILL respond!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  • bill Smith
    4 September 2014

    What a patronising article.

  • John Hot Dog
    3 September 2014

    There are no published clinical trials…There are no published clinical trials…There are no published clinical trials….

    Of course not. Double blind, long term clinical trials on humans is expensive. All the funding for these trials go into drugs, surgery and other procedures, where the money can be made. Doctors, Hospitals and the Health Care Industry don’t make money keeping you healthy.

  • Billy Bob
    2 September 2014

    Maybe its not the money they make from treatments but how much they make out of donations. And maybe theyre choosing to ignore trying to find a cure.

  • rich
    2 September 2014

    It’s not a conspiracy that corporations are corrupt, It is their legal obligation to make as much money as they can for their shareholders. Any loss through fines for illegal or underhand practices is a drop in the ocean compared to the profit. I find it quite alarming that you dispute this.

  • Shawn
    29 August 2014

    I don’t believe a word of this. You haven’t debunked anything. Just more parroting of the big Pharmas. You can’t even attach your name to the article. What a joke.

  • jack
    29 August 2014

    There is no doubt in any free thinking humans mind that cancer, it’s research, it’s treatment and the reason to try to debunk myths…. Money a trillion dollar industry, people have woken up.. Keeping searching, keep on with the killing g of people do what you feel is best, but please don’t insult us any more by ‘trying ‘ to cure it, cancer is like war they never want it to end, no profit no fear ,

  • Scott Miller
    28 August 2014

    I also agree that urine pH is not a useful indication of anything, but that does not debunk the acid/alkaline theory either in part for the reasons I just mentioned.

  • Scott Miller
    28 August 2014

    Trying to reply, but my messages are being moderated or just not published :-/

  • Scott
    28 August 2014

    LEH – Please look up Dichloroacetic acid, often abbreviated DCA. (Works by neutralising acid, and extremely effective against several types of cancer)

    Negative PR or misinformation campaigns, and people that misinterpret results, take the consistent pH of blood and apply this to every cell in the body…the fact is cellular pH is very different to blood pH, and many areas of the body have a different pH to blood. Theoretically every individual cell in the body could have its own pH and all require a higher concentration inside the cell than outside in order to be nourished aka osmosis.

    Cancer cells are known to be acidic compared to healthy cells, neutralising this cellular acidic environment appears to disrupt the cancer to the point of causing an apopostic effect or cell death.

    Sodium bi-carb or any alkaline minerals found in abundance in a healthy alkaline diet nourish our cells, and will naturally effect the individual pH of that cell.

  • CuredItAlready
    27 August 2014

    Where is your evidence? Your facts? This is a lousy dodge of an article. A search of the pubmed database with any knowledge will make you look uneducated. Give some facts/stats to back your dribble. I’ll be happy to reply.

  • Gail Harrison
    26 August 2014

    I have been diagnosed with stage 3 HER2 breast cancer. I had six chemo and 18 radiation treatments.
    I went for a mammogram every two years since I was in my forties. I am soon to be sixty. Well I had lumps on the side of my right breast as far back as my twenties. About four years ago I developed a lump under my right armpit. I was never called for biopsies even though the Breast Clinic new about the lumps. Then I believe the mammogram and diagnostic mammogram squished the cancer Tumors. 22 out of 24 lymph nodes were also removed from armpit, down right arm and chest. Cancer was on the outside of lymph nodes as well.
    The chemo Onocologist apologized that this shouldn’t have happened.
    Well I went the Conventuals ways and it failed. Hopefully the rest will be good.
    I feel that with all the money that has gone into research there should be a cure.
    I think it would be wise for Cancer Research to take Canabis Oil and do extensive research. Also baking soda and the other methods. Why not.

  • Beth Baumgartner
    26 August 2014

    If someone is diagnosed with Thyroid cancer what’s the wurst that could happen with no treatment? Just wondering

  • danar
    24 August 2014

    (lung – liver – pancreatic – stomach – colon – breast – kidney – Ovarian – prostate ) cancer, Leukemia and Non-Hodgkin lymphoma will never cure what progress have you done in all these years your best treatments are chemo and surgery and you ask people to do screening to find if they have cancer and catch cancer in early stage but does early stage make big difference in lung cancer stage 1 will live 5 years (in pain) as maximum but stage 4 will live for 1 year or 8 months (in pain). None of your scanning technology will find single cancer cell in the body instead they can detect only a tumor billion of cancerous cells. I hope I will die by ebola instead of cancer because it is faster than better than going through chemo radiation to die at the end. so please stop your treatment and allow people to die peacefully.

  • Moppo
    24 August 2014

    Ok..sorry for my bad english, I`m not from a country where they speak engish. But in short terms. Last year I lost my brother, my friend and my cousin in cancer. They were all around 30 year of age, and they all used chemotherapy and radiation. I had contact with a woman, the longest living human in Norway with my brother`s disease, and she said “never do what the doctors says”. But of course, in our days, the doctors is regarded as God, and we want to trust and believe them, and they adviced my brother to use the evil chemotherapy and radiation. And of course, my brother, my friend and my cousin passed away. Sorry, and it`s not a conspiratory, in my opinion, you people in the cancer-industry are some brain-washed and cynical humans. You perfectly know that your threatment doesn`t work in many cases, but you advice us to use it. Personally, this two years have showed me this world is cruel, and the power and the money speaks, and decide single perons destiny. I hope, and I know that chemotherapy and radiation too, will be a big, big shame in the future. The human nature can`t be threat like a machine.

  • Moppo
    24 August 2014

    d

  • Boo
    23 August 2014

    Some valid, some not valid.

  • Elizabeth
    22 August 2014

    I read your article with interest and agreed with a lot of what was said.Its true that many more people are surviving with cancer, but it still seems to be an incurable disease, or collection of diseases and will often recur. The thinking now seems to be shifting towards making cancer something the sufferer can live with, rather than a disease to be eradicated. The main problems with the chemotherapy, radiotherapy and surgery, are that the side effects can be intolerable, to such an extent that they greatly reduce the quality of life for those undertaking these treatments. That plus the fact it is now realised that cancer is not just one disease, but comprises different diseases, there will be no cure-all for the different cancers, all of which have varying outcomes. There is now talk of tailoring treatments to a person’s genetic make up but I am sure this would way too expensive to implement for the majority of cancer patients and their physicians. .

  • Stephen
    22 August 2014

    Phil, who said that an all natural diet will cure or prevent cancer? And since when has organic meat ajd natural cows milk been healthy? Just because something is organic doesn’t mean it’s healthy. Mental and emotional stress can also cause cancer. In fact, Dr Leonard Coldwell said that about half of his cancer patients started to recover as soon as they managed to reduce their stress levels in their lives. There are also many natural treatments that killcancer cells without side effects. But I guess poisioning your body with chemotherpay is more logical to you. I guess some sheep never wake up.

  • Experience is better than "fact".
    20 August 2014

    Totally drops the ball on issue # 7 of big pharma trying to the hide cure.

    A cure is not something that you would have to take for the rest of your life or for a long period of time so the argument that the cure would be just as profitable as the treatments we currently have is very intellectually lazy.

    Sure you might make as much profits initially but once everyone is eventually cured where are your profits then going to come from? There’s a reason car companies do not make cars that last forever. They want returning customers. Just like the cancer industry wants returning customers.

    See what happened to the profits of the polio industry when polio was cured. Sorry, I’ll give you a d for effort on this article.

  • John
    20 August 2014

    your treatment is pathetic, but does have a definition Insanity: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.

    Albert Einstein

  • LEH
    20 August 2014

    Scott – I can easily debunk the acid theory. The alkaline diet is based on urine tests. The kidneys are SUPPOSED to remove excess acid from the diet.

    If you do a urine test of the blood and not just the urine, you will find that urine pH is all over the board but blood pH is not.

    The value of the alkaline diet is the nutritional value of lots of vegetables, not how it affects blood chemistry. It is things like the alkaline diet, which does not hold up to actual scientific review, that lets writers like this dismiss all alternative medicine.

  • peter
    20 August 2014

    How can you ignore peer reviewed science and government owned patents? I see nothigng debunked what a pathetic exuce of journalism ive just had to bare and to the imbeciles who say stop looking at the internet for your information (the place where 90% of RELIABLE information comes from) . Peer reviewed science and government owned patents means even if there was no internet. It would still be a well documented fact that hundreds of doctors have physically proven. Debunk that

  • Steve
    20 August 2014

    Yeah , I went to the Cancer Research UK site and all I can say that I got from it is DONATE! DONATE! DONATE!.
    Shameful

  • Steve
    20 August 2014

    CRAP . Go to the NCBI site and do some research and it will blow holes in many of these so called ” myth” explanations

  • Scott
    18 August 2014

    This article goes a long way to NOT dispel these so-called myths. Instead just rambles around the subjects, like somehow they are an authority…News flash! you’re losing the battle. I’ll listen to the folks that have just successfully beat cancer with Gerson Therapy or canbabis oil thanks.

    My favourite is the body perfectly regulates PH, unless you’re really ill and then you can get acidosis, but diet can’t help that. Err, we’re talking about Cancer, that’s pretty ill in my view. Plus, Acidosis is treated in hospitals with IV bi-carb, usually necessary after too much chemo ironically. And cancer surrounds itself with acid (and thrives) but can’t be anything to do with ph…Really?!

    The research that has really helped change the tide in the cancer war is nutritional and lifestyle based.. By all means try and make less lethal cancer drugs, but don’t tell me that somehow a drug company can patent or profit from something that isn’t a drug, a drastic dietary or lifestyle change etc. because they can’t. Especially when this jeopardises on average 80% of their profits.

    If you want to research something useful, go and ask what thousands of so-called “spontaneous remission” survivors did differently…the ones that didn’t use conventional therapy but all got better…warning: the answers are unlikely to be profitable or make people go fundraising.

    Charity is a business too, especially ones that fund raise for the biggest most profitable industry in the world..no conspiracy, just fact!

    Dispel this!!

  • hansel
    18 August 2014

    cancer is perfect for the wa$$street

  • Kelly
    16 August 2014

    sounds like the drug makers…. helped right the B.S.

  • Jason
    15 August 2014

    This article is full of shot I can’t believe I read it

  • Serena
    14 August 2014

    Hi Kat, thanks for your reply,
    Reading my original post will tell you that I am aware of the difference between the metabolism of a cancerous cell and a normal cell. I find it interesting how conventional cancer treatments use the word “not proven” and not “disproved”. The fact is they CANT use “disproved” because it hasn’t been so. Two points about that: it IS proven by many published studies the effects, both positive and negative, of diet on cancer. I suggest you visit http://www.nutritionfacts.org to access this information, as well as reading “The China Study” by Dr. T. Colin Campbell, a Cornell professor. Second point: WHY do you think it is “not proven”? A question to answer that is HOW do you prove a medical treatment? Millions of dollars are spend on a research in order to prove medical treatments. When these millions are spend on drugs developed in a laboratory, they can be patented and made a profit on. Can you patent an apple? NO! Can you patent a healthy lifestyle? OF COARSE NOT! There is your answer on why it is “not proven”. However, there are testimonials on curing cancer with alternative treatments. I suggest you visit http://www.chrisbeatcancer.com to access that information.

    Are pharmaceuticals this apathetic about the survival of the sick? In 2005 Nexavar was FDA approved for the treatment of late stage liver/kidney cancer. This treatment had a cost of $69,000 minimum per year. India has a law which allows for patented drugs to be manufactured in within the country if the Western price tag is too high. The CEO of Bayer replied by saying “We did not develop this medicine for Indians, we developed it for Western patients who can afford it.” Big Pharma in a nutshell. These are the type of people who you are so dearly defending, Kat.

    My mother is a PharmD pharmacist with over 10 years’ experience of managing a pharmaceuticals company. A few years ago when I first learned about cancer in high school, I asked my mom to explain it to me in more detail. Once she was done, I asked “well how do you cure it?” she told me that you can never cure it unless it is found in an early stage,and even then, it will most likely come back. Also, that the chemotherapy available may only extend your life. She went on to tell me that if she were to (God forbid) ever get cancer, If its not at a very early stage, she will just go on with her life until the cancer kills her. I asked her why and she said “I rather have 2 or 3 years of normal living than 5 years of living in torture from the side effects of chemotherapy”. My mom, being the professional that she is, keeps this personal belief to herself and does not advise anyone based on it. My mom holds this belief because she KNOWS better than anyone what chemotherapy is.

    I would like to explain to you why I am greatly against chemotherapy. A very extensive Australian study was published on the effectiveness of chemotherapy. The results were 2.some odd number effective. THAT’S A SHAME! Even if you get completely cured, your body will be DESTROYED! The chance of the cancer reoccurring or secondary cancer is high, you may become infertile and you may enter menopause early. Let me make this perfectly clear, I DO NOT believe in a miracle cure like “cut sugar out of your diet” I never said such a thing, it was you who mentioned it. Cancer is very complex. It is not just relevant to diet but exposure to environmental toxins, stress and negative emotions, trauma, and the list goes on. Alternative treatments aim to strengthen the immune system and detoxify the body. How is this NOT a common sense approach? EVERYBODY creates at least one cancer cell EVERYDAY! Your immune system takes care of it, because your body is wise and knows how to heal itself, if given the right conditions. It is only when the immune system is weakened, or the body is over toxic that problems occur.

  • Jean Myhill
    12 August 2014

    I think this article was very enlightening

  • Phil
    9 August 2014

    You rock for writing this. I’m tired of reading all of the garbage about miracle cures and prevention techniques. My grandparents grew up on an “all natural” diet – veggies and fruits from the garden (no money for pesticides), meat came from cows and chickens (again no money for steroids etc…), eggs from chickens, no pasteurized milk, etc…. Yet we have had cancer, heart disease, diabetes, rheumatory arthritis, etc… I agree that a good diet is a great thing, but eat as healthy as you want and then try to explain what happened when you get one of these diseases. Try to explain cancer in a 3 year old who was breast fed and ate organic baby food – that’s my world. Medicines, chemo, radiation and surgeries have in turn prolonged many of my family members lives as painless as possible (my grandmother had arthritis and had literally every replaceable joint replaced – both hips, knees, shoulders, etc…) My mother also as rheumatory arthritis, less of a natural diet and more stress, and thanks to advancements in medicine, she has had zero surgeries and is able to get around normally. My grandmother lost her license around age 45 and by 60 was pretty much wheelchair only.

    People – stop reading the Internet and look around at actual circumstances where everything from a diet standpoint is pretty good, yet these horrible diseases still prevail. Rely on facts (real life) not blogs.

  • nyree
    9 August 2014

    there is no conspiracy huh! yeah right only because of these we can believe you are sooo legit!

  • Serena
    8 August 2014

    So sugar doesn’t feed cancer? This is a VERY strange idea coming from a legitimate cancer research organization which MUST know about diagnosis methods for cancer. Let me explain to you one of most popular methods of determining the existence of cancer as well as a method used to determine the stage of cancer: a PET scan. Radioactive glucose is injected to the patient then they are scanned. Since cancer uses MANY times MORE GLUCOSE for metabolism, cancer cells ingest this and the areas which you may have cancer in your body light up on the screen. Normal cells need oxygen as a vital component of their metabolism and survival, but cancer cells rely almost solely on glucose. Does every carb eventually get turned into glucose? YES! But it is the metabolism of the sugar which either raises your blood sugar, feeding the cancer, or metabolize correctly, providing NUTRITION to your body. An example is the sweetest fruit on earth: the date. CLINICAL RESEARCH EVIDENCE proves that this super sweet fruit does NOT cause a spike in your blood sugar at all! I could do a whole 9 other comments like this one explaining how they are FALSE! But for now, I would like to congratulate Big Pharma for robing people blind with their scare tactics of “What other way? There is no other way! Let us poison you BACK TO HEALTH!” I don’t mean robing people blind by simply taking BILLIONS of dollars per year from poor, terrified, hopeless victims, but robbing husbands and wives blind of their spouses, mothers of their parents, parents of their children, and friends of their loved ones, WAY TO GO!

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    11 August 2014

    Hi Serena,
    We’re fully aware of how PET scans work, as we explain in more detail here: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2013/07/09/chocolate-detects-cancer-headlines-are-misleading/
    As we make clear in our post above, all our cells, cancerous or not, use glucose for energy. Because cancer cells are usually growing very fast compared with healthy cells, they have a particularly high demand for this fuel. There’s also evidence that they use glucose and produce energy in a different way from healthy cells. We are certainly not saying that eating a healthy diet doesn’t matter when it comes to cancer. While it’s very sensible to limit sugary foods as part of an overall healthy diet and to avoid putting on weight, that’s a far cry from saying that sugary foods specifically feed cancer cells (they feed all cells, but cancer cells have a higher demand for energy overall), or that cutting out sugar completely from the diet will cure cancer (there’s no evidence that it does) – these are oversimplifications of the current state of research in a complex and poorly-understood area.
    Kat

  • halley (again)
    5 August 2014

    I have just read through lots of the comments and noted the numbers of ‘thumbs up’ and ‘thumbs down’ votes.
    I just want to say that I am so happy to see that so many people realise that Cancer Research is biased and close minded.
    BigPharma must be shown up for what it is – a moneymaking game. Even drug companies admit most of their drugs only help 7% of the people who use them. And that means it’s probably 3%. And of course the so-called ‘side-effects’ often cause such harm that they outweigh any possible small benefit.
    I am disgusted with Cancer Research UK. DO SOME RESEARCH instead of promoting mustard gas treatment (chemotherapy) and warding people off of exploring a range of possible safe solutions.
    Who on earth is Oliver Childs?
    EVERYBODY with more than one brain cell realises these days that every chronic disease is a result of inflammation. Caused by acidity. Caused mainly by diet and pollution.

    QUOTE Myth 3: “Their proposed answer: increase your intake of healthier ‘alkaline’ foods like green vegetables and fruits (including, paradoxically, lemons).”
    Paradoxically? Does Oliver Childs who wrote this REALLY know so little that he doesn’t know that lemons may be acid in taste but are alkalising in the body (pH9 thicko).
    MY brother left you idiot £10k in his will. You are using it to keep us in the 20th century.

  • halley
    5 August 2014

    You call yourselves Cancer Research?! Yet you only are interested in research that suits your limited views. You are living in the past. There is so much research out there now that offers an understanding of how cancer develops and what enables it to thrive. And also information about what you can do to prevent it from thriving and spreading. I can only conclude that you are in cahoots with BigPharma. My brother left you £10k in his will. So misguided given his doctors had no idea how to help him and let him die in extraordinary pain.

  • paul smith
    5 August 2014

    Some times you have to be brave in live when facing cancer and be brave enough to find out the answer to your prayers your self.Cures do seem to be out that claim to cure cancer, research for reviews on people who say this worked for them.Think where the Item is sold or might be online with feedback from people who have used it I have found various comments are available on the internet .Interesting search I did scientists and doctors opinion worldwide would they have chemo or consider alternative treatment, From science we know what can cure scurvy ,What may cure cancer could be just as simple who knows for sure but when all else fails where cancer is concerned what is the alternative to give up NO ,Find a natural cure many claim to have, read and research where the lowest cancer rates are in the worlds countries WHY? , To live we have to eat ,we are what we eat,when was the last time you read the full list of all the added chemicals in your food in a week,not much natural in our diets like years ago ,Do not see much hope reading the above ..

  • stephen j zets
    1 August 2014

    I think tat there always hope for a cure===I was hit by bladder cancer 27 months ago– was clean for 27 months — back again. the process is operation etc is nasty. I might have to go through it again in three months, iam looliking for something , but your information depresses me —thank you

  • kfo
    1 August 2014

    these guys, whoever pays them, use ‘quackwatch’ as a ‘reference’, by a certain dr. who has never seen a patient, has a psychiatry degree from a paper mill, and has been banned from ‘testifying’ in california courts forever, something that he did for as long as he was able to get away with…get lost, grow up…8,000,000 die worldwide of cancer each yr and climbing, 1/2 of all deaths in the US are from cancer now, the biggest #1 killer surpassing stroke, royal academy australian study shows chemo is 2.1% effective, close to nothing…who are you kidding ?!!…yourself for sure, besides being cynical and despicable….

  • Hsjjs
    31 July 2014

    Illuminati control everything

  • Stephen
    31 July 2014

    There will never be any evidence for natural cures as long as big pharma are funding the studies. I judge by results. When you have multiple alternative doctors and multiple people claiming how they were cured using natural cures, this is good enough for me, because at the end of the day the human body is designed to heal itself. What sense does it make to poison your way back to health? Cancer is one of the easiest diseases to cure, but the powers that be are using useful idiots to spread lies on the internet to make people doubt these natural cures

  • Jo
    29 July 2014

    The lady doth protest too much, methinks…

  • Christine Wyndham-Thomas
    29 July 2014

    Has any site been set up documenting people being cured of cancer (and other chronic diseases) using natural foods, herbs etc? I am fully in favour of the natural approach but one needs the right info. For eg., there are so many natural foods that are said to cure cancer and other chronic illnesses, but we’re only told that. We don’t know how much of this food we can eat. We don’t know whether we’re supposed to have it every day. We don’t know whether certain foods are better for certain types of cancers to others etc. etc. This is the information that is lacking.

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    29 July 2014

    Hi Christine,

    That’s a great question, and you’re right to be skeptical of claims made about particular foods or supplements. The information you’re after is exactly the sort of thing that can be shown through scientific research in the lab and clinical trials. The results of these studies are published in papers in scientific journals for doctors and scientists everywhere to read and build on – these are collated by a website called PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed This includes all kinds of studies on aspects of diet, herbal preparations and so on, as well as conventional cancer therapies.

    There may be all kinds of claims on the internet about how to use various foods and supplements – including anecdotes and testimonials from users – but the problem is that usually there have been no well-conducted published studies to show that they actually work in patients, or how best to use them. Sometimes there is information from studies on cancer cells grown in the lab or in animals, but without data from clinical trials it’s very difficult for any doctors to reliably know whether it will be an effective and safe treatment for patients. We’ve summarised some of these problems in a comment on our post about cannabis and cancer, but the points relate to any kind of cancer treatment: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/07/25/cannabis-cannabinoids-and-cancer-the-evidence-so-far/comment-page-1/#comment-36791

    As another example, there are several websites claiming that the soursop fruit (graviola) is a “cure for cancer”, but only five research studies have been published (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=graviola+cancer) and all of these were done using cancer cells grown in the lab rather than in patients. We’ve used this information to write our page on graviola, which we feel is a fair summary of the current scientific evidence around it: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-help/about-cancer/cancer-questions/can-graviola-cure-cancer

    We’ve also written a bit more about what to eat when being treated for cancer: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2011/11/01/what-should-you-eat-while-youre-being-treated-for-cancer/ as well as about misleading claims in the media: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/12/07/alternative-cancer-treatment-claims-in-the-media-are-damaging-and-misleading/ and miracle cures: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2013/09/13/miracle-cancer-cures-ask-for-evidence/

    I hope you find this information useful, Kat

  • Stephen
    28 July 2014

    seeet’s ignore ignore common sense. Let’s ignore the mountain of testimonies out there of people curing their cancer naturally. Let’s ignore the fact that the body is designed to heal itself. Let’s ignore all the alternative doctors who’ve had great success curing their patients. Let’s just all be sheep and believe everything the medical profession tell us. Ha, yer right!

  • RH
    22 July 2014

    Are you being serious? These are not even reasons!… you just say what is what- and that is it.
    Where the hell does all the money go and get wasted on for the so called research? Is it all just pumped into the chemotherapy side of things?

    You could have lots of data for these alternative methods to prove them wrong instead of JUST disregarding them because YOU say so. Yes even that would be a slow process of elimination, but hey least we could take your word for it. Because you could have discredited all the mis leading information and could back up your own statements. I see no evidence here.

    If these so called scam cures have no evidence to back it up then hey disprove it.

    Do something positive or stop asking for people to donate! This site installs no hope what so ever.

    I ask again whats the money spent on? Just slowing down cancer? Thought you were here to cure it. Notice your slogan change these last few years. Why is that?

    There are loads of natural cures all across the globe for different deceases, in that fact alone proves that there would be people conspiring in companies to make a profit on un-necessary medicine.

    Why?- Because there is such a vast array of products on our shelves today that contain beneficial components that we can find actually naturally in plant matter and nature. We are just not taught this in school. If something is found in nature it means it is free and there is no need to sell it. Understand this. Not everyone has to live and love by your world of monopoly.

    Education leads us into spirals of compartmentalized institutions that don’t communicate properly with each other. You so called professions should study every aspect of life as well as consciousness before trying to find cures like cancer. You have no idea of energy flow or how the body works.

    So don’t patronize people and make absurd claims.

    It is common sense that governments profit out of sickness, its not all just conspiracy crazy talk, its a fact of life, competition and strive for profit between peers society and then power hungry corporations. ( none of it interests me,corrupt)

    Although there is a lot of nonsense out there regarding cancer cure , false claims, you can not prove some of your claims you are also making either. You are a laughing stock.

    Never read such a negative site in my life that has the word research in it.

    What you seem to have researched is that there is only one way to kill cancer by killing off the human being too, slowly through radiation, then spent tons more money on it over the years, became content with this idea and then repeated it it some more.. horayyy!. Thus wasting more money on pretend research.

    Re-search= re search through a different mediums thoroughly to prove or disprove possible theories / investigate using data and reports,eyewitness accounts/experiences. Conduct your own experiments.

    NOT! re(turn) search back to your bubble size concept of cancer cures.

    Pathetic. People have it sussed. Its too late cancer.

  • Joey B.
    21 July 2014

    This article is just ridiculous. Of caurse there hasnt been any evidence scientifically that natural cures work, its because money isnt in the cure and if money isnt being made then theres no interest. There are money hoarding greedy rich white people out there that are hiding in the shadows of the media while making a fortune off of the sick. There are definitely natural cures for cancer but u wont find the recipe anywhere for and it wont be revealed in the news anytime soon. Just do your own research and try to experiment safely until you find it. Look to other countries other the USA for guidence. Good luck :)

  • Chris Petersen
    21 July 2014

    So many comments, mine probably won’t be read. I know there are many cures for cancer, and there are natural remedies that work. Many of them. The Doctors don’t know because they haven’t been taught in medical school. Why? Because the medical schools are controlled by the AMA and they teach what they want them to believe. If they were in the business of making you well, they wouldn’t be “practicing” medicine to see what work on you, while they get a kickback on what drugs they prescribe. They would be learning all they can about what cures or treats the cause of the problem and not trying to just treat the symptoms. That’s why I don’t believe in doctors for treating disease. They have their place in treating injuries, and that sort of thing, but when it comes to disease, they really are clueless. If you want a cure to cancer, just look for them online…there are many. If someone tries to tell you that natural methods don’t work. they are lying and they don’t know what they are talking about.

  • AndyG
    20 July 2014

    Thanks – your article helps separating the wheat from the chaff. If I wanted false hope I’d go to my local (or virtual) shaman. But I’d prefer a combination of proven knowledge with personal positivism, to find a path through this partially known and partially unknown labyrinth. While I agree with Rita below that hope (even false hope) helps, as well as all the other good things like the right diet, enough activity, avoiding known carcinogens including smoke, and that chemicals are lousy, sometimes all the good things together are not enough but the lousy chemical can help, and other times we just don’t know quite enough to figure out how we can beat this complicated family of diseases. While I have been lucky so far, people that I care for haven’t. Please keep up the good work.

  • rita
    20 July 2014

    your site kills hope!!!!Hope and positive thoughts do help! Not chemical concoctions that are totally unnatural and weaken the body! And I have been a contributor to cancer research for the last 10 years! Where are the answers to the cure!?

  • Fidel Carter
    16 July 2014

    From the line,” Researchers are working to understand the differences in energy usage in cancers compared with healthy cells” I deduce an admission that these so-called scientist are not sure. Keep in mind that the silver back gorilla was a “myth” as well, until it’s existence was confirmed by purported “authorities”. If we can sight as evidence, the reports of ancient Greeks and Egyptians, why summarily dismiss the reports of thousands of people who are alive and well today and able to defend their claims or have them proven or disproven with medical records. If we can interview a thousand individuals who make each of these claims, or even a hundred of each, and prove or disprove their claim, then this series of articles would be more scientific and less of an opinion editorial (op-ed).

  • Rita Kiehl
    12 July 2014

    I know 2 women who have the bracca 1 gene. Is there anything that can be done for them?

  • D.Charles Kenny
    11 July 2014

    why don’t you examine what people eat when buying from the supermarkets
    Diet causes most diease

  • Frank
    9 July 2014

    This is a typical dismissive and ignorant article, once again taking the “evidence” offerred by the holy allopathic model, full swing arrogance and all. It’s really quite an article, as it gathers the primary, so called Scientific, explanations for cancer and the alternatives to slash and burn and puts the AMA’s doctrine around this industry in a clear and concise form.

  • Frinak Bolla
    7 July 2014

    In my opinion, there should special diet plan for all the cancer patients. It should not be a routine plain diet, but a diet which would help to build the immunity system of the body. With respect to this, we should be give them olive leaf extract. It helps to increase the immunity growth percentage.

  • Jake
    6 July 2014

    In my own experience, I have personally known 23 people who had different cancers, all had chemotherapy, all dead within 5 years, probably poisoned by the crap you pump through them.
    I would go with alternative treatment any day …

  • Rosemary
    2 July 2014

    You don’t know it all. Science is not a God and there is more to life than just having everything proven. Your whole aim is to disprove what holistic therapists have been saying for years…therefore you are biased. There is no proof in what you say either. Some time you just ‘know’ it but of course that would be too unscientific for you.

  • Millie
    30 June 2014

    This article is utter BS. There’s one helluva lot of ever-mounting, solid evidence to the contrary of pretty much everything stated here, which you’ll find if you’re willing to do a little bit of research for yourself.

    Sad, it really is all about the money…

  • Christine Wyndham-Thomas
    30 June 2014

    I was going to read this article with a pinch of salt, because I fully favour natural healing, and every time I’ve seen an article from Natural Cures not Medicine I have always shared them. However, the article is very well written and highlights those myths well, as you see it.

    Patients certainly don’t want to feel they are victims of the pharmaceutical companies, which have definitely received bad publicity over the years, perhaps quite justifiably as there is no smoke without fire.

    When patients start losing faith in the medicines they’re taking because of what they read, one needs to analyse the reasons for this and in my opinion, this article helps restore the balance by putting across valid points worth bearing in mind.

  • Researcher
    27 June 2014

    This article nicely sums up why cannabis is not, and won’t ever be, a miracle cure for all cancers. All backed up with scientific evidence.

    It gives a great overview of how the scientific process works for those who aren’t in the know.

    Please read before jumping to conclusions, CRUK is doing so much good, I can’t believe the negativity I see against them.

    http://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/marijuana-cancer-what-facts-smoke/

  • Johnk770
    26 June 2014

    I have not checked in here for a while since I thought it was getting boring, but the last few posts are good quality so I guess I’ll add you back to my daily bloglist. You deserve it my friend kcfdaadckeka

  • hbpattskyn
    25 June 2014

    Great article. I wasn’t aware of all of these myths, but it was good to see them all addressed in one place.

  • Oscar
    25 June 2014

    Myth 7: … and Big Pharma are suppressing it

    Big Pharma is actually hiding the cure because it wont make them rich.

    What a joke of article

  • Mr Ambrose (again)
    22 June 2014

    Incredible – so you let someone through who claims that ‘only god has the cure’ yet censor mine. I suppose this is part of your religious tolerance policy – goodness what a disgrace!

  • Christopher
    22 June 2014

    Perhaps Cancer Research and it’s counter-parts should spend a bit more time trying to prevent cancer, than trying to cure it. If its prevented, there’s nothing to cure.

  • owenna mckenna
    21 June 2014

    Very interesting

  • Robson Grant
    20 June 2014

    I agree with J Ievolo, “There are other cures and you shoud spend more time researching them ! instead of promoting Poison and difficult cures as you state on your sight difficult cures should inspire you to look with an open mind and awareness about other alternative cancer cure options — the law of relativity – would have never been discovered with out the pathway of an open mind !”

  • Renee
    19 June 2014

    This article is a lot of nonsense. GOD has the cure, not man, not science. God’s nature contains everything man needs for cures and prevention. Man has found some good help for problems, but making chemical and toxic drugs, and putting them in the body, only hurts the body in the long run. Use God’s nature to both prevent and treat health problems.

  • Tony Spencer
    19 June 2014

    Well thought out. Amazed at all the pseudoscience believers!

    Good results for CAM eh, such as Steve Jobs, George Harrison, Linda McCartney, Farrah Fawcett – the lust is endless.

    http://edzardernst.com/2013/04/cancer-patients-who-use-alternative-medicine-die-sooner/

  • Delia
    19 June 2014

    What a completely ignorant article, from start to finish. Clearly the writer is living in the dark ages and has absolutely no current stats and facts near at hand. I thought to humour myself and read this just to see if there was perhaps any truth in any of what was said. But honestly, it is downright foolish and totally incorrect!! Suggestion to writer, be certain before you stick your neck out.

  • trevis
    19 June 2014

    this sht deserves no comment,it’s quite obvious who is behind it.allopathy came late on the scene(gate-crashed),now it’s dictating to everybody!!!try to fck nature,you get scrwd!

  • J Ievolo
    15 June 2014

    you are creating propaganda to support the Powerfull lobby of the international Drug companies !!! your website promotes the drug companies cures only and designed to use internet to convince the public that there are no alternate cures for CANCER other than what the drug companies provide. But there are other cures !! that work and people will find them no matter how hard you try to block or confuse or attack or alterntive methods from the public gaining knowledge of other cancer cures! Suggesting alternative methods and doctors are Quacks ? Doctors who are researching other wayd to fight cancer with aternative approaches
    I doubt you will post this comment because this whole website is designed to persuade people into believing Chemicals and drugs produced by international drug companies are the only way to cure cancer ! Propaganda Supported by the Drug lobby ! There are other cures and you shoud spend more time researching them ! instead of promoting Poison and difficult cures as you state on your sight difficult cures should inspire you to look with an open mind and awareness about other alternative cancer cure options — the law of relativity – would have never been discovered with out the pathway of an open mind !

  • eroll
    13 June 2014

    There is no scientific evidence that e-cigarettes are not a safe substitute for traditional cigarettes. Look http://goo.gl/qhfY4y

  • electronic-cigarette
    13 June 2014

    Thanks for the link Kat. I m copying your comment onto my fb page. Hope you don’t mind. Good point.

  • AnotherWorthlessArticle
    12 June 2014

    Your article only shows your ignorance. There are many trials that have worked in lab rats but governments will not allow human trials EVEN on terminal patients. Go do some research on mitochondrial reactivation through DCA before you spread anymore cluess information

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    12 June 2014

    We’ve written about DCA in detail here on the blog before, with an update on the latest studies including work by our own scientists. Read it here:

  • mh447
    12 June 2014

    my husband has both primary liver cancer and non-invasive bladder cancer and is not a candidate for any further treatment. I am doing my best to make his life relaxed and comfortable and healthy as possible on a 24hours basis so read all the information out there and extract those parts that I think will be helpful. it is called a balanced approach and keeping up to speed on what is going round us in the help and fight against cancer or be able to deal with the illness.

  • Nancy
    10 June 2014

    haha this is a cancer FUND Raising company for research -of course, who is behind this FUND raising company?!!! wow…who actually listens to this …it reminds me when “they” said cigarettes were safe…and you were crazy to think otherwise because doctors smoked them…lol

  • Max
    10 June 2014

    Wow, this is very incredibly reckless, insulting and arrogent article.

    Who on earth is Oilver Childs to make such counter claims against real Scientists who are conducting crucial research into the cancer killing properties of THC.

    Well one day the truth will be out on a much wider scale. Let’s hope CR do not have the audactiy to claim they were helping to support it.

  • Bryant
    10 June 2014

    I agree with most of this, with one notable exception. Just as there are clear correlations between smoking and several forms of cancer, and excess alcohol consumption and certain forms of cancer, there is overwhelming evidence that diet has a great deal to do with rates of many cancers, although there are certainly many factors that come into play, including environmental, genetic, social, and habitual factors. There have been a number of well documented and well funded scientific studies that show clearly that diet plays a factor in a large number of diseases, including cancer.

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    10 June 2014

    Hi Bryant,
    We absolutely agree that diet is important when it comes to reducing the risk of cancer – that’s why it’s something we’ve highlighted several times in this post. For example:
    “Both the ‘acidic diet’ and ‘sugar feeds cancer’ myths distort sensible dietary advice – of course, nobody is saying that eating a healthy diet doesn’t matter when it comes to cancer. You can read about the scientific evidence on diet and cancer on our website.

    But dietary advice must be based on nutritional and scientific fact. When it comes to offering diet tips to reduce cancer risk, research shows that the same boring healthy eating advice still holds true. Fruit, vegetables, fibre, white meat and fish are good. Too much fat, salt, sugar, red or processed meat and alcohol are less so.”

    We also have much more extensive information on our website about diet and cancer, which we linked to several times in our post – you can read more here: http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/healthyliving/dietandhealthyeating/

    Kat

  • JK
    9 June 2014

    Incredible arrogance on display here. You may herald yourself as a non-profit organisation, but by proxy you represent the interests of one of the biggest profiteers on the planet, which is big pharmacy. To deny their interest shows how far you are willing to cover for them.

    Really, you cannot expect people to be so naive in this day and age, or are you just scared that they might be able to break free from the perpetual maze of fear and ignorance you have created for them? Its a crime of egos, you could not stand the fact that the answer could be so simple, that such things could be outside the clutches of patents, (that lovely little terms which keeps the rich getting richer.)

    Yes, in regards to THC, testimony and scientific evidence can be found on places like youtube, because guess what, – some groups do not have the huge funds available to buy ‘mainstream’ tv or science, in your view, this somehow relegates it to the realm of mythology or (gasp) conspiracy. As you can see, people are just not buying these paid up official views any longer.

  • emms
    9 June 2014

    One last point….the fact is..if there is a ‘Natural’ cure that occurs in plant life or natural food sources it cannot be ‘patented’ because it hasn’t been developed in a lab or man made. After all man cannot patent a source that is in nature, that is free for all & something we in effect can produce ourselves that God has created (my belief;-) Something that cannot be patented cannot be released as a ‘cure’ or ‘treatment’ by a government or health organisation & certainly not Big Pharma. I mean lets face it…if the cure for cancer is lying right there at our fingertips, free of charge, at our disposal then not only would Big Pharma probably go out of business (near enough) but all you guys, researchers & medics would look pretty dumb! So let’s make everyone else look stupid!

  • emms
    9 June 2014

    Myth No 11…it should say below!! Naive if you think Big Corporations & Governments aren’t hiding herding the sheeple….we are just pawns in a big game….& all done in ‘plain sight’. Cancer Research spends 70% of it’s donations on Charity Activities!!! Money spent on research is going down the drain. Treatment is the same as it was in the 50’s, there has been no advancement & little improvement on survival rates. More children are getting cancer than before & you have the audacity to say that eating a healthy diet of veg & fruits can’t help. What planet are you on? Cancer Research….mmm maybe you need to re-phrase that!!!!!

  • emms
    9 June 2014

    And Myth No 10 is…..Don’t be sucked into blogs written by someone who ia clearly a fan of Big Pharma!!

  • Kim
    9 June 2014

    Pure, close minded, lack of experience point of reference!

  • LOL
    8 June 2014

    Money makes the world go ’round. And cancer makes the money go ’round. Very likely that this website would try and debunk the baking soda cure as a myth, no? Of all the testimonials advocating the use of baking soda to cure cancer (and there are quite a few), tell me this: what motive would people have in saying that baking soda really works, if it doesn’t?? Baking Soda companies? I don’t think so. What motive would an Oncologist have in saying that the baking soda cure is a myth? Money, and a lot of it.

  • Universal Wisdom
    6 June 2014

    Cancer research can only exist with money. This keeps people in jobs and the ability to provide an income. It all starts on an energetic level before it physically manifests like cloud starts as vapour before rain. Stress and negative consequences through actions resulting in negative consequences. The biggest hype of all is don’t fall for drugs companies who like the church prey on the uneducated and unintuitive public. Great people like Royal Rife and Wilhelm Reich suffered at the hands of greedy profitiers.

  • Yeaj
    6 June 2014

    This article is pathetic …

  • Chris
    6 June 2014

    I personally know two ppl who cured their cancer with Backing soda. No question about that. Its a fact that the backing soda/ maple sirup method is not only save it simply REMOVED the cancer. Now I was reading this and dont believe anything the author has written.

  • Saab
    5 June 2014

    There’s a lot unsure about cancer. We cannot yell all kind of things about cancer if we’re not sure. People are naive, naturally, and it’s all fear mongering. People are scared very fast.

  • JoJo
    5 June 2014

    Actually I agree with the majority of other comments here. I myself have independently scoured through over one-thousand hours of bio-chemical research on nutrients, supplements/vitamins, disease, and numerous medical studies proving the information in this article is corrupt. (There are also tens of thousands of medical studies showing the efficacies of natural medicinal supplementations that treat and/or cure cancers. Meanwhile traditional cancer treatments are venomous poisons that rob people quality of life, also creating new and more aggressive cancers, and only offer a short time of survival; while, a cancer patient that does next to nothing will survive just as long but with a longer existing quality of life, and also has the chance to completely recover if they make the right choices in their own personal healthcare. Once one does Chemotherapy they can pretty much look forward to a painful death; either sooner or later. Radiation isn‘t any better, and can you imagine the two – as typically prescribed – being taken in treatment! (Isn’t it something how so many proven treatments to cure cancers have either been outlawed in the U.S. or that Insurance Companies won’t cover them; because otherwise they would have no wealth at all, and thus no power to manipulate and control politics.) Where in the world does this author get off trying to route people away from the truth?!) Some of the information here is accurate; like the obvious with lifestyle choices and prevention, but perpetual stress in combination of the innumerable toxic chemicals in most foods, and one’s environment, is the culprit. (The best thing one can do for themselves before buying and using different supplementations is finding out about the Liver & Gallbladder flush, and yes it is even more important if one has had their Gallbladder removed; which, that in itself is a criminal enterprise to say the least. Disease is a buildup of toxins in either fat and/or muscle tissue; unable to be removed while storing up because the Gallbladder and Liver are obstructed from doing their jobs; eventually the cells in those tissues change into cancerous cells. Both the Liver and Gallbladder have stones (as you know so do the Kidneys), but doctors are either largely ignorant of this with the Liver, or simply would rather you be; they sure don’t advise patients on how to cleanse these stones out of the Gallbladder either.. now do they! In doing these flushes you can remove up to thousands of stones from both the Liver and Gallbladder, and yes.. I said thousands! After performing the flushes and removing the stones the enzymes in your intestines will be able to actually route the nutrients, and re-route the toxins, to where they need to be; instead of retaining the toxins and routing the nutrients into the toilet; our systems actually act in reversal when we’re unable to properly digest foods. Bile in the Gallbladder becomes better restored as we do the flushes and remove the stones to breakdown and digest food, and those without a Gallbladder unfortunately will never have adequate bile, because the bile is constantly dripping into the intestine, so when it’s needed there is not enough there to adequately breakdown and digest food (though there should be some improvement yet with digestion), but the flushes are still a great improvement to remove stones and built up waste from the liver. Someone without a Gallbladder should do them the same as one with a Gallbladder – every 4 to 6 weeks for 12 months, but unlike one with their Gallbladder who stops after the last two flushes prove to show no stones and then resumes one annual flush per year; it’s probably best for one without a Gallbladder to perform 2 to 3 per year thereafter to maintain a clean liver.

    Find and read the book, The Amazing Liver and Gallbladder Flush, by Andreas Moritz. Andreas’ philosophies in life can be considered ‘new age’ and not everything he informs people of is accurate, but most things are; every individual thing should be cross-referenced and researched first by oneself anyway (like eating meat as he is against; it is still healthy if organic and grass-fed, but only at 2 to 3oz. per day, or I’m more inclined to believe every other day to few days for someone already healthy, and far less than that to none if having cancer, because meat is acidic, and that only promotes the growth of cancer instead of getting healthier). As to his philosophies.. well Yahweh (God) uses evil for good, and knowledge is power. I will say though that this is in itself is vital information to learn about; however, one should order and read the book before even thinking of doing this (find it on Amazon it’s cheaper). People on medications shouldn’t do this – unless it’s safe to be off the meds at least for one twenty-four period of time for the actual flush (though you can be on thyroid medication). It’s a six-day preparation and you’ll have to know what things to do and not to do; as well as knowing what you can eat and can’t eat during the six days for actual success, and then this is repeated once every 4 to 6 weeks for 12 months. This flush isn’t a game and shouldn’t be taken lightly or without serious commitment to oneself; it is otherwise very inexpensive. (Depending on the medication/s one uses it is my advice to stick to your ‘guns’ and workout something with your doctor so you can find/plan a way to do this. Also there are supplements and/or nutrients out there that in time would take one off almost any medication; including heart medications. (Note: anything that purports to alleviate the need for medications should first only be given consideration after your own rigorous research, sticking to your guns, consulting with your doctor (switching meds if need be to allow for whatever supplement or nutrient you want to take), and never going off of your medications until tests show you’re no longer in need of them. If you‘re on Cholesterol lowering drugs.. Get OFF of them, but first find out what to do to stay healthy without them, because there are numerous things you can do (you won‘t even have to do numerous things, but you should choose at least a couple to a few), and very cheaply and easily; I don‘t think you need to talk to your doctor about this one; they‘re all making out like bandits with the $$ and will always advise you to stay on them. However, make sure after you’ve researched and made your changes that you do go in for testing, and if need be change doctors, or even pay out of pocket for independent lab work; there are independent labs in most cities/towns that do this for almost any test you want. These drugs – as with most – are extremely debilitating to many functions biologically; including that cholesterol drugs are known to cause bladder, and other, cancers.)

    Once one has Cancer there are many natural medicinal ways to treat and cure it, but it will not come from one ‘thing’ alone. I think the most rewarding lifestyle benefit to living healthy aside from what we put into our mouths is being physically active; period! Oh, and learning to reprogram the way we deal with circumstances instead of remaining enslaved to perpetual stress. One has to otherwise really find it in themselves to invest their time and efforts to research/study and cross-reference information; separating the legitimate from the illegitimate; this takes a lot of time and patience; however, if you’re already motivated to live as healthy as possible it’s much easier and more rewarding.

    Personally I also find for myself that Yahweh (God) – if you have Yahshua (Christ our Messiah) as your Lord & Savior, and have faith and belief in Yahweh’s will to heal you, then He either will heal someone instantaneously or lead one into and through a physical healing process. Also with Yahweh – if you read the Bible for yourself – you’ll come to know, and be able to live in, complete peace even in the midst of what otherwise is still miserable or intense misery; I’m living proof of this!

    In conclusion I’ll just further say America is known for the biggest healthcare system in the world, but many do not wonder why, but rather have been brainwashed to be proud of it! We’re the most unhealthy nation of people, and everything in our medical industry is a perpetual revolving door only creating profound wealth for Big Pharma, Hospitals/Clinics, Insurance Companies, Food Manufacture’s, all different facets of Advertising, and Politicians.. treating symptoms instead of treating and curing the root causes; these are the reasons we’re the biggest healthcare system.. oh I mean scam in the world. I should add Monsanto to the list of greedy criminals, too. When it came to Obamanocare I never heard one network analyst or everyday person – Not One – talk about if we sanctioned the outrageous criminal costs of medical supplies alone – Alone – we could afford healthcare very easily, and easily pay for those without it; easily! Anywhere from nine to twenty-five dollars or more per aspirin in a hospital, three-hundred dollars and more for something that costs fifty cents, thousands of dollars for something just a few hundred dollars, hundreds of dollars for a five minute overview from a doctor and you’re done, and this is the usual way of business! Healthcare costs were actually at a five-year low before Obamanocare, and now they’ll be more than we dreamed they could ever be here in America! Meanwhile everyone in America has had the ability to get healthcare even when not employed; for decades in every city there have been programs setup just for this. Last year I received a letter from the Obama Administration.. that until Obamanocare becomes available I can use any program – choosing from quite a few in my county and state – that have already been available for years!

    The sad truth of health and our society is that most people – even when faced with life threatening debilitating health issues – won’t advocate for themselves; not even when you passionately try to share and inform them of things they can do for themselves on their own; they believe in their doctors, and it could be even more than that that they’re just too lazy to know more (not that they‘re lazy people overall), or defeated, to do anything but reach around for the prescription bottle; so sad.. so sad. We need large numbers of people, and lobbyists, to advocate for the natural aids that have been outlawed, and restore them to us; maybe then with that, and coverage, these people will actually have a real chance at real health. Three-hundred and thirty-million plus citizens in the U.S. and maybe one-million care enough to take their healthcare into their own hands; the internet will never change that unfortunately.

    My brother sent me three articles, this was number two, and before pasting my comment here I opened the third e-mail; which, proves to be interesting to what I‘ve been sharing; remember though.. research and cross-reference away: https://wausaunews.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/big-hospital-finally-telling-the-truth-about-cancer-johns-hopkins/

    This is just one of innumerable articles, but also go to John Hopkins and find out info, and look into the thousands of medical studies as well from differing medical institutions and medical journals. Also even a tad of common sense is mighty powerful, overall, too!

  • Just see WHO finances this "blog". Big Pharma all over it.
    5 June 2014

    This blog has BIG PHARMA written all over it. Dot ORG suggest this is an organization financed by someone/something. We all know who finances these organizations and the medical schools… and who tries to brainwash people into popping pills by the bucket to just kick the can down the road (and enrich those companies in the process), when the cure is just outside, in the nature.

  • Alastair Leith
    5 June 2014

    The response to Myth 2 is a bit misleading. There is evidence around antioxidants and to pretend otherwise is strange. Of course clinical trials are not the complete story and neither are large epidemiological studies but they are the best tools we have to do scientific trials is complex areas of health.

    How can you mention leading cause factors for cancer and not mention animal protein? Professor T Colin Campbell had teams studying the link for years and the links were unequivocal. They were able to not only turn cancerous growth on and off in rats by feeding them casein as 10% of diet, they could *reverse* stage III cancers by removing casein from the rats feed. Read about it in The China Study which also documents the largest epidemiological study into population health ever conducted and the evidence for links between animal proteins and cancers could not be more stark.

    The China Study

  • john chapman
    4 June 2014

    Food Chemistry, January 2009
    “The antiproliferative and antioxidant activities of common vegetables: A comparative study”

    Read this and Chris Wark’s blog.

  • Alastair Leith
    4 June 2014

    The responce to Myth 1 is a bit misleading. Saying the biggest risk factor for cancer is aging is like saying the biggest risk factor for car accidents is driving a car.

    As we age cancer’s become more likely to become obvious with symptoms. Okay got that, what next? Lifestyle, lifestyle, & did I mention lifestyle? That’s what makes cancers notationally ‘modern’ or ‘man-made’ diseases. Remove consumption of animal fats and proteins and your risk improves dramatically. Get fit and hydrate, in addition to removing animal foods, even better.

  • Patrick McVeigh
    4 June 2014

    This article contradicts itself and buried within are the solution to the causes of Cancer-
    eat a healthy mostly plant based diet -fruits, vegetables, do not smoke, greatly reduce alcohol consumption, >>drink mainly water and plenty of it,< < exercise (walking is the best form), avoid or reduce sun exposure. Also have a general medical check-up and preventative cancer screenings. These simple rules will reduce and almost eliminate
    90% of cancers. It is not brain surgery – just common sense.

  • Elizabeth Forbes Bryson
    3 June 2014

    I think laterally. Cancer is a huge business. There is greed and kudos causing interference with clear thinking with this condition. Arguments say cancer is cell development avoiding the checks to halt this within our immune system and poisons are the answer,

    BUT isn’t it about the stress that is placed upon the body to keep churning out perfection day after day despite the complicated lives that cause individuals to neglect
    themselves or take up the latest trends.

    And when we are told about a cancer developing we willing let the stress continue and allow our cells to be stripped out, poisoned and burned.

    In a 100 years our current techniques will be recognised as barbaric as making our ancestors drink mercury . Our NHS is brainwashed – even America recognises that natural medicine is more beneficial.

  • Ryley Michalak
    3 June 2014

    Awful article so many ideas in this are bias, unproven, and frankly incorrect.

  • kalina
    3 June 2014

    what about deodorant? i heard that it causes cancer

  • Lou
    2 June 2014

    I’m heartened to see from the comments that people aren’t swallowing this bunkum any more. Of course pharma don’t want the 80 to 90% profit directly from cancer drugs threatened, it would be ridiculous to believe that they would embrace a treatment that people could administer without paying them a fortune, either directly or through the taxes they’ve paid. Cancer Research UK wouldn’t exist if people realised their best chance was via alternative treatments, so you’re hardly in an unbiased position. You’d be on the dole queue. I’m a very well educated person, and can recognise misleading statements presented as facts very clearly when I see them, as can most. This article just shows how scared this industry is that people are getting clued up. We don’t need you any more.

  • Nuncia Trifilo
    2 June 2014

    Your sight is typical of traditional medicine not understanding nutrition and then debunking all the “myths” that alternative treatments use. I’m sick of the ignorance of traditional medicine regarding natural vs. allopathic medicine. Medical schools are built and supported by Big Pharma – and so, most of the education is around which drug works to eliminate which symptom. Good nutrition
    does the same thing – only it doesn’t pollute the system while addressing the problem.

  • Wendy
    1 June 2014

    I think whoever wrote this article is an idiot…that’s what I think!

  • carolina alvarez
    31 May 2014

    It’s obvious that you guys are not looking for a cure but for money instead…sadly

  • Mike
    31 May 2014

    And why are these ‘myths’ so persistent? Spoiler: they’re facts! Knowledge of which may hurt Cancer Research UK’s income…

    Be sure to do your own research. You owe it to yourself.

  • Steve Michaels
    31 May 2014

    The two largest sectors of profit for pharmaceutical companies are cancer and vaccines. The CDC has already admitted that at least one vaccine (polio) has been directly linked to the increases in cancer rates via SV40 which was also admitted by the most prolific vaccine developer in history, the late Maurice Hillemann. Where is the statement on that one CRUK?

    Cancer Research is merely another funding vehicle for the pharmaceutical industry. Donation that actually go to “research” (a small amount after admin and marketing costs) ONLY go to industry approved researchers, i.e. looking at pharma treatments instead of prevention or non-patentable natural treatments.

    The very notion that cancer is “age related” due to us living longer is so ludicrous as to justify completely ignoring any other claims made in this article. In the early 1900’s. cancer rates were around 1 in 10,000, 30 years ago they were around 1 in 1,000 today we are told that 2 in 3 should expect to get cancer at some point. Life expectancies are virtually unchanged over that period if you factor out under 5 mortality rates. Yes, life expectancy was lower overall 100 years ago, but that was due to high childhood mortality. Of those who survived childhood, life expectancy was still into the 70,s even 100 years ago. Cancer Research is a joke!

  • Tony DeAngelis
    31 May 2014

    This article does show that medical treatments are not as dismal as some want you to think but there are more half-truths and misrepresentations than are disputable in the room allotted here. Using scientific facts out of context to show a viewpoint is a common trick used by the seemingly educated to convey an idea to the uneducated.

  • Curedofcancer
    30 May 2014

    What a load of *%#$@* Good luck trying to debunk all the natural cures. Starting to hurt huh?

  • Sean Gilder
    30 May 2014

    If there are so many people claiming similar results from some of these “myths”, would it not be prudent for the institutions to follow up on them and check the case files, etc before claiming out of hand that they are not real?
    To claim them as myth without any proof is of no use to anybody and fuels the general thoughts of many that the industry and “big pharma” etc are are trying to keep the truth and effectiveness about alternative treatments under cover, and not promote them as beneficial. People with cancer are desperate and vulnerable, and deserve better than what they get from “traditional” or institutional sources and treatments. It should be part of “public service” of these institutions to follow up on interesting cases, especially where for example oncologist reports and case histories are available.

  • coco
    30 May 2014

    just very quick response : as long as people can cure THEIR cancer with alternative or unorthodox therapies scientists should take it serious and work on evidence.
    The only EVIDENCE people have is their own cure what is amazing already.
    Even your “Myths” descriptions lack of evidence in some cases. And if we want to talk about nonsense Myths we are sitting here a few weeks.
    Cancer patients have no chance to play around, what they decide is right or wrong for THEM, nothing inbetween. You cure your cancer or you die. That simple.
    I am a cancer patient advocate and surviver since 14 years. I denied the chemotherapy and all orthodox medicine. I have NO EVIDENCE that my path is the blueprint for others.
    But I survived, I am healthy and happy since then, I don’t care about EVIDENCE.

  • Estelle
    30 May 2014

    Unlike you ignorant conspiracy theorists, I have actually GOT cancer. And I am placing my trust in science. Good luck with the green tea LOL

  • Jasmine
    30 May 2014

    Grasping at straws now aren’t we CRUK? Anything to keep the cash flowing in…
    The truth will prevail; it’s only a matter of time.

  • Karen Wilt
    30 May 2014

    I wonder what drug company put this out. Aside from No. 5 & 10, I’ve heard them all and boy….what crap this one is!

  • Holly Hallowell
    30 May 2014

    There are many seemingly “miracle” cancer cures available. Period. But the Allopath’s have us all believing that cutting, poisoning, and frying are the only options. That is the number one cancer myth. Get a clue guys! They stand to loose billions if we start healing ourselves with remedies already available. I am sure one of them was paid to support the biggest myth of all (that cancer can’t be cured!) is hoping you all fall for these “myths” supposedly debunked. Worst than the Holocaust this is. All these innocent people dying each year because they buy into the fear-based ridiculousness when other affordable, and real cures exist. It’s only going to be a bit longer before people realize there are holistic options that work. And, that the products we use have changed. The toxins we blindly put into your bodies is ridiculous. All in the name of lowering prices. Praying for a speedy realization.

  • Katie
    30 May 2014

    For those of you giving the Johns Hopkins link to “cancer cures,” this is the very reason this article was written. It’s a hoax. you can find it in five seconds on snopes, but you want to believe it because it makes you feel better about the possibility of an “easy” cure. I think an individual has every right to choose what kind of treatment they have. I’m not going to laugh at one of my patients that has stage IV cancer and wants to try alternative medicine instead of enduring chemo that probably won’t help at that point. But chemo and radiation are so far the best treatments because we’ve seen the greatest results from them so far. Maybe one day we’ll have a more specific cure, that would be awesome. But you copying and pasting a link to a fake article that can be completely debunked by actual science is not going to help.

  • wak
    30 May 2014

    so how do you enjoy life with cancer, and jd rock e fell a didnt make synthetic meds because he wanted us well no he just gave all the unis millions from his tax free foundation and made them agree to trash true natural cures for meds made from crude oil and then said theres no cures only management plans, all to control us like in the zoo

  • wak
    30 May 2014

    well youll get cancer if you litsen to these dribblers

  • me
    30 May 2014

    lolz

  • sarah
    30 May 2014

    How biased. You say information on Google is incorrect yet you tell people to look up proof of something on wiki. People have had cancer cured without chemotherapy and it is people’s FREE will to believe and treat their illnesses how they choose. If they die in the process or not is no ones business.

  • Taraveah
    29 May 2014

    Thank you for a rational article that debunks the BS circulating so widely everywhere it seems these days that makes so many people paranoid and shifts so much of our focus from enjoying life. Instead of becoming so fanatical about what we eat, for example, I think better advice is to just live. Live each day to the fullest. You never know which day will be your last regardless.

  • Rebecca
    29 May 2014

    People want to believe whatever fluffy myths they hear, and no amount of evidence or research will dissuade them. The facts are too hard for people. It’s easier to say “sugar” than it is to remember all those pesky -ose words like sucrose and glucose. It’s easier to say “your body” than it is to specify an organ, a haemoglobin, a synapse, and so on. An aunt can feel smart when she tells her nephew to eat “superfoods” even though she actually has no idea what effect that food has on “the body”. People are lazy and stupid, which is why we’ll always have myths, quacks, superfoods, and silly facebook articles. I applaud the author for trying, but if people wanted the facts, they would have looked for them.

  • Lucy
    29 May 2014

    Susan I posted a comment before you did, and it still hasn’t posted….talk about censorship! Do we really live in a “free” country?

  • Susan
    29 May 2014

    Big Hospital Finally telling the truth about Cancer, Johns Hopkins
    https://wausaunews.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/big-hospital-finally-telling-the-truth-about-cancer-johns-hopkins/
    A bit contradictory I would say

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    30 May 2014

    That story is a hoax and has been refuted by Johns Hopkins – more details here:
    http://www.snopes.com/medical/disease/cancerupdate.asp
    and here:
    http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/kimmel_cancer_center/news_events/featured/cancer_update_email_it_is_a_hoax.html

  • Lucy
    29 May 2014

    Censorship! I commented on this article and it was censored!!

  • patty
    29 May 2014

    Really hate this article…if it was up to you we would all eat really bad and depend on terrible treatments of which most people die…What are the hospitals afraid they are going to lose big money??? This tells me that by us trying to get healthy it scares the hell out of all the people that depend on cancer business….find another way …other than destroying people’s lives with the treatments and ruining families financially while you sit and condemn!!!!!

  • Maria
    28 May 2014

    A food’s acid or alkaline forming tendency in the body has nothing to do with the actual pH of the food itself. For example, lemons are very acidic, however the end products they produce after digestion and assimilation are very alkaline so, lemons are alkaline forming in the body. Likewise, meat will test alkaline before digestion, but it leaves very acidic residue in the body so, like nearly all animal products, meat is very acid forming.

  • Katter
    28 May 2014

    disinformation masquerading as sound scientific and reasonable arguments…
    i am sure the author believes what they wrote, but what they don’t want to admit is how much they are bought into a paradigm that is very limited and demeaning to people who have experience with cancer but draw very different conclusions.

  • Tonya
    28 May 2014

    When I read your article, my first thought was “are you also an Atheist?”

    Why? because when you say “Not scientifically proven”, God is real and really the only people I hear saying this is Atheist.

    Things don’t always have to be scientifically proven to know the work or are real, and because of doubt and unbelief some are not healed or helped.

  • Ben
    28 May 2014

    The amount of ignorance in this comment thread is mind-boggling.

    This is a clearly written, well cited and well supported article. Every point is backed up with several links to peer-reviewed studies and hard evidence. The authors even posted, in response to several questions, a direct link to all their financial backing information. Which apparently nobody has bothered to read.

    My favorite post by far was the one that linked the “Hospital finally tells truth about cancer” site. “All lies, all lies! Look at this website! It has the truth! Things that I agree with!” The linked website had ZERO sources.

    The authors are not denying a link between diet and cancer. On the contrary, they post links to several articles on the subject. A well-balanced, nutritional diet will go a long way towards keeping your immune system healthy.

  • christina
    28 May 2014

    To begin with I would like to give a reprimand to Kim that are telling Rachel she is wrong – there is no right and wrong in defeating cancer. I know people that have died and some have survived what ever method they have used. In first Place its a matter of what you Believe will cure you and that no one else can say or push on Another. The best thing is just to make your self informed and pick the method YOU Think is the best and stick to it! The mind is a powerful tool. And I do Think Rachel have had 100 of friends telling her the best way to do it – everyone have their ways and beliefs. Now she have choosen one and she should be encouraged and given hope, not be knocked down! Rachel I hope the best for you and the treatment you are doing I do know many that have won the same battle you are fighting so go for it girl go for it and live a wonderful Life! Another tought Kim, is the escalation on cancer a measure on that it have escalated or that we have become better on finding it? Is there any good statistics on this that you can refere too? as Phil said cure is not the Word due to that we all have cancer cells in our bodies they are most of the time not growing in high speed so we do not “have cancer” this was not a common known fact for 20 years ago either. Also Kim are you telling people to belive in your God and that everyone else is stupid not doing so also???? its the same thing……. I do know our enviroment and food is getting worse and worse but our bodies is also adjusting to enviroment even if it takes time ( I understand its not that fun to be the mid generation that have to suffer…) The human body is an Amazing Creation.

  • Phil
    28 May 2014

    Kim, I don’t know of any cancer survivor who was told he/she was “cured”. Tumors can be removed, cancer can be in remission, but “cure” is not in an oncologist’s lexicon.

    Are we ingesting things that could be dangerous? Yes. BPA and other chemicals are indeed in the food supply and that does concern me. However that doesn’t mean that the treatment for cancer is simply changing diet. That’s like saying since sun exposure can cause skin cancer, then the “cure” is to stay indoors.

  • Kim
    28 May 2014

    Rachel, you have been brainwashed like the rest of us. “Hard science” has an objective and is financially backed for a known profit and end result. If you get results from conventional chemo & radiation you will find later you will get another cancer from those treatments-despite being told you may be cured. It does not take a doctor or a scientist to realize what needs to be done to cure cancer. The incidence of cancer is higher now than 20 years ago??? Our food supply has been compromised. Going back to basics is your chance. Raw, unadulterated foods our grandparents would recognize. The author of this article is obviously closely affiliated with conventional medicine. There are a number of inconsistencies in her refuting these myths and to say it is not about greed and profit is completely naive. It is all about both. We have been lied to and lead down a path in the name of profit for some one else. Scientific studies are only performed where the end result will support a profit. You will not obtain financial backing otherwise. You really should keep an open mind and research extensively before you settle for what we have been brainwashed into thinking is the only way. There are other, more viable options.

  • Rachel
    28 May 2014

    For those whom have had luck with alternative/nutritional therapies, there is a phenomenon of spontaneous remission. It does happen. Also alternative therapies may be a better option for some populations – those that are older, very weak, cancer is a later stage, yadda yadda. I was diagnosed with stage 1B2 cervical cancer and do I want to just try to radically change my diet (with no hard numbers behind it no matter where I look the science is really sketchy, sorry) or use conventional treatments (chemo and radiation) which yes, have some harsh side effects but nothing my 39 year old body can’t take and has a 70-80% cure rate? Sorry but I really want to live so I’m banking on hard science. If this course of treatment doesn’t work, then maybe I’ll try something else. It’s easy for those who aren’t directly dealing with the potential of losing their own life to tell others that are what to do, but until you’ve walked a mile in my shoes, please STFU!

  • Nick Gayton
    28 May 2014

    Your outlook is different when you personally know people who have had cancer and gone through hell with conventional treatment, “beaten” it only to have it return a few years later. Then not willing to go through the same treatment they try an alkaline diet and raw juicing and it works for them. They keep it up and years go by and they are still cancer free. Some anecdotal testimonials may be exaggerated or outright fakes but many of your so called myths have some validity. Feel free to keep your head in the sand. Chemo may have acceptable results with a couple of types of cancer but there are definitely safer more effective treatments out there

  • Scott Lara
    28 May 2014

    12 years ago my wife Marty was diagnosed with stage IIB lung cancer in her left lung. Her entire lung was removed, followed by 8 weeks of radiation. 12 years later she remains cancer free.

  • www.NaturopathicKnights.com
    28 May 2014

    Cancer is a process. The the tumor is the pathology which is seen after so much time has passed. Everyone has cancer cells! Not everyone develops a tumor. Big difference. Everyone has cancer cells, because it is just natural law to have them, but the healthy body kills cancer cells. It is only when there is persistent imbalance that cancer cells flourish.

    Since cancer is a process and the end result is a tumor, cutting out the tumor in no way cures the cancer, it removes the pathology (many cancer cells lumped together). And the process by which it was caused? Do you cut that out with a knife, too? Of course not. Thinking you can cut out cancer is a stupid mans thinking.

    Also, testicular cancer is just one form of cancer. Hanging you hat on that as a means to justify radiating cancers is more absurdity. Furthermore, stating that more than half the people who get treated for cancer live past 10 years is a blatant lie. Articles like this are completely unethical.

  • Lou
    28 May 2014

    I would like to know if the cancer research this writer is affiliated with is supported by the sales of chemotherapy drugs. That would say a lot. However, I couldn’t find much on the author. AS the church lady says, :how conveeeenient!”.

  • Henry Scowcroft
    28 May 2014

    As you can see, people have been leaving a large number of comments on this post that disagree, sometimes rather rudely, with the evidence-based arguments we’ve made above. We thought readers might be interested to know that almost all of these people seem to have arrived at our blog from US-based alternative medicine Facebook pages. We leave you to make up your own mind as to whether you think their opinions, anecdotes and arguments – while no doubt sincere and heartfelt – constitute an objective, unbiased source of information.

    We’d also like to reiterate that our research is funded entirely by the generosity of the public (you can see our annual reports and accounts here).

    And finally, we would like to highlight another article we’ve written, entitled “There’s no conspiracy – sometimes it just doesn’t work“.

    Henry Scowcroft
    Cancer Research UK

  • Sue
    28 May 2014

    If Cancer Research UK reserves the right to edit, remove, delete my comments … really … what’s the point in commenting at all?

  • Frederic Burnett
    28 May 2014

    Thank you for debunking the myth that all sharks are free of cancer cells. The “cures” are out there. Change is just slow in coming.

  • anon
    28 May 2014

    This article and whoever wrote it is so wrong and completely manipulative. You talk about these super foods and how food companies are just trying to sell the product… are you serious?! Because it seems like you’re encouraging chemotherapy and surgery and drugs which is WAY worse! Fruits, vegetables, these super foods as some may call them have been on this planet way longer than all these man made drugs filled with chemicals and chemo as well that will only further destroy your insides… Two people in my family got diagnosed with cancer within the past few years. Sadly only one of them survived. The one that survived was diagnosed with stage 3 liver and pancreatic cancer. He never did chemotherapy or surgery. He refused to do these things and instead opted for natural remedies (a very strict but healthy diet with supplements). My other family member which passed away was diagnosed with breast cancer however it wasn’t the cancer that killed her but the chemotherapy that only weakened her immune system day by day. This is no coincidence. The body is a very interesting machine made to heal itself if you care for it correctly. This article is so full of crap and it needs to be reported and taken down. STOP BRAINWASHING PEOPLE!

  • mro
    28 May 2014

    yeah right, that’s why you see a nation of people recoverying after chemo, holding their grandchildren in their arms. Rather common I would say.

  • ANON
    28 May 2014

    This article is extremely harmful and biased. Yet again more propaganda spun by ‘cancer research’. After all if you start promoting things that actually work there won’t be a need for your organisation and for people to donate lots of money to you will there.

  • Northern
    28 May 2014

    Fact 10 lol.

  • John Doe
    28 May 2014

    What about Dr. Burzynski’s findings?….Why did the FDA, the AMA, and the American Cancer Institute not want to help him further his studies after his clinical trials were showing promise without the side effects that Chemotherapy does to people??? Dr. Burzynski is helping people beat cancer…why are his breakthroughs not more publicized?

  • Kate
    28 May 2014

    Having so far survived a Gene mutation which has given me terminal lung cancer, and having spent 6 years researching the correlation between cancer and food. I can honestly say this is the most disgraceful, harmful, outrageous & downright irresponsible article I have ever read.
    Disgusted. Utterly furious.
    I have a string of oncologist, professors & doctors who have said ‘why are you still alive? whatever it is you are doing, keep doing it.’
    So ok, they are not interested in the details, but they clearly acknowledge it’s keeping me alive.

  • Fauz
    28 May 2014

    This article is TOTAL BS… and as you can see by the comments below, no one intelligent is stupid enough to buy it. It’s nice to see that the average intelligence is rapidly increasing on these matters allow society to see through this crap. This article needs to be burned.

  • sam starr
    28 May 2014

    LIARS! SHAME ON YOU FOR LYING. WHO PAYS YOU TO LIE? HERE IS THE TRUTH: https://wausaunews.wordpress.com/2014/01/18/big-hospital-finally-telling-the-truth-about-cancer-johns-hopkins/

  • Grace A Bell, JP
    28 May 2014

    Whoa re the criminal who penned this article. and I agree with you ‘youareaniditotobeleivethis. Too late, too many of of us in the general population are no longer fooled by Big Pharma; we are doing our own research on the hundreds of protocols that we can turn to when ‘the text book cures don’t work’ You can fool some of the people some of the times, but you won’t fool all of the people all of the time! SHAME ON YOU

  • youreanidiotifyoubelievethis
    28 May 2014

    Whoever wrote this article must be employed by Monsanto. You should be ashamed of yourself.

  • Jimi
    28 May 2014

    There are no “miracle cures”… the only miracle is how many of you would rather die than believe that you’ve been lied to by every government sponsored faction.

  • Jimi
    28 May 2014

    This whole post is a big joke…. but the worst part is the entries about the miracle cures and the truth being suppressed. It’s written for brainwashed idiots. No person with any reasonable level of common sense would believe any of this.

  • Julie
    27 May 2014

    You are wrong!! I completely got rid of my skin cancer by using coconut oil and bicarbonate soda. Many other people have tried this also with success!! Even my doctors have told me that the proper diet and nutrition can work just as well if not better than chemo on many kinds of cancers.

  • vince
    27 May 2014

    I had stage 3 ewings sarcoma, an agressive cancer. I abided by most of those “myths” mid-way through my chemo treatment. I had 30 days of straight radiation then 14 months of chemo. I am now 5 years cancer free. Myth or not I’m still going living by those rules.

  • AG
    27 May 2014

    To all the comments posting correlational studies that “disprove” what this article is saying:

    CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION.

    A recent “correlational” study found a high correlation between women wearing bras and getting breast cancer…but considering that most women wear bras, this information is somehow not that shocking. Yet they tried to use it as “evidence” for a causal link between bras and breast cancer, a link that has not been proven experimentally.

    If something has not been proven experimentally, you cannot and should not alter your lifestyle around it because there is no causal link. You don’t know what you’re doing to your body.

  • Adam
    27 May 2014

    To ‘J’: Considering this piece cites research piece after research piece for its claims, I can’t tell what you are basing your comment on, other than a kind of zealous denial… they clearly have done their ‘own research’ in covering the literature to produce this. Perhaps it would make more sense for YOU, since you have the information readily to hand it seems, to show the reliable, peer reviewed science that proves efficacious cures for cancer. And also maybe ask yourself why an entire world of competing, unrelated academic institutions, research facilities, doctors, hospitals, biomedical scientists that wouldn’t mind recieving the Nobel prize – why all these parties, all with a vested interest in spotting each other’s errors, exposing each other’s bad methodologies and importantly, discovering world-changing medical breakthroughs – are ignoring the evidence you seem to state is there for the world to see?

    As for the next point, the article explicitly DOESN’T ‘completely exclude nutrition and its link to cancer’ – it is as if you didn’t even read the body, just the subsection titles and then guessed what they might say. The article states the overly sensational links between foods and cancer as grossly oversimplified. Which is correct, and it backs that up with evidence. I think any reasonable person reading the article would agree that it actually goes very much out of its way, to a level that seems quite sympathetic and generous to some of the ridiculous tabloid claims that it may be referring to, to state that there may well be links. And it suggests what some of the links may be, and how they work biologically. It does not ‘make out that they are not linked at all’ – or not to me, and I presume, most people that read the article.

    Finally, even though I don’t think they denied the correlation anyway – be careful about treating correlation as important. Not only because *CORRELATION DOES NOT IMPLY CAUSATION* – but also because there are correlations all over the place between totally unrelated things, just by chance. There is a correlation between the colour of my laptop, and the colour of coal. My laptop is probably not made of coal, and you wouldn’t think it worth treating that as a serious assertion until somebody disproves it… but there is a correlation. And many laptops will also share that.

    Small correlations might also be what we reasonable scientists call statistically insignificant. Now, there is a whole world of fierce debate over the importance and lack thereof of statistical inference in drawing conclusions from data, but like I said, correlations pop up all the time between unrelated things by chance – so perhaps these small correlations you speak of are just that. But that is why we do research, and the article cites research articles throughout for all it’s claims, whereas you just made a number of seemingly baseless arguments and didn’t back them up with anything other than your rather livid and hostile rhetoric.

    I know if I have to so basically spell out to you how unreasonable your point is, that you aren’t very likely to be reasonable enough to either accept or refute what I’m saying in an intelligent and scientific way, but I just bit onto this a bit and couldn’t help it.

    Having read your comment, I remain pretty confident that CRUK do their research, that this article’s authors have done their research (because they flippin’ cite it throughout) and that you don’t really have the evidence you say exists that proves what you say it proves, and are just either in denial or showing insufferable contrariety.

  • J
    26 May 2014

    Instead of labeling all these things as Myths and taking an incredibly biased view when writing this article, Cancer Research, why don’t you do your own research where you will find a large number of scientific studies detailing a number of cures that have been proven to work in a large number of cases. You should moreover, not completely exclude nutrition and its link to cancer. You make out that they are not linked at all. Of course there is some correlation, even if small. Do your research! And you call yourself Cancer Research, good one!!

  • Jose Castro
    26 May 2014

    “According to the classical view, the principal cells respond to systemic hormones like aldosterone and vasopressin to modulate transport of salt, water, and K+, while intercalated cells can excrete either H+ (type A cells) or HCO3– (type B cells), depending on the body’s acid-base status (1).”

    Quoted from “Mitochondrial TCA cycle intermediates regulate body fluid and acid-base balance”

  • José Castro
    26 May 2014

    About sugar and cancer.
    (And how it’s criminal to deny the link.)

    Dietary glycemic index and glycemic load and breast cancer risk in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC).

    High glycemic diet and breast cancer occurrence in the Italian EPIC cohort.

    Glycemic index, glycemic load and cancer risk.

    Dietary glycemic index, glycemic load, and risk of breast cancer: meta-analysis of prospective cohort studies.

    Title only, no links allowed in this discussion.

  • José Castro
    26 May 2014

    Semin Dial. 2000 Jul-Aug;13(4):221-6.
    Influence of diet on acid-base balance.
    Remer T.
    Author information

    Abstract
    It is well established that diet and certain food components have a clear impact on acid-base balance. For adults, the following factors are involved: 1) the chemical composition of foods (i.e., their content of protein, chloride, phosphorus, sodium, potassium, calcium, and magnesium), 2) the different intestinal absorption rates of the relevant nutrients, 3) the metabolic generation of sulfate from sulfur-containing amino acids, 4) the grade of dissociation of phosphorus at the physiologic pH of 7.4, and 5) the ionic valence of calcium and magnesium. All these factors allow us to estimate the potential renal acid load (PRAL) of any given food or diet. The PRAL (calculated for a 24-hour period), together with a relatively constant daily amount of urinary excreted organic acids (in healthy subjects proportional to body surface area or body weight), yields the daily net acid excretion. This article provides an overview of the current concepts of diet influences on acid-base balance and also focuses on the underlying physiologic and biochemical basis as well as on relevant clinical implications.

  • Robin
    26 May 2014

    Who is funding this cherry picked nonsense? I stopped subscribing to you guys years ago when your chief exec laughed at the innovative evidence-based work work being done at the Pine Street Foundation in San Francisco – on dogs aiding cancer diagnosis. My old man died of cancer and I wish I knew then what I’ve seen with my own eyes of nutritional approaches – and unsympathetic doctors dismissing this approach when it’s successful as ‘idiomatic spontaneous remission”. Lets have some real evidence based debate if you want to convince the public, not hand picked web bytes from those with eye watering vested interests. Lets start with an answer to why docs are given next to no nutritional training. Where on earth do we get the building blocks of all those intricate chemical pathways? From the phamaceuticals we somehow lack?

  • José Castro
    26 May 2014

    I posted a comment with links but that wasn’t approved.

    “Generally a sensible article. Though I must point out some disagreements. Debunking is not always an easy task and one can over do it.

”the specific vegetables you choose doesn’t really matter”

While it is true that for basic prevention is probably good enough just to eat a good bunch of a random variety of fresh vegetables, some vegetables have specifics properties that can help in prevention in general (for example for antiangiogenesis) or in specific types of cancer for example the cabbage family (cruciferous plants) for lung cancer prevention in smokers (no link allowed in comments sorry).


    
”there’s no good evidence to prove that diet can manipulate whole body pH”
    
This is an amazingly ignorant statment. You just need a pH indicator paper to verify very easily how diet can influence urine pH. It’s a very straight-forward indicator of whole body acidity.

By the way people who defend this thesis don’t claim it’s the blood pH you should try to influence. The blood pH is very stable because of a whole set fo mechanisms that make it within a very short range of acidity. But the rest of the body don’t have the same defenses so you can expect a greater range of which the urine pH is the simplest indicator.

    Why don’t you check it out yourself? Have a fast-food meal, pizza, coke, and an icecream. Measure your next urine pH. Next day eat only vegetables, some whole rice and beans, lots of fruits and kale. Measure your urine pH. Unless your body pH is chronically low, you should notice a very large difference.


    
”that’s a far cry from saying that sugary foods specifically feed cancer cells”

Agree that is probably not exactly correct. But… there is a huge difference between consuming refined or processed sugar (like in Coke) or to do it in the form of a piece of fruit (like an apple). These forms of consumption of foods must be clearly differenciated, as they are by the scientific community. There is huge evidence linking high blood sugar (as after eating sugary foods, but also in diabetes type I uncontrolled) and cancer.

    Sugar in the refined form is poison, very different effect from that found in fruits for example. I advice checking out this talk on youtube: sugar the bitter truth.


    “Cancer treatment kills more than it cures”
Agree this is not so. But there is evidence some kinds of chemotherapy may actually create microconditions for tumour development. (no link allowed in comments sorry).

  • gth
    26 May 2014

    Appreciate the effort to put together all the links and knowledge and blast away some of the tripe.

    Families thrust into dealing with cancer who don’t have medical expertise are bombarded by doctors trying to help – and they need to absorb and understand that knowledge as fast as possible.

    Unfortunately the panic, despair and fear also makes them ripe targets for untested, unproven (or in the case of the shark stuff, specifically disproven) “alternative therapies”. As the Tim Minchin song says, if a therapy is scientifically proven to work… it is then called medicine.

    If only the asshats were as serious as citing their sources and doing peer reviews as the scientific community is.

  • Usizael
    25 May 2014

    This article and the sites this crap comes from are written by a funded trolls (as well as people that can’t see passed their nose!) All of this is crap information and mostly false. Yes, people got cancer a looooong time ago as well, but due to nutritional deficiencies…just like today. But one thing i can tell you for sure, the statistics were nowhere near 1 in 3 people get cancer. More like 1 every several thousand. It’s just like institutions consumed in greed to forget their founding fathers’ words (thus the state of our country as well, USA and others.) “Let food be thy medicine and medicine be thy food.” If you don’t know these words’ origin then you shouldn’t EVER talk about the state of “modern” medicine, because you don’t even know its foundations, nor would you have any idea how far it has strayed from its foundation due to greed.

  • Allan Johnson
    25 May 2014

    If cancer flourishes in an acidic environment and doesn’t in an alkaline one, then I choose an alkaline one. Less acidic causing foods and more alkaline.

    I would like someone to spend more time and money on determining the cause rather than the current focus on treatment after you have already got cancer.

    There is a well known Dr. In Italy who treats certain tumors with sodium bicarbonate directly on the tumor. He is very successful with his treatments with almost no side effects.

    I suggest everyone do there own research and go with those solutions you believe to work. We are being deceived by many groups, so don’t believe everything you are told because it’s scientific. There much science can ‘t explain.

  • Leann
    25 May 2014

    Leann is still waiting for this moderation?

  • Leann
    25 May 2014

    What kind of moderation? Did I hit a nerve?

  • Leann
    25 May 2014

    I absolutely believe that the pharmaceutical co’s will suffer severely if they turn out all the cures they have for cancer, not to mention other ailments. Am I suppose to just read & believe? Do not insult the majority of the people on this planet. I am entitled to my opinion.

  • Linda
    25 May 2014

    Looks like Cancer Research is terrified that it might go out of business. This amuses me greatly. There are huge numbers of people now with proof that some alternative therapies work, especially the ones mentioned here!

  • elena
    25 May 2014

    who is funding you?????

  • Angie
    25 May 2014

    Hello, everyone. I would like to translate this excellent science article into spanish. Could you give me your permission? I will add every reference and, also, link the translation with this original post.

    Thank you!

  • Luke
    22 May 2014

    quote: It simply doesn’t make sense that pharmaceutical companies would want to suppress a potential cure. Finding a highly effective therapy would guarantee huge worldwide sales.
    If worldwide sales are their aim then if eating a product like coconut oil imstead of consuming their useless alzheimers drugs will never pronoted because the sales of coconut oil wont make them money.

  • Marco Esquandolas
    21 May 2014

    Debunking sites are funny. No one ever questions the source of the debunkers because they claim science as their proof. Just like Nivlac said, this was probably funded and created by big pharma or one of their shills. No surprise.

  • Nivlac
    21 May 2014

    Ok, some might call this left field, but this article sounds like one of two things. Either propaganda paid for by big pharma to mislead Americans who are waking up to the truth, or the author really has not done their research. Cancer cures have been around for years. They just keep getting squashed. But don’t take my word for it. Do your own research.

  • Thijs
    20 May 2014

    This is a good article, hopefully people will stop with those not scientifically proven “cures”.

  • Arnas
    19 May 2014

    What about naked mole rat species? They don’t get cancer, do they?

  • Gerhard
    19 May 2014

    I can not help it, I do not believe you.

  • Tammy Vires
    17 May 2014

    I seriously hope you are wrong. My husband was just diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer and we are trying most of the treatments you “debunked” in your article and a few others besides.

  • Andrew
    16 May 2014

    I cannot believe this article appears on the Cancer Research website.

    Glucose is not the only energy source the body utilises. What about ketones? Cancer cells cannot process any form of energy other than glucose.

    So is it not possible that if you cut off the supply of glucose, you can hurt the cancer cells?

  • Ana
    16 May 2014

    Howcome the food you put into your system and, therefore, works into you and goes into your organs DO NOT AFFECT the way you develop or not CANCER

    Is like sayiny it doesnt matter what you put to your car, diesel, water or gasoline, it still will run through….

    Im not even going to discuss every point….

  • Tony
    16 May 2014

    Your sodium evaluation is dead wrong …… I am living proof of that!!!

  • Adrian
    10 May 2014

    As I started to read those “myths”, I was hoping someone in the comments section would point out what blatant bullsh!t this article is… And I wasn’t disappointed.
    Seems the world is waking up to the lies.

  • danar
    9 May 2014

    I think this website is lying there is no doubt any one can get cancer but the risk factors have increased by human (business) like smoking, fast(junk) food and pollution stop these factors and then cancer rate will decrease.

  • Chillax
    8 May 2014

    You know one major cause of cancer? Stress. So how ’bout we all just chill out and stop stressing so much about what causes cancer, what cures cancer, conspiracies, and myths. Just relax, man.

  • @Olushky
    8 May 2014

    And this article just proves that cancer is big business… So who do u like to trust… and what this article tells us?
    That cancer is incurable.
    http://on.rt.com/4w1jwb
    With all respect to the taxpayer… patient .

  • Joseph S
    8 May 2014

    Well I forgot to mention the cure for cancer… just simply because there is not any single miracle cure… the cure consists of plenty small things u have to do to get rid of it…
    The reason why I am writing here is simple… My mother last year developed cancer… quite serious they had to remove her womb. I told her to try couple of things before the surgery… So it might not be needed… The resistance which came from my mothers side was astonishing… She didn’t wanted to try anything what I suggested… After a month of trying to talk to her that she needs to give up smoking and get on a special diet I gave up. 4 weeks before the surgery she went for last check which turned out very bad, her cancer started spreading rapidly… The doctor set her surgery 2 weeks earlier. After she came from her doctor she rang me… I told her what I found and tried. She changed her diet for alkaline and started drinking sodium bicarbonate and gave up smoking… and sugar… she did some parasitic cleanse, heavy metals detox, chlorophyll,hydrogen peroxide, lemons with sea salt, epsom salts. The tumor shrank about 30% in less then 2 weeks. She still had the surgery…because her doctor said she needs to, ignoring that she wanted another test. What this experience gave to me and to my family?
    It gave us a new hope and a far distant view to what we know from media about cancer and other well known unsolvable mystery diseases.
    We are grateful for everything what doctors are doing… to us.

  • Joseph S
    7 May 2014

    Hi, this article is very informative to everybody who doesn’t care about cancer because simply they don’t have it. Once u get the disease u will change your mind in a split of a second, and u will be desperate to find anything to change your not so bright looking future… (chemo, radiation, surgery, deadlines for how much time u have left)
    U listing these myths… well there is this freedom to write anything… yes
    Let me tell u the story I am living in for past years.
    Since I developed type 1 diabetes, now 4 years ago, I used to be ill plenty times per year. The last time I was very ill, feeling like I was very close to pass from this life… not been able to get out of the house and being depressed like never before. After several sleepless nights searching for some answers I was so desperate for… how to improve my health with my diabetes related complications which my doctor said are “normal” for people with diabetes… hmm not very bright… I thought
    I still not believe what hidden world of cures there is.
    I started taking sodium bicarbonate 3-6 times everyday, what happened next is just out of this world… After 2 days on sodium bicarbonate treatment I was out and about walking in the park with plenty of energy… most important my lungs became mucus free after expelling huge quantities of dark brown and green mucus for about 3 days. I could breathe again… after nearly two weeks of pneumonia with high temperature… I have changed my diet to alkaline within short period of time after. Well I do the sodium bicarbonate ever since… and guess what…? I haven’t been seriously ill for a year and 5 months… I don’t know… must be a miracle, don’t u think?

  • Richie
    6 May 2014

    “Myth 8: Cancer treatment kills more than it cures” = Lies. It does kill more than it cures. And horribly too. Just walk into any office administering chemo. No one is smiling. It’s grueling, painful and it KILLS. What the pharma “cancer industry” calls ‘cures’ is equal to “not dying within 5 years of treatment”. There is no data kept after that. When cancer returns to the individual after 5 years, it’s a new case.

  • Zumaman
    5 May 2014

    Cancer Research UK is sponsored by Big Pharma so i wouldn’t take anything they say seriously. Big Pharma wants to profit and treating cancer with their useless drugs is far more lucrative than offering or developing a cure. They will say that there is no evidence to any of the above but they continue to ignore the testimonies of those who have been cured by such and alternative treatments like DCA and DMSO. The answer is simple. Because they can’t patent something, they don’t profit. Profiteering comes first you see, humanity second. They want you to buy their expensive drugs that offer you a lottery of a chance and take their deadly treatments that do actually kill than cure more people. But killing is their business remember. All the wars they wage on this planet is about profit and population control. We live in a sick and twisted world where the banksters run the show. As long as they’re in power they will take your charity and offer no cure. Makes you wonder why the Royals all live to well into their 80s and don’t tell me its in the genes please, i’m not that stupid and nor are people. We can put a probe on Mars but can’t find a cure for cancer?? Something is wrong, something is very wrong! Cancer, like war is big big business!

  • Mr Alfred Tidey
    2 May 2014

    I have had prostate cancer and gratefully I am cured of it by having radiotherapy treatment. Oddly, I was never worried about it when it was diagnosed two years ago because I knew I had a good chance of a cure. The damage caused to some healthy tissue near to the prostate gland is unfortunate and I hope something could be done to prevent this happening.

  • Peter Shotton
    2 May 2014

    Very interesting article. Have passed it to several friends.
    I notice that no mention has been made regarding the benefits of turmeric – which is a very strong anti-oxidant. It is known that the incidence of cancers, particularly stomach, liver and bowel cancers in India is less than in Europe. Suggest: take a teaspoonful of turmeric in fruit juice every day.

  • John atkins
    2 May 2014

    As someone who has recently beaten bowel cancer and secondary liver cancer I am fairly certain that a low carb diet or ketogenic diet is beneficial in fighting cancer. The science is as the author says uncertain at the present time but i do not hesitate to recommend the ketogenic diet to someone diagnosed with cancer who is willing and able to fight this disease by what is a fairly difficult dietary regime in support of chemo and surgery and whatever else the medics can offer. You will lose weight which is not always helpful but with care the diet is healthy and sustainable for most people.

  • James
    30 April 2014

    My comment is regarding a cure for cancer being hidden. You argue that any drug company that found a cure would make huge profits worldwide. My concern is what would happen to the multimillion pound research programmes that are operating around the world keeping thousands of peolple in work and generating millions of dollars or pounds. Surely these operations would all cease ‘overnight’ making all concerned redundant? So is it in some drug companies interest to withold the cure?

  • Colbert
    30 April 2014

    We know a lot about cancer, but not as much as we should know. Everybody keeps saying something else about it. But I think we are all so afraid of getting cancer that we try to abandon everything out of our lives that can cause cancer.. The problem is, we don’t know for sure wat causes it. This text shows us that in a good, clear way. There are a lot of myths about this horrible disease we have to deny.

  • Adriaan Heyns u14017157
    29 April 2014

    The increase in cancer is it due to the increase in the average life expectancy or is it mainly caused by our modern lifestyle? What is it about our modern lifestyle that has caused this sudden increase in cancer prevalence?

  • Kelly Smith
    28 April 2014

    This site is so full of disinformation. Billions of dollars thrown at breast cancer research alone and we are no closer to a cure than we were 40 years ago. More people make a living from cancer than die from it. One of the side effects of chemo is cancer and they are still using chemo drugs from the 1950s. There is no oversight of cancer research to make sure one research facility is not doing an experiment that failed at another one. 10% decrease in deaths in 10 years is so small as to be negligible. The phony cut, burn, and poison treatments are a crude way of dealing with a disease and are designed to kill you so you can’t see the cancer doctors for murder and mayhem.

  • Kaz
    25 April 2014

    http://www.ted.com/talks/william_li?language=en

  • Guest
    24 April 2014

    In relation to Myth 8: If you read Knockout by Suzanne Sommers she mentions that there are three type of cancers that respond well to chemo, testicular cancer being one of them. Lets see some statistics for other cancers that do not respond well to Chemo at all.

  • Guest
    24 April 2014

    lmaoooooooooooo This article was a long time coming… I figured big pharma and the gov’t would begin fighting back…. You will only confuse the people on the fence, the rest of us know the truth… This article us complete satire, thanks for the early morning laugh

  • Judith Bradshaw
    24 April 2014

    Excellent article. Beautifully written and very informative.

  • Michael Chomsky
    24 April 2014

    Total disinformation B.S.

  • Armando
    23 April 2014

    Yes, let us reject all scientific and non-scientific studies performed by Doctors that you are trying to debunk, and only follow your propaganda. Let us not hear from those who have been cured, or have cured them selves by alternative natural methods. This posting is so one sided it belongs in an Opinion blog. I notice you did not reach out to the alternative healing side for a rebuttal for a fair and balanced posting. I am sure you do not want to see the evidence.

  • Geraldine
    23 April 2014

    I agree with this, but there is one more thing. If there was a cheap cure, big Insurance who pays for most treatments would never let the Bid Pharmaceuticals hid it. They would fight tooth and nail to get it out there.

  • Nikki
    23 April 2014

    You forgot to add ” PS Keep sending the cheques” What a load of unsubstantiated twaddle!

  • martre66
    20 April 2014

    Treating cancer is BIG business in America . In fact, it’s a $200 billion a year business. Yet 98 percent of conventional cancer treatments not only FAIL miserably, but are also almost guaranteed to make cancer patients sicker.What’s worse: The powers are suppressing natural cancer cures that could help tens of thousands of people get well and live cancer free with little or no dependence on drugs, surgery and chemotherapy.

    .

  • Emma Mead
    19 April 2014

    In relation to your feedback on myth 3 an acidic diet causes cancer I would like to know more about why you believe this is the case. Here are some of the facts that make be believe than an alkaline diet is beneficial
    1. Otto Warburg was awarded the Nobel Prize for his work on the effects of acid and alkaline solutions on cell health. Warburg’s research showed that a low pH environment killed healthy calls or caused them to mutate into cancerous cells
    2. The majority of our cells and organs we thrive when the pH is at alkaline at @ 7.4. In fact our blood needs to be in a range of 7.35 to 7.45. Our body is designed to jealously guard the pH of our blood as moving outside of that range is not compatible with life ie fatal. So whilst it would be incorrect to say that our blood becomes acidic due to our diet, our bodies still need to neutralise any acid load caused by diet/cells metabolism which they do via our bodies buffers which are replenished from by drawing down on your reserves of ‘calcium phosphate’, which are stored within your bones (there is very strong research indicating the link between an acidic diet and osteoporosis). However my understanding is that if the buffers don’t work fast enough then your body will need to eliminate the acid load into surrounding tissues and organs to be stored, thereby causing low grade acidosis. I believe that Robert Young and Susan Brown have linked this low level of acidosis with many chronic diseases including cancer.
    3. In contrast to acidic foods, alkaline plant based diet replenishes those buffers that keeps your blood at the pH level compatible with life.
    4. My understanding from the research I have reviewed is that when our pH is unbalanced then we have an increased level of free radicals and the antioxidant enzymes which act as our cells shields from these free radicals start to fail when our pH is unbalanced ie when we have a low grade acidosis. This leads to the premature death of healthy cells and almost all diseases are are caused by the premature death of healthy cells for example its the premature death of beta cells in our pancreas that leads to diabetes.
    5. Not only do our cells become damaged by those hostile free radicals but the acidic environment impacts our cells electrical charge and that impacts their ability to send and receive messages. It’s like when you you are in a poor signal area with your mobile and your phone keeps cutting out or there is lots of static, not everything you are saying is heard. When effective communication between cells break down it means that cells such as cancer cells, which our body should kill off are left to continue to divide

    For me these are 5 very powerful reasons why we SHOULD ensure we get the right acid:alkaline balance in our diet. Why would you not want to encourage those touched by cancer to do this? I am not saying that an acid diet causes cancer however it is evident that there is a lot to be gained from eating a plant rich diet surely we shoud be doing everything we can to improve people’s health, why would an alkaline diet not be a good idea to encourage? Your article does not achieve this end

    There is significant evidence in the impact of eating meat (which is acidic) on cancer. The world health organisation has concluded that dietary factors account for 30% of all cancers in the western world. Large studies in England and Germany showed that vegetarians were about 40 percent less likely to develop cancer compared to meat eaters so why would you want to declare something a ‘myth’ that has actually been shown to lower your cancer risk? Even though it may not be the alkaline vs acidic nature of foods that are the underlying driver, I know for example that meat and dairy foods are high fat and that fat causes a woman’s body to make more estrogens, which encourage cancer cell growth in the breast. I also know that items that are deemed alkaline ie plant based don’t have the same effect. Research has shown that amount of estradiol (a principal estrogen) in their blood dropped by 30 percent for those girls that switched their diet by reducing animal based protein and increasing plant based protein. That is a significant result – why would you not want to communicate this clearly to people as the action they should take – encouraging An alkaline diet would achieve this. Two themes consistently emerge from studies of cancer from many sites: vegetables and fruits help to reduce risk, while meat, animal products, and other fatty foods are frequently found to increase risk.

    I look forward to understanding exactly which scientific studies you reviewed to come to the conclusion that encouraging people not to eat an alkaline diet would be good advice

  • evelyn mhande
    14 April 2014

    Thanks for the information.it sounds very positive.

  • Jane
    11 April 2014

    I am hoping someone can help me find an answer to a question. I am strung out with anxiety and do not have an appointment with a Hemotologist until the 21st. I have seen two doctors who have been trying to diagnose my neuropathy. In doing so they have run a TON of blood tests. One test “Cryoglobulin Quantitative” has come back listed as “trace” when it should be negative. 3 more tests were ordered — 2 of which were fine but the third “Protein Immunofixation Serum” shows an abnormality. The IGG, IGA and IGM are all within normal limits but the Immunofixation ELP has a note that says: Monoclonal IgM immunoglobulin of lambda light chain type. Pathological significance requires clinical correlation. I paniced and sent a note to the ordering doc since everything I put in to google tells me I have multiple mylomea. He sent me a note back that says the test results are consistent to someone who does NOT have cancer but he wants me to see a hemotologist/oncologist “just to be certain”. Does ANYONE on here have any background on these types of tests and if I should be concerned?

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    12 April 2014

    Hi Jane,
    I appreciate this must be a worrying time for you. If you’d like to speak to someone and you’re in the UK, give our Cancer Information Nurses a call – you can reach them on freephone 0808 800 4040 (9am to 5pm, Monday to Friday).
    Best wishes,
    Kat

  • Wiggers99
    11 April 2014

    You say, “All our cells, cancerous or not, use glucose for energy” (Myth 4) but in fact “ATP can be produced by redox reactions using simple and complex sugars (carbohydrates) or lipids as an energy source.” There are strong arguments from the correlation between the rise in consumption of processed food rich in carbohydrates and rise of cancer rates. Myth 1 mentions Egyptian and Greek physicians, but it is around then that agriculture and the consumption of carbs began to take off. Before then as hunter gatherers we were eating mainly red meat, berries, nuts, etc. As I understand it, most of the studies condemning red meat and fat have been confounded by a lack of control for carbs, mainly starches (polysaccharides) in legumes and root vegetables. (I.e. steak, chips and peas.)

  • MC Rob Mont
    9 April 2014

    This is what i found about the author’s background:

    Oliver Childs studied Natural Sciences at Bath University. After graduating, he then spent several years working in science publishing in various editorial roles, including as Copy Editor of Nature Reviews Cancer and Managing Editor at International Medical Press. He’s also worked as a freelance medical and healthcare copywriter.

    He joined the Science Communications team at Cancer Research UK in January 2009, working on their annual publications. He now works as part of the News and Multimedia team, helping to manage the charity’s blog and news feed.

    Source: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/oliver-childs

  • L.Hibbert
    7 April 2014

    Treatment using mistletoe instead of chemotherapy is used in other European countries and has been proved successful as well as causing far fewer side effects and yet I can find nothing about it on your website. I still think that the money for research is too focused on treatments that make a lot of money. And I was shocked at the quality and type of food given to people when in hospital. Surely this is a chance for the nhs to remind people what they should be eating to stay healthy.

  • Mrs Christine Williamson
    7 April 2014

    Great article, very informative, keep up the good work, thank you :)

  • Pan Pantziarka
    7 April 2014

    The idea of miracle cures is one that just doesn’t go away. It’s often driven by desperation and used by the unscrupulous to fleece people who need help.

    http://www.anticancer.org.uk/2011/06/miracle-cures.html

  • http://www.removemykidneystones.com/
    6 April 2014

    Some might be true and some could be true myths. What’s the point if shark don’t get cancer anyway? Maybe finding some cure of typical cancers and chronic diseases like kidney stone is much better though.

  • AS
    6 April 2014

    Who are you, stupid person who wrote this article??? Those are not myths and chemotherapy is the worst thing you can do to your body. It seems that you work for Big Pharma. You debunked those “myths” without providing evidence. So stupid. And those people actually believe you. Human body is a perfectly designed machine made to repair itself if you give it the right fuel – food made by God, not man. You need a strong immune system to cure cancer or prevent it. And only the right food can give you that, not those barbaric chemo or radiation treatments. I am shocked at you ignorant article.

  • Naresh Lathia
    6 April 2014

    Read this elsewhere on the Cancer Research (UK) website

    “There is strong evidence that eating a lot of red meat and processed meats increases bowel cancer risk. In 2011, it was estimated that around 1 in 5 bowel cancers were linked to eating these types of meat. Red meats include lamb, pork, veal and beef. Processed meats include sausages, salami, ham, bacon, paté and tinned meat. ”
    Cancer Research (UK) will make much more progress in prevention of 1 in 5 bowel cancer if it breaks its friendship with the Meat Marketing!

  • The Sultana
    6 April 2014

    Would have liked more information on the effects of alcohol and cancer!

  • Moira
    6 April 2014

    Very helpful, summary article. Thank you

  • Terence Richards
    5 April 2014

    Are you saying that Canceractive.com and Chris Woollams M.A. (Oxon) are just a load of rubbish? because that is what you are implying in your article.

  • Angela Maguire
    4 April 2014

    Thank you for a sensible, thought provoking article.

  • Shirley Denwood
    4 April 2014

    Thank you for that fascinating article. I hadn’t heard some of those myths before; it just shows what a lot of twaddle gets spread around. Most people can’t tell what’s true and what’s not, so thank goodness for people like you who can tell us the facts.

  • Sam
    4 April 2014

    This is a great review of common myths surrounding Cancer and I would like to thank Cancer Research UK for posting it. I sympathize with anyone who is going through this ordeal and I cannot imagine how it must feel. Many people, as has already been pointed out, turn to natural cures or complementary alternative medicine solutions in their darkest hour. Sourcing a second opinion is never a bad idea, but turning to an unproven method of treatment may not only be ineffective but combined with the potential for false hope this generates, could be devastating for the patent and family if treatments fail. I find the conspiracy theories surrounding this matter extremely disrespectful to the patients and the doctors who treat them. It is good to see that cancer research U.K. have discussed the’ big pharma’ and patenting conspiracy by providing insight into their own research on aspirin, a cheap and readily available drug. I look forward to reading the literature on that.
    My approach is clearly a science based medicine approach, and everyone is of course welcome to their own opinions with regards to their own treatment. I would like to thank Cancer research and I will continue to support CRUK to hopefully cure Cancer.

  • Samantha Kelleher
    4 April 2014

    Thanks for this interesting article. I donate in the memory of my father Michael Arthur Pryces, a keen cyclist, who died of Non-Hodgekins Lymphoma, aged 50 in 1992. I know progress has been made in the treatment of this cancer in the last 20 years. Thank you to all the dedicated people involved in cancer research and treatment.

  • Tomas
    4 April 2014

    why has my comment not been posted please?

  • Lorraine
    4 April 2014

    My young cousin Koray died from Cancer, Please god you find a cure before any more of my family and friends die from it.

  • Tomas
    4 April 2014

    Very enlightening article. Only thing I would disagree with is that people who claim conspiracy theories against pharmaceutical giants are being offensive to victims and families. They most certainly are not. Money tends to be the root of most evil and large pharmaceutical companies are some of the least transparent and ethically questionable bodies in the world. The book you suggested highlights these issues well (misuse of data, negative trial data omissions). I’m not suggesting there is a cover up for a single cancer cure. But I do think it is healthy for people to challenge and question non- transparent companies which wield incredible power, make huge profits and have numerous lobbyists.

  • Albert Henderson
    4 April 2014

    Excellent article, Cancer Research is doing great work. My wife died with pancreatic cancer and I will not forget the attention and help she received from our local hospice during her final hours.

  • Zahid Malik
    4 April 2014

    Cancer has a cure in cancer, only one link is missing

  • kat
    4 April 2014

    I donate to you and have done for a number of years
    To quote you “Problems with conventional medicine don’t automatically prove that alternative ‘cures’ work. To use a metaphor, just because cars sometimes crash doesn’t mean that flying carpets are a viable transport option.”
    Not sure you chose the right metaphor here, as flying carpets don’t exist and never have and its not a fair picture to paint. Alternative medicine has helped people over centuries…even if its just to help support the body deal with what its going through when taking conventional medicine. Be nice if we can just partner up conventional medicine with alternative and just let the individual person decide what works for them, instead of saying one way is right and the other wrong. Also just wanted what cancer research thinks of the following article… http://www.bbc.com/news/health-26038460
    kindest regards

  • Simon
    4 April 2014

    Why is this item helpful? An item advising what might ‘help’ rather than what doesn’t would be more appropriate.

  • James
    4 April 2014

    Very good and clear. I hope that you can persuade the tone of this article to be included in biology lessons in schools so that the young can learn not to believe the veracity of non scientific sources.

  • Mrs Lorna Bailey
    4 April 2014

    thanks for all your helpful information – it does seem to the relatives of loved ones that they have lost that cancer is becoming more and more prevalent and taking more lives as it takes a hold on the human race. That is why it is encouraging to read all about the research that is taking place all the time. Having lost my husband 3 years ago suffering from bowel cancer also my eldest daughter has had breast cancer and is now fit and getting on with her life – my interest in the medical steps that are taking place all the time is ongoing!!! Please continue to keep all of us up to date!!!

  • H Hardy
    4 April 2014

    Interesting to read

  • Pauline Whiteley
    4 April 2014

    Brilliant article

  • K Craig
    4 April 2014

    Thank you for the highly informative information. I lost a parent to cancer when I was young and I always take great interest in the hard work and dedication that cancer research does for all our benefit. This contained lots of informative links too and good health advice that we can all follow. Thank you for all your hard work.

  • Anna
    4 April 2014

    Really informative article, well researched and not too scientific to put off the non scientific. Thank you.

  • Sandra Hall
    4 April 2014

    Thank you so much for all this information. I found it all very interesting and encouraging

  • Manohar V. Rakhe
    4 April 2014

    Sir, this is an excellent article. As my knowledge of medical matters is extremely limited, I found the article dispelling the myths about cancer, very easy to understand. But I still do not understand, the difference between Chemotherapy & a GP prescribing a medicine to treat say migraine headaches. Is there any way, you can explain it to me? Thank you for the excellent article.

  • Martin
    3 April 2014

    food for thought. Why are have there been no new anti biotics developed for over 20 years?
    Not because the pharma’s can’t develop one.It is because they won’t as it is not financially viable( over £1,000,000,000 to develop one single anti-biotic). It will become viable once it becomes an epidemic and thousands or even millions die. Then and only then will it be developed. Money not humans are the important factor in all this. Please do not rubbish a cure just because no individual has the money to prove it’s benefits. pharma will not research it as it is not in their interest to prove it’s benefits as most of them are natural and free to everybody.
    Manage your own life and your own cancer and don’t let anybody control either other than yourself and those closest to you who have genuine interest in your well being.

  • Carol Cain
    3 April 2014

    What an excellent and informative article. Cancer Research UK is a very worthy organisation giving us hope for cures in the future. Thank you

  • Tony Meacock
    3 April 2014

    A very useful email, which I will file for reference.

  • Narotam Lathia
    3 April 2014

    I will not cancel the Direct Debit for the donations I regularly make to Cancer Research. I am aware Cancer Research is under a great deal of pressure from Big Pharma. But to call these methods, of prevention and even cure, simply MYTHS is to throw the baby with the bath water. The biggest issue here is that these natural methods do not produce profits for Big Pharma as they are not patentable. They have been handed down from generation to generation for centuries! Did I hear you say cancer was not so widespread then? Yes, it was not widespread only due to USE OF such methods. Yes! a close friend of my family has lost 2 members of the family in a year in spite of HOSPITAL treatment using all the methods Cancer Research supports.

  • Narotam Lathia
    3 April 2014

    Myth 3: ‘Acidic’ diets cause cancer

    You say:- But there’s no good evidence to prove that diet can manipulate whole body pH, or that it has an impact on cancer.
    My comment:-Studies have revealed that lemon extract can successfully destroy malignant cells in a wide range of cancers, including breast cancer, colon cancer, and lung cancer. Several research studies also make the claim that lemons can destroy cancer much more effectively than chemotherapy, and in a safer and healthier manner. Additionally, the studies also show that lemon extract therapy only affects malignant cells, leaving healthy cells unharmed.
    Additional health benefits of lemons include:
    It is antibacterial
    It is antiviral
    It aids in digestion
    It can be used to treat acne
    It helps to regulate blood pressure
    It fights against parasites and worms
    It possesses antidepressant qualities
    It helps to reduce stress and anxiety

  • Narotam Lathia
    3 April 2014

    Myth 2: Superfoods prevent cancer

    You say:- Blueberries, beetroot, broccoli, garlic, green tea… there’s no such thing as a ‘superfood’. It’s a marketing term used to sell products and has no scientific basis.

    My comment:- What scientific research has been ALLOWED by Big Parma on these NON Patentable means of prevention and often cures?

  • Narotam Lathia
    3 April 2014

    Myth 1: Cancer is a man-made, modern disease

    You say:- Yes, lifestyle, diet other things like air pollution collectively have a huge impact on our risk of cancer – smoking for instance is behind a quarter of all cancer deaths in the UK – but that’s not the same as saying it’s entirely a modern, man-made disease. There are plenty of natural causes of cancer – for example, one in six worldwide cancers is caused by viruses and bacteria.
    My comment:- We humans can live with the NON MAN MADE CANCER! We do not need to CAUSE cancer. e.g. by the MASS MARKETING of tobacco. Major cause of bowel cancer is meat eating. When will Cancer Research UK Science tell the general public about this instead of hiding it behind a single hypelinked word –‘diet’?

  • Gemma broom
    3 April 2014

    Great read! Helped a lot.thank you

  • Tricia Woodgate
    3 April 2014

    What a brilliant article! Informative, reassuring and authorative. Thank you very much.

  • Derek
    3 April 2014

    It is said that Sodium Bicarbonate does not increase blood alkalinity but i have always used this for hangovers, 1/3 teaspoon in warm water and within half an hour hangover is gone and alcohol breath test is negative, i have tested this so i know it works. As for working in cancer i have no idea.
    Just thought i would post as it is always said that you cannot get rid of alcohol out of your body any faster than it is possible for the body to rid itself of the alcohol.
    I truly believe the cause of most/all ills are a combination of lack of oxygen, lack of nutrients,pathogens and too much gut bacteria.

  • Lucia
    3 April 2014

    Thank you for this informative article! I’m surprised at the ignorance still surrounding this (cancer caused by fungus?? really?) and I also cringe when I hear conspiracy theories about pharmaceutical companies ,,,,

  • MargaretKT
    3 April 2014

    Excellent article. Thank you. The myths need to be dispelled as they have the potential to divert people’s attention from the good work that is being done. Personal comment: taxotere is evil – but I thAnk you all for the fact that it was available to me.

  • Ivor
    3 April 2014

    naked mole rats don’t get cancer, due to a complex sugar.

    http://news.sciencemag.org/health/2013/06/why-naked-mole-rats-dont-get-cancer

  • Shaun
    3 April 2014

    It’s great to have it broken down like this, I cringe when I hear people shouting ‘conspiracy theory’ about how a full on cure for cancer is out there but being held back. Hopefully people will start seeing the truth; most people shouting this are trying to sell you a cure and line their own pockets! Sad but true. So thank you for this great article.

  • Dave Hurst
    3 April 2014

    thanks for busting a few myths

  • Martin Dillon
    3 April 2014

    This is a terrible article which proves a great deal about a vast number of cancer charities.
    Charities are not independent and are linked to the Pharma industry and the finances behind them. I am a firm believer in juiced wheatgrass and the only reason it is not proven or disproved is because there is no financial gain to do so.
    Nobody least of all pharma industry or government will spend the money because it would cause their own downfall if found to be proven cure which they cannot control and make a profit from. Anything that cannot be patented and controlled is of no gain to nobody. Philanthropists should research more of these so called cures.
    Shame on you for discounting natural cures for people in a dark place with little hope. For the record Chemo I was given had no effect on my tumours and my new chemo has only about a 10% chance of success (how is this proven?). Please don’t knock cures or remedies just because the rich will, and don’t want to research them in case they do work.

  • Joanne Moore
    3 April 2014

    Do the results of your research go towards helping treat animal cancers too?

  • Mr.Brian James MacKintosh
    3 April 2014

    I found this article very interesting and easy to understand,thank you.

  • m wright
    3 April 2014

    My God, there are some sick and stupid people out there. (Since being re-diagnosed with cancer, I’m afraid I have become more critical of really silly people with no education and a fondness for conspiracy theories. Has the age of the internet increased them, or were they always there? No doubt someone will tell me they hope I die soon!!) Do you REALLY think if there was a cure someone wouldn’t want to clean up?? All the quacks out there peddling miracle cures did it since man first walked the earth!! Credible and easily-influenced people have always given their monies away that way. All I will say is, watch a film called Idiocracy. It will tell you all you need to know about how stupidity is on the increase. Cancer Research, you keep going. You may not be able to save me, but you saved my daughter – she would have died had she been born 20 years earlier. And the rest of you – don’t talk about what you don’t know anything about.

  • Angel
    3 April 2014

    I have read many of the comments here and wanted to say was diagnosed with Hodgkins Lymphoma in 2009 and underwent 6 months of chemo. I have been in remission since then. I have adjusted my lifestyle doing what i can to eat healthier and to exercise a lot more to prevent it returning as well as keeping my faith in God. I am appalled at the negative comments around chemotherapy. I am someone who is against taking any form of drug and by the grace of God I don’t have to take any medication now. In the meantime I have lost a friend who when diagnosed with cancer opted for the ‘natural treatment’ he is now no longer here to tell the tail.

    Chemo works for some people and has worked for me so far. I get regular check ups and so far so good. so please people stop being ignorant about the treatment. I have not met anyone who was treated for Cancer with natural remedies that is still alive but know a few people who are following chemo (myself included). So if there is anyone out there who was treated naturally and are still alive 5 years later I would love to know.

  • J. Kmiecik
    3 April 2014

    Excellent. Clear and easy to understand. Thanks.

  • Yanni
    3 April 2014

    To the cancer researcher not only should you and your colleagues should feel insultated but looking at your performance you should be embarrassed with your chase your tail performance that keeps you employed for as long as possible without a cure.

  • Yanni
    3 April 2014

    We would support cancer research if they looked at all possible cures and not only the money making ones that pharma choose to persue and this.article proves just that.

  • Geraldine Campbell
    2 April 2014

    We all need to support Cancer Research. Without it there’s no hope of finding a cure.m

  • Kees
    2 April 2014

    Please view this documentary: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWLrfNJICeM

  • Chris
    2 April 2014

    Myth 1: “Yes, lifestyle, DIET and other things like air pollution collectively have a huge impact on our risk of cancer.”

    Myth 2: Diet won’t really impact risk of cancer.

    Hmm…

  • To the killer who wrot this article
    2 April 2014

    Do you seriously think this article is going to stop the truth movement , you have blood on your hands you are sick beyond words !

  • Nicole
    2 April 2014

    As a cancer researcher I think for the most part that this blog is a pretty good argument against some common myths. Especially the myths that persist regarding miracle cures and the industry hiding cures. For one thing there are different types of cancers, which will/do require different types of treatments to cure them. I work for a non-profit institute, but we do collaborate with big pharma companies. Trust me, there are millions of dollars spent each year from a myriad of sources on cancer research. To say we are hiding a cure is an insult to me and my colleagues. There is no reason to hide an effective treatment/cure. However, I must state that as a professional scientist, I wish there were more citations/references to peer-reivewed research to back up the claims stated.

  • Guy G
    1 April 2014

    This is a very poor example on how an uneducated mind sees cancer.

    The fact that they compared sugar from a carrot to a cake is ridiculous.

    REFINED SUGAR – Is the cause of MANY diseases – not simply glucose or sucrose.

    But, leave it to an uneducated mind to decipher what people are talking about when they say ‘sugar causes cancer’

    Do your research on REFINED SUGAR – and you will see when it was introduced, why, how it affects the body, and how it changes a body to crave it.

    Not saying refined sugar is the cause of all cancer – but it’s what should be discussed, not a general “sugar”

  • AndyS
    1 April 2014

    I will be straight, many people commenting on this article must have some severe intellectural deficiencies. You make claims that you seem to pull straight out of your asses, make firm judgments based on documentaries/one article that has no rigorous scientific testing whatsoever, and are paranoid whenever big pharma is involved. Everything said here is true, anyone with 1-2 years of education in any life sciences would agree. And where did you see him advocating for big pharmas or suppressing innovation? Please do not interpret articles aimed at providing sound general knowledge with your own personal bias.

    Basic biology: Cancer is just normal body sell proliferating at an abnormal rate due to initial insult and eventually attaining metastasis. These cells have basically the same cellular composition as their normal counterparts, and claiming any drug that can completely ‘cure’ cancer without harming other parts of your body is just an insult to anyone with introductory expertise to pharmacology.

  • fred
    1 April 2014

    I know Dr.s that get kick backs for pushing drugs big pharmas meds.So don’t try and tell me it’s not first and for most about the money and not our well being. Look up Bayer and tainted meds for hemofilac patients. My cousin died of this drug they knew aas tainted. We stoped using tthem in the US and sold them to France and Germany killing thousands. In France and Germany the people involved are in prison. In the US not one has seen a court room.

  • Iloveepi
    1 April 2014

    DOCTOR Schwartz, why don’t you leave Epidemiology to the Epidemiologists? Please stop using our discipline to advance your personal political opinions and shutting out people’s attempt for innovation.

  • Frank Sabine
    1 April 2014

    Where is all of the research links that make this article true? Just more internet bull, don’t knock a new cure until you try it! Of all the billions of dollars people empty out of their pockets and sink into cancer research you think there would be a cure by now! Look into the populations that have the lowest rates of cancer, see where they live and what their diet is and there’s your cure…or prevention! If there was a cause to donate money for a cancer cure I would surely donate.. but cancer research..ya right!!!

  • WL
    1 April 2014

    The comment section is the new fad of society-withholding crazy that plagues the current generation; this especially referring to those who think that cancer research institutes are money-making farms. It’s extremely offensive and insulting for those working overtime, overnight without rest on their research (myself included) aiming to contribute to the pool of knowledge and progressing the enterprise of knowledge and process for humankind, while science-deniers slouch around in the very convenience built upon by generations of the same scientific process they are denouncing. It’s downright embarrassing for the party making these claims. Sometimes you do wonder if any of them ever bothered to pick up a textbook, converse with an actual scientist or step into an actual laboratory beyond envisaging science labs and scientists as depicted in sci-fi horror and popular media. I’m glad groups for the public understanding of science are blossoming in response for the next generation, but I fear we might need more than that.

  • NH
    1 April 2014

    This is very misleading:

    Using the word “cure” when you mean “treatment.”

    Using the word “survival” when cancer orgs know they define survival differently then us common folk.

    Using the word “cause” when you mean potentially “increasing risk” or a “contributing factor.”

    Not fair; not nice.

    Also, I couldn’t find any author bio nor does your about us link work, so I’m not sure who is specifically behind this article.

    Can you understand how we everyday people come to mistrust the medical establishment when you dissemble (intentionally or unintentionally) on basic concepts?

  • R.w.Foster
    1 April 2014

    It’s scary how many crazy things people will believe. Chelation? Homeopathy? Naturopathy? Those of us who say we follow the scientific method, and dismiss stuff like this are labeled as “Big Pharma Shills.” The irony is they are unpaid “Big Naturo shills.”

  • harry
    31 March 2014

    excellent article, but missing mention of a variety of herbs that are cancer preventive. the peer reviewed research you mention is necessary to validate these claims are available at the memorial slone kettering website mskcc.org. this is a cancer research hospital in ny. at the site search herbs. look at turmeric or boswilla for example. there you will find the peer reviewed studies you mention. stage 2 burkitts survivor here and take some of these herbs every day.

  • Peter B
    29 March 2014

    A message to all of the people criticising this article.
    A close relative was diagnosed with cancer too late for a chance of any form of cure.
    He searched the internet for the sort of alternative remedies that many people posting here seem to be keen on and tried many of them.
    Sadly, they had no effect and he died.
    What’s the harm in trying alternative therapies?
    My relative believed the hype, and was in denial about his fate until he went into a coma shortly before dying. He never allowed his family to go through the processes of coming to terms with a husband/father/brother/son having a terminal disease – we all had to be positive and believe that the many ‘cures’ he was trying would save him. His family were devastated when he died, because they had never had the chance to say things that should have been said, or to grab some precious moments whilst he was still well enough to go out.
    That is all bad enough.
    But none of the alternative cures come cheap, and he bankrupted his family in the desperate search for a ‘cure’. They’re now having to move out of the family home and into rented accommodation, have lost savings and capital invested over the years and still face a prolonged period of paying off debts.
    I don’t think that the ‘alternative’ market is benign or altruistic – my relative was fleeced by crooks and charlatans selling cheap sounding remedies at massive prices to feather their own nests. I hope the worst of them rot in hell for what they did to him and his family.

  • Vasile
    29 March 2014

    I have discovered treatment for skin cancer i want 9 million euro for it

  • Tania
    29 March 2014

    Whoever wrote this obviously was paid by Big Pharma!
    Get your facts straight and stop making money on lives of innocent people.
    Cancer is a cash-cow. Cancer Institutes are not interested in curing people. They are only interested in extending their lives for a year or two during which cancer patients and their insurance companies will be paying for expensive “treatment” which has no intention to cure.
    Please watch “Forbidden Cures”, this documentary says it all

  • Jeri
    29 March 2014

    I completely agree with Justin. At first I thought this was a satire piece ! Luckily more and more people are learning from experience that alternatives DO work, and given that chemo has a 97-98% FAILURE rate, it’s a good thing that people are taking their health into their own hands , because conventional methods are failing miserably .

  • Bruce
    28 March 2014

    Myth 1: Cancer is a man-made, modern disease.

    I think the issues about man-made are mostly related to the production of foods, drugs and environmental pollution. Business is always about profit no matter what the negative outcome could be. But when it comes to health, profit must be included, but not where it will hurt others.

    We have already seen a huge changes in manufacturing of healthy food by the same manufactures who designed the obvious bad foods. We have seen dramatic improvements in health among the people who chose to shop at Wholefoods or other health food stores. Even Kaiser Permanente recognizes eating better will change your health.

    So with that being said, it’s up to each person to choose the best way to live for their health, and that alone will slowly change society to make healthier foods, less pollution and safer drugs.

    It is modern societies that see more cases cancer vs the rest of the world that see very little cancer or diseases in general.

    Man most likely does not make cancer, but he is without a doubt part of the manufactured problem.

  • Justin
    28 March 2014

    This is the most disinformation I’ve seen in one spot, impressive must of took some time. Everyone of your claims have medical and lab tested finding providing the exact opposite conclusions, with credible sources not just an opinion. Fact! You should honestly not have children and let your bloodline die with you.

  • Bruce
    28 March 2014

    Hi Oliver Childs:

    Who is Dr. Florey? He is not in the UK registry.
    I forgot to ask, where are your references for each myth? All good articles have reliable references.

    Bruce

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    28 March 2014

    Hi Bruce,
    We have provided links to references and referenced sources throughout the text – these hyperlinks are coloured blue, but they can be a bit difficult to see.
    Kat

  • Bruce
    28 March 2014

    Hi Oliver Childs:

    If you ever get cancer and modern medicine can’t help you or the treatments fail, email me. The truth always prevails!!

  • Bob
    28 March 2014

    What a load of crap. Your a paid debunker.

  • Emmanuel Yannikakis
    28 March 2014

    But when we supply Dr Simoncini’s site you block it, but allow your version through. You ask a question and when we answer you filter the information for you sposors benefit, what a mockery to freedom of speech and a equal oppurtunity to debate this subject does not exist here. Your actions show your true colours and you are not here for the interest of the cancer patients but for your sponsors only!!!

  • no name
    28 March 2014

    Go here and see for yourself uspatent6630507.com

  • no name
    28 March 2014

    I think that you re all a bunch of liars. Stop lying to people.
    Cannabis oil cures cancer. That is a fact.

  • Jack Hu
    28 March 2014

    @Adam – RE: Cannabinoids (i.e., Cannabis)

    It’s not a myth, and it’s mentioned a few times in this article.

    Read: http://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2012/07/25/cannabis-cannabinoids-and-cancer-the-evidence-so-far/

    Some research looks quite promising, and again, it’s not a myth. There have been literally hundreds of medical journals written about it.

  • Smarter than the guy who wrote this article
    28 March 2014

    The word your looking for is Oncologist. Where are your cites? I see no factual evidence backing any claims that were made. I know that you can say whatever you want on the internet, but if you want people to take you seriously; have a little professionalism. There are literally NO cited information… Also, almost no fruits are considered to be alkaline on the pH scale. Honestly, you started this article with a statement about other articles being nothing, but hype and hot air. How is your different???

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    28 March 2014

    Hi “Smarter than the guy who wrote this article”,
    There are plenty of links to the scientific evidence in this article – they’re provided in the hyperlinks, which link through to primary papers and review resources that cite the scientific literature on different topics. They’re coloured blue in the text so can be a bit hard to see.

    Also we are discussing the claims we have seen made by others that some fruits are “alkaline” or can “alkalinise” the body, which are not factually correct – we are not claiming ourselves that this is true.
    Kat

  • Jack Hu
    28 March 2014

    They euthanised the shark, and upon dissection they found no evidence of metastasis.

    Charming.

    Bet the shark was happy.

  • Dug
    28 March 2014

    This isn’t debunking. Where are your references to scientific peer reviewed studies?

    This is just you saying things. You’re no better that gillian mckeif.

    What about the overwhelming evidence that a diet rich in saturated fats and omega 3 reduces cancer causing inflammation? Cancer is very largely caused by the diet of bull shit that we’re fed by the pharma companies that you’re defending. I’m not saying that they have a magic cure but they certainly want us to take the meds!

  • Yanni
    28 March 2014

    They are blocking what does not agree with their sponsors big pharma !!!!

  • Yanni
    28 March 2014

    I just wrote a article which showed the truth which proves the article here is a lot of nonsense and has been blocked Debunked !!!! Emmanuel I had to use a alias

  • Frank Smith
    28 March 2014

    Michael (Gregory) as you are one of the same person. You are clearly sick in the head if you believe you own hype. Stop trolling the internet, remove your hand for your trousers and do something useful with your life.

  • Adam
    28 March 2014

    What about the myth that cannabis cures cancer?

  • Michael
    28 March 2014

    This article proves the Big Cancer Industry machine is following the cancer forums and trying to debunk realistic alternatives to cancer treatments. Instead of fighting for continued orthodox toxic and nerve damaging treatments. The cancer industry should see other perspectives in cancer protocol. Not so, when the more patients with cancer the more revenue source. And the less cancer cure incentive. People are becoming better informed and more savvy in consumer fraud, especially cancer patients. This is not a tit for tat this is life or death. And greed and profiteering have no ethics or soul.

  • Michael Gregory
    28 March 2014

    Well at least half of these ‘myths’ are in fact true. Seems keeping people in the dark regarding cancer could be benefiting this charity?

  • Neil thompson
    27 March 2014

    Thanks for this post guys. Seeing the comments on every facebook post, how ‘cures’ are being surpressed and cannabis this, cannabis that, was getting a bit much. Great post! :)

  • sb1970
    27 March 2014

    Leading Cancer hospitals in the US like MD Anderson have integrative programmes to improve chances of survival and extend lives. Fact. These programmes encourage and support patients in making lifestyle and dietary changes to compliment conventional therapies to improve their chances. I don’t support the far fetched treatments which holds no evidence and lots of false promises however the UK can certainly benefit with expanding its approach to Cancer treatments outside of the traditional medical box it’s stuffed into. My husband passed away a few months ago at 32 years of age. If I had to describe the reckless administration of drugs he was given access to for ‘Palliative Care’ you wouldn’t believe it. If we had access to some of the more progressive Cancer Hospitals outside of the UK I believe he would have lived out his 2/3 year prognosis and not the 9 months he spent fighting side effects of his Palliative care.

  • Sisn
    27 March 2014

    Thank you cancer research for publishing evidence based facts that may help people currently living with cancer who sometimes get conflicting information.

  • Elaine Allen
    27 March 2014

    Why have you chosen now to publish this information, you have just as much evidence that this all true as the alternative therapies have to back up their theories. I fear your article will do far more damage than good and is just tit for tat against the alternative and holistic approaches out there. Today I joined race for life for the 8th time, I have raised over £10,000 for your Charity, but this article has given me serious doubts as to your intentions.

  • Yasmin
    27 March 2014

    I’ve also heard people say you get cancer from:
    Bananas, peanut butter, the white stuff inside oranges, it’s stupid!

  • JP
    27 March 2014

    A great example of Cancer that MAY have been curable is Steve Jobs Pancreatic cancer.
    Hi Official biography tells how he tried to treat it with diet and by the time he came round to accepting the advice of the medical profession it was too far advanced

  • Amy
    27 March 2014

    I just wish more people would see the sense you’ve written – I’m a cancer surgeon and there’s nothing worse than a patient refusing conventional treatment, going off to be ‘healed’ at vast expense by some charlatan, to then come back asking for treatment as things are getting worse… and finding that their cancer that was initially early and likely curable has now spread and is inoperable. It makes me so sad, and ANGRY at these alternative healers. By all means follow these as COMPLEMENTARY means, it helps people a lot to follow a healthy diet, meditate etc – it can give a valuable feeling of power and control over the situation – but these must only be use alongside evidence based, proven treatments that WORK. I have read Ben Goldacres books and absolutely know that big pharma has improvements to make, but thats why doctors are trained to assess the evidence, and we’re lucky that the NHS only uses treatments that work, not those that we’re paid to use.

  • Kim
    27 March 2014

    It just doesn’t make any sense to me that radiation and chemo are our only answer to helping cancer victims prolong their life. Reading up on Zoopharmacognosy made me wonder about many things, alternative ways to “naturally” reduce our chances of getting cancer, if not cure it.

  • Tom
    27 March 2014

    Watch the TED talk with William Li on anti-angiogenesis. Food can in fact limit the blood supply cancer receives.

  • Kmac720
    27 March 2014

    I would argue with #9. The majority of survival rate improvement has come from early detection, not treatment. Look at the rates of survival for people with Stage 3 cancer, it hasn’t improved all that much.

  • Open your Eyes
    27 March 2014

    Alternative treatments work every time if the right regimen is followed. I’v done hours of research on Max Gerson. He has treated hundreds of cancer patients with 100% success rate. His theory goes like this, the human body has evolved to take the best of the food we eat that the Planet, not the “plant” gives us and we can be practically resistant to any and all disease and virus. Which if you read more in detail about this theory it makes complete sense. You wont hear of success stories where people dont make a 100% commitment to a life change, in other words you cant have one foot stepping out of the change. You cant drink soda or have a drink or a cheeseburger while on alternative treatment it will never work. Gerson did a test on several patients while the nurse snuck in brownies at night 0% success, tried again on a strict special diet 100% success. Do the research, these “Foundations” that collect money for research are a joke, Gerson and hundreds of doctors around world have cured Cancer, Muscular Dystrophy, Diabetes, Tuberculosis and many more harmful and deadly diseases for a very long time now. Remember we live in the U.S. the only thing that matters to our politicians is money, it would be tragic if people found out they could grow one of the many cures in your back yard. Google Max Gerson

  • Claire
    27 March 2014

    As to cancer research charities not wanting to find a cure because they’ll be out of business – WTF? Does it follow that the RSPCA want people to continue to be cruel to animals, NSPCC loves child cruelty, Fawcett want women to continue to earn less than men, women’s aid love it when men beat up their partners etc etc.
    Foolish thought.
    If there was a ‘cure for cancer’ (just the one presumably which works on all varieties!) there’d still be other diseases one presumes…

  • Claire
    27 March 2014

    Love it when people start talking about things having ‘chemicals’ in them. Everything is chemicals! Water is H2O – a chemical. Only place there are no chemicals is in a vacuum.
    I’m sure you mean dangerous chemicals, Geoffrey but that’s not what you said!

  • celia
    27 March 2014

    Of course cancer has always been around but we are not being told the truth about the causes. Cancer is a massive money maker. . We all know cancer is a huge killer .Why would the drug companies want to find a cure when they can come up with expensive treatments

  • Emmanuel Yannikakis
    27 March 2014

    The last kicks of a failing money generating industry and the self serving so called charities, as long as no cure is found this circus will carry on and on. You are wrong that the drugs the big pharma cure cancer, they are cellular poisons, stupid, they cannot differentiate between healthy and cancerous cells, first World War Mastard gas slightly reduced in potency. This stupid drugs are killing everyday and it is time a proper register with the true picture is publish for all to see !!!! The Dr Simoncini method that you degrade so readily and yet will not allow any trials that will prove you wrong is been succesfully applied in Switzerland, without removing womens breast they cure breast cancer in a few days. Stop this madness now. I myself I am with Leukemia and have reversed it with very high intake of Vitamin D (high 25(OH)D3) while friends of mine all over the world are dying with your stupid promotion of this drugs. It is time this stopped we are not going to be your test lab rats while you pull the wool over peoples eyes and your money making self serving industry flourises. Oh I must add my method of Vitamin D and the hormone producesed by it 1,25(OH)D3 but with a 11 times more potent version has had amazing results in France on my CLL and on prostate cancer so do not even try and play it down. https://www.euronext.com/sites/europeanequities.nyx.com/files/Connect_pr_hasselt-cll_update_final_uk.pdf

  • nox
    26 March 2014

    This is fantastic. Once you start studying biology academically, the first thing you’ll notice is how many people actually talk absolute nonsense (and scarily enough, they’re very confident while doing so). Science education should be mandatory throughout elementary and secondary schools in order to help people understand concepts and actions which affect the quality of life on this planet (for all species).

  • Sherry Routledge
    26 March 2014

    “there’s no such thing as a ‘superfood’. It’s a marketing term used to sell products and has no scientific basis.” The term superfood if you had googled it lists foods high in certain scientific categories; such as orac value, nutritional profile, vitamin, mineral, and protein completeness. I am sure you can agree that those are scientific? In it’s simplest definition-superfoods are just ways of optimizing nutrition. If you think blueberry growers are spending millions of “marketing dollars” on pushing their products as superfoods you may not be watching television-no blueberry commercials EVER!
    “Our bodies are complex and cancer is too, so it’s gross oversimplification to say that any one food, on its own, could have a major influence over your chance of developing cancer.” Each of us just needs to make the best choices possible everyday, no one could argue that a cheeseburger is a better choice over an apple.

  • David Salter
    26 March 2014

    Yes, the survival statistics show that more people are surviving cancer – but these stats only look at the 5 year survival. If a cancer sufferer dies 5 years and one day after first diagnosis, then this is still recorded as a “survival”. So, with all the emphasis on early detection, the earlier the cancer is discovered, the more likely the person will survive past 5 years. It has little to do with how successful the treatments are – and lets face it, there has been 10’s of billions of $$$ thrown at cancer research since the 60s, and yet still more people get cancer than ever. This doesn’t sound to me like the war is being won, but does sound like the goal posts are being moved every time the pharma industry wants a new headline.

    More and more people are coming to realise that cancer prevention, in the hands of a profit-centred industry, will always be a conflict of interest, and a perpetual, never changing cycle of lies, obfuscation and distortion of truth.

  • reply
    Oliver Childs
    26 March 2014

    Hi David,

    Thanks for your comment. You are obviously passionate about cancer prevention, as are we. As well as looking into new ways to treat cancer, we fund lots of research into ways to prevent cancer – you can see some of the projects here.

    You may also be interested in this post we wrote about work by our scientists to look at the causes of cancer people can control. More than 4 in 10 cancers could be prevented by lifestyle changes, so we are keen for people to understand the things they can do to reduce their risk of disease.

    The survival statistics we quote are based on 10-year survival rates. Also, as we point out in the above article, cancer death rates – a pretty definitive measurement and one that the ‘industry’ can’t really move the goal posts on – have fallen by 10 percent in the past decade too. Clearly we can’t be complacent though, as survival rates for some cancers such as lung and oesophageal cancer have remained stubbornly low.

    We very much agree with some of the sentiment of your comment – that prevention is better than cure – and that’s why much of our research is on new ways to prevent cancer or diagnose it earlier, when treatment is more likely to be successful. But I’m afraid we disagree with your view that treatments have no part to play in our quest to beat cancer, or that the pharma industry isn’t incentivised to help us beat cancer. Cancer is more than 200 different diseases, and against a backdrop of an aging population, we’ll need to tackle these diseases from multiple angles – prevention, diagnosis and treatment all have a part to play.

  • David Salter
    26 March 2014

    Myth No.11 Cancer charities give money to the already super wealthy pharma industry, for researching new drugs which they then SELL back to us. There is no significant research into the prevention of cancer, because their objective is to find patentable, therefore profitable drugs. No-one is going to spend millions researching natural cures for anything, because there is no profit. This is why there is so little evidence for natural cures – it has nothing to do with whether or not they are effective.

  • Geoffrey Docherty from Sunderland.
    25 March 2014

    Every day when people drink water they are unaware that it contains up to 18 chemicals, non organic beer contains up to 15 chemicals,. Table salt contains magnesium carbonate. White cardboard cartons contain bleach in order to make them white as paper pulp is usually brown. Plastic containers contain chemicals that leak in to whatever it contains. Marks and Spencers organic wholemeal stoneground bread,contains a flour treatment agent,(Check the Label) As far as I’m concerned white bread is virtually a poison in as much as it has little or no nutritional value Doctors reccomend 8 hours sleep a night. however, once late drinking hours were introduced, young people stay out late and sacrifice their sleep which when the kidneys are manfully struggling to cleanse the blood of these toxins. I could go on for ever but I’m convinced they’ll never cure cancer until we eliminate these chemicals with which we are being attacked on a daily basis. Nature does prevent anti oxidants but far too many people are eating vegetables that have been grown with the help of pesticides.

  • George Kuchanny
    25 March 2014

    Well written clarification.

  • Kate
    25 March 2014

    Hooray sense promoted! I find it very sad when I see people spending vast sums and spending time away from family and loved ones for a miracle cure.

  • Peter
    25 March 2014

    Thank you so much for this excellent article. I have known several people waste time and money chasing some of these quack cures, leaving them poorer and robbed of precious time that could have been spent with their loved ones.

  • Dan
    25 March 2014

    Ian: “And if CRUK told you they had a cure why would they tell you. Guess what they would no longer exist.”

    This is quite the most boneheaded idiocy. Vague hand-wavey conspiracy theories like this are childish nonsense. You’re implying CRUK exist to perpetuate their own income and would actively supress a cure for cancer to keep their organisation going.

    Not only is that profoundly insulting to anyone working within CRUK, it also implies there is one cure for cancer, a condition most notable for being so varied in type, a single cure for cancer is basically a holy grail held by a pink unicorn on a rainbow.

    Re-read your idiotic screed and consider growing up to face a world which is a bit more complicated than the one you think you inhabit.

    “Look into history cancer has gone up massively since the 40s may be before”

    Of course that can’t have anything to do with better diagnosis and a population that lives longer (thanks to – hey! – medical advances) and are more susceptible to cancer the older they get. Can it?

  • David Brown
    25 March 2014

    The “Cancer has a sweet tooth” section is a pretty superficial treatment of the subject matter. I suggest this article by Fred and Alice Ottoboni: http://ketopia.com/a-biochemical-outline-of-a-cure-for-cancer/ Excerpt:

    “Ascorbic acid has been demonstrated to be a very efficient method for selectively killing cancer cells. The biochemical mechanism by which ascorbic acid kills malignant cells has been discovered and described. The mechanism in brief is as follows:

    When ascorbic acid enters the oxidizing environment of a cancer, it is oxidized to dehydroascorbic acid. Because of structural similarity between dehydroascorbic acid and glucose (cancer’s preferred energy source), cancer cells cannot distinguish between the two. Thus, when dehydroascorbic acid is present in high concentrations it competes effectively with glucose for active transport into cancer cells by glucose pumps. Once inside, dehydroascorbic acid generates hydrogen peroxide and other oxidants that the cancer cells cannot counter. The very high levels of hydrogen peroxide cause either apoptosis (programmed cell death) or necrosis of cancer cells. Normal cells are protected by catalase, which destroys peroxide. Cancer cells do not contain catalase.

    These data on the effectiveness of ascorbic acid in cancer treatment have been either rejected or ignored by the medical establishment.”

  • Gillian McMahon
    25 March 2014

    A really brilliant and useful article. As a cancer sufferer I am sick of hearing about ‘snake oil’ cures and ideas. It gets me down no end. The people who tout these ideas/cures pray on the vulnerable. I close my eyes/ears to such nonsense.

  • Ian
    25 March 2014

    And if CRUK told you they had a cure why would they tell you. Guess what they would no longer exist. Not saying There is a cure As there are so many different types of cancer.
    but polio only had a few different strains and was on the decrees before we started injecting everyone with the anti virus now there are a lot of different strains of polio but people like CRUK covered it up and called the other types of polio something completely different. in fact because of your cover up 98% of the people who contracted polio after the anti virus got the infection from the virus you injected into them. good job… Look into history cancer has gone up massively since the 40s may be before. and this all started when certain foods got taken from our selfs. and when they started spraying food with toxic chemicals. radio waves there are so many reasons why cancer is on the up. these people know why its happening. but the money lost and how fare back in time we would go eradicating all the inhibitors of cancer cells. we do not get sick because we have cancer, we are sick and this is why we get cancer. Good clean food will keep you health simple as that.
    and we will not get this kind of food at a supermarket. I wish i was wrong but i Seen why to many thing now in my life to no its all about the money.. These people don’t care about you.. They just guilt use into thinking they do.

  • judy
    25 March 2014

    this is crap

  • Liberum
    24 March 2014

    Using animal testing to extrapolate results to a potential cancer cure for human is pseudoscience as you have yourself so succesfully demonstrated in “This excellent article goes into why the myth about the cancer-free shark has been so persistent” The article states that the myth was born on frankenstein alike animal experimentation where Brem and Folkman had inserted cartilage from baby rabbits alongside tumors in experimental animals. You have debunked yourself by demonstrating that you were not any more scientifically evolved than in 1975. Animal experimentation has 0.01% success rate and is responsible for tens of thousands deaths due to secondary effects per year. Animals can simply not serve as appropriate model:
    to a complex desease such as cancer (caused by environnemental factors and genetic factors)
    – methods used to induce cancer in animals do not mimic the same type of biochemical reactions as in humans.
    – inter-species differences (presence/absence of biomarkers) lead to false negatives + drugs efficiency physiological assessment to false positives
    – mice and rats used as models have a large phenotypic and genotypic variability (there are hundreds of inbred strains some rendered more responsive to cancer cures then others by gene knockouts)
    If you are not capable of putting your means and methods in question for the love of science and respect for your patients and their loved ones your organization would rightly deserve a Myth 1 position

  • Lindiloo
    24 March 2014

    Excellent article thank you , far too many myths and quack theories regarding cancer online sadly putting cancer patients lives in danger, well done CRUK ,keep up the good work in getting the message out there too many people get brainwashed with all this nonsense sadly .

  • Jon
    24 March 2014

    This is absolutely brilliant stuff, thanks guys. My mum died from advanced ovarian cancer just before Christmas. She went with absolute courage and dignity, politely shooing away offers of cannabis extract (she might’ve had a spliff if she’d felt up to it, but not for it’s “cancer-curing” properties), colour therapy and various other quacky-duck ludicrousness. She would’ve loved this. Thanks for your efforts. I can imagine you take quite a lot of grief for speaking the truth on these matters, but some of us are really grateful.

  • reply
    Kat Arney
    24 March 2014

    Hi Jon,
    We’re so sorry to hear about your mum. Thanks so much for your feedback – we really appreciate it.
    Kat