THEY SAY.....Oh yes? And who’s ‘they’?

[Guest guest]

http://www.whatareweswallowing.freeserve.co.uk/vitc.htm

 

THEY SAY THAT VITAMIN C

 

CAN INCREASE THE RISK OF CANCER

 

Oh yes? And who’s ‘they’?

 

Steven Ransom

 

 

 

“VITAMIN C CANCER FEAR. High doses of Vitamin C could increase the risk of

cancer, scientists warn today….”

 

So begins the 15th June 2001 UK Daily Mail front-page report, outlining the work

of Dr Ian Blair, resident researcher at the University of Pennsylvania

Pharmacology Unit. The Mail headline appears to be in direct conflict with Dr

Blair’s statement: “Absolutely, for God's sake, don't say Vitamin C causes

cancer.” ( News, Thursday June 14 2001) But of course, The Mail and others

have shamelessly done exactly that. To the less discerning reader, the story

raises worrisome questions as to the wisdom of high-level Vitamin C

supplementation. If these worldwide headlines have served any useful purpose at

all, it has been to confirm the moral/intellectual void currently reigning in

today’s mass media ‘news’ departments.

 

 

 

At a more fundamental level, why is Dr Blair conducting tests on the efficacy of

Vitamin C in the first place? We are about to discover that certain powerful

parties have a very definite interest in casting aspersions upon Vitamin C. Yet

again, we are being taught what to think about a certain subject, but not how.

To our knowledge, the information you are about to read has not been included in

any of the latest, and now worldwide ‘Vitamin C Cancer Scare’ headlines

generated by Dr Blair’s findings.

 

 

 

A GOLDEN RULE

 

Dr Blair postulates that high consumption of Vitamin C (a most beneficial

adjunct in non-toxic cancer recovery treatment) might actually cause human

tissue degeneration, which in turn could lead to a heightened risk of

contracting cancer. And it is here that we arrive at our first golden rule: when

it comes to assessing the veracity of any scientific claim, we must always read

between the lines – we must search for what the report does not say. We must

especially be on the look-out for that hoary old chestnut, otherwise known as

vested interests. A University of Manchester research methodology handbook

contains the following valuable advice:

 

“Science and research must be studied in the context of all the interested

parties involved. The questions centre on determining the relative weight of the

various allies in the ‘fact-creating’ process - e.g. funding bodies, businesses,

departments of state, professions and other scientists. In analysing scientific

debates, one should always ask what social, institutional, political and

philosophical interests lie behind often apparently ‘neutral’ and ‘technical’

knowledge claims.” (University of Manchester Institute of Science & Technology

(UMIST) research methodology course handout, 1994) (emphasis mine)

 

On the matter of the ‘fact creation’ process, renowned author John Le Carre

recently stated:

 

" Big Pharma [the industry in general] is engaged in the deliberate seduction of

the medical profession, country by country, worldwide. It is spending a fortune

on influencing, hiring and purchasing academic judgment to a point where, in a

few years' time, if Big Pharma continues unchecked on its present happy path,

unbought medical opinion will be hard to find. " (The Nation, New York,

Interview with John Le Carre, 9th April 2001)

 

 

 

BOUGHT?

 

With the above in mind, let's put Dr Blair’s University of Pennsylvania under

the spotlight and see what encouragement Dr Blair might have had in taking his

extraordinary position hinting against the overuse of Vitamin C. We must ask the

following questions:

 

What Big Pharma influences might there be supporting the University of

Pennsylvania Cancer Center (UPCC) and its mother ship, the University of

Pennsylvania Health Service?

 

What is the relative weight of the funding bodies? If industry sponsorship is

taking place, are UPHS personnel free to exercise unbiased critical thinking?

 

Are there grounds to suspect that UPHS has been ‘bought’ - that somewhere along

the line, vested interests have ‘purchased academic judgment’?

 

 

 

 

 

CERTAIN ALLIANCES

 

Before tackling the Vitamin C issue itself, the following UPHS general

statistics are very revealing.In May 2000, Dr Ian Blair’s employers at UPCC

received a $26 million, five year Core Grant from the National Cancer Institute

(NCI) - the largest and most influential conventional cancer treatment

institution in the world. In fact, UPCC has been continuously funded by the NCI

Core Grant mechanism since the grant was created by the National Cancer Act in

the early 1970’s. Currently, UPCC is awash with more than $100 million in cancer

research funding:

 

$37 million is from the National Cancer Institute;

 

$43 million from closely affiliated organisations, such as the National

Institutes of Health, the organisation which actually funded Dr Blair’s Vitamin

C research;

 

$12 million from foundational support such as the American Cancer Society and

the Leukaemia Society and

 

$8 to $10 million from various pharmaceutical companies.

 

Earlier, in June of 1999, UPCC received a $4.5 million gift from the William H.

Gates Foundation to research conventional treatments for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

 

 

 

Aside from the Bill and Melinda Gates connection, OncoLink, the University of

Pennsylvania Cancer Center, is sponsored very generously by the following

corporations: Amgen, the world's largest independent biotechnology company;

Aventis, Ortho Biotech, Inc., Varian, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceutica, AstraZeneca,

Pharmacia Upjohn and Pfizer. These corporations are not small fry! They are very

big indeed, and their names represent no mean sponsorship committee.

 

 

 

MORE ALLIANCES

 

In March 2001, UPHS announced a strategic alliance with Siemens Medical Systems,

Inc. Under the terms of the purchasing agreement, UPHS will make an initial

discounted purchase of cardiology, radiology and radiation oncology equipment

from Siemens, who will also service and maintain the biomedical equipment

already in place at designated UPHS sites over the life of the agreement. In the

year 2000, Siemens Medical Solutions, based in Iselin, New Jersey, reported new

orders of $5.65 billion, sales of $5.44 billion and employs 27,000 worldwide.

" This is the kind of alliance that will be critical in our continuing financial

recovery and to assure our position as a leading national health system, " said

Robert D. Martin, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer of UPHS.

 

 

 

A good relationship with Siemens may well be critical to UPHS’ financial

recovery, but does this kind of dependent alliance foster the aforementioned

necessary climate for critical thinking? What if there are privately held

reservations within UPHS over the Siemens equipment, methodology or ethos? Who

will break rank first? Will anyone? What kind of commercially gagged framework

are the UPHS staff now locked into with Siemens?

 

 

 

YET MORE CORPORATE ALLIANCES

 

On April 26, 2001, UPCC announced a business partnership with Integral PET

Associates, the nation's leading operator of fixed-site Positron Emission

Tomography (PET) cancer scanners. A patient receiving a PET scan today is

injected with a radio-pharmaceutical, such as flurodeoxyglucose (FDG), about 45

minutes before the scan, which takes about two hours to circulate through the

system. The radiopharmaceutical tracer emits signals which are then picked up by

the PET scanner. A computer reassembles the signals into recognisable images to

determine if a cancer has spread, if a particular treatment is effective or if a

patient is disease-free. IPA will now be seeking to supply major hospitals

throughout Pennsylvania with this very expensive equipment. Installing and

operating a PET scanner typically costs around $1,600,000 in up-front capital

costs, plus an additional $800,000 in yearly staff and operational costs.

 

 

 

A short visit to the UPHS website at www.med.upenn.edu will not only confirm all

of the above information, but will also confirm that these alliances represent

only a small percentage of the long-standing conventional ‘friendships’ UPHS has

fostered with Big Pharma over the years. Given the strictly conventional source

of sponsorship monies received at UPHS, what chance will the following

statements have of being ‘allowed’ to feature on the UPHS cancer information

page?

 

“If I contracted cancer, I would never go to a standard cancer treatment centre.

Cancer victims who live far from such centres have a chance.” Professor Charles

Mathe, French cancer specialist

 

“...as a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that

physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more

harm than good.” - Alan C Nixon, PhD, former president of the American Chemical

Society

 

“Doctors are too busy to dig into the statistics of cancer treatments, they

assume that what they are taught at school or what is demonstrated in the pages

of briefing journals is the best treatment. They cannot afford to suspect that

these treatments are only the best for the pharmaceutical companies that

influence their ‘institutions of higher learning’.” Paul Winter, The Cancell

Home Page.

 

“To the cancer establishment, a cancer patient is a profit center. The actual

clinical and scientific evidence does not support the claims of the cancer

industry. Conventional cancer treatments are in place as the law of the land

because they pay, not heal, the best. Decades of the

politics-of-cancer-as-usual have kept you from knowing this, and will continue

to do so unless you wake up to this reality.” - Lee Cowden MD

 

“Almost every patient treated with IL2 (a current conventional cancer treatment)

suffered fever, malaise, nausea or vomiting, diarrhoea, sharp drops in blood

pressure, skin rashes, breathing difficulties, liver abnormalities and

irregularities in blood chemistry. Rosenberg himself details a number of

horrifying case histories, and one in particular where the administration of IL2

had precipitated amongst other things, vomiting, swollen joints, lung fluid and

‘vascular leak syndrome’ where blood would ooze through the vessel walls and

collect under the skin.” Steven Rosenberg, The Transformed Cell, 1992. (IL2 is

still used today.)

 

“Dr Linus Pauling, often known as the ‘Father of Vitamin C’ and twice awarded

the Nobel Prize, declared that large intakes of up to 10g of the vitamin each

day aids anti-cancer activity within the body. Pauling was largely derided for

making these declarations, but today, large doses of Vitamin C are used by many

practitioners for cancer patients in nutritional therapy, who believe Pauling

was right and that the popular nutrient is indispensable to the body in its

fight to regain health from cancer.” Phillip Day, Cancer, Why We’re Still Dying

to Know The Truth, Credence Publications, 2001.

 

“Do not let either the medical authorities or the politicians mislead you. Find

out what the facts are, and make your own decisions about how to live a happy

life and how to work for a better world.” Linus Pauling

http://www.cforyourself.com

 

 

 

 

 

The above remarks are representative of a vast library of well-sourced contrary

information which sensibly questions the validity and efficacy of conventional

cancer treatments and are based on a huge amount of clinical research and data.

But surely, with all these expensive and patented conventional treatments

available to fight cancer, the cancer rates should be going down? They are not.

They are increasing.

 

 

 

STAGGERING AMOUNTS

 

UPHS is totally locked into the conventional cancer framework - a framework

which today, rightly stands accused of achieving no measurable success at all in

its approach to the treatment of cancer, immense success in causing widespread,

unnecessary death through its application of lethal and highly toxic

pharma-radiation treatments and even greater success in rewarding itself

absolutely staggering amounts of money in the whole grisly process. That these

cancer corporations have become incredibly wealthy through their ‘chemo ’til we

drop’ approach is a fact which Messrs Siemens, Zeneca, Upjohn, Glaxo, Rhone

Poulenc cannot deny.

 

 

 

COMMON SENSE

 

Pauling was right. We have been seriously misled. Taking the Siemens

$multi-million technology as an example, it may well detect certain forms of

cancer, but upon detecting it, what then happens? Quite simply, a bewildered,

obedient, grateful and unsuspecting cancer sufferer is immediately directed

towards the door marked ‘iatrogenic (doctor-induced) illness and probable

death.’ Closer examination of today's orthodox cancer treatments reveals that

the conventional path is fraught with toxic danger. But the CEO of UPHS has made

it quite clear that ‘the Siemens alliance [one of so many] is critical to the

financial security of UPHS’.

 

 

 

This is why we will hear no publicly dissenting voices from UPHS as to the

horrific realities associated with 20th and 21st Century conventional cancer

treatments. The corporate big boys’ riches must continue to flow…. and a

handsome proportion of it into the coffers of the very dependent UPHS, of

course, ‘to assist in their financial recovery’.

 

 

 

SO WHY THE SLUR ON VITAMIN C?

 

As has already been stated, conventional cancer treatment represents a

$multi-billion a year industry. These vast profits are fiercely protected by the

industry giants. But their treatments in no way address the underlying causes of

cancer. Cancer is a nutritional/toxic/environmental condition, which, in a great

number of instances, can be successfully reversed through the application of a

sound nutritional approach and common-sense lifestyle changes. Linus Pauling,

dubbed the father of Vitamin C, sensibly promoted the benefits of consuming high

doses Vitamin C in the prevention of and battle against cancer.

 

 

 

HALF-TRUTHS AND LIES

 

So why aren’t we hearing about these natural treatment successes? Why aren’t

they being heralded across the world? The answer is money. Despite the

multitudinous successes in cancer regression through nutrition, and through

extensive application of vital elements such as Vitamin C, Vitamin B17,

pancreatic enzymes and other co-factors, Big Pharma is doing all it can to

silence these success stories. To have it become widely known that cancer can be

successfully treated without toxic and profitable pharmaceuticals would be

catastrophic for its business. Who would continue to purchase these products?

What would the Siemens, Glaxo and Upjohn shareholders have to say about that?

To their shame, vested interests are keeping well-proven, non-toxic cancer

treatments away from the public domain. This is why, under ‘cancer treatments’

the UPHS website says this of vitamin B17:

 

“Several patients displayed symptoms of cyanide poisoning, including muscle

weakness and impaired reflexes, or had life-threatening levels of cyanide in

their blood. (Laetrile can release cyanide, which is a highly toxic chemical.)

The researchers concluded that Laetrile is not effective as a cancer treatment

and is harmful in some cases.”

 

 

 

But now read this contrary extract from a radio talk show, featured in Phillip

Day’s Cancer, Why We Are Still Dying To Know The Truth:

 

 

 

Radio host Laurie Lee: “So this is verified, that laetrile [b17] can have this

positive effect?”

 

Dr Ralph Moss: “We were finding this and yet, we in Public Affairs were told to

issue statements to the exact opposite of what we were finding scientifically.”

 

 

 

At the time, Ralph Moss was former Assistant Director of Public Relations at

Memorial Sloan Kettering, NY, a leading American conventional cancer research

facility.

 

 

 

Of course Laetrile, or Vitamin B17, is not approved by the FDA, but not because

it isn’t beneficial – it is, as the links provided at the bottom of this report

will demonstrate. No, Vitamin B17 has not been approved by the FDA simply

because the FDA have been leaned on. That’s the way it goes in the

self-preserving, self-serving, conventional cancer business. To put it bluntly,

biddable FDA officials are only a phone call and a golfing lunch away from the

NCI and the NIH. A classic example of these conflicts of interests and double

standards can be appreciated when one learns that sodium fluoride is also not

approved by the FDA due to its toxicity, and yet drug giant Proctor and Gamble

and others can market the stuff in their toothpastes with complete impunity.

 

 

 

The UPHS statement on Laetrile is a fabrication. Such is the wealth of evidence

overturning the conventional stance on Laetrile and Vitamin C, that one can only

assume the UPHS statement falls into the following category:

 

 

 

FALSE SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH ‘ENDANGERING THE PUBLIC’, Independent News, 13.12.

2000 Doctors are fabricating research results to win grants and advance their

careers, but the medical establishment is failing to protect the public from the

menace of these scientific frauds, a committee of medical editors said

yesterday. Eighty cases of fraudulent research have been detected in the past

four years, and 30 have been investigated in the past year. In some cases,

institutions have covered up wrongdoing to protect reputations….

 

 

 

THE NUB OF IT

 

In an effort to subvert this mass-awakening to the horrors of conventional

cancer treatments, a devious attack on all genuinely beneficial, natural (and

therefore un-patentable) anti-cancer products is now being waged by a rather

worried conventional cancer establishment The ever-so-gentle slur on our most

vital of vitamins, namely Vitamin C, will soon be extended to a wide range of

essential minerals and vitamins. This is just the beginning of the subtle, but

concerted attack. The latest conventional legislation surrounding the codifying

and banning of efficacious natural treatments is being instituted, purely

because there is no money in these natural treatments for Big Pharma. It is

profit before human health, but couched in respectable-looking, ‘sciency’

reports. And this veneer of respectability is fooling the unsuspecting minions

lower down the UPHS research chain it seems.

 

 

 

NAÏVE

 

The two UPHS officials I spoke to regarding Dr Blair’s Vitamin C report were

extremely pleasant, open and helpful and displayed no intention to supply

misleading information. But both persons were entirely locked into their

superiors’ way of thinking. Media Relations officer Olivia Fermano was curious

as to my interest into who funded the Vitamin C report. When I pointed out that

if Dr Blair’s funding could be traced to a pharmaceutical company producing

conventional cancer treatments, then the results would have to be very seriously

questioned, Ms Fermano was genuinely supportive. “My goodness! That is a good

question. I will be right back to you.” Her word-for-word courteous reply, some

two minutes later was as follows: “You had me genuinely worried for a few

minutes there, sir. But I am pleased to tell you that our funding came directly

from the National Institutes for Health itself. I am so relieved.”

 

Ho Hum.

 

Similarly, Dr Garret Fitzgerald, chair of UPHS Centre for Cancer Pharmacy

Department stated: “The evidence supporting Vitamin C as a useful adjunct in

cancer treatment ranges from scant to non-existent. Linus Pauling’s work was

framed around a tenuous hypothesis only.”

 

 

 

Whilst the courtesy displayed by Ms Fermano and Dr Fitzgerald is commendable,

their naivety is the result of them both working in a commercially cocooned

workplace, purposefully insulated from the many success stories attributed to

non-toxic, metabolic cancer treatments, and from the amazing health benefits

accrued from consuming a lot more Vitamin C than the FDA’s recommended daily

intake of a miserable 60 mg – barely enough to keep one out of rags and scurvy.

 

 

 

Long live Vitamin C and let’s have even more of it! For a more in-depth study of

the conventional cancer industry, and of the very good news concerning

alternative cancer treatments, readers are encouraged to visit www.credence.org

and take the cancer tour.

 

 

 

Steven Ransom

 

 

 

home

 

 

 

 

Gettingwell- / Vitamins, Herbs, Aminos, etc.

 

To , e-mail to: Gettingwell-

Or, go to our group site: Gettingwell

 

 

 

 

Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now