Medical science has taken great strides forward. However, the vulnerability to many diseases like cancer, remain. Thus, billions of dollars are spent on researching alternative cancer cure treatments every year through out the world. Alternative cancer cure encompasses methods, natural and otherwise, that go beyond the traditional realm of surgery, radiation or chemotherapy.
Physical Touch method
Amidst the varied alternative cancer cure methods, Manual Healing or the Physical Touch method is widely known.
Reiki
The Japanese observation of Reiki is another alternative cancer cure methodology, which also works along similar lines. A Reiki master can unclog your congested energy pathways to relieve you of the pain of the disease and the treatment.
Chiropractic
Chiropractic provides a remedy for musculoskeletal disorders by working on the spine and the neck. Chiropractors believe that this boosts the immune system by restoring the bodily balance that had gone haywire due to cancer.
Massages
Massages, though not proven effective as a cancer cure, provide relief from pain and discomfort.
Nutritional Therapy
Amongst the other kinds of alternative cancer remedy, Nutritional Therapy is the most widely publicized. It has been medically proved that some food prevent and can even cure some cancer forms like breast cancer. In fact, recent discoveries point out to the cancer-combating agents present in fruits like pomegranates and red berries.
Naturopathy and Homeopathy
Naturopathy and Homeopathy are grounded on similar lines. Both therapies believe in achieving bodily harmony, which in turn rouses the self-healing process, which can relieve the symptoms of many forms of cancer like prostate, colon, liver or skin. The core difference in these two cancer remedy methods lies in their modus operandi.
While Homeopathy is almost like vaccination, wherein trace amounts of cancer-inducing agents are introduced in the body in an attempt to trigger a defense mechanism to combat the disease, Naturopathy is actually an amalgamation of various methods like Homeopathy, usage of herbal substances or electrical treatment to achieve the requisite bodily balance.
Other upcoming alternative treatments include:
While many alternative cancer treatment methods agree to the use of natural processes, some like the oxygen and ozone therapies profess the injection of oxygen and ozone to retard the growth of cancer cells and even have them transmute into normal cells.
Recently gaining ground in the dominion of alternative cancer treatment methodologies is the Bristol Approach, combining physical, psychological, emotional and spiritual therapies, aimed at corporal and mental well being.
Its underlying philosophy shares ground with many holistic lines of treatment. These empower the mind to control the bodily processes. The Bristol Approach also incorporates numerous self-help techniques to aid the cancer patient during this treatment period.
The synergistic effect of these alternative cancer cure methods is far greater than when used in seclusion. The alternative treatment is doubly effective when used in conjunction with some conventional mode of cancer remedy.
Has the medical established been overlooking what could be a very effective cancer cure protocol.
Is it possible that the cure for cancer or at the very least an effective cancer treatment for some reason has not been pursued by mainstream medicine? What if qualified PhD researchers have validated its efficacy?
After many decades of pursuing a cancer cure, why is it that we still don't have a treatment protocol that works in the vast majority of cases?
We probably do have that treatment protocol! The tragic reality of cancer research is quite simply this. It seems that those with the money to invest in cancer research rightfully expect a significant return on that investment based on the fact that cancer research is a very costly undertaking. That expectation is reasonable enough, because people with money to invest have an expectation that they will earn a decent return on their investment.
What if a cancer cure had been discovered but if it had no likelihood of returning any payback on the investment. Would you invest additional money to put it through the necessary clinical trials? The answer really is very simple. People in the business of finding cures for cancer are really in the business of finding cures for cancer that can return a hefty profit to their bottom line.
Cancer treatment is a "HUGE BUSINESS" which by definition means a meaningful return on every dollar invested. If it were you, would you continue to market a product that works some of the time but it has hefty returns? Or would you market a product that works most of the time but has zero returns and would effectively put you out of business?
I have no idea what your answer is but I know what their answer is likely to be. Better to make lots of money and save a few cancer patients rather than make no money and save a lot of cancer patients.
Common sense will tell most of us that if we could put a man on the moon in 10 years then it stands to reason that we should have far better treatment protocols that would result in an effective cancer cure after 70 years of clinical research.
We probably already have that cancer cure or at the very least a treatment protocol that turns cancer into a chronic disease as opposed to a death sentence. It is our individual responsibility to determine what researchers have figured out over the last 70 years that could save our lives. But, for whatever reason mainstream medicine and organizations that conduct clinical trials have decided that it is not in their collective best interest to promote because the return on their investment just isn't worth it.
Do your homework and don't let your lack of knowledge leave you in a situation where you think you have no good options or real hope for a cancer cure!
Physical Touch method
Amidst the varied alternative cancer cure methods, Manual Healing or the Physical Touch method is widely known.
Reiki
The Japanese observation of Reiki is another alternative cancer cure methodology, which also works along similar lines. A Reiki master can unclog your congested energy pathways to relieve you of the pain of the disease and the treatment.
Chiropractic
Chiropractic provides a remedy for musculoskeletal disorders by working on the spine and the neck. Chiropractors believe that this boosts the immune system by restoring the bodily balance that had gone haywire due to cancer.
Massages
Massages, though not proven effective as a cancer cure, provide relief from pain and discomfort.
Nutritional Therapy
Amongst the other kinds of alternative cancer remedy, Nutritional Therapy is the most widely publicized. It has been medically proved that some food prevent and can even cure some cancer forms like breast cancer. In fact, recent discoveries point out to the cancer-combating agents present in fruits like pomegranates and red berries.
Naturopathy and Homeopathy
Naturopathy and Homeopathy are grounded on similar lines. Both therapies believe in achieving bodily harmony, which in turn rouses the self-healing process, which can relieve the symptoms of many forms of cancer like prostate, colon, liver or skin. The core difference in these two cancer remedy methods lies in their modus operandi.
While Homeopathy is almost like vaccination, wherein trace amounts of cancer-inducing agents are introduced in the body in an attempt to trigger a defense mechanism to combat the disease, Naturopathy is actually an amalgamation of various methods like Homeopathy, usage of herbal substances or electrical treatment to achieve the requisite bodily balance.
Other upcoming alternative treatments include:
While many alternative cancer treatment methods agree to the use of natural processes, some like the oxygen and ozone therapies profess the injection of oxygen and ozone to retard the growth of cancer cells and even have them transmute into normal cells.
Recently gaining ground in the dominion of alternative cancer treatment methodologies is the Bristol Approach, combining physical, psychological, emotional and spiritual therapies, aimed at corporal and mental well being.
Its underlying philosophy shares ground with many holistic lines of treatment. These empower the mind to control the bodily processes. The Bristol Approach also incorporates numerous self-help techniques to aid the cancer patient during this treatment period.
The synergistic effect of these alternative cancer cure methods is far greater than when used in seclusion. The alternative treatment is doubly effective when used in conjunction with some conventional mode of cancer remedy.
Has the medical established been overlooking what could be a very effective cancer cure protocol.
Is it possible that the cure for cancer or at the very least an effective cancer treatment for some reason has not been pursued by mainstream medicine? What if qualified PhD researchers have validated its efficacy?
After many decades of pursuing a cancer cure, why is it that we still don't have a treatment protocol that works in the vast majority of cases?
We probably do have that treatment protocol! The tragic reality of cancer research is quite simply this. It seems that those with the money to invest in cancer research rightfully expect a significant return on that investment based on the fact that cancer research is a very costly undertaking. That expectation is reasonable enough, because people with money to invest have an expectation that they will earn a decent return on their investment.
What if a cancer cure had been discovered but if it had no likelihood of returning any payback on the investment. Would you invest additional money to put it through the necessary clinical trials? The answer really is very simple. People in the business of finding cures for cancer are really in the business of finding cures for cancer that can return a hefty profit to their bottom line.
Cancer treatment is a "HUGE BUSINESS" which by definition means a meaningful return on every dollar invested. If it were you, would you continue to market a product that works some of the time but it has hefty returns? Or would you market a product that works most of the time but has zero returns and would effectively put you out of business?
I have no idea what your answer is but I know what their answer is likely to be. Better to make lots of money and save a few cancer patients rather than make no money and save a lot of cancer patients.
Common sense will tell most of us that if we could put a man on the moon in 10 years then it stands to reason that we should have far better treatment protocols that would result in an effective cancer cure after 70 years of clinical research.
We probably already have that cancer cure or at the very least a treatment protocol that turns cancer into a chronic disease as opposed to a death sentence. It is our individual responsibility to determine what researchers have figured out over the last 70 years that could save our lives. But, for whatever reason mainstream medicine and organizations that conduct clinical trials have decided that it is not in their collective best interest to promote because the return on their investment just isn't worth it.
Do your homework and don't let your lack of knowledge leave you in a situation where you think you have no good options or real hope for a cancer cure!
Post a Comment