It is understandable that a medicinal drug having undergone double blind studies, several years of research, and millions of dollars spent on that research, should hit a locate of credibility.
But what if the entire system was imperfect to begin with, money and time lost on treating a symptom kinder than working to find a hindrance of the disease? Or what if the system was more than imperfect but in many cases left the person in a less healthy state after having completed communication using a pharmaceutical drug? With all of our knowledge about how the manlike embody works, knowing its intolerance of eery elements, ground are we, as medical patients, so accepting of the idea that we should be treating ourselves with synthetic drugs that are virtually poison to our body? To relieve one symptom we acquire two or three newborn symptoms, a newborn habitual condition we need to care with and, of course, added prescription drug to fill apiece month.
There is also far too much time and effort settled on spotting than finding hindrance of the disease.
The key is prevention, not detection.
Detection means the disease has had a quantity to manifest itself and verify hold.
At the rattling small we should not be poisoning our body with toxic drugs once a diagnosis has been made.
Here are a list of lateral effects from chemotherapy and you be the judge as to whether this sounds like a viable communication option: Low hemoglobin, low glabrescent murder cells, low platelets, infection, need for murder transfusion, need for platelet transfusion, pain, nausea, vomiting, hair loss, skin injury, heart damage, lung damage, liver damage, kidney damage, expiration of hearing, small stature, hormonal problems such as low growth catecholamine or low thyroid hormone, infertility, second cancer, highbrowed decline, worsening of neurological symptoms, ineffectiveness, and death.
To understand better the hypocrisy of cancer treatment, consider the following, One of the maximal and most prestigious cancer communication centers in the world did a study of oncologists to determine how they would respond to a diagnosis of cancer.
On the private questionnaire, 58 out of 64 doctors said that all chemotherapy programs were unacceptable to them and their family members.
The overwhelming thought process for this decision was that they believe the drugs are ineffective and hit an unacceptable degree of toxicity.
Can you imagine these same doctors are recommending chemotherapy communication to shrink their patient's tumors? The answer is yes if they want to continue to be in good standing with mainstream medicine.
For various reasons alternative cancer treatments basically get labeled as quackery which is really unfair.
Granted, there have been some proclaimed treatments that have been found to be along some of the "cure-all elixirs" that would go town to town just to part people from their money, but to categorize all natural alternatives as quackery seems a bit of a stretch.
In fact, it seems after all these years of alternative's for cancer being shot down that perhaps there is an agenda to actually scare people away from even seeking natural methods to prevent and treat cancer.
The good news is there are legitimate natural alternative cancer treatments available.