The next read is an excerpt from “The Doctor’s Book of Survival Home Remedies”, Chapter: Cancer, pages 89-91:
Cancer is a loaded word. It’s complex because it’s not actually one single disease.
The word is effectively an umbrella for over 100 diseases characterized by one common factor. Abnormal cells that metabolize nutrients in unusual ways — differently than healthy cells. Cancer can, therefore, be considered a metabolic disease.
This is, in part, why cancer behaves differently from person to person. In fact, the way the cells metabolize is unique to each individual. Even if two people have the same type of cancer, it behaves differently. Symptoms vary like that not only because each type of cancer behaves differently, but also each person’s cells behave differently.
These differences impact how each person’s body responds to treatments. Two patients with breast cancer could receive the same amount of radiation, for example. One might lose her hair, while the other keeps all of hers. Their cells may even respond differently to some high-dose IV nutrients.
Otto Warburg realized cancer cells display metabolic action[1] that’s different from that of healthy cells already back in the 1920s. According to James Hamblin MD, of The Atlantic, food is a metabolic therapy[2]. I wholeheartedly concur. In addition to environment and genes, a major player in cancer is nutrition. It’s long been known nutrition plays a major role in other diseases (like diabetes) but now its role in cancer is ever more evident.
Prevalence of Cancer
Is cancer so prevalent now because more aging baby boomers are getting diagnosed? Or can we attribute it to big pharma manufacturing ever more cancer drugs, filling the internet and airwaves with cancer-related advertisements?
You’ll want to find reliable information on cancer if you are newly diagnosed. Gone are the days, thankfully, when the only accessible information on cancer was in brochures at a hospital. Now we have Siri. While it’s great to have the internet to access information, it can be a slog to navigate.
The volume of online content about cancer is staggering. A google search for ‘cancer’ today, in fact, fetched 1, 210, 000, 000 hits. One on Google Scholar found 5, 860, 000 academic articles. Clearly, the body of published research in this field is growing.
Back to nutrition—the link between nutritional deficiencies and cancer is one of the most promising areas of cancer research. Although it may seem at first glance to be a new line of investigation, it isn’t new. As mentioned above the concept dates back decades. But the mainstream scientific community is only investigating its potential now.
Linus Pauling, a two-time Nobel Prize-winning chemist, studied the effects of vitamin therapy on human health between 1973 and 1993. He maintained that high-dose IV-administered vitamin C could kill cancer cells. If the conditions were right. But what were the “right conditions”? That was—and still is—the problem. The American scientific community still does not know what the right conditions are.
The variability in results when administering vitamin C was definitely a deal-breaker for researchers who later attempted to validate Pauling’s work. Significantly, there were two factors that successful treatment depended on. The patients’ rate of absorption from their digestive tract and their kidney’s rate of elimination. But these rates varied from patient to patient. These are the kinds of variables that cause “flawed” studies.
>>> GET THE BOOK TO DISCOVER THE FULL CHAPTER <<<
It is forbidden to replicate any of the above content without Dr. John Herzog’s consent. However, in order to support the discounts and donations we’re making, we depend on free advertising. The doctor needs your help in sharing this with the world.
Resources
[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3873478/
[2] https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2019/05/food-cancer/589714/?utm_source=newsletter_cancer&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_cancer_2019-05-22
Everyone should know that Pauling’s VALID work with high dose vitamin C supplementation has been “falsified” by data distortions and lies, and he as a person (a double Nobel laureate) has been slandered as some deluded idiot by the criminal medical establishment and its countless quackwatch shills, lackeys, ignoramuses, and trolls for decades and it continues today — search for the scholarly report “2 Big Lies: No Vitamin Benefits & Supplements Are Very Dangerous” by Rolf Hefti (a published author of the Orthomolecular Medicine News organization).
But you can’t discredit the facts with lies. That only exposes and discredits the liars (see citation above).