Rediscover the Healing Power of Orgone Energy: Transform Your Health and Well-being with Orgonite Devices

Orgone, also known as prana, life force, ki, chi, mana, or universal energy, is a form of energy that is present in everything. Dr. Wilhelm Reich, a visionary scientist, rediscovered this energy and found that layering organic and non-organic materials can act as a magnet for it. Reich used this discovery to help cure patients of various illnesses, including advanced stages of cancer, leading to conflict with the medical establishment.

Today, Reich’s orgone work is being rediscovered as a healing tool that helps the body and subtle bodies become whole. Orgone is also known as orgone devices or generators or orgonite, which is a combination of metal particles and resin that creates the orgone matrix. People from around the world are making their own orgone devices and adding gemstones and crystals to amplify the energy of orgone. Water, particularly charged water, is an important component of the orgone matrix.

The elements of fire, air, earth, and water can also be added to the orgone matrix using shamanic techniques for added power. The benefits of orgone include improved health, increased plant growth, transmutation of negative energy into positive vibes, increased prosperity, and a general state of well-being. DOR, or deadly orgone, is a form of orgone that has “turned stale” and is often associated with strong electromagnetism, such as from power lines and cell phones.

However, DOR can be transformed into OR, or healthy orgone, using orgonite devices.

MSM & DMSO – Organic Sulphur As A Versatile Healer

MSM, dimethylsulfone or methylsulfonylmethane with the formula (CH3)2SO2 occurs naturally in many fresh foods but is lost during processing.

Its main use in the body is for collagen synthesis, forming skin, blood vessels, hair and nails. Its main benefit is to keep cells, skin and blood vessels elastic, which is the attribute of youth.

That is why organic sulphur is often regarded as the beauty mineral. It keeps cell walls permeable so that nutrients can freely flow into the cells and wastes and toxins can easily be removed.

Amino acid chains are usually linked with each other through flexible sulphur bridges.

Also the oxidative energy production of cells requires reactive sulphur compounds. Without sufficient organic sulphur as in the form of MSM cells and body structures lose their elasticity and flexibility.

The result are the well-known signs of aging:

inelastic skin with increasing wrinkles, scar tissue, hardening arteries, varicose veins and also hardened lungs causing emphysema.

Sufficient MSM is able to reverse these conditions to a significant degree, including emphysema. It is believed that the MSM in Aloe Vera is the active ingredient for repairing damaged skin.

MSM is used by athletes to increase stamina and minimize sore muscles. Its use for this purpose is even more widespread with racehorses and greyhounds. This effect may be mainly due to the ability of MSM to greatly increase the body’s ability to eliminate metabolic residues, wastes and toxins from the cells. In a similar way it appears to help those with chronic fatigue.

With this it also helps us to recuperate from severe physical and mental exhaustion. MSM reduces the effects of stress and the incidence of stress related deaths in animals

MSM tends to reduce or eliminate allergic reactions to foods, chemicals and inhaled allergens. It also reduces reactions to the bites of mosquitoes, bees, poisonous spiders and snakes. It lessens inflammation, pain, stiffness and swellings due to arthritis or from other musculoskeletal system disorders and helps to normalize the blood chemistry in these conditions. It also reduces inflammations of the skin and mucous membranes.

MSM relieves leg and back cramps and muscle spasms, be it after periods of inactivity (night cramps) or during athletic activities.

Other conditions that often benefit from MSM supplementation are,

hot flashes (or hot flushes) as well as discomfort due to the monthly cycle, also acne, asthma, back pain, Candida, constipation, diabetes, diarrhea, diverticulitis, gastro-intestinal ulcers, hypertension, inflammations of all kinds, itching skin, migraines, nausea, pain, stress, sunburn and wound healing.

It should also be helpful with other chronic degenerative or inflammatory conditions, especially,

  • Alzheimer’s disease
  • cancer
  • Crohn’s disease
  • myasthenia gravis
  • Parkinson’s disease

Melanoma cells of a particularly aggressive strain were treated with a 2% MSM solution (see ‘Methyl Sulfone Induces Loss of Metastatic Properties and Reemergence of Normal Phenotypes in a Metastatic Cloudman S-91 (M3) Murine Melanoma Cell Line‘).

After one day of exposure the cells had become completely normal and remained so indefinitely.

Fingernails and hair have a high sulphur content and generally improve with MSM. It also reduces parasite infections in the intestinal and urogenital tracts. MSM appears to normalize our mental condition.

Individuals on MSM tend to report increased alertness, reduced mood swings and less depression. It seems to improve the immune system and the senses of taste and smell. In addition, it neutralizes the toxicity of anticholinesterase, thereby providing protection against insecticide exposure or ingestion. It also aids the liver in the detoxification of chemicals and, with this, is useful to ease drug withdrawal symptoms.

The Oregon Health Service University demonstrated in many years of clinical use that MSM:

  1. inhibits pain impulses along nerve fibres (analgesia)
  2. lessens inflammation
  3. increases blood supply
  4. reduces muscle spasm
  5. softens scar tissue

How to Use MSM

MSM is a natural food ingredient and is free of unpleasant taste and odor.

It is reported to be completely safe even in very high amounts. Because of its inert composition, it does not normally cause allergies or undesirable pharmacological effects. It can even safely be used to dilute blood.

The body will use what it needs and remove any excess through the kidneys. The water-soluble MSM is easily absorbed and provides a therapeutically important source of organically bound sulphur.

The daily maintenance intake commonly ranges from 5 to 20 g in several divided doses. Try to adjust the dose according to your wellbeing or observed effects. You may use more or less of these commonly used amounts. Initially I suggest starting with about 1 g and increase the dosage gradually to the full amount.

The reason for a slow increase is that MSM often causes some beneficial but uncomfortable cleansing reactions.

This may result in headaches, nausea, diarrhea or weakness for a few days. If you are already on a high dose when this happens, just reduce or stop the intake until it is over. Cleansing reactions are a common and necessary part of effective natural healing methods.

If you want to overcome a specific health problem faster you may experiment with taking more than your usual maintenance dose. To spread the intake more evenly during the day you may dissolve the daily amount in a glass of fruit juice or herb tea and taking a sip now and then. The exact amount used each day is not critical.

You may equate a rounded teaspoonful of the fine, white crystals as being approximately 5 g. The benefit of MSM will be enhanced by a diet high in vitamin C or with additional vitamin C supplements.

You may also use MSM externally to carry other nutrients or remedies into the skin. With arthritis or connective tissue problems or generally for skin rejuvenation, you may dissolve,

glucosamine, copper salicylate, sodium ascorbate, magnesium chloride and MSM in a small amount of (warm) water and aloe vera gel,

…and rub it into the affected area, although DMSO is more effective for skin absorption.

MSM in amounts of 10 to 20 grams in addition to several teaspoons of DMSO can be used as an alternative oxygen supply system to greatly increase energy. For details see Increase Your Energy.

Caution: Individuals who are sensitive to sulphites (often used as preservative) also may react to MSM and DMSO. This is usually due to a deficiency of molybdenum and can be overcome with supplementation (try 500 mcg).


DMSO (CH3)2SO is a natural substance derived from wood pulp.

It is generated during the normal decomposition of plants and therefore is in low concentrations present in many foods. DMSO is an antioxidant, by taking up oxygen it is converted into MSM. Unlike MSM which is sold as a powder or fine crystals, DMSO is an odorless, clear liquid which is completely water miscible. It has a high boiling point of 189°C and solidifies at about 18°C.

It has all of the beneficial properties of MSM but often at a higher degree, and it has some additional healing properties. These are based on the combination of its antioxidant nature with its excellent solvent properties for a wide range of nutrients and remedies.

There is no other biological solvent that can so easily penetrate the skin and carry such nutrients and remedies into the body.

There is a very long list of health benefits from using DMSO, the main ones are:

  • It is an all-round microbicide effective against bacteria, fungi, mycoplasmas and viruses
  • It improves the immune system and reduces allergies
  • It is strongly anti-inflammatory with good antioxidant properties
  • It blocks pain when rubbed onto affected muscles or joints
  • It improves blood circulation by inhibiting formation of blood clots and hypercoagulation
  • It even dissolves newly formed blood clots
  • It dilates blood vessels and improves the function of the heart
  • It efficiently transports molecules across cell membranes and moves through the blood-brain barrier
  • It improves connective tissue, softens collagen and stimulates wound healing
  • It is a potent diuretic and very effective with chronic bladder inflammation/cystitis

Equally impressive is the long list of diseases that have benefited from its use, including some that may not respond to other remedies, such as,

  • brain and spinal cord damage
  • Down’s Syndrome
  • schizophrenia
  • ALS (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis)

It is able to dissolve blood clots and prevent damage after a stroke, improves skin conditions such as psoriasis and scleroderma, and is effective with autoimmune diseases, arthritis, ulcers, cystitis and other inflammatory conditions.

With diabetes it can improve insulin control and blood circulation.

Also eye problems have been successfully treated with DMSO, including macular degeneration, retinitis pigmentosa, glaucoma and cataracts, sometimes just with oral use but sometimes also with added remedies as eye drops.

DMSO is frequently used as a carrier in conventional chemotherapy or in antiviral therapy because of its ability to easily enter affected cells. With cancer it specifically zooms in on cancer cells and can be used to carry remedies along, good for treating brain tumors which are otherwise difficult to reach. There are also reports of an anti-cancer effect of DMSO on its own (see ‘Dimethyl Sulfoxide Promotes the Multiple Functions of the Tumor Suppressor HLJ1 through Activator Protein-1 Activation in NSCLC Cells‘).

It is apparently beneficial with many cancers such as breast, lung and prostate cancers, leukemia and lymphomas.

Relatively weak (2%) solutions of DMSO were eliminating leukemia cells and, with the addition of suitable remedies, induced a variety of cancer cells to become normal cells.

DMSO also caused cancer cells to die naturally (apoptosis), and it has been shown to protect against radiation damage, especially in regard to cancer treatment.

DMSO kills the pleomorphic microbes that are the basic cause of cancer and autoimmune diseases. One of its most impressive functions is its ability to easily enter cells and kill viruses and mycoplasma that may hide there.

There are patents combining DMSO with antiviral remedies, anti-tumor agents, and amino acids and other nutraceuticals to enhance memory and other brain functions.

DMSO is also excellent for healing deep tissue, muscle injuries, burns, and other wounds. It has extensively been used in sports medicine and horse racing.

Because it is so rapidly absorbed – it can be tasted in the mouth only minutes after applying it to the skin – and combined with its ability to block pain signals to the brain, DMSO also acts very fast to stop or greatly reduce pain from arthritis, muscle injuries, insect bites, and other sites of pain or inflammation. While the pain may come back after several hours, it tends to lessen with each re-application of DMSO.

Unlike other pain relievers, especially of the medical kind which may cause long-term damage, DMSO greatly speeds up healing of damaged areas.

This is due to its antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial properties, and its ability to improve blood circulation, nutrient supply, dissolve obstructions, and remove stress.

After oral use or skin application DMSO not only penetrates all soft tissues but also the bones. This is not only good for treating tumors and cancer of the bone, but also jawbone infections and cavitations. Molecular or elemental iodine easily dissolves in DMSO.

Therefore I would dissolve a small amount of iodine or Lugol’s solution in DMSO and frequently dab that from both sides on the affected gum. Dilute sufficiently so that it does not irritate. DMSO with iodine is also effective for fungal problems of nails, skin or scalp, e.g. manifesting as hair loss.

DMSO seems to inhibit Helicobacter pylori and help heal peptic ulcers in relatively low doses but higher doses are required with Candida.

I found the research on DMSO and Candida somewhat amusing. Different researches got inconsistent and varying results for investigated fungicides until one recently had the bright idea to test DMSO which is commonly used as a solvent for antifungal drugs. It was found that the more DMSO was used as a solvent the stronger was the effectiveness of the investigated fungicides.

DMSO protects body cells against oxidative stress but increases stress on fungi.

If given soon after a stroke, DMSO has been shown to dissolve the stroke-causing clot, restore circulation and prevent paralysis. It is best to start DMSO therapy within a few hours. In one reported case a male with a stroke refused to go to hospital and waited for 11 hours until his wife had talked to Dr Jacob.

Then she gave him one ounce of 50% DMSO in orange juice every 15 minutes for two hours and afterwards every half hour for two hours. The next day, he was better and soon returned to normal.

In another case a 16-year-old girl broke her neck while diving into a pool. and became a complete quadriplegic. She was on DMSO for an entire year and gradually her organs began to function again until finally she could also walk.

Another quadriplegic did not start DMSO therapy until two years after his accident. Six months later he could lift both arms over his head, and sensation began to return to his lower chest and right hip. Later he also learned to move both of his legs.

Dr Jacob helped two other quadriplegics recover completely when DMSO was started within one hour after the accident.

How and what to use

DMSO has been described as a clear colorless, very hygroscopic liquid, with practically no odor or slight garlic odor, slightly bitter taste with sweet after-taste.

Because cheap industrial grade DMSO can contain dangerous impurities, only good quality products with at least 99% and preferably higher purity should be used.

Because DMSO is hygroscopic (it attracts water) the main impurity at the higher grades is water.

Commonly used are Laboratory reagent and medical/pharmaceutical grades with about 99.5 to 99.9% purity. While glass bottles are best for retail sales, even highest grades of DMSO are commercially stored and shipped in HDPE (Type 2) containers which do not seem to cause any leaching problem.

Pure DMSO is not toxic and generally very safe but some precaution needs to be taken. For instance when applying DMSO for transdermal treatment the skin should be clean and free of undesirable chemicals, such as from commercial lotions or sunscreens.

DMSO can be used on its own and applied over inflamed, stiff or painful muscles or joints, or over troublesome organs, or it can be used to carry remedies or nutrients through the skin into the body. However, it does not carry microbes, large molecules or chemicals into the body that normally cannot penetrate the skin, it only enhances the absorption rate of those that are able to penetrate on their own but at a much lower rate.

To avoid skin irritation apply DMSO only in diluted form at 70% or less.

Some products on the market are already diluted. For common use you may make a treatment solution, e.g. in another glass bottle, by diluting full strength DMSO. To make it about 70% mix 2 parts of 100% DMSO with 1 part of water, and for a weaker solution (50%) mix equal parts of DMSO and water.

If you also add other dissolved remedies, such as Magnesium Oil, Glycerin, MSM or Lugol’s, then you can count this as part of the water. It is alright to mix DMSO with non-acidified MMS/sodium chlorite, but the acidified MMS will probably become inactive by oxidizing DMSO to MSM.

Be careful, the solution gets warm when mixing DMSO with water, and while it does not harm the skin, spills may damage painted or plastic surfaces.

Strength for topical use may vary according to the sensitivity of the skin. DMSO is not normally used on broken or open skin, but it has been applied to fresh cuts and other wounds and greatly speeded up healing without causing pain or other discomfort. Depending on the degree of pain or inflammation DMSO may be applied several times during the day over the area of pain, but the need for multiple applications may reduce on following days.

The effect may be felt within minutes. Also swellings such as from sprained ankles can quickly disappear if kept covered with DMSO.

While DMSO mixes freely with water and glycerin, it does not mix with oils or kerosene. It does not dissolve magnesium chloride but it can improve absorption by carrying along water in which the magnesium is dissolved. The same seems to apply to vitamin B12 which also does not dissolve directly in DMSO but can be better absorbed with its addition. For general applications it may be good for the skin to add a small amount of glycerin.

Alpha lipoic acid dissolves very well in DMSO, and Glutathione and Coenzyme Q10 to some degree. Transdermal application of these may give a better absorption rate than oral use. Generally strong oxidants oxidize DMSO to MSM while microbes reduce it to Dimethylsulfide or DMS which creates a strong sulphur smell.

It has been noticed that during periods of infection individuals emit a much stronger garlicky smell when using DMSO than when they are well.

This is actually the main drawback of DMSO, and why some individuals do not like to use it – it can lead to social problems, especially at the workplace. Not everyone has this problem, and one may be able to minimize it by using only a relatively small amount in the evening or experiment with spraying or rinsing mouth and exposed skin with diluted non-acidified MMS (sodium chlorite) solution (e.g. 1 teaspoon of MMS in 500 ml of water) which can oxidize and so deodorize smelly sulphur compounds.

Oral intake is the other major form of DMSO use.

As to its safety:

Dr Stanley Jacob who pioneered the medical use of DMSO has taken an ounce of it orally every day for more than 40 years. The only side-effect seems to be that he has not been sick in years. Others have taken even higher doses for weeks or months.

DMSO is effective in heart attacks and angina; prompt use of it in heart attacks has been credited with preventing damage to heart muscle but rather high doses should be used.

Dr Morton Walker suggested 2 grams per kilogram of body weight in the treatment of heart attacks.

Except for emergencies, it is always best to start with low doses, such as half a teaspoon in a drink, and increase gradually to the intended maximum or until there is some unexplained reaction. Generally effective healing methods tend to induce some kind of reaction, be it microbial die-off effects or skin eruptions or gastro-intestinal effects, such as diarrhea.

In such case temporarily cut back and when the reaction subsides gradually increase again.

A suitable daily maximum intake with chronic diseases may be 20 to 30 ml in divided doses, good to take it in a drink together with specific supplements to enhance their absorption.

As with all supplements, It is also good not to remain at the same dose for a long time but rather slowly cycle up and down between a maximum and a minimum level. Finally, as long as there are problems in specific parts of the body it is preferable to use topical applications in addition to oral use.

While DMSO is widely used in most countries as a medical drug, in the USA it is only approved for the treatment of interstitial cystitis.

In Australia DMSO is a prescription poison and cannot be used for treating humans but it can be sold and used for veterinary purposes and as a solvent. For a good account of the DMSO saga see http//

With DMSO having so many superb features you may wonder if there is still a place for MSM.

I believe there is. MSM provides the many benefits of a high sulphur intake for detoxifying and regenerating connective tissue without any apparent side-effect, while DMSO can cause an odor problem in social and work-related settings. DMSO can also cause excess intestinal gas and loose bowels.

It has the ability to carry not only desirable but also undesirable chemicals through the skin and into the brain, therefore one needs to be much more careful, and it can induce microbial die-off reactions which are ultimately beneficial but need to be understood and managed.

As MSM and also DMSO are effective in cancer treatment but in a somewhat different way, it may be preferable to use them both combined.

MSM may be dissolved in DMSO at a rate of 34 grams per 100 ml. For breast cancer, melanomas and other tumors close to the skin this solution may be diluted 2 : 1 or 1:1 with water and kept as a pack over the tumor until it appears to normalize.

For accessible internal tumors, such as in stomach, uterus etc it may be best to expose them frequently to this solution by assuming a position which tends to pool the ingested or instilled solution around the tumor.

However, DMSO should not be used rectally as it may carry toxins into the blood. For inaccessible tumors a combination of high-dose topical and oral intake could be tried.

I do not believe that there is a genuine allergy to DMSO.

Instead some individuals react because they are deficient in the trace mineral molybdenum which is required by enzymes to oxidize sulphur compounds such as sulphites to sulphates.


Is there a possible COVID vaccine antidote

Is there a possible COVID vaccine antidote

which could protect those who have been injected with the concoction passing itself off as a COVID vaccine? Dr. Judy Mikovits thinks so. Mikovits, who was featured in the Plandemic film, recently revealed the name of it (which you can hear in this video excerpt): suramin. The disturbing horror stories of the COVID vaxxed never seem to end. Firstly, there are all the numerous adverse effects of those who have taken the COVID non-vaccine including migraines, bruising, heavy and irregular menstruation, miscarriages, potential sterility and potentially lethal blood clotting. (You can read what people are self-reporting at this Reddit group – scary). Then, there is the bizarre phenomenon of the COVID vaxxed transmitting these effects to the unvaccinated just by being around them. On top of that, there is the phenomenon of magnets sticking to the COVID vaxxed at the injection site. The point of the COVID non-vaccine is to program your RNA to make spike proteins so that your body will make antibodies against them, antibodies which will supposedly protect you against SARS-CoV-2. While there are many problems with this theory – including the fact there is no real SARS-CoV-2 and that spike proteins rest on the unfounded assumption of an isolated and purified virus – there is also the distinct danger that these artificially-induced spike proteins will cause you harm. This is where the possible COVID vaccine antidote comes in.

Possible COVID Vaccine Antidote: Suramin

Suramin is a drug which has been used as medicine for conditions such as African sleeping sickness and river blindness. It has been know to the medical profession for 100 years. Recently a small randomized clinical trial conducted the University of California San Diego found that a single intravenous dose of suramin produced dramatic improvement of core symptoms of autism, aka autism spectrum disorder (ASD). So what is suramin exactly? It turns out that it’s yet another pharmaceutical drug which is an extract of a natural substance, in this case pine needles. This follow the Big Pharma business model of bio-piracy – find natural plants and substances, isolate a chemical from them, get a patent on it and sell it, while using scientific journals and the media to trash anyone who claims the original plant has medicinal value.

The article Possible Antidote for the V-Serum and the Current Spike Protein Contagion does a good job of going down the rabbit hole to reveal what suramin does and where it comes from:

“Here is the trail of science and data that shows the derivative relationship between pine needles and Suramin (“the elist’s antidote” to microbial illnesses) – and which also provides a potential antidote for those affected by the spike protein contagion … Suramin further decreases the activities of a large number of enzymes involved in DNA and RNA synthesis and modification: DNA polymerases (103, 104), RNA polymerases (103, 105, 106), reverse transcriptase (18, 103), telomerase (67), and enzymes involved in winding/ unwinding of DNA (107, 108) are inhibited by suramin, as well as histone- and chromatin-modifying enzymes like chromobox proteins (109), methyltransferases (110), and sirtuin histone deacetylases (111). This is medical-speak for inhibiting the inappropriate replication and modification of RNA and DNA … Suramin also showed inhibitory effects against components of the coagulation cascade (71, 130) … Excessive coagulation causes blood clots, mini-clots, strokes, and unusually heavy menstrual cycles.”

Extremely interesting! It reveals that suramin inhibits blood coagulation or blood clots (a major theme throughout the entire COVID op) – the very issue that caused officials to be wary of the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson COVID vaccines, causing many European nations to ban them, and also causing the US CDC at one point to halt them. Blood coagulation is also a theme of COVID itself, even before the advent of vaccines. What is also very fascinating is that suramin has the reported ability to decrease the activities of enzymes involved in DNA and RNA synthesis. This is exactly what the other 2 COVID vaccines – those made by Moderna and Pfizer – are trying to promote.

So, in plain English, this stuff could potentially slow or stop all the horrible blood clots people are suffering, plus potentially block the inappropriate RNA and DNA replication that the mRNA devices are trying to engender.

Suramin is Derived from Pine Needles

So where does suramin come from? Pine needles. It is one of many phytochemicals or plant chemicals that comes from pine needles, as the above article summarizes:

Suramin is Derived from Trypan Blue

Trypan blue is derived from toluidine, that is, any of several isomeric bases, C14H16N2, derived from toluene. Trypan blue is so-called because it can kill trypanosomes, the parasites that cause sleeping sickness. An  analog of trypan blue, suramin, is used pharmacologically against trypanosomiasis. Trypan blue is also known as diamine blue and Niagara blue… Trypan red and trypan blue were first synthesized by the German scientist Paul Ehrlich in 1904.

Trypan Blue is a derivative of toluene which is a derivative of pine oil. The compound was first isolated in 1837 through a distillation of pine oil by the Polish chemist Filip Walter, who named it rétinnaphte.”

Why Take Suramin when You Could Make and Take Pine Needle Tea?

Why take a synthetic and isolated version when you could take the full-spectrum natural substance?

“Pine needle tea provides a similar, if not superior, benefit, due in part to the fact that it is a direct mild extract of the whole herb leaving many of its properties still intact that might be destroyed by excessive heat during distillation and further dissection of its many nutrient components … Pine needles are high in vitamin C and A among numerous other compounds which provide a long list of benefits:

A 2011 Korean study demonstrated using pine needles in tea was the best way to access the antioxidant benefits from pine needles.  The study demonstrated that the hot water extract of pine needle proanthocyanidins and catechins offer the highest levels of antioxidant benefits compared with chemical extract processes. There are other known benefits that pine needle tea and the tea made from other conifers share, which include:

  • Analgesic
  • Antibacterial
  • Antifungal
  • Anti-inflammatory
  • Antimicrobial
  • Antioxidant
  • Antiseptic
  • Antitumor
  • Antitussive
  • Antiviral
  • Aromatic
  • Astringent
  • Decongestant
  • Detoxifying
  • Disinfectant
  • Diuretic
  • Expectorant
  • Immuno-modulating
  • Improves circulation
  • Invigorating
  • Lymphatic
  • Relaxing
  • Relieves nervous exhaustion and fatigue
  • Relieves sore muscles
  • Restorative
  • Tonic

Herbalists the world over have known all along about the benefits of this simple natural tea. Pine needle tea has been used medicinally worldwide for thousands of years.”

Final Thoughts

As always, do your own research. I am not claiming suramin and/or pine needle tea is the COVID vaccine antidote, but rather a possible COVID vaccine antidote. More research needs to be done. If you are going to make your own, make sure you research what you’re doing –  be careful with the yew pine (which is not a true pine and can be toxic, although it does have some medicinal properties). The cypress is not to be used as an essential oil in high doses, but normally safe otherwise. Overall, however, pine needle tea has amazing health benefits. Being aware of natural substances which can block DNA and RNA replication may be very important knowledge in the years to come as we face an increasing virulent nanotech invasion carried out under the rubric of Operation Coronavirus.

Original Article:

What You Need to Know About CBD Oil for Dogs


As an individual who is sure to stay informed on the latest advancements in holistic wellness, you’re likely familiar with CBD. In fact, you may already use it regularly to combat a slew of ailments. CBD is continuing to prove itself to be a remarkably effective alternative for just about every commonly prescribed conventional medication. It’s no secret that more and more people are turning to the powerful herb over the potentially harmful adverse reactions of chemically manufactured drugs.

What you may not know is that CBD has also proven to be extremely effective and safe for our dogs providing comparable, impressive benefits without the need for prescription medications.

However, with the sudden rise in popularity of the herb, there is also a rise in the unknown surrounding it. What exactly is CBD? Where does it come from? Will it make my dog high?

We’ll tackle these questions and many others as we dive into: CBD for dogs.


CBD oil is a liquid extracted from the hemp plant. The hemp plant falls under the Cannabis Sativa L. “umbrella,” along with the marijuana plant. Here’s where several uncertainties and miscommunication begin. While the hemp plant and the marijuana plant do have many things in common, there are also a fair amount of differences that make each of the plants unique.

For starters, the marijuana plant has high amounts of THC. THC is the psychoactive property that gives the user a “high,” euphoric feeling. The hemp plant has less than 0.3% THC. In other words, CBD derived from the hemp plant will not give its user a high feeling.

The CBD that is safe for pets is derived from the hemp plant. Because of the fact that it is derived from hemp, it won’t get your dog high. However, it will offer your dog a slew of benefits that you may have to see to believe.


The health benefits of CBD oil are truly remarkable.

CBD oil effectively provides relief for:

  • Anxiety disorders (separation anxiety, anxiety caused by traveling, etc.)
  • Epilepsy and seizure disorders
  • Fears and phobias (such as thunderstorms and fireworks)
  • Pain and inflammation (chronic and acute)
  • Chronic inflammation & autoimmune disease
  • Reduces environmental allergies
  • Supports heart health
  • Reduces the growth and spreading of cancerous cells
  • Decreases nausea and side effects of conventional medications
  • Boosts the immune system
  • Promotes overall wellness

Additionally, CBD acts as a preventative. Not only does CBD treat present ailments but it actually helps prevent many conditions from developing in the first place.


All conventional medicine has one thing in common: side effects. While the severity of the side effects varies with each drug, they exist nonetheless. It ultimately leaves dog owners up in arms and feeling defeated when it comes to medicating their animals. Yes, it’s necessary to treat a dog suffering from seizures, but at what cost? Thankfully, with CBD, pet owners now have a choice in the matter.

Furthermore, CBD is effective. One of the scariest things about conventional drugs is that they may not work, even when administered correctly. Some dogs are immune to certain medication but the veterinarian will likely not have a way of knowing. Incredibly, CBD has proven to be effective in cases where conventional medications didn’t work.


One of the most incredible features of CBD is the fact that it has virtually zero side effects in dogs. Even the extremely mild side effects of CBD in humans (lethargy, sleepiness) don’t seem to exist when the herb is given in the appropriate dose to your four-legged companion.


Pet owners may opt to introduce CBD through CBD oil. The CBD oil comes in tincture form with an easy-to-use dropper. The dropper allows dog owners to have total control over the amount of CBD product that the dog receives. CBD oil can be administered directly into the dog’s mouth, mixed in with their food, or placed on top of their favorite treat.


Dog owners may also choose to introduce the CBD product in treat form. The great thing about CBD treats is that they can either be given for overall wellness or pet owners can purchase treats that are specially formulated for specific ailments.


At the end of the day, you want what’s best for your dog. Pet owners go above and beyond to ensure their dog’s happiness and well-being. However, many dog owners don’t fully realize that they are likely doing more harm than good with the use of conventional medication.

Luckily, we are living in a time where the conversation surrounding holistic medicine is increasing by the day. Conventional medicine is no longer the end all be all which allows pet owners to have a choice in how they treat their beloved animals and for that, we are incredibly grateful.

Editor’s Note: Always consult with your veterinarian before discontinuing use of medications or introducing new supplements to your dog’s diet.



EMF Neutralizing Orgone Devices On Sale

There’s one way to help prevent the cabal from affecting your senses with EMF (Electro Magnetic Field) and that’s to get yourself some Orgone in and around your house.

If made correctly it can help transform negative energy into positive energy which leads to better moods, increase in sleep quality and a feeling of general well being.

Empower Orgone have an Etsy shop and provide high quality devices made using only quality metals and crystals. They have tried to create gorgeous looking pieces that are also functional. Click the picture below to go to their Etsy shop.


They have Orgone Pyramids, Hearts, Pendants, and new art shaped devices.

They all contain Shungite which is a natural EMF neutralizer.

Shungite is:

shungite stone• a natural antioxidant that can increase human immunity with regards to many serious illnesses and suppress the development of many allergic diseases;
• a sorbent, purifying air and water from many organic and inorganic compounds and from excess of free radicals;
• a catalyst, which ensures decomposition of organic substances sorbed and restoration of the sorption properties;
• a carrier of wide range of microelements and biologically active substances, intensifying biological processes in the bodies of human beings and animals;
• a material, actively interacting with electromagnetic fields of different nature (anthropogenic high-frequency, solar, geopathogenic, biofields) and neutralizing their negative impact.

It possesses:

• adsorptive activity, the ability to absorb substances from the environment;
• bactericidal action;
• high level of adhesion, the ability to connect with any substance;
• anti-inflammatory and antihistaminic effects;
• radio shield properties;
• electroconductivity;
• ability to absorb oxygen, actively interact with it at the room temperature in water and in the air.

They ship worldwide too.

Nanochips And Smart Dust – Dangerous New Face Of Human Microchipping Agenda

By Makia Freeman

Nanochips and Smart Dust are the new technological means for the advancement of the human microchipping agenda. Due to their incredibly tiny size, both nanochips and Smart dust have the capacity to infiltrate the human body, become lodged within, and begin to set up a synthetic network on the inside which can be remotely controlled from the outside. Needless to say, this has grave freedom, privacy and health implications, because it means the New World Order would be moving from controlling the outside world (environment/society) to controlling the inside world (your body). This article explores what the advent of nanochips and Smart dust could mean for you.

Different Forms of Control

Humanity’s history is filled with examples of societies where the people were sharply divided into 2 categories: rulers and slaves. In the distant past, the slaves have usually been kept in place because the rulers had access to and control over the resources, such as money, food, water, weapons or other necessities of life (control of the environment).

In our more recent history, control was implemented not only by monopolizing resources but also via propaganda (control of the mind). This has manifested itself in many ways, e.g. the caste system in India (you must remain in your position on the hierarchical ladder for life), the royal bloodlines in Rome, the Middle East and Europe (who claimed an inherent and divine “right to rule”), the centralization of power in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia during the 1930s (where a single autocrat or a small committee decided the fate of millions), and finally in the West (especially in the US) with the advent of specialized PR and mind control techniques that were refined by the CIA. Projects like MKUltra gave the NWO controllers unheard of power to remotely and subconsciously influence people without them ever knowing, including the ability to create sex slaves and sleeper assassins.

Control of the Mind-Emotion Nexus

Project MKUltra was at its height 60+ years ago, and things have moved on a lot since then. We are now entering an era where technological advancements are giving the NWO conspirators influence over a new realm – control of the emotions, or more accurately, control over the entire mind-emotion nexus in the human body. I am talking about microchips, tiny electronic devices which can be embedded under your skin., and which receive and transmit information. Although microchips have been around awhile, they are now outdated. What we are facing is something much tinier than a microchip, and therefore more of a threat: nanochips and smart dust.

What is a Nanochip?

So what is nanochip? The word “nano” is 3 orders of magnitude smaller than “micro”. Nano means “one billionth” while micro means “one millionth”. While microchips are about the size of a grain of rice and measured in millimeters, nanochips are completely invisible to the human eye. Some of the nanochips are far smaller than human hair (e.g. the μ-chip that is 0.4 x 0.4 mm). In 2015, IBM announced that they had developed functional nanochips measuring just 7 nm or nanometers (7 billionths of 1 meter). In comparison, a strand of human DNA is about 2.5 nm and the diameter of a single red blood cell is about 7500 nm! These nanochips power themselves from their environment (they don’t need batteries) and have a 100 year life span. They are slated to be rolled out first on products (so the corporatocracy can have total knowledge of consumer behavior in real-time) before they can be used inside people’s bodies. Did you know that nerve cells grow onto/meld with the chip?

Free 1000 Lumen LED Flashlight (Ad)

In this Leak Project video, the presenter claims that the NWO aim to introduce 100 trillion nanochips into the world, so that literally every single thing in the world is tagged, including you. He includes many patents and other docs as proof of this agenda. He singles out the company HP (Hewlett-Packard) as being the executor of the plan to construct a central nervous system for the Earth – linking all resources and people in real-time.

What is Smart Dust?

You may already be familiar with the “Smart” agenda or better put the Smart Deception. For those new to this, the Smart agenda is to create a giant electromagnetic grid or network that encompasses the entire Earth. Everything that moves is to be made or injected with some kind of sensor or mote that connects it to the grid – including household products, appliances, food/drink items, animals, plants and humans too. Smart dust is another name for these motes which will act as mini computers, broadcasting and receiving. They are small wireless microelectromechanical sensors (MEMS). As of 2013, a mote was about the size of a grain of rice, but with technology advancing all the time, these will keep on reducing in size. Motes can be ingested through food (as will be discussed below).

The Smart agenda is basically synonymous with the UN Agenda 21 or Agenda 2030, and the Smart grid is synonymous with the IoT (Internet of Things)which is also going to use the new 5G network to achieve its desired saturation levels.

While this kind of technology can be used for the benefit of mankind, like many things today, it has been weaponized. The existence of smart dust forms a massive threat against the sovereignty of every human being alive. What we are up against is nothing less than the attempted technological possession of humanity.

Delivery Systems for Nanochips and Smart Dust

In a fundamental way, vaccines, GMOs, bioengineered food and geoengineering/chemtrails are all connected, as they are delivery systemswhereby this miniature technology of nanochips and Smart dust is planned to be inserted into our bodies. Some chemtrails contain Smart dust motes which readily infiltrate the body, communicate with other motes in your body, set up their own network and which can, unfortunately, be remotely controlled. Even if you are fastidious about what you eat and what you expose yourself to, it is difficult to see how you can avoid breathing in a mote of smart dust that was dropped on you by a plane spraying chemtrails.

With nanochips and motes inside your body, the NWO criminals can combine the IoT smart grid with brain mapping and other technological information in their attempt to pull off their ultimate endgame: to remotely influence and control an entire population by overriding (and programming) the thoughts, feelings and actions of the masses.

(The rabbit hole definitely does not stop at nanochips and Smart dust. An entire new category of lifeforms are being forged via synthetic biology. Morgellons fibers are self-aware, self-replicating and are likely assisting the dark agenda to remotely control the thoughts, feelings and bodily functions of the entire population. This will be explored in other articles.)

New Technology Always Pushed as Being Cool, Efficient and Convenient

Naturally, the full scope and goal of this agenda will not be revealed to the public as the technology is rolled out. Instead, we will continue to be told how wonderful, cool, trendy and efficient it all is. Note especially how all of this will be promoted under the banner of speed and convenience (while people unwittingly flush their freedom, health and privacy down the toilet). Yes, being surrounded by fields of manmade EM radiation everywhere you go will be disastrous for your health too.

The nanochips will also be pushed using peer pressure, encouraging people to get in the game out of social conformity. Like many governmental programs, the chips may initially be voluntary before they become mandatory. There is already a segment of society that is willingly chipping itself using tattoo ink. Recently, a company in Wisconsin (Three Square Market or 32M) introduced such an internal system and began encouraging its employees to get chipped. Although it was not mandatory, reportedly about half of them (41 out of 85) stepped forward and chose to get chipped!

Solutions: How to Remove a Chip

So what can you do about this? Firstly, get informed and make sure you understand the true nature and danger of nanochip and smart technology. Secondly, make sure you never acquiesce to getting chipped, no matter what reason you’re given. Doing so is tantamount to opening yourself to being remotely controlled without your knowledge. Thirdly, if you do discover a chip inside your body, get it removed. There are various ways to do. Some people crudely cut the chips out if they are large enough (i.e. a microchip instead of a nanochip). Other people claim you can used magnets such as neodymium magnets to render the nano chips useless. Hopefully, there will be intelligent inventors to step forward with new technologies that we can use to deactivate, disable and remove nanochips inside of our bodies.

American Natural Superfood (Ad) 

Final Thoughts

The human microchipping agenda is really the same thing as the transhumanist agenda – to turn mankind into machine which will ultimately mean becoming not superhuman but subhuman.

We need to be very careful and think critically as we go forward into a world of fantastic technology. Like the surgeon’s knife, it can heal or it can kill. Given everything we know, it would be naïve to believe that nanochips will only be used for good. If we’re not aware, this technology will be used by the power-hungry to enslave us by tricking us with promises of utopia. Nanobots are already being used in Western medicine for all sorts of diseases. Once the smart grid is established, how will you avoid being monitored, tracked and influenced 24/7 every day of the year?

No matter how good the technology becomes, it can never replace the spirit of consciousness inside of you, which is your true power.


The Cancer Treatment Protection Racket

The Cancer Treatment Protection Racket

— How the Cancer Act 1939 maintains ineffective cancer treatments

The Cancer Act 1939 and similar legislation around the world gives orthodox cancer treatment an undeserved monopoly, ensuring that ineffective but profitable treatments like chemotherapy and radiotherapy can never be challenged by more effective alternative treatments.

THE TOTNES CANCER HEALTHCARE CONFERENCE (TCHCC) took place on Saturday 24th March 2012 at Eden Rise retreat ten minutes drive from the little town of Totnes in sleepy Devonshire, England. It might not have happened at all because it was almost cancelled by the local Trading Standards, which had been egged on by local MP Dr. Sarah Woolaston and the usual mob of campaigning UK skeptics who argued that the conference was promoting cancer treatments and therefore contravened the Cancer Act 1939 which gives the medical establishment a monopoly on cancer treatment and the promotion of cancer treatment. As a consequence, the conference was no longer able to go ahead at its planned venue — Totnes Civic Hall — a venue which had been booked and promoted months in advance.

Both the local and national mainstream media assumed that, with the venue location stopped, the conference was cancelled, and this they reported without checking their facts with the conference organiser, Dr. Stephen Hopwood. True to form, the mainstream media billed the cancellation as a victory for public safety over “irresponsible” cancer treatment claims, highlighting the view of one of the billed speakers — oncologist Tullio Simoncini — that baking soda can be used as a cancer treatment. Because Dr. Simoncini has been struck off the medical register for his views, he provided perfect justification to cancel the conference: baking soda curing cancer… how irresponsible! Of course this was only a pretext to cancel the conference because the Trading Standards did not change their position when Hopwood responded by dropping Simoncini as a speaker.

However, Trading Standards, Sarah Woolaston, the rabble of UK skeptics and the mainstream media underestimated the resolve of the conference organisers and those planning to attend — free speech would not be thwarted — and the skeptics glee at the announced cancellation was short-lived as the event was switched, last minute, to a private venue on a donation basis. This placed it more firmly under the protection of free speech legislation, and the conference ended up being a success with a remarkable turnout considering the blanket media reports that it was cancelled.

The conference organiser, Dr. Stephen Hopwood, is a wholistic medical doctor with 20 years of healthcare experience. He currently runs the Arcturus Clinic ( and the Totnes Cancer Help Centre ( Hopwood set up the conference to “discuss potential underlying causes of cancer, offer thoughts on how best to protect yourself and as the day unfolds provide a clear map of how to cultivate your health and immunity.” This was to be a discussion day for those interested in complementary and alternative approaches to cancer survival, “based on the idea that if our body’s immune and endocrine systems are correctly functioning, well supported and balanced physiologically then cancer is less likely to arise and that our body’s own immune system may itself hold the key to prevention.”

This perspective of cancer treatment is actually quasi-respectable, and forms the basis of treatments of a surprising number of orthodox-focused medical doctors and researchers. But this respectability makes no difference to those opposing the conference, and they continued to cite a piece of UK legislation called the Cancer Act 1939 as the reason that this conference should not go ahead, a legal Act, they claim, was put in place to protect the public.

The Cancer Act 1939, which you can read at, was actually passed into British Law in 1939 to effectively give a monopoly to the emerging radiotherapy industry which believed at the time that the cure for cancer was the radioactive element radium. As radium was hugely expensive to procure and to administer, the Act ensured that the government loan to the National Radium Trust (an independent non-governmental trust) would be secured by eliminating competing cancer treatments — it was the means of securing this business arrangement.

An Act to make further provision for the treatment of cancer, to authorise the Minister of Health to lend money to the National Radium Trust, to prohibit certain advertisements relating to cancer, and for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid. [The first paragraph in the Cancer Act 1939 introduction]

In the original Cancer Act 1939, in Section 3 (since repealed), the condition of the loan to the National Radium Trust was that “no money shall be lent under this section after the expiration of ten years from the commencement of this Act.” So it appears that this legislation was primarily to secure start-up capital the radiotherapy industry, which at that time was nationalized, although the loan did have provision for repayment: “Any sums received by the Minister by way of repayment of a loan under this section or by way of interest thereon shall be paid into the Exchequer.” This was therefore a piece of legislation principally defining a business arrangement, rather than one for public protection — the advertising restrictions are clearly secondary to the loan arrangement.

And anyway, heart disease is just as dangerous as cancer but we do not have a Heart Disease Act because other legislation is perfectly adequate in protecting the public from bogus heart disease remedies and practitioners. Cancer was singled out because of the expense of radium and the need to set up a monopoly to deal with money loaned for that expense.

You also have to remember that back in 1939, cancer was not as common as it is today with only 1 in 30 to 1 in 40 people getting the disease as opposed to today’s rate of between 1 in 2 and 1 in 3. So health practitioners did not have the massive customer base that they have today, making the protection of what was considered at the time to be a promising but expensive treatment commercially essential.

See Dounne Alexander’s proposal for a legal reformation of the Cancer Act

The National Radium Trust was abolished soon after the Second World War with the introduction of the National Health Service(NHS) in 1948, and most sections of the original Cancer Act 1939have replaced by the Medicines Act 1968( Today, the main part of the Act that remains is Section 4, which prohibits the “advertising” of cancer treatments:

No person shall take any part in the publication of any advertisement containing an offer to treat any person for cancer, or to prescribe any remedy therefor, or to give any advice in connection with the treatment thereof;

An advertisement here is defined as “any notice, circular, label, wrapper or other document, and any announcement made orally or by any means of producing or transmitting sounds.” Cancer treatments, however, can be advertised by local authorities, hospitals and anyone acting with the approval of the Minister of Health (which generally translates as oncologists, research doctors and large cancer research charities):

Nothing in this section shall apply in respect of any advertisement published by a local authority or by the governing body of a voluntary hospital or by any person acting with the sanction of the Minister.

The Act does however allow cancer treatments to be advertised to registered doctors, registered nurses, registered pharmacists and students training in these professions. This allows the medical establishment to maintain its indoctrination on its conventional cancer treatments.

So the Cancer Act 1939 basically affords a monopoly on the medical establishment (which includes government), but as medical establishments around the world tend to be funded and controlled by Big Pharma (which also, as we will see, manipulates government), then that monopoly on cancer treatment and cancer treatment information dissemination is effectively Big Pharma’s monopoly. As we shall see later on, this is not in the interest of cancer patients, because if we are banned from even discussing alternative cancer treatments then patients’ choices are limited almost exclusively to conventional cancer treatments, treatments that we shall see have a dismal success rate.

What is most concerning about the Cancer Act 1939, however, is that it violates Freedom of Speech legislation. This is what makes it so controversial and why so many are now calling for its complete repeal — it is no longer serves the purpose for which it was set up (to kick-start expensive new radium treatments) and it has been superceded by newer legislation like the Medicines Act 1968, legislation which is perfectly adequate for protecting the public against medical scammers and charlatans. Unfortunately, monopolies are not easily given up, especially a monopoly as lucrative as that involving cancer treatment, and so Big Pharma makes sure, through its influence on the medical establishment and government, that full repeal of the Cancer Act 1939 never happens.

With this monopoly in place, the Cancer Act 1939 allowed radiotherapy to flourish, so that today “about half of all cancer patients receive some type of radiation therapy sometime during the course of their treatment.” [The National Cancer Institute – Cancer Research UK estimate that 40% of UK cancer patients receive radiotherapy.] And yet, despite its widespread use, it is very difficult to find the actual success rates of radiotherapy for various types of cancer. As cancer consultant and researcher Dr. Ralph Moss ( said in a 2008 newsletter: “Many forms of radiation treatment… have simply been ‘grandfathered in,’ – i.e., accepted by default largely on the basis of having been around for a long time.” He goes on to say:

While few would dispute that radiation does have a useful role in the treatment of cancer, the fact remains that in many instances the relative merits of different kinds of radiation treatment, the limits of its usefulness and the extent of its effectiveness have never been clearly established through clinical trials. This has led to a situation where on the one hand the treatment is almost universally available, yet on the other hand there is very little solid evidence comparing the effectiveness of radiation to various other treatment approaches.

Of course, oncologists themselves are most likely to have an idea of radiotherapy’s effectiveness as a cancer treatment, but they are certainly keeping quiet about it. For example, a Harvard study published by the U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) found that “90% of oncologists would never take radiation for lung cancer. 84% would never take chemotherapy for colon cancer,” both standard treatments offered by the medical establishment to those particular cancer-type sufferers. Why would oncologists be recommending treatments to their patients that they would avoid themselves? What is causing this duplicity?

Ralph Moss, the researcher mentioned earlier, remembers the reluctance of a brain cancer specialist, who visited him, to take radiation should he ever develop a brain tumour himself:

“I had a brain cancer specialist sit in my living room and tell me that he would never take radiation if he had a brain tumour. And I asked him, ‘but, do you send people for radiation?’ and he said, ‘of course, I’d be drummed out of the hospital if I didn’t.'”

So the Cancer Act 1939 , which was put in place to nurture a fledgling radiotherapy industry, is actually protecting an industry that those administering its treatment — the medical establishment — have serious doubts about behind closed doors, obviously concerned about their careers if they publicly stand by their opinions.

But of course, these days, orthodox cancer treatment is more than just radiotherapy. Today we also have chemotherapy as the other main orthodox cancer treatment. But this therapy, one that involves intravenously administering highly toxic substances in the hope of poisoning the cancer before poisoning the patient, also has an extremely low overall success rate. For example, a 2004 study by three Australian oncologists, published in the peer-reviewed journal Clinical Oncology (, concluded that:

“The overall contribution of curative and adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults was estimated to be 2.3% in Australia and 2.1% in the USA. As the 5-year relative survival rate for cancer in Australia is now over 60%, it is clear that cytotoxic chemotherapy only makes a minor contribution to cancer survival.”

This is consistent with Ralph Moss’ ( meta-studies (studies of studies) on the success rate of chemotherapy. In his ground-breaking book Questioning Chemotherapy (and his subsequent books, which are all extensively documented), Moss provides evidence that chemotherapy is ineffective for most forms of cancer, with a 2% to 4% overall success rate. He also reports the exceptions where this treatment has been shown to be useful, exceptions which include Hodgkin’s disease, lymphocytic leukemia and nonseminomatous testicular cancer, as well as a few extremely rare forms of cancer which include retinoblastoma, choriocarcinoma and Wilm’s tumour. Chemotherapy can also be helpful with State 3 ovarian cancer and small-call lung cancer. But with the vast majority of cancers (96% to 98%), it basically useless, subjecting patients to unnecessary suffering and biological (including immune system) damage.

Part of the problem is that the medical establishment take a very short-term view regarding treatment success. For example, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defines a particular chemotherapy treatment as “effective” if it reduces a humour by 50% or more in just 28 days. But this definition falsely implies that there is some correlation between fast tumour reduction and overall survival (which is generally set at a 5-year period). However, If the research is anything to go by, this assumption is false as there is little to no correlation for most cancers. Just because chemotherapy can quickly shrink tumours does NOT make it an effective cancer treatment (except in cases where immediate survival is the only concern). As chemotherapy, like radiotherapy, destroys much of the immune system in the process of destroying cancer cells, it is not only a notoriously torturous treatment but it leaves patients it does not help (almost all of them) in a worse situation than before because, once the immune system is destroyed, the body becomes unresponsive to alternative treatments, many of which rely upon stimulating its innate immune response. As a consequence, orthodox cancer treatment is not only largely useless for most cancer sufferers, causing a great suffering, but it takes patients on an all-or-nothing roller-coaster ride with often lottery odds of survival.

So chemotherapy and radiotherapy, the two cornerstones of modern orthodox cancer treatment, are not effective treatments to the vast majority of cancer patients, and yet these “treatments” are given protected monopoly status by most developed countries around the world, effectively sentencing 96% – 98% of cancer sufferers to hugely destructive and painful treatments which are not to their benefit. In the UK, it is the Cancer Act 1939 that ensures alternatives to chemotherapy and radiotherapy do not see the light of day.

Of course, if chemotherapy and radiotherapy, ineffective as they are, really are the best options for cancer patients, then a case can be made for this sort of monopoly legislation. But with success rates of these treatments being little better than doing nothing for most cancers, the bar has been set so incredibly low for cancer treatment success that you would think that this might encourage an openness by governments and the medical authorities to explore every other possible avenue for cancer treatment in an effort to raise the dismal odds of current cancer survival. But in reality, governments and the medical authorities are still not only closed to alternative cancer treatments, but they take every step to stamp alternatives out without examining them, criminalizing well-meaning scientists and doctors who are trying to raise that bar for cancer survival rates.

How can this be? Surely governments and the medical establishment have the people’s interests at heart? After all, it is the people who elect and pay for their governments to look after their interests, including their health interests, and in those countries with national health services, it is the people who pay for the cancer treatments. So how can any system that is in service to the people be maintaining treatment monopolies that are not in the interest of the people?

There are two responses to these questions, and they separate people into those who want to maintain the fairy tale of benign government and a fatherly healthcare system, and those who look a little deeper and realize that governments do not necessarily act in the interest of the people they represent, and that the medical establishment has loyalties stronger than those to its patients.

If you are in the former group and you believe the fairy tale that your government and your medical establishment are looking out for your interest, then you should probably stop reading here. This article is not for fantasists. If you have an emotional investment in benign patriarchal leaders, then you will have strong resistance to entertaining the possibility that our leaders do not act in the collective interest, and you will probably try to dismiss the statistics outlined above, clinging on to the belief that chemotherapy and radiotherapy are effective cancer treatments, and that their universal use should not be questioned. After all, caring leaders would not allow the suffering of those that they lead, and medical researchers and doctors are 100% objective and would never offer treatments they knew to be ineffective or that they would not take themselves or recommend to their families. So the facts above MUST be false. (Dream on!)

Unfortunately, although blind loyalty to a benign patriarchal vision is a valid emotional response, it is one that can and does lead to mass suffering and slaughter because it is based on entirely false assumptions. (Sometimes fantasies are worth more to many people than life itself because they determine the philosophical foundation of the world that we live in. Take away the fantasy of benign government, for example, and a large portion of society would lose the will to live.) The truth is that our leaders (including medical leaders and doctors) act in ways that are not in our collective interest, and the dismal statistics above indicated that something is very wrong with any health system that gives a monopoly to treatments with such dismal success rates, and even protects that monopoly with the full weight of criminal law.

So why would a government or a health service act in ways that are not in the interest of the people? The short answer is money (and the power that comes with money).

Money skews the whole democratic process, it always has and it always will. If you have money, serious amounts of money, then you can hire lobbyists and buy access to politicians, which allows you to have a disproportionate influence on government and the legislative process, an influence many orders of magnitude greater than that associated with mere voting rights. Money also allows you to influence the media, through advertising and ownership, and this allows you to control general public opinion. After all, people can only vote in their own interests if they know what is really going on and where their interests actually lie. As the mass media has become the eyes and ears for the vast majority of people, those who control the media control how people will vote.

Who has the greatest wealth in the world today? Multi-national big business, which is why legislation is generally so favourable to the interests of big business, which further increases the wealth of big business and further consolidates its power. Today we have a runaway situation whereby the whole modern democratic systems is in service primarily to industry and not the voters, and this situation is rapidly worsening.

Orthodox cancer treatment is HUGE business, estimated to be worth hundreds of billions of dollars each year. In fact, cancer treatment is becoming so expensive that even developed nations are struggling to afford it, as was recently pointed out in The Lancet ( As approximately 12 million people globally receive a cancer diagnosis, and as this is likely to increase to 22 million by 2030 (which according to the report is due to rising cancer rates in an aging global population and better diagnosis methods), the future outlook for the cancer treatment monopoly is extremely rosy, and orthodox cancer treatment is now one of the fastest growing industries. Indeed, the pharmaceutical industry, which controls most of modern cancer care, is now a trillion dollar global industry and one with some of the highest profit margins.

Businesses, like individuals, naturally protect their interests, doing everything they can to increase their profits and discourage competing industries. When you have billions of dollars behind you to fight your corner, you tend to win your fights, which is how, for example, new healthcare legislation that favours only the pharmaceutical giants at the expense of the public general health is sweeping across developed nations, pushing out natural and alternative therapies with a barrage of red-tape and biased healthcare legislation that favour mass medication. How is this achieved? By the ability of those with money to influence politicians, both through political donations and by hiring an army of full-time lobbyists to influence politicians.

In Brussels, for example, there are 15,000 lobbyists hired by corporations and other organisations specifically to represent their special interests to MEPs in an attempt to influence their decisions and skew the democratic process in their favour. ( How is this in the interest of democracy and the people? It is not. In democracies, special interest groups should not be allowed to influence politicians, period. But they currently are allowed to skew the democratic process, which is why the world is becoming increasingly corporatised. We all know it; we all see it in our local communities; and today an increasing number of people are waking up to this fact and questioning this destructive process. But as long as money is able to buy influence and political access, this undemocratic process will continue unabated.

There is also the massive problem of “revolving door” employment between politicians and big business. Politicians usually have a limited shelf-life, and when their political careers end, they usually end up on the boards of big corporations, basically hiring out their political connections to the highest bidder. So when in office, politicians are naturally extremely accommodating to big business because they know that they will be their future employers; big business is the gravy train they will eventually be catching. And this relationship also works the other way too: heads of business often find themselves in powerful positions of government where they can influence policy. As a consequence of this “revolving door” relationship between politicians and big business, government tends to strongly favour the interests of corporations over those of the electorate. This is further compounded by the influence of political party donations (bribes) and special interest lobbyists mentioned earlier, all of which unduly influence government and the legislative process.

Corporations can also get special treatment, if they are large enough, by threatening to locate or relocate their factories/offices to other states or other countries, which makes government and local government very keen to give them strong incentives, including tax breaks and other special corporate treatment, to keep them employing local people (and possibly giving a hefty backhand). This further adds to the runaway situation we have now in which large corporations are calling all the shots because they basically own the place.

The rapidly increasing power and influence of big business is morphing society to make big business even bigger and therefore more influential. In fact, it would be fair to say that governments now act primarily in the interests of big business, not the people who elect them. And this is why there is now so much public disgust with politicians, who quietly drop their campaign promises as soon as they are elected. (A recent poll in the UK showed that the combined popularity of the main party leaders, including the prime minister, were the lowest they had ever been since polling began.)

Money, however, not only skews the political and legislative processes, it also skews the scientific process. Only those outside the scientific research world believe in the fairy story of scientific objectivity and the foolproof nature of the peer-review process. In reality, research is subject to the influence of its sponsor, and it is very easy to bury studies that do not support the objective of the sponsor. (Do enough studies, select the best of them, and you can usually come up with “positive clinical evidence” for even the most useless treatment).

For example, a 2012 report in the scientific journal Nature ( by Glenn Begley (former head of cancer research at Amgen) and Lee Ellis (surgical oncologist at MD Anderson), describes how 100 Amgen scientists [Amgen is a multinational biopharmaceutical company] could only replicate 6 of the results of 53 widely cited landmark cancer research papers. This means that 47 (89%) of these important research papers, papers which influence how cancer is treated, may well be based on spurious research — they are bad science. And to make matters worse, some of the authors of research questioned by the Amgen scientists insisted on a confidentiality agreement preventing the investigating Amgen scientists from publicly disclosing data at odds with the original findings. So these key cancer medical researchers not only know the spurious nature of their research, but they are quite prepared to cover it up, something which is against public interest because it ultimately costs lives — possibly a huge number. (Under any other name, this is mass murder, but under the conventional cancer treatment banner, this is business as usual.)

Sharon Begley of Reuters also reported in her article (“In cancer science, many ‘discoveries’ don’t hold up,” it is not just Amgen scientists who are aware of this massive problem:

[This Amgen report] echoes a report from scientists at Bayer AG last year. Neither group of researchers alleges fraud, nor would they identify the research they had tried to replicate.

But they and others fear the phenomenon is the product of a skewed system of incentives that has academics cutting corners to further their careers.

George Robertson of Dalhousie University in Nova Scotia previously worked at Merck on neurodegenerative diseases such as Parkinson’s. While at Merck, he also found many academic studies that did not hold up.

“It drives people in industry crazy. Why are we seeing a collapse of the pharma and biotech industries? One possibility is that academia is not providing accurate findings,” he said.

The National Academy of Sciences held a panel to discuss these problems, and the fact that “the number of scientific papers that had to be retracted increased more than tenfold over the last decade [while] the number of journal articles published rose only 44 percent.” Panelist, Ferric Fang of the University of Washington, stated:

The surest ticket to getting a grant or job is getting published in a high-profile journal. This is an unhealthy belief that can lead a scientist to engage in sensationalism and sometimes even dishonest behaviour.

So just because research is “peer-reviewed” is no guarantee that it is objective or accurate. ( Indeed, some prefer to call these journals “peer-controlled” rather than “peer-reviewed” because the peers who are acting as gatekeepers for the journals often have a financial interest in supporting the status quo — their own careers and status are on the line. Just try submitting scientific research on alternative treatments and you soon come up against a brick wall.

The British Medical Journal itself, in its Clinical Evidence journal, reported in 2007 that only 13% of orthodox treatments were in the beneficial category. 23% of treatments were “likely to be beneficial”; 8% were a “trade-off between benefits and harms”, 6% were “unlikely to be beneficial”; 4% were “likely to be ineffective or harmful”; and a full 46% were of “unknown effectiveness”. And these statistics are from a leading mainstream medical journal, and so are likely to be more conservative estimates (from an independent perspective the scientific ineffectiveness of conventional medicine is likely to be worse). This means that doctors haven’t a clue as to the effectiveness of half of the treatments they are giving, and most of the remaining portion are questionable.

The bigger picture that was not covered in Sharon Begley’s Reuters article above is that the massive pharmaceutical industry is the one that is actually funding most of the research. So rather than just being part of the solution in identifying the high levels of bad science, as the Amgen scientists were doing, they are the ones that are funding most of this bad science with their research grants and donations to universities. When big business and science meet, you can be sure that objectivity and ethics are compromised because of the levels of money involved.

Scientists and doctors, Gary Null, Caroyln Dean, Martin Feldman, Deborah Rasio and Dorothy Smith, produced a detailed report entitled “Death by Medicine” in 2006. The authors uncovered the fact that nearly 800,000 people in the United States alone are killed by conventional medicine every year, making it the leading cause of death and injury in the US. You can read the full article here:

And this article went on to inspire Gary Null to produce an excellent documentary of the same name which you can watch here:

So going back to cancer treatment, we see an insanely profitable conventional cancer treatment industry not only ineffective for the vast majority of cancer sufferers and based mostly on spurious science, but one that has also been granted a monopoly by our governments to prevent other treatments (which may or may not be more effective) from even being discussed (like blocking the alternative cancer conference in the Totnes public hall). This situation cannot be, by any stretch of the imagination, in the public interest.

The problem with most of the alternative cancer treatments is that they include more natural approaches such as special diets, natural food supplements, herbs, holistic treatments, nutrients and other lifestyle changes, treatments that are not profitable for big business because they cannot be patented and owned. Therefore, giving big business the monopoly on cancer treatment ensures that only treatments that fit its big business model are even considered for cancer sufferers, and these are almost entirely profitable drug and radiation treatments that can be intellectually owned and therefore effectively marketed.

Just suppose, hypothetically if you want, that special diets, natural food supplements, herbs, holistic treatments, nutrients and/or other lifestyle changes do in fact present a more successful way to treat cancer than current conventional methods. If this were the case, the public would be kept almost entirely in the dark about it because those with the monopoly on cancer treatment would never examine these approaches. And not only that, but they would actively discourage media reporting of these approaches as they would be seen as damaging to existing profits. We have to remember that just because pharmaceuticals are dealing with life and death situations does not imply that the healthcare industry is more ethical than other industries in the way they chase profits. Business is business, and when the conventional cancer care industry is worth hundreds of billions of dollars, you can be absolutely sure that current ineffective treatments will be aggressively and often underhandedly defended using effectively unlimited resources. (To see just how Big Pharma deals with competing healthcare systems, read investigative journalist Martin Walker’s excellent exposé called Dirty Medicine in which he thoroughly documents the underhanded assault on natural health care —

With the massive influence of the pharmaceutical industry on the mainstream media (through ownership, advertising and PR etc.), it is actually a remarkable testimony to the persistence and efficacy of alternative cancer treatments that so many people seek out these alternative treatments and that positive articles still manage to get published in the mainstream media. After all, if a trillion-dollar industry is unable to stamp out the competition, then that competition is certainly worth investigating!

It is important to state at this point that alternative cancer treatments are not necessarily more effective than conventional ones. There is certainly evidence that some might well be, but with practically all research money going to conventional treatment, the necessary studies are just not being done on the same scale. After all, to study any less-profitable treatments requires Government grants, because industry (which supports most clinical research) is not going to be interested if the treatment does not fit its profit-making model. But as Government is so closely allied to the pharmaceutical companies, grants for research into alternative cancer treatments are notoriously hard to procure. (And the large cancer research charities focus their funding almost entirely on conventional cancer treatment, which is why they should not be supported.)

Of course there are token studies undertaken on some aspects of these non-profitable cancer treatment approaches such as lifestyle changes, but the results of those studies, no matter how successful, don’t seem make it into mainstream cancer care. In fact, there is as much as a 50-year gap between the findings of new research and the implementation of those findings by medical doctors. For example, a multitude of studies over the past few decades have shown a strong link between cancer and poor diets, so you would assume that oncologists would make it standard policy to advise cancer patients to avoid junk food and eat healthy diets. But this does not generally happen, despite the research. Indeed, when Kevin Wright, who used to run the charity Kids Integrated Cancer Treatment, took his son to the leading children’s cancer hospital in the UK, for example, he was given a leaflet advising parents on how to feed their sick children. Wright brought the leaflet with him to the Totnes Cancer Healthcare Conference mentioned above and it unambiguously recommends an appalling high sugar, high junk food diet. And that is exactly what the nurses at that hospital were getting for the children in their care. (Fast-food outlets like McDonalds and Burger King are now prevalent in conventional hospitals because those that control the hospitals are unfortunately in healthcare La La Land sponsored by big business. It is not about health, it is about money, and junk food not only makes money, but it will get you more clients for your hospital.)

So the conventional cancer treatment industry maintains the status quo, pushing treatments that it can profit from and discouraging treatments it cannot profit from, irrespective of treatment effectiveness. The word “discouraging” is perhaps a little tame for some of their thuggish behaviour in stamping out the competition. We might feel outrage at the lengths that the medical industry will go to maintain its monopolies and eliminate the competition, but this behaviour is business as usual for all sectors of big business. This is the way that corporations operate. (For more information on corporations, how they operate and how they damage society, watch the following film-documentary that was released a few years back:

The other major reason for big business rejecting alternative cancer treatments is that they tend to be multi-faceted. Most people who take alternative and complementary treatments usually take a number of them, rather than taking just one in isolation. And often (but not always), alternative treatments are individually tailored to each person, especially with holistic alternative treatments where the person rather than the disease is the focus of treatment. With this approach, it is difficult to turn most alternative treatments into easily-packaged commodities, or indeed into treatments that can be reductively studied scientifically, where the causative factors have to be somewhat limited. After all, if there are too many variables in a study, even the best statistical methods will fail to quantify the relative effectiveness of each component of the treatment — identifying which ones are useful and which ones are not. (This is a problem due to the complexity of both alternative treatment methods and the body: see In Defense of Alternative Medicine – With 15% to 50% of cancer patients using alternative and complementary treatments (the stats are about 33% in Europe, even conventional cancer treatment reviews are questionable due to the number of variables involved with such wide scale complementary practices.

This is not, however, a dismissal of conventional medicine; it certainly has its place. Modern conventional medicine is second-to-none with regard to dealing with medical emergencies. If you get run over by a car, your best bet on recovery is your local emergency hospital, not your local homeopathic clinic. Conventional emergency care is called acute medicine, and is tailored for injuries, infections, organ failure etc., in fact any situation that requires urgent and rapid intervention, often to save patients’ lives.

But what plagues society today are often complex chronic diseases like cancer, heart disease, stroke, diabetes, arthritis, respiratory diseases, mental health disorders and the like, which are responsible for 63% of all deaths, and a far larger percentage of treatment cost as treatments tend to be more expensive and longer-term (you are usually in hospital far longer if you have cancer than if you have an infection or an injury). Indeed, The World Economic Forum has estimated that the the global cost of treating the five top chronic diseases — cancer, diabetes, heart disease, lung disease and mental health disorders — could top $47 trillion by 2030.

These complex chronic diseases require a different approach to that of acute conditions. With acute medical issues, the focus has to be on the symptoms of the problem because it is those symptoms that are putting the patient’s life in danger. Infections and injury are obvious examples where the focus is on dealing with the symptoms, and the primary concern is the patient’s immediate stabilization, not how he or she was injured or caught the infection. With chronic diseases, on the other hand, long-term factors such as lifestyle and psychological issues come into play. Usually, if left unchecked with no lifestyle changes made, chronic diseases eventually reach a critical phase — vascular disease can lead to a heart attack and cancer can stop our organs working — and when this happens the situation demands acute conventional medicine, which might well include emergency surgery. This is conventional medicine at its best. But if your heart disease is not at an emergency stage (yet), then your best bet might be to focus on completely modifying your diet, controlling your psychological stress levels and taking gentle exercise. These are not, however, profitable to conventional medicine, and so Big Pharma has instead developed a slew of powerful and profitable drugs such as statins, ACE inhibitors, diuretics, warfarin, and beta-blockers, that patients are often put on for the rest of their lives, drugs that can have some very serious long-term side-effects. In this way, the symptom-focused medical model is used to “treat” a chronic disease, a recipe for quick symptomatic fixes at the expense of long-term health. Statins, for example, are drugs with dangerous side-effects that are routinely prescribed preventively for those with high cholesterol, and yet even The Lancet has suggested that they are almost useless for women and older men. (See and the book Food is Better Medicine than Drugs by Holford and Burne.)

The same considerations regarding acute medical mindset being used on chronic disease applies to cancer as well. For instance, if a tumour is pressing against a vital organ, it may need to be surgically removed (if indeed it can be safely removed) as quickly as possible. After this, a course of chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy to try to kill any remaining cancer cells and possible secondary cancer sites, and possibly hormone therapy. (If a tumour is inoperable then it is usually just blasted with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy — with the oncologist just hoping for the best.) This is an acute medical approach to cancer. The cause of the disease is not a consideration, and the treatment is entirely symptom-focused and aggressive. (Follow-up chemotherapy and radiotherapy, outside of the immediate emergency situation, is however questionable, because damage to the immune system can have deleterious long-term consequences.)

But what if the cancer is not immediately life-threatening and treatment is less immediately urgent? The conventional treatment is pretty much the same acute care response — a combination of surgery, chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy (and sometimes hormone therapy). But these treatments, all of which can rapidly reduce the size of a tumour (or number of cancer cells in the case of non-tumour cancer), cause a great deal of injury to the body, to such an extent that they usually irreparably damage the immune system causing fatal relapses. (The small number of cancer cells that survive the poisoning and burning of chemotherapy and radiotherapy tend to be the more hardy and virulent ones, so that when/if the cancer recurs, it is significantly more likely to kill the patient.) This short-term view might be considered an acceptable risk if the cancer is immediately life-threatening, but if it is not, then short-term gains in rapid reduction in the number of cancer cells might not actually have any long-term benefit. Indeed, the severity of the treatment usually means that not only is little is actually gained in the longer-term, but it comes at the price of terrible suffering in the short-term. (The question that always needs to be asked is whether the little gained is worth the suffering.)

On the other hand, alternative approaches to cancer treatment tend to be slower and less aggressive, taking a longer term view of patient survival and not focusing exclusively on goals like the rapidity of tumour shrinkage. Disease-causes are investigated in relation to formulating treatments with view to long-term success rather than short-term symptomatic reduction. Deeper questions are asked such as “Why has the cancer rate increased so enormously over the last century?” to try to understand what the main causes might be, which can lead to preventative measures. This is a more systemic approach that brings together integrated treatments (which may sometimes include elements of conventional cancer treatment) to give the best chance of long-term survival. These approaches might involve changing the diet, removing toxins from the body (which both cause cancer and interfere with the body’s defense mechanisms), taking additional high-nutrient and anti-cancer food supplements, and undertaking various other alternative therapies. (After all, diet changes and a massive toxin increase are hallmarks of modern living recent and so could well be causative factors in the alarming cancer-rate increases.) Usually, no single component of most alternative cancer treatments can be classified or identified as the “active component” — all elements working synergistically together — and this creates a nightmare, mentioned above, of trying to squeeze multi-faceted treatments through cookie-cutter research analysis that requires simpler cause-and-effect mechanisms (procedures and active components that can be more easily isolated to determine their specific roles and effects).

This slower approach does not fit well with the conventional medical model which wants quick results using patentable and therefore profitable treatment programs and drugs. This is why the FDA defines how effective a cancer treatment is by how quickly it can reduce a tumour. In the words of US congressman Ron Paul, at a recent press conference, “the FDA and the drug companies are in bed together.” He went on to ask, “What does the FDA do when it comes to alternative or natural products? The FDA and the drug industry keep them off the market.” ( This is due to the usual revolving door hiring policies between the FDA and the drug companies, policies that ensure that the FDA is working almost exclusively in the interests of Big Pharma, which is why the organisation is working so hard at the moment to outlaw alternative medicine and natural foods. (Check out for updates on the latest FDA assaults on American liberty, assaults that are becoming the hallmark of health regulatory bodies throughout Europe and other countries around the world, including the World Health Organisation itself — see

So today we have a system of medicine that is second to none for acute conditions, but misses the mark completely for most complex chronic conditions such as cancer. But because cancer treatment has become a mammoth cash cow for big business, ineffective but insanely profitable treatments like chemotherapy and radiotherapy enjoy a wholly undeserved monopoly status. We have allowed the profits of private corporations to control how chronic life-and-death diseases are treated. And like any industry given a monopoly, it will not only use its considerable influence to make sure that the monopoly stays in place, but the system itself will naturally tune to profit maximization (as there is no competition) rather than effectiveness. So the dismal success rate of conventional cancer treatments creates little to no incentive to challenge those treatments when they are protected by a monopoly. This is entirely understandable from a big business perspective where profit is the focus, but it is a tragedy from a human perspective.

This means that the whole edifice of modern cancer care is rotten at the core because policy is controlled by big business. This problem of profits coming before people is a universal one across all industries, not just the healthcare sector. For example, you only have to look at the banking system and how corrupt it has become, and how it operates against the interest of society as a whole, to see a classic case of money calling the shots at the expense of everything else. The corruption of the banking system was exposed after the recent financial collapse and bailout fiasco, so that today most people would agree with you if you called the banking industry corrupt, whereas a decade ago, most would dismiss the accusation as conspiracy theory because… well banks and bankers were considered just too respectable!

There are now similar problems with the food industry, where corporate control is ensuring that our food becomes what is most profitable to big business rather than what is most healthy to the individual. As a consequence, profitable foods such as those that are highly processed, high-sugar, high-fat, high-salt, addictive, and genetically modified are being forced onto the population, creating a disease time-bomb which ironically creates more profits for the “healthcare” industry! (It is no coincidence that health insurance companies often have massive stakes in the fast food industry –

Genetic modification of food is particularly concerning because no adequate long-term safety studies are being done, and many of the studies that show the dangers of genetically modified food have been buried, their authors vilified and retired from their research careers. Genetic modification allows corporations to own food sources, including the seeds produced from crops, and only someone extremely naive would think that this was in the interests of the collective. You often hear the argument that genetically modified crops will solve world hunger, but the reality is actually very different. (See

So big business control of any sector of modern civilisation creates problems for the majority of people by its very nature as a profit-focused system. Some make the point that corporations have to service their customers well for them to be successful, but while this applies to smaller and medium sized corporations, it does NOT apply to massive multi-national businesses, especially those like the cancer treatment industry that enjoy a monopoly. These behemoths have too much power and control to be led by consumer interests. Instead, they manipulate people into consuming what is most profitable to them, and they do this through monopolies and other protective legislation, as well as their control over the media and, in the case of healthcare and food production, the entire medical establishment. Most people do not realize that multi-national corporations are not just scaled up versions of smaller corporations, they are an entirely different species, one that is exempt from many of the checks and balances — and taxes — that automatically apply to smaller corporations.

If big business is the root cause of ineffective modern cancer treatment, what can we actually do about it? How do we break this monopoly?

Fortunately, we have not reached a stage (yet) when medical treatment is forced on adults, and so long as we the people have a choice as to how we want our cancer treated, we have the option to avoid Big Pharma solutions if those solutions are not actually in our long-term interest. How would we know? By looking for independent sources of information, and by getting involved with organisations that are fighting for your right to a choice of effective healthcare. Here are some of the things you can do for yourself and anyone you know with cancer to find the most effective way forward:

  • Try to at least consult with open-minded doctors, health practitioners and other medical consultants willing to state the limits of conventional medicine (including actual 5-year survival statistics for particular treatments) and willing to suggest (and perhaps supervise) effective alternative and complementary treatments. There are also many clinics that offer alternative cancer treatments, usually with medical doctors on hand.
  • Investigate cancer treatment info websites that include alternative and complementary cancer treatments, and look for statistical assessments of treatments (both conventional and unconventional) that you are considering. It is true that the internet has a lot of misinformation on it too, but no more so than we get from the mouths of most doctors and hospital staff.
  • Visit online forums where cancer patients discuss treatment prognosis based on similar treatments for similar conditions. This not only imparts important information, but also gives invaluable emotional support to those facing intense treatments such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy.
  • Check out books on alternative and complementary cancer treatments that include the wider perspective of lifestyle changes.
  • Attend (and organise if you can) lectures and talks (no matter how formal or informal) on alternative and complementary cancer treatments, such as Stephen Hopwood’s Totnes cancer conference mentioned above.
  • Support individuals and organisations that are defending your rights to natural and alternative treatments. For example, in Europe, the David going up against the Goliath of the EU healthcare regulatory body, which is trying to regulate out of existence effective food supplements, herbs and other forms of natural and alternative healthcare, is the Alliance for Natural Health ( and its spokesperson and founder Dr. Robert Verkerk. The ANH is also doing important work in other parts of the world including the US ( Get involved with this organisation if you have the time, or perhaps support it with a donation.
  • If you want to support cancer charities that are making a real difference, support the small alternative and complementary cancer charities which give out a lot of information, organise events, and support those that conventional medicine has given up on. But AVOID donating to the large charities focused on cancer research as their support focuses on conventional treatments, making them part of the problem, not part of the solution. In fact, some describe them as the PR-agents of Big Pharma. Charities in the UK you might consider are Yes to Life( and Cancer Active ( And of course it is always good to donate to cancer care hospice charities which really do provide an invaluable service.

It can take real courage not to just blindly follow your doctor’s advice. If you refuse chemotherapy in the UK, for example, you can forfeit your right to be seen by an NHS doctor. This is understandably a frightening prospect for most people, and few have the courage to take an alternative path until they have completely failed the conventional route, by which time their chances of success with alternative treatments is low. This is one of the worrying dilemmas faced by cancer patients who are interested in alternative and complementary approaches. Challenging those in authority is very difficult for most people, who have been conditioned by society since birth not to rock the boat. But there is also no better motivation to rock the boat when your life is on the line.

We must all educate ourselves on the different cancer treatments available using independent information outlets which big business has no influence on, and pass that information on to anyone we know suffering from cancer. We have to expose the cancer racket being perpetrated by big business in the name of health, and get the Cancer Act 1939 , and similar protective legislation around the world, repealed because these monopolies are causing untold suffering. This 73-year-old law serves no positive purpose apart from filling Big Pharma’s coffers, allow it to gain even more control over government and society.

Where will this end? As big business gets its tentacles into every aspect of modern life, when it owns and controls everything, we will be living in the Big Brother nightmare that Orwell wrote about in 1984. Some say that nightmare is here already. Had this statement been made a decade or two ago, it would be dismissed as conspiracy theory. But people worldwide are waking up to the the fact that even in so called “free” and “democratic” societies, those in authority are not acting for the collective interest. At best they merely have their noses in the trough, at worst, they are also scheming to centralize power, ridding ordinary people of their freedoms of choice, including healthcare choices, in all but the most superficial aspects of their lives. People have become commodities, pawns in a system that enslaves them — invariably in the name of “safety” and “their own good”. Big Brother knows best and will protect you… so long as you obey him!

The internet is the last bastion of free speech in a corporatised world, which is why governments (especially the US government) and the corporations that control them, are pushing so hard for online censorship and control. As long as there is free speech, we are never going to be completely in the control of big business. But dark clouds are appearing on the horizon as new censorship laws (such as SOPA, PIPA and the like) are being introduced, in the name of public safety and intellectual property protection. Recently in America, for example, the Board of Dietetics / Nutrition in North Caroline have threatened a nutritional blogger with jail for advocating a health diet on his website claiming that he is guilty of the crime of “practicing nutrition without a license.” (For more info, visit: This means that we may get to the stage whereby only those who are licensed (indoctrinated) can disseminate information — in other words, only doctrine will be allowed to be freely expressed. When this happens, we will not be so far off from Orwell’s thought-crimes, and the enslavement of the human race will be complete.

On a slightly different note, what is most disappointing when we campaign for healthcare outside of the big business monopoly is that we invariably end up having to defend ourselves on two fronts: first against big business and its lackeys (government officials, medical doctors, and local trading standard officials) who obediently execute its agendas, and secondly against a motley crew of skeptics — solo or group vigilantes who vigorously defend anything that challenges the monopoly of big business, especially in the areas of healthcare and food manufacture. Some of them act independently to big business, taking upon themselves the responsibility to outlaw anything remotely alternative — alternatives which are always labelled as “bad science”, and those that promote them, as “quacks”, “charlatans” and “scammers”. Others are on the big business payroll, either directly or indirectly, and defend their masters because their living depends upon it.

Skeptics focused on alternative and complementary healthcare actually believe or are paid to believe in the fantasy that big business, with its unlimited financial resources, is unable and/or unwilling to skew science, politics and legislation in pursuit of its corporate agendas. They believe that the influence of money can be held in check by proper government procedures and scientific vetting. In their minds, objectivity can be protected from manipulation, and so the healthcare promoted by big business, which masquerades as scientific (despite the fact that only 15% of conventional medicine is based on science at all), is the only legitimate healthcare, with every other system of healthcare being, by definition, a scam or superstition.

You hear the most ridiculous and unscientific beliefs, beliefs that form the Skeptics’ Creed because they have no scientific backing. Here are a few of the beliefs you can find online on some of the prominent skeptics’ websites:

  • Anyone cured of cancer by an alternative cancer treatment was probably misdiagnosed in the first place or was fortunate enough to have a spontaneous remission. Alternative treatments do not work, period. And of course anyone who gets better from conventional treatment was diagnosed correctly and did not have a spontaneous remission.
  • The figures that show conventional medicine kills hundreds of thousands of people a year are false, no matter what the source.
  • Those that die at the hands of conventional medicine are the unfortunate collateral damage in a war that has saved a greater number of lives.
  • The war on cancer is being won by conventional treatments. Cancer recovery rates are rising, and this has nothing to do with earlier detection.
  • Peer-reviewed studies are the only means of testing medical treatments, despite the fact that most of conventional medicine is not based on them.
  • Modern conventional treatments are backed by science, and so nobody should question them or the doctors that prescribe them.
  • Big Pharma is trying to do the best for us. They would never dream of hurting us for profit. And anyway, it would be illegal for them to do so.
  • The legislation that prevents big business from manipulating research results is perfectly adequate. Most research can be trusted.
  • Anyone promoting alternative treatments is naive and/or a charlatan. In fact, those like Stephen Hopwood are “scumbags”.
  • Modern orthodox cancer care is second to none and its monopoly should be protected at all costs.
  • Chemotherapy and radiotherapy are scientifically proven to work and are effective cancer treatments.
  • Taking food supplements is unnecessary, even when recovering from illness. A “balanced diet” provides everything you need.
  • Junk food can be an important part of a “balanced diet”, which is why it is freely recommended to children with cancer.
  • Processing foods does not remove its nutrients but can enhance them. Processed foods is good for you.
  • Diet has no effect on behaviour. (Give those hyperactive screaming kids Ritalin instead, which of course is safe or it wouldn’t be legal.)
  • The fluoridation of water is safe and good for our teeth, despite the fact that there is no evidence that swallowed fluoride does anything for the teeth.
  • Pesticides and other chemical fertilizers are not harmful to health, and organic food is a waste of time and money.
  • Additives and preservatives are safe, otherwise they wouldn’t be on the market. The government regulatory bodies can be fully trusted.
  • Recommended Daily Allowances are adequate and not set too low. And any nutritive factor which has not been given an RDA by the government is not needed, even when we are sick.
  • When we are stressed , our need for nutrients such as vitamins is not increased in any way.
  • Natural food supplements are not healthier than synthetic ones.
  • Health cannot be rapidly affected by changes in diet.
  • Detoxification cannot be encouraged by particular nutrients. It is a myth and one that is perpetrated by quacks.
  • Sugar is perfectly healthy.

The list of nonsense goes on and on, despite the fact that these beliefs contradict most independent scientific research. Skeptics take every opportunity to promote their creed as objective science, a creed that offers them a worldview in which they are safely cocooned by Big Brother, where the government and big businesses patriarchies protect, heal and nurture them. It is a comforting illusion, but one that unfortunately masks a terrible reality. But denial is easier to cope with, and the tight ideological strait-jacket of mental bondage is a small price to pay for perceived security. Actually, many skeptics seem to get a positive kick out of denigrating anything and everything outside their tightly controlled worldviews. And their justification is usually public safety. However, if public safety really was the motivating factor, these individuals and organisations would be focusing their attention on Big Pharma which is killing hundreds of thousands of people annually, and maiming countless others. This is the real scam going on.

It is indeed a comforting thought for most people that their doctors are looking out for their best interests, promoting the safest and most effective treatment programs and pharmaceutical drugs. But it is unfortunately (and perhaps shockingly for many) not true. Even the kindest of doctors with the very best intentions have been indoctrinated into a system of medicine cultured to enrich the pharmaceutical industry. We have to awaken to the hijacking of every aspect of our lives by big business, and realize that we are collectively being exploited by the few for the profits of the few. The conventional cancer treatment protection racket is only a small part of a far larger agenda that is rapidly moving modern society towards a Big Brother scenario. Already in Europe, for example, people are waking up to the fact that their governments have sold them out to a non-democratically elected central power base in Brussels, a treason that was masqueraded as economic cooperation before it was realized that it involved the dissolution of basic sovereignty and self-determination.

In today’s uncertain world, we collectively seem so eager to give up our freedom for security, falling for the propaganda that only by forfeiting freedoms can we deal with the perceived dangers ahead. Before he became President of the United States, Dwight Eisenhower gave a speech in 1949 in which he stated:

“If all that Americans want is security, they can go to prison. They will have enough to eat, a bed and a roof over their heads. But if an American wants to preserve his dignity and his equality as a human being, he must not bow his neck to any dictatorial government.”

Freedom is not a luxury to be enjoyed when the world is safer, but is as basic as oxygen to human existence. If we give up our freedom for security, then we dehumanize ourselves. Fear is a potent weapon when it comes to controlling a population and getting it to give up its human rights, rights that get in the way of corporate and political agendas.

Those freedoms can and must include the freedom to determine our own healthcare, including cancer care, and to discuss these topics openly in public venues. If we allow outdated legislation like the Cancer Act 1939 in the UK (and similar legislation in other parts of the world) to interfere with these freedoms, to interfere with Freedom of Speech, then we lose our very humanity, becoming slaves to a system that wants to dictate every aspect of our lives, from how we are treated when we are sick, to the foods we eat — all in the name of profit.

So defending the right to discuss alternative and complementary cancer treatments at Hopwood’s Totnes cancer conference was not just an issue about healthcare, but more importantly was an act of standing up to the control of big business — the same control that allowed draconian legislation like the Cancer Act 1939 to be passed in the first place, legislation that protects treatments that even most oncologists privately reject.

I hope that none of you reading this article will ever get cancer, but if you do, I hope that you have access to ALL the information you need to responsibly make an informed choice that is entirely in your own interest, rather than have a third party with questionable interests make that choice for you. After all, making informed choices in every aspect of our lives, especially health, is a central part of our basic humanity.



Thanks for getting through this one. It is a very long and rambling article I know, but I did want to emphasise the symbiotic relationship between conventional healthcare (in this case cancer care) and the operations of big business. You cannot understand them independently of each other as they are basically one and the same. This is not conspiracy theory, but just what naturally happens as big business takes over the different facets of society. The truth is that democracy and big business are on a collision course, a fact that people all over the world are now waking up to. As long as big business is allowed to influence politicians and the medical establishment with its legal bribes, then this situation of protected ineffective and expensive healthcare will continue unabated, as will the sacrifice of ordinary people to fill the corporate coffers.

Update 20 Oct 2012

Much of the problem with conventional cancer treatments and the blocking of alternative and complementary cancer treatments stem from the misuse of mathematics. It is invalid in disease states to compare the results of large-groups of people using randomized double-blind trials, the so called “gold standard” of medical research. This irrational approach, which is called Evidence-based Medicine (EBM) is mathematically invalid because it assumes a “one-size-fits-all” approach to a problem where each person is actually unique in their expression of different disease states. Research on populations cannot be mindlessly applied to individuals. If you are interested in looking further into the irrationality of EBM, check out the book Tarnished Gold: The Sickness of Evidence-based Medicine by Steve Hickey PhD and Hilary Roberts PhD.


This article is for interest only and should not form the basis of diagnosis or treatment of any medical condition or illness. If you are unwell or have a specific medical condition, please base your healthcare decisions on the advice of a medical doctor or other healthcare practitioner.


Dean Oliver – Alternative Healing Podcast

OYM Logo

Dean Oliver

Podcast Link Here

Open Your Mind Radio –

Guest – Dean Oliver – Sunday 27th August 2017 – Dean is the architect of Sacred. Following the loss of several beloved family members, Dean became disenchanted with western medicine and was guided towards earth-made solutions for many of the man-made problems we face today. After an exploration of self-healing in 2012, Dean envisaged a world where people became less dis-connected and the healing power of plants was available to all. And how would he do this? By providing access to safe, effective and affordable medicine which facilitate people in self-healing. Dean became passionate in uncovering the truth about dis-ease within the body, predominantly cancer, and immersed himself in scientific study. He continues to question medical indoctrination and is committed to passing on the correct information so that you can live a more empowered life. Ever thankful to the plants for their guidance, Dean continues to regenerate himself to optimum health, and cannot wait to extend the knowledge to you, CBD, Carbon, C60, Borox.