💾 Archived View for clemat.is › saccophore › library › ezines › textfiles › ezines › TEOAS › teoas03… captured on 2022-01-08 at 17:21:33.
⬅️ Previous capture (2021-12-04)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
%%T%%%H%%%E%%%%%%%%E%%%Y%%%E%%%%%%%%O%%%F%%%%%%%%A%%%%%%%%S%%%T%%%O%%%R%%%M%%
.--.-. ��������������������������������������������������������� .-.--.
( ( )__ A CULTURAL RESURRECTION PUBLICATION __( ) )
(_, \ ) ,_) ������������������������������������������������� (_, ( / ,_)
'- \\---' T THE EYE OF A STORM T '---// -'
_\\ E ����������������������������������������� E //_
\\ . O TEOAS O . //
'.\:. A ��������������������������������� A :./ .'
� .':`\ S ROCK'N INTO 2000 S /':'. �
۳������������������������������������������������������������������������۳�
۳� The Cunning Circumvention of Imposed Limitations by the Distribution ߳�
۳ to the Public of Suppressed Information... Disclaimer in Is�00 ��
��������������������������������������������������������������������������Ĵ�
%%T%%%H%%%E%%%%%%%%E%%%Y%%%E%%%%%%%%O%%%F%%%%%%%%A%%%%%%%%S%%%T%%%O%%%R%%%M%%
۳������������������������������������������������������������������������۳�
۳ ��
۳ Authored by: [�t�rm] Release Dates: [Monthly] ��
۳ ��
۳ Edited by: [Demented Pixie] Issue [Is�03] ��
۳ ��
۳ Released by: [Cultural Resurrection] Language: [English] ��
۳ ��
۳ Distribution by: [City of Angels] Issue Content: [Cancer Cure]��
۳ ��
۳ ~~~Plz View Ezine in Fixed Width Font such as Courier~~~ ��
��������������������������������������������������������������������������Ĵ�
%%T%%%H%%%E%%%%%%%%E%%%Y%%%E%%%%%%%%O%%%F%%%%%%%%A%%%%%%%%S%%%T%%%O%%%R%%%M%%
۳������������������������������������������������������������������������۳�
۳Is�03 ��
۳ Cancer Cure ��
۳ ��
۳ This material...as issue Is�02...is an attempt to open your eyes on ��
۳ suppressed issues within our medical community. We tend to worship our ��
۳ doctors as gods who will save us from diseases. If these false gods let ��
۳ us down, isn't it then time we ourselves take back the responsibility ��
۳ for our lives and well-being? As the public begins to learn of promising��
۳ healing technology, they should demand to know why it is being withheld.��
۳ Dr Sam Chachoua has developed a safe, effective treatment for healing ��
۳ cancer, AIDS and other related terminal illnesses years ago, but medical��
۳ authorities ignore his work and try to prevent his treatments & Reseach ��
۳ from becoming widely known. If you believe things of this nature doesn't��
۳ happen in our society, you are simply misinformed. It is not, nor ever ��
۳ will be TEOAS's intentions for the public to believe in any published ��
۳ information blindly. Only to open there eyes to some documented fact and��
۳ possibly gain enough public interest so more questions are asked and ��
۳ there answers demanded. You've seen this phrase so often "Knowledge is ��
۳ Power". With knowledge comes a certain responsibility. Knowledge isn't ��
۳ Power in itself...Applied knowledge is Power. Lets make it a point and ��
۳ goal of our underground culture to distribute suppressed information to ��
۳ the public, then let them judge for themselves what the truth is. At ��
۳ least develop enough of an interest to start asking the right questions ��
۳ to the correct people. Learn and be aware of what goes on in the world ��
۳ around you. ��
۳ ��
۳ �t�rm ��
۳ ��
��������������������������������������������������������������������������Ĵ�
%%T%%%H%%%E%%%%%%%%E%%%Y%%%E%%%%%%%%O%%%F%%%%%%%%A%%%%%%%%S%%%T%%%O%%%R%%%M%%
۳������������������������������������������������������������������������۳�
۳ Extractions directly from his book, The Challenge, The Promise & The ��
۳ Cure, published in 1998. by Sam Chachoua, MB, BS, �1997 All Rights ��
۳ Reserved of course... ��
��������������������������������������������������������������������������Ĵ�
%%T%%%H%%%E%%%%%%%%E%%%Y%%%E%%%%%%%%O%%%F%%%%%%%%A%%%%%%%%S%%%T%%%O%%%R%%%M%%
۳������������������������������������������������������������������������۳�
۳ ��
۳ Cancer Cure/Part I, History ��
۳ ��
۳ TRUTH, LIES AND CONSPIRACIES ��
۳ ��
۳ Cancer, AIDS, heart disease: three faces of death that devastate so many��
۳ lives. Many believe that modern medicine will someday develop effective ��
۳ therapies. Those afflicted, their friends, family, lovers, pray that the��
۳ breakthroughs will come one day soon. ��
۳ Imagine that the world was offered new treatments and even real cures. ��
۳ Newspaper, television, radio and magazines would carry images of medical��
۳ triumph supported not only by hard data but by living, walking, healthy ��
۳ miracles. Imagine the impact this gift would have on millions of lives: ��
۳ the fulfillment of dreams, the awakening of hope. Try to imagine that ��
۳ the announcement was made and the world slept through it. Try to picture��
۳ a public reception with indifference and a medical society charged not ��
۳ to embrace but to destroy all embers of this success. ��
۳ If the scenario is hard to picture, then don't try to imagine it but try��
۳ to remember. It happened. I know. I developed the technology. I made the��
۳ announcement. ��
۳ I had always known that the medical system would take time to change, to��
۳ develop, but I could not have believed that the public announcement ��
۳ would fall on the deaf ears of victims, nor that any of my peers would ��
۳ challenge me not on the science of my achievements but with baseless ��
۳ rumours, lies and personal attacks. I could never have anticipated that ��
۳ in answering the dreams of so many, my life would turn into a nightmare.��
۳ ��
۳ A THREAT TO THE STATUS QUO ��
۳ ��
۳ Summer of 1995 was the proudest in my life. Fifteen years of research ��
۳ and medical trials had been building up to this one moment: the ��
۳ triumphant return to my adopted homeland Australia, and the fulfillment ��
۳ of a promise I had made to myself as I watched my father die of cancer ��
۳ so many years before. ��
۳ Investigating three previously overlooked phenomena-organ resistance, ��
۳ organism resistance and spontaneous remission-I had developed effective ��
۳ vaccines for the prevention and treatment of many killer diseases. The ��
۳ genesis of what I call..."Induced Remission Therapy"...had begun in ��
۳ Australia more than a decade earlier, but I had spent five years touring��
۳ the world, lecturing and training doctors in hospitals and institutes. I��
۳ was returning with independent proof: dramatic and overwhelming evidence��
۳ that a new age of health was being ushered in. I was returning home to ��
۳ present my discoveries and to fund all research and development in this ��
۳ field. ��
۳ Armed with X-rays, blood tests, preliminary data from the Colorado ��
۳ University Medical School, UCLA, Cedars Sinai Medical Center and ��
۳ undoubtedly the strongest proof: patients in remission from cancer, AIDS��
۳ and heart disease-rescued after all other options had been exhausted. ��
۳ This should have been the realisation of my life's goals. Via the media,��
۳ millions would meet the success stories and hear of my grant offer, ��
۳ $100,000 to initiate investigations in Australia of this new therapy. ��
۳ Then, suddenly, silence. All research institutes were eligible for the ��
۳ $100,000 grant, but none came. ��
۳ I found myself suddenly in the vacuum of a media blackout. Interviews ��
۳ were cancelled, news stories were not run. The public returned to its ��
۳ comfortable staple of cancer "breakthroughs" that may come to be in the ��
۳ next 10 years, the weekly announcements from the familiar research ��
۳ institutes. Soon, to the public, I became a forgotten memory. To other ��
۳ interests, however, I was a threat that needed to be destroyed. ��
۳ A direct frontal assault on Australian soil was not the way, though. I ��
۳ am a medical doctor in Australia; that gives me certain powers and ��
۳ rights. I had offered money to have my therapies proved or disproved, ��
۳ and I had reached out to the public. Attacking me overtly would have ��
۳ raised too many questions. Backed by data from some of the world's most ��
۳ prestigious research institutes, I was offering my technology with no ��
۳ strings attached. ��
۳ Australian Medical Board representatives attempted to chastise me for ��
۳ what they believed were obvious lies and deception. They demanded to ��
۳ know who had evaluated my data and where. They accused me of falsely ��
۳ raising hope in poor, dying individuals. It seemed okay to announce that��
۳ you can cure an occasional rat and raise millions in public donations if��
۳ you are an institute; however, to say that you can help people and not ��
۳ ask for, but offer money to prove your point was not quite the done ��
۳ thing. Interestingly, the Medical Board enquiry into my "unprofessional"��
۳ behaviour was the first time I had divulged details of the contacts and ��
۳ institutes investigating my technology. Incredibly, within days, these ��
۳ centres would not only cancel their collaboration with me but also, ��
۳ paradoxically, begin to deny that one had ever existed. ��
۳ In the USA and Mexico clinics opened up, offering my therapy but ��
۳ delivering heaven-knows-what to unsuspecting patients. I initiated legal��
۳ action to shut them down, but then became a victim of intense personal ��
۳ and professional attacks as well as physical attempts on my life. I was ��
۳ disgusted to learn that members of UCLA and Cedars Sinai took part in my��
۳ denigration, but I was in for an even greater shock. When the names of ��
۳ individuals from the Australian Medical Board were used against me, I ��
۳ asked them to intervene; they would not. It seemed that my own Medical ��
۳ Board was supporting the attacks, even if only by inaction. ��
۳ What is even more incredible is that amongst all the lies were claims ��
۳ that my MB, BS (the Australian medical degree) was not that of a doctor ��
۳ but rather of a nurse or undergraduate. In court, American expert ��
۳ witnesses testified to that and the Australian Medical Board seemed to ��
۳ go along for the ride. Despite incredible resistance and bias, I won the��
۳ court battle-but the war to save lives still rages. ��
۳ Unlike stories of conspiracies and cover-ups from long ago, this is ��
۳ happening now. I am still alive; the dream need not be lost, then ��
۳ mourned. The proof is there if you would only look. ��
۳ I would never have imagined that the hardest part of healing cancer and ��
۳ AIDS would be to get people to listen. ��
۳ This is my story and our dream. Please read; read and remember. ��
۳ ��
۳ ACCELERATED DREAMS ��
۳ ��
۳ Every child has dreams and aspirations, major contributions to make, ��
۳ marks to be left, fame to be found-and what feels like an eternity in ��
۳ which to accomplish these objectives. Curing cancer, growing up to be a ��
۳ hero, saving mankind-these must be some of the commonest fantasies of ��
۳ the young. Impossible tasks seem achievable because there is so much ��
۳ time-time to study, time to grow, time to prepare. Time allows for ��
۳ attainable fantasies, for pleasant dreams. When time is shortened by age��
۳ or situation, when there is a need for rapid realisation of the dream, ��
۳ reality destroys fantasies and dreams are either abandoned or are often ��
۳ transformed into tangible despair that mourns with its loss by cutting ��
۳ harsher than reality ever could. ��
۳ My father was first diagnosed with cancer in 1975. He was aware of the ��
۳ multiple myeloma (a cancer of the bone marrow) several months prior to ��
۳ submitting to investigations and therapy. Multiple myeloma at the time ��
۳ was treated only when symptomatic, as therapy was felt to decrease ��
۳ lifespan, so he felt no rush to confirm his diagnosis. ��
۳ He also felt no rush in informing me of his condition. My brother and ��
۳ sister had already entered medical school; I had entered puberty. My ��
۳ father worried that the news would devastate me and affect my studies. ��
۳ Even when faced with death, his concerns were for my life and future. ��
۳ So much changed in the next few years. My father, the workaholic, became��
۳ much more the family man; always my hero, now my best friend. ��
۳ ��
۳ STEPPING STONES, ALTERED PERCEPTION ��
۳ ��
۳ Cancer is a disease that has repeatedly thwarted a cure. To defeat it, ��
۳ surely one did not simply need to understand current teachings, one ��
۳ needed to excel. Curing cancer, was not within current knowledge, ��
۳ therefore one needed not only to master existing technology but to ��
۳ surpass it. ��
۳ When seen as stepping stones to achieving my dream, teachings were ��
۳ devoured. I top-marked in several exams and received the T. F. Ryan ��
۳ Roentgen Prize in physics. I tried to apply every new nugget of ��
۳ information to my father's situation. Biochemistry taught of new agents ��
۳ that could increase the efficacy of chemotherapy and radiotherapy, and ��
۳ of cellular toxic agents that were presented in other contexts. Review ��
۳ of old and new medical research often showed that these agents had been ��
۳ used, and failed to demonstrate efficacy. Chemical therapy of cancer was��
۳ receiving such intense worldwide scrutiny that it was virtually ��
۳ impossible to generate an original thought or concept from within the ��
۳ field. ��
۳ Perhaps the answer then lay in the application of unrelated technology ��
۳ to the cancer problem. In physics we were taught that ultrasonic waves ��
۳ would have different heating coefficients depending on the density of ��
۳ the target; that is, the harder something was, the hotter it would ��
۳ become when exposed to ultrasonic frequencies. Cancer was usually denser��
۳ than normal tissue, and my father's cancer, being surrounded by bone, ��
۳ could be heated up much more so than surrounding soft tissue. Perhaps ��
۳ such preferential heat damage could kill the cancer. ��
۳ I approached several cancer researchers. They seemed as excited as I was��
۳ but cautioned me to check past publications on the subject. Thirty years��
۳ previously, someone had applied that effect to cancer with marginal and ��
۳ occasionally harmful responses. ��
۳ Preferential attacks on cancer were not the answer, perhaps protection ��
۳ of normal structures against toxic agents would allow for more savage ��
۳ attacks against cancer. I discovered entire fields of science on the ��
۳ topic of radioprotective and chemoprotective agents. It was almost ��
۳ impossible to generate an original thought within the confines of ��
۳ chemotherapy and radiotherapy, yet despite continued failure these ��
۳ modalities seemed so powerful, alluring. Cancer was killing my father; ��
۳ I wanted to hit back, hard! ��
۳ Searching for metabolic weaknesses; poisoning some pathway essential to ��
۳ cancer but not to normal cells; combining modalitie of chemotherapy with��
۳ each other, with radiation, with hormones-everything had previously been��
۳ done and had failed. ��
۳ Cancer was seen as a disease of excess (too much smoking, radiation, ��
۳ pollution etc.); the generation of an evil, foreign life-form which ��
۳ battles and invariably destroys its host. Excess must be cut down, taken��
۳ away, burned or poisoned. This logic, combined with the frustration and ��
۳ hatred generated by this invulnerable nemesis, had locked us into the ��
۳ mindset that dominates current therapies-therapies that have failed us ��
۳ for so long, yet which we refuse to abandon. ��
۳ ��
۳ STANDARD CONCEPTS OF CANCER ��
۳ ��
۳ I would like to outline the concepts that have dominated cancer research��
۳ and therapies over the past few decades. Understanding failure is a ��
۳ useful tool in attaining success. ��
۳ By definition, cancer is a rogue cell which multiplies without respect ��
۳ for normal systems of cellular control and develops into a mass that ��
۳ invades and destroys normal tissue and structures. It is a powerful, ��
۳ mindless beast that spreads, grows more rapidly than normal tissue and ��
۳ ultimately leads to the death of the host. ��
۳ Cancer growth rate may be slowed or accelerated by a mass variety of ��
۳ infections. Even in its natural history, cancer growth is not constant, ��
۳ for during the life of the patient the disease often grows in spurts. It��
۳ is not uncommon for some cancer metastase to shrink, while most increase��
۳ in size. ��
۳ Cancer, the "mindless beast", starts in a localised area, invades ��
۳ circulatory and lymphatic systems, then spreads throughout the body. ��
۳ Certain cancers exhibit specific patterns of spread, long held by ��
۳ conventional teachings to be dictated by the pattern of circulatory ��
۳ distribution of micro-tumour emboli. This belief furthers the concept ��
۳ that cancer is a rampaging monster, cast by chance to spread its deadly ��
۳ seeds. Passively carried by blood and lymph to their new targets, cancer��
۳ cells are undifferentiated, nonspecific parcels of destruction that care��
۳ not where they lodge and are not part of the decision-making process in ��
۳ their travels to new organs. ��
۳ ��
۳ SEARCHING FOR MISSING DEFENCES ��
۳ ��
۳ A few observations regarding cancer, its population and age distribution��
۳ are cited repeatedly in immunotherapy literature. Essentially, increased��
۳ cancer incidence occurs with immunodeficiency and age, particularly past��
۳ puberty, also appears to be a promoting factor. ��
۳ If one considers only these observations, one can conclude that after ��
۳ puberty theres a loss of some vital immune-protective agent. If only we ��
۳ could identify it and replenish it, perhaps we could then triumph over ��
۳ this living nightmare. ��
۳ The most likely candidate for our source of white blood cells in shining��
۳ armour seemed to be the thymus gland, a master immune- cell generator ��
۳ which atrophies by early teenage years. Its degeneration seemed to ��
۳ correlate with increased appearance of cancer. ��
۳ Therapies have proliferated over the years where part or all of the ��
۳ thymus, its products and hormones were used to treat cancer patients. ��
۳ Results were marginal to non-existent, yet, of all the borderline ��
۳ alternative therapies, thymus supplementation persists most stubbornly. ��
۳ Propelled by a romantic notion, hope does not fade-even when it is a ��
۳ false hope. This restricted logic may have been sound. Perhaps we had ��
۳ fixated on the wrong atrophied organ. ��
۳ ��
۳ ORGAN RESISTANCE ��
۳ ��
۳ A common observation, even in the most advanced of malignancies, is that��
۳ some organs and tissues appear resistant to cancer spread and invasion. ��
۳ The small intestine not only resist spread but also very rarely develops��
۳ primary cancer. Perhaps there is specific immunologic capacity in the ��
۳ small intestine that prevents cancer from developing and protects it ��
۳ from tumour spread. ��
۳ A quick search of anatomy and immunology books revealed that the small ��
۳ intestine is blessed with its own immune protection in the form of ��
۳ lymphoid aggregates called "Peyer's patches". Much of the function of ��
۳ this line of defence is restricted to the small intestine and does not ��
۳ circulate. This could account for the cancer resistance being local. ��
۳ Studies of lower animals, particularly birds, indicated that their main ��
۳ immune-processing organ was not the thymus but was located in their ��
۳ embryonic and foetal intestine. Could this part of human immunology have��
۳ been delegated an unfairly low status? In the animals, their capacity to��
۳ transfer immune resistance to the entire body is optimal early in life. ��
۳ What if human correlation exists whereby there is transfer of resistant ��
۳ factors between Peyer's patches (and immune responses localised to the ��
۳ small intestine in later life) and the rest of the body early in life? ��
۳ In view of the logic supporting thymic supplementation and the hope that��
۳ restoration of an atrophied organ would destroy disease, there was ��
۳ another interesting observation with relation to Peyer's patches. ��
۳ Intestinal lymphoid aggregates atrophied with age. We had been so ��
۳ obsessed with the thymus that perhaps we overlooked the real saviour. ��
۳ ��
۳ THOUGHT TO ACTION ��
۳ ��
۳ I had yet to start medical school but spent a good deal of time at the ��
۳ Peter McCallum Cancer Institute in Melbourne where my father was ��
۳ receiving treatment. He had introduced me to several oncologists and I ��
۳ approached them with my ideas. The general response was condescending ��
۳ but usually polite. Dr Ian Cooper, chief haematologist, was not only ��
۳ supportive but also advised me to formulate my ideas as an experimental ��
۳ protocol and present it to Dr Jose of the Immunology Department. ��
۳ The reply to my preliminary correspondence was surprisingly encouraging:��
۳ I was invited to address the weekly group meeting of the immunology ��
۳ research team. I prepared theory, protocol and an experimental design. ��
۳ The presentation was informal and pleasant. Researchers from around the ��
۳ world had submitted protocols for review by this unit. Immunostimulants,��
۳ interferon, interleukin, lymphocyte harvest pre-chemotherapy: the ��
۳ suggestions were complicated but the themes familiar. I had heard or ��
۳ read about all these concepts before; worse yet, the experiments had ��
۳ been done and repeated years previously. I felt encouraged; my protocol ��
۳ was the only original idea being presented on that day. Surely a new ��
۳ concept would be more appealing to a research unit on the cutting edge ��
۳ of technology than simple repetition of prior failures? ��
۳ To demonstrate that Peyer's patches could be stimulated to produce anti-��
۳ cancer activity, I proposed that lymphocytes isolated from these ��
۳ aggregates be tested against those taken from the spleen and other ��
۳ sources for efficacy against cancer. For obvious reasons I chose ��
۳ multiple myeloma as the cancer system to attack. An important design ��
۳ feature was the testing of ordinary extracts to check for inherent ��
۳ activity and the evaluation of lymphocytes exposed to the cancer during ��
۳ the animal's life to search for induced activity. ��
۳ I was aware that the members of the unit had not been previously exposed��
۳ to this approach; it was new to them. I was also aware that they were ��
۳ not in the least interested. ��
۳ The first question I was asked was by Dr Jose, requesting the sources ��
۳ and literature supporting this concept as well as data on previous ��
۳ trials and their conclusions on this issue. ��
۳ "This experiment hasn't been done before!" I claimed proudly. ��
۳ "But we need to see prior work in this field," he countered. "That is a ��
۳ key factor in our accepting experimental protocols!" ��
۳ In that instant, I understood an intrinsic flaw in the cancer research ��
۳ industry. In order to realise easy acceptance of ideas and receive ��
۳ grants, it was important to show that you were travelling down the same ��
۳ well-worn path of prior investigations. ��
۳ "I don't understand," I replied. "Are you telling me that you won't do ��
۳ this because it hasn't been done before?" ��
۳ "It is hard for me to allocate funds to work lacking prior experimental ��
۳ and data references." (In essence, he meant "yes".) ��
۳ "We have no cure for cancer; we aren't even close. How will we find it ��
۳ if we don't explore new avenues?" I did not mean to sound cocky, but all��
۳ of my hope and courage were suddenly dissipating. I was being rejected. ��
۳ "We are on a strict budget and have defined guidelines." ��
۳ I would not be dismissed; my chance to save my father demanded their ��
۳ acceptance. ��
۳ "Okay, I'll pay for it!" (The first of many times that this phrase would��
۳ pass my lips, and about the only time that I would not regret it.) ��
۳ Dr Jose smiled and relented. "We'll see," he said. "Go do an intensive ��
۳ literature search; we'll start arranging things next week. Your ideas ��
۳ are interesting and worth exploring." ��
۳ My father, Isaac, was by now confined to a wheelchair and my mother, ��
۳ Catherine, catered to his every need and whim. He had been a whirlwind, ��
۳ an active workaholic who delighted in helping the ill. Now confined to ��
۳ a chair and to bed, he exhibited a spirit and attitude that I have since��
۳ come to realise is far from common. Isaac wasted no time cursing his ��
۳ debility but would focus on how long he was able to stay in his garden, ��
۳ tending to his plants, or on how active and pain-free he could be on a ��
۳ particular day. ��
۳ That day, my father and mother awaited my return from the conference ��
۳ with anticipation. That night, my home was filled with intense happiness��
۳ hope and prayer. ��
۳ ��
۳ SIMPLE MIRACLES ��
۳ ��
۳ The experiment I had proposed was amateurish in its simplicity. The ��
۳ small intestine dealt with foreign challenges from ingested food on a ��
۳ continuous basis. Mechanisms for immunologically dealing with harmful ��
۳ agents had to be dramatic, rapid and effective. Every time an organism ��
۳ entered our intestine, we did not have the luxury of mounting a slow ��
۳ response with temperature, lethargy and all the normal physiologic and ��
۳ metabolic features of an immune response. It had to be eliminated with ��
۳ prejudice and finality. ��
۳ Neighbourhood lymphocytes in the blood and other organs would never meet��
۳ such overwhelming numbers of challenges, as several barriers needed to ��
۳ be passed first.... their response therefore could afford to be more ��
۳ delayed. Immune cells from respiratory passages would also be expected ��
۳ to act rapidly, but they did not appear resistant to the spread and ��
۳ appearance of cancer. Peyer's patches would protect the small intestine ��
۳ against direct invasion from the large bowel cancers as well as blood- ��
۳ borne metastases. I reasoned that their cancer-killing ability should ��
۳ be visible within minutes. ��
۳ Others in the laboratory were sceptical, and with reason. Data repeated ��
۳ from decades of studies indicated that it would take the incubation of ��
۳ 50,000 to 100,000 white blood cells for three days with cancer cells ��
۳ and immunostimulants for some of these cells to kill one cancer cell. ��
۳ The effect was often so subtle that radio-uptake and leakage studies ��
۳ had to be undertaken to detect differences. This involved incubating ��
۳ cancer cells with radioactive isotopes of an agent such as caesium, to ��
۳ allow the cancer cells to absorb it. When damaged, cancer cells would ��
۳ then leak the radioactive caesium and that leakage can be measured to ��
۳ indicate cell damage. I reasoned that the effect would be easily seen ��
۳ on light microscopy with oesin uptake. This technique is one where a ��
۳ red dye is added to the cells. Living cells have an active pump system ��
۳ and patent membranes that stop dye entry, whereas damaged and dying ��
۳ cells would be coloured by the oesin. ��
۳ Control studies using cells from Peyer's patches that had not been ��
۳ exposed to cancer, showed cancer viability close to 95 per cent. Spleen ��
۳ cells from unexposed animals did the same. Spleen cells from animals ��
۳ that had been carrying the cancer gave me a surprising finding of 100 ��
۳ per cent viability of cancer and an actual increase in cancer count ��
۳ after short-term incubation. It appeared that spleen extract from a ��
۳ diseased animal was actually promoting tumour growth. I did not pay much��
۳ attention to that finding at the time; I was searching for a cure, not ��
۳ riddles. ��
۳ Cells from Peyer's patches of mice that had been carrying the cancer ��
۳ surpassed my expectations. As opposed to the 50,000 to 100,000 cells ��
۳ destroying one cancer cell as previously mentioned over a three-day ��
۳ period, it took one lymphocyte from sensitised aggregates to kill 400 ��
۳ cancer cells in a one-hour-or-less time period. The cancer cells would ��
۳ uptake the red oesin dye and soon collapse. ��
۳ The experiment would be repeated over and over before I would let myself��
۳ believe it, before I would show others. Exposed to a very small amount ��
۳ of Peyer's patch extracts, the cancer cells would turn red with ��
۳ embarrassment, then shrivel and die. Mass slaughter of an invulnerable ��
۳ enemy-it was intoxicating and delicious. ��
۳ I beckoned for Dr Jose to review the carnage. With just a hint of ��
۳ excitement he exclaimed, "They're all dead!" He then added in standard ��
۳ clinical "Vulcan" coldness: "Interesting." ��
۳ The following weeks were filled with more magic. Tests confirmed no ��
۳ toxicity to healthy cells from my lymphocyte extracts. They were able to��
۳ protect animals against cancer inoculations, and single low-dose ��
۳ treatment was able to keep the animals living longer once they had the ��
۳ disease. Other cancer systems were tested, including the hepatoma rat ��
۳ model, with identical successes. ��
۳ ��
۳ FADING DREAMS ��
۳ ��
۳ I asked when this discovery could be put to use in terminally-ill ��
۳ humans. "Not for a long, long time," I was told condescendingly. ��
۳ None of my colleagues or superiors in the laboratory seemed to share my ��
۳ excitement; worse yet, they seemed to resent my success-and me, too, for��
۳ that matter. Perhaps their egos were bruised. I was often reminded that ��
۳ I had no formal training or education in the field, whereas they had ��
۳ Hospital) and the Ludwig Institute became more and more isolated. ��
۳ Other affiliates and collaborators who had donated animals and lab space��
۳ to me included the Department of Biochemistry at Melbourne University. ��
۳ Dr Schreiber, the department head, called me in to advise me personally ��
۳ that in the few days I had been there I had created friction as I was ��
۳ not qualified, paid or a member of their 'group' and that structurally ��
۳ they could not support another worker. I had not fought with anybody, ��
۳ or argued or insulted anyone. I was unpaid and, above all, my work was ��
۳ yielding incredible results. How could they terminate investigation on ��
۳ such a promising avenue? These extracts were killing cancer more ��
۳ effectively and more safely than anything else in history! "It doesn't ��
۳ matter," Dr Schreiber replied. ��
۳ Dr Jose reminded me that publication was the only way for a scientist ��
۳ to achieve recognition, and offered me a poster presentation at the ��
۳ Clinical Oncology Society of Australia (COSA) annual meeting in 1981. ��
۳ Hopes rekindled; I prepared for the big time. Perhaps amongst doctors, ��
۳ the idea of an effective therapy would be better received than in the ��
۳ sterile field of research. ��
۳ A few months later I was standing proudly by my poster; the youngest- ��
۳ ever presenter of an original project at the prestigious COSA meeting. ��
۳ Few people stopped by my exhibit and most did so only to advise me to ��
۳ leave research and concentrate on my medical studies. I was simply too ��
۳ young and na�ve, they said. "What about the work?" I asked. "Interesting��
۳ ," they replied, and moved on. ��
۳ Most people spent their time around a diagnostic antibody exhibit. The ��
۳ attractive researcher's mini-skirt and plunging neckline were also on ��
۳ exhibit. Hell, even I found myself distracted by her monoclonals! ��
۳ I had come with aspirations of recognition, of encountering someone who ��
۳ would carry the investigation where I could not: in the human field. If ��
۳ I had harboured any illusions of discovery, fame or acceptance, they ��
۳ were quickly shattered. Scientists and doctors alike had greeted me and ��
۳ my discoveries with the same warmth one reserves for an acute attack of ��
۳ haemorrhoids or outbreak of herpes. ��
۳ While I found the displays worthwhile, the conferences themselves were ��
۳ electrifying. I learned of new techniques being used and the latest ��
۳ trials of hormonal agents, immunostimulants and chemotherapy. ��
۳ Immunotherapy remained an exciting field, whereas the latest ��
۳ chemotherapy evaluations were delivered in gritty, realistic and ��
۳ defeatist manner. Hormones were finding increasing application in ��
۳ general disease management. Bone damage and pain in cancer such as ��
۳ multiple myeloma were shown to be preventable and treatable with ��
۳ anabolic hormones. Just that tidbit of information was worthwhile. It ��
۳ represented a concrete, usable way to help my father. ��
۳ During the presentations I was to strike a friendship with an oncologist��
۳ who would later do his best to destroy me. It would be a recurring theme��
۳ of my life. My greatest enemies would always start as respected friends.��
۳ When I suggested to my father's oncologist that anabolic hormones be ��
۳ added to strengthen his bones and diminish his pain, he became annoyed. ��
۳ I had stepped on his toes by daring to suggest a therapy. Had I hurt his��
۳ ego? Was there a better way to ask him? Who cares? I just wanted the ��
۳ best for my father. He refused to recommend it and my father refused to ��
۳ try anything his specialist did not recommend. ��
۳ In one presentation I managed to offend my father's doctor and be ��
۳ ignored by virtually all others. I had presented a technology for curing��
۳ cancer, and no one cared. ��
۳ ��
۳ EGOS AND LIES IN THE HEALING ARTS ��
۳ ��
۳ One of modern medicine's greatest achievements is the claim that no one ��
۳ needs to suffer, for there is supposedly no pain that cannot be elimin- ��
۳ ated by modern pharmaceuticals. That is perhaps true even in severe ��
۳ terminal pain, if one does not mind existing instead of living; existing��
۳ with clouded perceptions, blunted emotions, a drug-induced stupor; a ��
۳ waking coma where you struggle to comprehend the world racing around ��
۳ you, where you try to communicate but mouth gibberish, where you dig ��
۳ deep, searching for the spark, the joy, the will to continue but find ��
۳ not even a memory of it. ��
۳ This desperation, this depression, this torment, this torture is often ��
۳ the price paid for physical comfort. "We can prevent suffering in ��
۳ terminal disease" is a statement often made by a medical fool more ��
۳ concerned with perpetuating and reaffirming his illusions of godhood ��
۳ without any regard for reality. ��
۳ Cancer is nothing if not relentless. Chemotherapy and radiotherapy had ��
۳ failed to arrest the progress of my father's disease. As the multiple ��
۳ myeloma spread its physical domination, shattered my father's skeleton ��
۳ and destroyed his immune function, fractures, recurrent infections and ��
۳ pain, constant pain, became features of his life. As he lay bedridden ��
۳ with bone compression, multiple rib breaks and a disintegrating pelvis, ��
۳ my father refused painkillers except at night so that he could sleep. ��
۳ He would not permit any loss of mental clarity during his waking hours: ��
۳ time was short and he wanted to live it, experience it fully. With his ��
۳ body deteriorating, his mind remained the only undesecrated sanctuary, ��
۳ haven, drive to continue. He would not allow this most cherished ��
۳ possession to be tainted; he would not allow his loved ones to see him ��
۳ as anything less than the best he could be. ��
۳ I was beginning to have major problems at medical school. I could not ��
۳ see the relevance of many topics, nor fathom the time-wasting techniques��
۳ in teaching other subjects. We learned, for example, how to launch a ��
۳ projectile into orbit around Jupiter (useful knowledge if your practice ��
۳ caters for outer-space aliens and you wish to post them a prescription; ��
۳ of course that would necessitate a pharmacy on Uranus, which could prove��
۳ uncomfortable). Plutonium purification in the manufacture of nuclear ��
۳ warheads was another priceless inclusion in our study of the healing ��
۳ arts. Important topics were noted by their absence. Preventive medicine ��
۳ was never discussed. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, when I undertook��
۳ my formal medical studies-diet and nutrition were considered alternative��
۳ heresy. ��
۳ The study of anatomy was done in a particularly inefficient manner. We ��
۳ were given cadavers to dissect for two years. A group of eight students ��
۳ would spend hours, scalpels in hand, digging at a corpse, hoping to find��
۳ and trace nerves and arteries to their origins and distributions. Dead ��
۳ bodies do not handle the same as living tissue, and rarely look the same��
۳ as in book illustrations. I studied my anatomy from a book. Much more ��
۳ could have been learned had each group been assigned one person who was ��
۳ well-trained and who could have guided and educated us. My memories of ��
۳ these sessions are ones of the stench of formalin, of a student eating ��
۳ someone's biceps on a dare, and of others skipping rope using a corpse's��
۳ small intestine or playing football with a hardened lung. This abhorrent��
۳ lack of respect for men and women who had donated their bodies to ��
۳ science and medicine sickened me. ��
۳ ��
۳ MEDICAL RESEARCH: STAGNANT, DIRECTIONLESS ��
۳ ��
۳ In this era of genetic engineering and daily promises of medical marvels��
۳ it is hard to imagine a period where innovative thought seemed to be at ��
۳ a standstill; yet back then, as now, in the playing fields of clinical ��
۳ trials, one finds some variations of intricate protocols and slight ��
۳ modifications of some rules and tools to search for slightly improved ��
۳ responses from the same tired players: surgery, radiation and ��
۳ chemotherapy. This points to the stagnant nature of real options ��
۳ available to the public. ��
۳ As a medical student, I was now becoming exposed to rigid, inhumane ��
۳ insanity often associated with clinical trials and questionable measures��
۳ of success. Only in cancer, for example, would a chemotherapeutic agent ��
۳ being evaluated be considered a success if it shrank a cancer mass, even��
۳ if it shortened patient survival. ��
۳ Decades ago hospitals had carried out unethical and repulsive procedures��
۳ in the name of science. Pregnant women were injected with high doses of ��
۳ radioactive isotopes to gauge the effect on embryos; prisoners' ��
۳ testicles were irradiated to study changes; relatives were inoculated ��
۳ with patients' cancers to study their response (at least one case of ��
۳ cancer transfer and death of a patient's mother occurred). ��
۳ Modern-day inhumanity was present, but not quite as overt. It lay in ��
۳ protocol objectives and structures. ��
۳ I remember the case of a patient, a 22-year-old mother, who entered a ��
۳ monitored trial situation where she was slotted into the hormone-blocker��
۳ evaluation group. This breast cancer study was designed to evaluate ��
۳ survival with various treatment options: surgery alone (localised), ��
۳ surgery alone (extensive), with radiation, with chemotherapy, with ��
۳ hormonal blocker therapy, with combinations of the preceding. ��
۳ This data had already been gathered to reasonable precision from studies��
۳ too numerous to mention worldwide, and with certain guidelines for ��
۳ combinations had been enforced for many years. This particular design ��
۳ protocol did not allow for such flexibility. How could we achieve ��
۳ accurate readings if we contaminated one group with the therapy of ��
۳ another group? ��
۳ The cruelty of the last statement could be seen in the plight of the ��
۳ patient referred to above. Having been assigned to the hormone group, ��
۳ other therapy was withheld-even when it became obvious that it was not ��
۳ working, and spreading cancer had broken several bones in her spine. ��
۳ (This was not an unusual occurrence in breast cancer. The standard ��
۳ therapy of the time, which remains to this day, is the use of radiation ��
۳ to allow for fracture-healing and to resolve the associated pain. This ��
۳ was denied her; actually, never offered, for the 'sake' of the trial.) ��
۳ The insanity of this situation must be restated: this trial was ��
۳ confirming many others which had already outlined the relative merits ��
۳ of therapy. Why this theme of repetitive rediscovery of the known, ��
۳ regardless of human consequence? Because it gives the illusion of work, ��
۳ progress and motion in a stagnant cesspit of medical impotence. ��
۳ In Australia, the natural health revolution had only just begun and was ��
۳ struggling for acceptance. The adamant claims of this new field of ��
۳ medicine were both inspiring and confusing. The response from all the ��
۳ conventional medicine was cutting. Alternative medicine was deemed ��
۳ fraudulent and rejected outright, its practitioners shunned and ��
۳ persecuted. Disgrace and deregistration awaited doctors who preached or ��
۳ practised its beliefs. ��
۳ Supporters of this emerging field dealt in an inexact science, yet the ��
۳ detractors refused to carry out investigations to disprove the claims ��
۳ of alternative medicine. What resulted was a slinging match with a ��
۳ confused public as the victim. Patients were often punished if they saw ��
۳ a naturopath or asked a doctor advice on supplements; they would be ��
۳ treated curtly, and it was not unusual for the doctor to refuse their ��
۳ ongoing care. New options had been thrust onto patients, yet proof of ��
۳ efficacy was as lacking as proof of inefficacy. ��
۳ My mother and I had been searching constantly for anything in research, ��
۳ folklore or overseas programs. The sudden influx of claims from natural ��
۳ medicine brought a range of new modalities to try: mind power, herbs, ��
۳ vitamins, vegetarianism, macrobiotics. My father tried them all, to no ��
۳ avail. ��
۳ Fasting, juices, meditation, simple do-it-yourself techniques with a ��
۳ universal appeal could restore a person's capacity to help themselves ��
۳ against a condition so foreign, so overwhelming that grown adults would ��
۳ revert to child-like dependency on their doctors. Even if only of ��
۳ marginal efficacy in the physical long-run, the psychological advantage ��
۳ of regaining some measure of control of one's life was a feature ��
۳ conventional medicine could not compete with. There was also a link that��
۳ had only been hinted at previously. Alternative medicine heavily ��
۳ promoted the concept that proper activation of immune function could ��
۳ eliminate cancer-again, an empowering concept. ��
۳ Perhaps in an effort to compete with the new challenger, or perhaps ��
۳ finally disgusted with the toxic failures called "standard therapy", ��
۳ the powers-that-be launched a major thrust into immunotherapy. I was ��
۳ part of the "IF" generation. Conventional medicine brought out a new ��
۳ warrior, an immunostimulant called "interferon"-the "IF" drug. I cannot ��
۳ claim to know or understand what changes the emphasis of investigative ��
۳ pathways in modern medicine, only to say that the industry is ��
۳ particularly well tuned to public views and needs. In the 1970s it was ��
۳ immune function, so interferon and interleukin occupied the forefront ��
۳ of research for a decade or so. In the 1980s the public cried out for ��
۳ natural medicine, so Taxol, a natural extract, was released. ��
۳ If the above passage alluded to a sinister, manipulative arm to the ��
۳ industry, it is because I believe it to be inherent in this field. ��
۳ Interferon, hailed as the new champion in the 1970s, had actually been ��
۳ discovered at least 50 years previously and then shelved. Why turn to ��
۳ it now unless the above were true? Public manipulation and public ��
۳ gullibility are extreme in many areas; cancer, however, leads the ��
۳ field. ��
۳ STOLEN HOPE ��
۳ ��
۳ The interferon onslaught was savage. Newspapers, magazines, television ��
۳ and radio programs were at saturation levels with details of miraculous ��
۳ cures. Like a well-oiled machine, the Cancer Institute announced it ��
۳ would commence interferon trials; then... soon after... hospital ��
۳ fundraising events were commenced. This '''dance''' of announcing ��
۳ breakthroughs, then a program for implementation followed by appeals ��
۳ for public donation, was monotonous and obvious, year after year. ��
۳ Many controversial figures have been accused of preying on desperate ��
۳ victims and profiting from false hope. With decades of failure behind ��
۳ them but excellent marketing and publicity, with daily announcements of ��
۳ breakthroughs and assurances of imminent success, with billions raised ��
۳ within this format, could the cancer industry not also be accused of the��
۳ same? Yesterday's heroes fade into oblivion and new hopeful contenders ��
۳ are found to blaze in glory for a time, then fail. They may fail in ��
۳ living up to therapeutic expectation but always succeed in maintaining ��
۳ the illusion of dynamic progress and in raising phenomenal income. ��
۳ Interferon was showing initial remarkable activity in several cancer ��
۳ types; most importantly, and repeatedly, cases of advanced multiple ��
۳ myeloma were shown recovering with this new therapy. My father's ��
۳ hospital had announced that it would investigate its efficacy in the ��
۳ treatment of multiple myeloma. A dream come true, a hope reignited! ��
۳ Institute and was on first-name basis with most of the specialists ��
۳ there. He was also one of few long-term survivors of multiple myeloma ��
۳ at that hospital, so surely he would be one of those enrolled in the ��
۳ trial now that all other therapies were failing him. ��
۳ Reality hardly ever fulfils all your dreams and prayers. It is also not ��
۳ usually as needlessly cruel as it was to my father. Following months of ��
۳ anticipation and planning into what had seemed a bleak future, we ��
۳ awaited notification of the interferon trial. My father was not ��
۳ accepted. ��
۳ In medical trials, patient selection is very often optimised for ��
۳ demonstrating good results. The healthier the patient, the more likely ��
۳ they are to survive the trial (no point investing in someone who may ��
۳ die prior to accumulation of data), and the more likely they are to make��
۳ the product look good. My father was a risk. Death loomed closer; cancer��
۳ laughed and marched on, its progress accelerated by a weary body and ��
۳ a spirit shattered not by disease but by hope that was taken away. ��
۳ ��
۳ Part II-Lecture ��
۳ ��
۳ My name is Sam Chachoua and I'm an MD from Melbourne, Australia. What ��
۳ I'm going to talk to you about now is something quite new and ��
۳ revolutionary. It's called Induced Remission Therapy and it's a ��
۳ treatment that is based on three natural phenomena: organ resistance, ��
۳ organism resistance, and spontaneous remission. ��
۳ I first got into cancer research at an early age when my father was ��
۳ diagnosed with multiple myeloma, and I basically tried to see whether ��
۳ I could find something that could help him where conventional therapies ��
۳ were failing. One thing that I noted in all the studies I had was that ��
۳ there are parts of the human body-for example, the small intestine-which��
۳ are consistently resistant to cancer. Regardless of how far and wide ��
۳ cancer usually spreads, it usually leaves the small intestine alone. ��
۳ There's also something known as "organism resistance", which means that ��
۳ most other animals that we try to give human cancer to are able to ��
۳ reject it. So I set about designing an experimental protocol where I was��
۳ going to find out what it was about the small intestine that made it ��
۳ resistant to cancer, and I was going to find out what it was about ��
۳ horses, cats and dogs and other animals that made them resistant to ��
۳ human cancer. ��
۳ To cut a long story short, I managed to isolate the immunological ��
۳ factors which I used in experimental protocols at the Peter McCallum ��
۳ Cancer Institute. At age 18 I'd written my first paper, and the ��
۳ following year I presented it before the Clinical Oncology Society of ��
۳ Australia. Let me tell you, I was pretty proud of myself. I thought: ��
۳ "Kid, you've got it made; you've helped your dad now, and this therapy ��
۳ is going to be adopted soon." And I could just see it. I was going to ��
۳ walk into the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia. Everybody's going ��
۳ to cheer and get on the phone and say: "Hey, we've got a young kid here;��
۳ give me the Nobel Committee." Na�ve! I was actually greeted with all the��
۳ warmth one usually reserves for a venereal disease or an acute attack of��
۳ haemorrhoids! ��
۳ Let me just jump to how this form of therapy can apply to AIDS. We've ��
۳ known for a very long time that it's impossible to give animals AIDS by ��
۳ injecting them with HIV. Now there are two possibilities: either animals��
۳ are inherently resistant, i.e., they don't have receptor sites for HIV; ��
۳ or maybe, just maybe, they have an immune system which is capable of ��
۳ fighting and destroying the virus. Well, hey, let's check it out! ��
۳ So the initial data all showed promise that you could raise an immune ��
۳ response out of a horse, for example, that would selectively destroy ��
۳ HIV. What intrigued and amazed me was seeing the thought processes or, ��
۳ rather, not being able to see the thought processes in the AIDS ��
۳ researchers who for years now have tried to find some way of developing ��
۳ an immune system resistant to AIDS. They sit there and say: "Well, we ��
۳ need to make an animal model. Once we have an animal model, once we've ��
۳ made an animal sick with AIDS we can find a way to cure it." So they get��
۳ their little test animals; they get their rats, their dogs, their horses��
۳ and cats; they inject them with HIV-and they can't give them AIDS! They ��
۳ get really upset about that: "How am I supposed to find a cure for AIDS ��
۳ if I can't give this animal AIDS? I'm injecting it with HIV to try to ��
۳ find an immune response that will kill HIV, and it won't take it. How ��
۳ am I supposed to do my job?" Are you following the thought pattern ��
۳ here? It's looking right at them. ��
۳ It would seem a bit of an anticlimax if I were to tell you that one of ��
۳ the easiest ways to deal with the greatest plague today is to use an ��
۳ animal system that's resistant to the plague, and treat and cure the ��
۳ people suffering from the disease. A hundred years ago, before we had ��
۳ antibiotics, the only therapy we had for pneumonia, smallpox and polio ��
۳ was horse serum. They'd get a horse, shoot it with a disease, draw the ��
۳ horse serum out, shoot that into the person and cure them. If that ��
۳ therapy was good enough to deal with the plagues a hundred years ago, ��
۳ why isn't it being applied now? ��
۳ But what happens if you do apply it now? Here's the case of a young man ��
۳ with AIDS. He's 32 years old. He's got a pneumocystis pneumonia, he's ��
۳ short of breath, he's got a T-cell count of 80 and a T4/T8 imbalance. ��
۳ So, essentially, his blood, his virus, is extracted out; an animal, such��
۳ as a horse, is vaccinated with his blood; the antiserum from the animal ��
۳ is then purified against this patient's blood so it doesn't cause ��
۳ allergic reactions; and the patient is treated with the horse's serum. ��
۳ And we see that within 24 hours, the pneumocystis pneumonia clears up. ��
۳ That's pretty remarkable considering that the best that antibiotics can ��
۳ do, if they can clear it, is take days to weeks. This patient's symptoms��
۳ resolved; his T-cell count went up to 780 within 10 days from a low of ��
۳ 80, and his T4/T8 ratio became normal. ��
۳ Now what I've just told you is pretty dramatic, but doesn't it make some��
۳ sense to you? Isn't it common sense? We have a disease that can ravage ��
۳ our immune systems but can't ravage a horse's, can't ravage another ��
۳ disease? ��
۳ So, off I went to the big hospitals in the US, and I said, "Hey, guys, ��
۳ look at this!" I showed them the case study and the patient I brought ��
۳ with me. I showed them 'befores' and 'afters' which were done on US ��
۳ soil, and they said: "Inject a person with horse serum? Are you insane? ��
۳ We'd never do that." ��
۳ A few months later, some of the people whom I was speaking to from a ��
۳ related centre-friends of theirs, actually-came out with the ��
۳ announcement that they're going to give a baboon's bone marrow to an ��
۳ AIDS patient because baboons are resistant to HIV! ��
۳ At that stage, feeling dejected and rather silly, I set about trying to ��
۳ investigate as much in the way of alternative therapy and conventional ��
۳ therapy as I could-and believe me, I investigated just about everything,��
۳ down to laughter therapy! ��
۳ Now one thing that really struck me very quickly on in the piece when I ��
۳ was reviewing all the alternative, natural and conventional therapies ��
۳ is that there are two misnomers that exist in this world. One of them ��
۳ is "natural therapy". ��
۳ Please, don't take me the wrong way. There's a lot of good in ��
۳ alternative therapy, there's a lot of good in vitamins and diet, but ��
۳ what on Earth is natural about shoving 50,000 units of vitamin C ��
۳ intravenously? What's natural about injecting ozone into somebody's ��
۳ backside? What's natural about cappuccino enemas? ��
۳ The other great misnomer in the medical field of conventional therapy ��
۳ are the terms "radiotherapy" and "chemotherapy". How the world "chemo" ��
۳ ever got side by side with the word "therapy" is beyond me. Never before��
۳ has a therapy repeatedly failed for 80 years, caused the most hideous ��
۳ side effects known to man, and continued to prosper and flourish. It ��
۳ amazes me that chemotherapy has spread its wings without people knowing.��
۳ For example, how many people know that the commonest therapy for ��
۳ aggressive psoriasis these days is chemotherapy? Teenagers and people of��
۳ child-bearing age will go to the doctor, and their doctor will say: ��
۳ "I'll give you a folic acid antagonist called Methotrexate." You see, ��
۳ "folic acid antagonist" sounds better than "chemotherapy", doesn't it, ��
۳ but it's chemo. These kids are swallowing poison, and they and their ��
۳ kids will suffer the consequences. ��
۳ Did you hear about the latest breakthrough, a new form of contraception ��
۳ that's now on the market? It's a one-shot abortion injection. Well, the ��
۳ abortion injection is a folic acid antagonist. It's chemotherapy. ��
۳ Let's be blunt about something. Alternative therapy is great, and we can��
۳ probably extend and improve the quality of life of people who are ill, ��
۳ and, heaven knows, we can prevent a lot of diseases from happening; but ��
۳ when you cut down to the chase, conventional therapy and alternative ��
۳ therapy are joined by one thing. ��
۳ Over the past hundred years in the war against cancer, we've failed ��
۳ abysmally. Let's be frank here: if a hundred people were to do the most ��
۳ arduous alternative therapy available, we would not cure a hundred ��
۳ cancer patients; we would not cure a hundred AIDS patients. ��
۳ There are only three reasons why we're failing in our war. One large ��
۳ possibility is that the weaponry isn't powerful enough. Now, in ��
۳ chemotherapy and radiotherapy we have weaponry that can cremate a ��
۳ person! So, it can't be that one; rule that one out. The second ��
۳ possibility is that the target is invisible. Now we know that to be ��
۳ true; we know that cancer cells are immunologically invisible. The third��
۳ possibility is that there's another target. ��
۳ The one thing I found depressing about alternative and conventional ��
۳ therapy is that they both totally ignored the phenomenon of "spontaneous��
۳ remission" which is perhaps the most natural phenomenon which repeatedly��
۳ tells us how to cure terminal disease. "Spontaneous remission" is a term��
۳ given to miraculous healings, where people on their death bed 'rise from��
۳ the dead' within two to three days without a trace of their disease. ��
۳ It's a phenomenon that's been reported in the literature but hardly ever��
۳ investigated. ��
۳ The data on spontaneous remission strongly suggest that just before a ��
۳ person with cancer, heart disease, arthritis or any of the other ��
۳ terminal diseases has a spontaneous remission or a cure of their ��
۳ disease, they suffer what seems to be a viral or bacterial or some form ��
۳ of severe infection. ��
۳ This was noticed by a Dr Didot, in France, who noted that the existence ��
۳ of syphilis precluded the appearance of cancer. If prostitutes had ��
۳ syphilis, they were very unlikely to develop cancer. This doctor ��
۳ actually treated 20 cancer patients with syphilis and, of those 20, 14 ��
۳ went into total remission. As the syphilis grew, it munched up the ��
۳ cancer; the cancer went away. Another three patients did pretty well, ��
۳ and a couple of them died of the syphilis. But this was a few hundred ��
۳ years ago, and given the choice between "the Big C" and "the Big S"-well��
۳ , today we can cure syphilis with a couple of shots of penicillin, or so��
۳ I've been told! ��
۳ Late last century, Dr William Coley had a patient who had bone cancer ��
۳ and developed a severe syphilis or skin infection. As the skin infection��
۳ grew, it munched on the bone cancer and the bone cancer disappeared. Dr ��
۳ Coley went on to develop what he called "Coley's toxins" and used them ��
۳ for many years as a therapy that got quite good results. ��
۳ The trouble here is that Dr Coley succumbed to what I call "macho ��
۳ medicine". The infection he isolated from the patient, and which cured ��
۳ the patient, had remarkable successes in subsequent patients treated ��
۳ with the same infection, but he wasn't happy with that. Coley wanted ��
۳ something that would do better, so he found a more toxic infection. ��
۳ Instead of using the specific Streptococcus strain which he'd isolated ��
۳ from the patient, he found a Streptococcus that kills people, reasoning ��
۳ that it's more toxic, therefore it will kill more cancer, and therefore ��
۳ the chances of cure are better. ��
۳ It's been long known that in areas where malaria exists, there's no ��
۳ cancer; and when you get rid of malaria, drain the swamps, kill the ��
۳ mosquitoes, the cancer rate rises. People who have cancer and who catch ��
۳ malaria have a chance of going into remission. Just recently, Dr Henry ��
۳ Heimlich [who developed the Heimlich manoeuvre for preventing choking] ��
۳ injected a few AIDS patients with malaria and managed to get them into ��
۳ some form of remission where they improved and stayed stable at the ��
۳ improved level. ��
۳ All these observations led me to come up with something I call "nemesis ��
۳ theory", which states that for every disease there's an antidisease ��
۳ organism which will specifically attack and destroy it. ��
۳ This then led to the development of "nemesis therapy", where I make ��
۳ extracts of these "nemesis organisms" with which to treat specific ��
۳ diseases. ��
۳ And how do you find nemesis organisms? Well, you look around. Where ��
۳ there's a disease and there's less of another disease, the chances are ��
۳ that they're antagonistic to each other. Or, you work on basic levels, ��
۳ as I like to do, and do test after test after test to check. ��
۳ What I did in the laboratory was get thousands of bottles and place ��
۳ leukaemia lymph node tumour biopsies in them. Each bottle had a ��
۳ particular organism growing inside it. The one with affinity for the ��
۳ cancer actually grabbed hold of the cancer and ate it. This protein ��
۳ 'web'-actually, a fungus-shot up and encapsulated the tumour. Within a ��
۳ few days, there was a little bit of the cancer left. A couple of weeks ��
۳ later, no cancer-just the fungus! ��
۳ So what this does is it gives us this new therapeutic modality. This ��
۳ nemesis organism can now give us highly specific chemicals that it used ��
۳ to kill the cancer, but which can be made so they do not attack any ��
۳ other sort of tissue. Two, it can give us tagging complexes which stick ��
۳ to the outside of the cancer and make the cancer highly visible to the ��
۳ immune system. And three, it can give us a complete range of digestive ��
۳ enzymes which are specific for digesting the cancer and the cancer ��
۳ alone. So this little baby not just kills the disease, it also cleans up��
۳ after itself! ��
۳ With use of the tagging system, if the immune system looks at this ��
۳ fibrillary network of protein stuck onto the outside of the cancer, it ��
۳ doesn't see cancer; it sees a bug and it wants to go after the bug. Now,��
۳ you don't inject the bug; you purify the protein extract that sticks to ��
۳ the cancer and you inject that. That then sticks to the cancer in the ��
۳ body. The body can then see it and recognise it because it's tagged with��
۳ bacterial, fungal or viral protein. ��
۳ You and I have no trouble getting rid of a cough or a cold in a week or ��
۳ two. We can get rid of cancer: make the cancer look like a cough or a ��
۳ cold by sticking cough or cold particles on it, and the body will attack��
۳ it, destroy it and remove it. ��
۳ However, there were instances where patients had a regression several ��
۳ months or years after treatment of their tumours with a tagging complex.��
۳ This suggested that tagging the cancer was not the be-all and end-all, ��
۳ that tagging the cancer cell still didn't cure cancer the disease. There��
۳ was another factor at work. ��
۳ An interesting observation was made about 20 years ago when leukaemia ��
۳ patients were treated by wiping out their bone marrow and then giving ��
۳ them somebody else's bone marrow. It was found that the leukaemia would ��
۳ invariably recur. And you know how they say how cancer comes back? Well,��
۳ the doctor says: "Sorry, Mr Jones; it seems that when I was operating ��
۳ on you and I was giving you the chemo and the radio, one cell spilt, and��
۳ this one cell hid and then went all over the place and grew again-just ��
۳ this one cell, the spilt cell." One cell or a few cells get loose and ��
۳ the disease comes back. This may account for some of the cancer ��
۳ recurrences, but to try to explain all cancer recurrences that way, the ��
۳ medical term for that is "crap"! ��
۳ What we know from those leukaemia trials is that they wiped out the ��
۳ patient's bone marrow. There was nothing left! They gave him someone ��
۳ else's bone marrow. Six months later, the leukaemia came back. Now, if ��
۳ it was a leftover cell, then when you check that leukaemia cell you ��
۳ should find that it's the same as the leukaemia you treated before the ��
۳ patient went into remission, true? It should be the same cell come back.��
۳ However, when they ran DNA checks, they found that not only wasn't it ��
۳ the same cell, but it belonged to the donor. It was the donor's bone ��
۳ marrow that had turned into leukaemia cells! ��
۳ This finding has been published in the conventional medical literature, ��
۳ and it means that cancer the disease is not cancer the cell. There is ��
۳ something in the body of a patient which regenerates and augments cancer��
۳ , the cancer cell. And if you don't address that, then you won't get rid��
۳ of the disease. ��
۳ So there I was, with all these little bottles, cooking up these nemesis ��
۳ organisms and tagging them, but something kept showing up over and over ��
۳ and over again which was driving me nuts. I would incubate the cancer ��
۳ with another organism-say, an E. coli-and I'd find other organisms ��
۳ growing when the cancer cells died, that I hadn't put in there. They ��
۳ would usually be staphylococcal or streptococcal in appearance. Acid- ��
۳ fast bacilli sometimes would show up, depending on what culture medium ��
۳ was used and for how long I cultured them. ��
۳ Now this is really interesting. What you notice is what some people ��
۳ would call "pleomorphism" in progress. A couple of elements would ��
۳ develop these elongated rodlike structures, and you could actually see ��
۳ a coccal form changing into a rodlike form. Pleomorphism in action. ��
۳ I went to my colleagues and said: "Look, why do I keep getting these ��
۳ bugs? It's a sterile cancer I'm putting into the bottle, for goodness ��
۳ sake. I'm incubating with something completely different, and these bugs��
۳ keep showing up." And they said: "Well, Sam, you know what you're like. ��
۳ You probably sneezed and contaminated the whole lot!" Then I said: "It's��
۳ happened over and over and over again. So it's contamination?" "Yes, ��
۳ yes, absolutely." ��
۳ A hundred years ago, everybody blamed this contamination as the cause of��
۳ cancer. I have the literature. There were thousands of articles written ��
۳ on bacteria-bacterial and fungal organisms-being the cause of cancer. ��
۳ But, as technology gets more and more advanced, we have to reject what's��
۳ obvious; and when we reject what's obvious, the truth becomes very hard ��
۳ to find. ��
۳ So how could I prove to these people that these organisms are actually ��
۳ intricately involved in the cancer process or in the AIDS process? ��
۳ The first thing to do is to grow a bunch of them out of some cancer ��
۳ cells, inject them into a few animals and see how many animals get ��
۳ cancer-and a lot of them do. Because the bug does not kill the animal, ��
۳ the animal develops cancer. In a strange way, it actually appears that ��
۳ developing the cancer makes the animal live longer. ��
۳ Now, let me warp your minds a little bit here. Believe me, what I'm ��
۳ about to say to you is just a theory, and it has no bearing at all on ��
۳ the efficacy of the therapy, but what if these bugs can't entice an ��
۳ immune response? They are contained in the middle of the cancer; the ��
۳ body is not doing anything to fight them, and yet they're not spreading.��
۳ What's containing them? What if cancer isn't really the enemy? What if ��
۳ it's the body's last-chance attempt at getting these bugs and ��
۳ localising them in an area so they don't spread and kill us in a hurry? ��
۳ What if cancer is actually doing us a favour? Is that why every time we ��
۳ fry a cancer lesion with radiotherapy and chemotherapy, the whole thing ��
۳ then comes back and explodes all over the place because we're actually ��
۳ releasing the cause from its entrapment? Just a theory! ��
۳ This therapy at the very least can control the disease, and at best can ��
۳ cause dramatic, rapid improvement. There are many cases of cancer tumour��
۳ reducing to half its size within a week or two. ��
۳ For example, fig. 1a shows the mammogram of a breast cancer in a 65-year��
۳ -old woman. After 10 days of treatment, the breast is normal (fig. 1b). ��
۳ Fig. 2a shows a case of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in a 32-year-old woman. ��
۳ After two weeks of treatment, her lymphoma was considerably reduced in ��
۳ size (fig. 2b). ["Note" No fig's available]. ��
۳ It's unheard of to be able to do that and not have significant die-off ��
۳ or toxic effects-and yet they don't exist with this treatment. When you ��
۳ follow nature and follow the guidelines of what happens in spontaneous ��
۳ remission, Induced Remission Therapy can achieve cures with minimal side��
۳ effects. ��
۳ I didn't choose the public forum to come here and speak to you today. ��
۳ Please understand me: I would much rather be addressing medical ��
۳ practitioners, peers, and getting this out not as an alternative ��
۳ therapy but as a conventional therapy. I've spent 12 years trying to ��
۳ get my research published in the conventional literature, and 12 years ��
۳ going from hospital to hospital and being treated like something they'd ��
۳ stepped in. ��
۳ In light of what I read in the paper today-somebody wrote an article ��
۳ condemning this conference-it appears that the message being sent by ��
۳ that person is that if the conventional medical establishment in all ��
۳ its holiness doesn't agree with a concept or a therapy, then the public ��
۳ is just too stupid to be able to understand it fully and evaluate it for��
۳ themselves. The attitude is that the public is just so dumb that they ��
۳ shouldn't be given the opportunity. Well, my apologies to the author, ��
۳ but the greatest fool I know is a blind fool who'll say opinions about ��
۳ things he hasn't even bothered experiencing or investigating himself. ��
۳ In this "Kevorkian age", as I call it, where people champion the concept��
۳ of death with dignity when faced with suffering, pain and disease, I'm ��
۳ offering a technology that can end suffering, pain and disease; and I ��
۳ pray that the emphasis will shift now from trying to support death with ��
۳ dignity to championing life with dignity. ��
۳ ��
۳ Part III-Update ��
۳ (Charts not available referenced in text) ��
۳ ��
۳ After years of lectures, presentations to peers and public appearances ��
۳ as well as numerous radio, television, newspaper and magazine ��
۳ appearances, I find that conventional medicine still has little ��
۳ awareness of the efficacy of my therapies-as evidenced, for example, in ��
۳ the advances achieved using IRT in AIDS remission (see table 1). ��
۳ Any doctor can make amazing claims, but independent, unbiased testing is��
۳ a credible way to determine the efficacy of a treatment. It would not ��
۳ only document the effectiveness of my vaccines but would also stir ��
۳ interest in any promising new therapy. ��
۳ So I brought case studies of AIDS patients I'd treated to Cedar Sinai ��
۳ Medical Center for evaluation. Dr Shlomo Melmed was impressed with the ��
۳ results, and at his suggestion I sent samples of my vaccine to the AIDS ��
۳ and Immune Disorders Center's Division of Infectious Diseases for an ��
۳ vitro analysis. The clinical analysis performed by Dr. Eric Daar ��
۳ indicated that out of the 22 samples tested, 20 of them showed 99% ��
۳ efficacy in neutralising HIV-1. ��
۳ This analysis was followed up with an independent evaluation by ��
۳ University of Southern California clinical laboratories. This involved ��
۳ the electron microscopy of blood samples taken by a control group ��
۳ infected with HIV. This group yielded over 100 photos that demonstrate ��
۳ the attack, death, disintegration and purge of the HIV virus. The PhD ��
۳ who conducted this test remarked that "the number of intact viral ��
۳ particles has declined for each patient following vaccine administration��
۳ at a level approximating 50%". ��
۳ Examples of this progression from attack to purge are shown in figures ��
۳ 3a to 3d. The first electron microscope photograph (fig. 3a) shows the ��
۳ fragmenting cell full of HIV particles. The next photo (fig. 3b) shows ��
۳ the cell three days later, with improved stability and decreased viral ��
۳ particle count. The third photo (fig. 3c) was taken six days after ��
۳ vaccine treatment and shows fewer viral particles per cell. The final ��
۳ photo (fig. 3d), taken nine days after therapy, shows no intracellular ��
۳ viral particles and the now-visible cell nucleus. ��
۳ This evidence from the cellular level demonstrates that AIDS and cancer ��
۳ can be attacked genetically without causing significant damage to the ��
۳ healthy, fast-multiplying cells needed to maintain a healthy life. ��
۳ You'd think that the media, the medical community and others would be ��
۳ alerted to the fantastic results of this treatment. ��
۳ It's hard to imagine that institutes entrusted with the public faith and��
۳ public funds to discover and research new therapies would delay the ��
۳ application of life-saving technology and treatments. It was my hope ��
۳ that knowledge of IRT would be disseminated and the FDA would allow the ��
۳ practice of this therapy upon the countless AIDS and cancer victims who ��
۳ had little hope otherwise. But these doctors and medical institutes ��
۳ denied having any affiliation with me. They denied the impressive test ��
۳ data and even denied knowing me-until forced to declare otherwise before��
۳ a judge in a civil legal action in San Diego, CA (case no. 700406). It ��
۳ was their incomprehensible behaviour that led me to bring a lawsuit, if ��
۳ for no other reason than to make these test results a record of the ��
۳ court, but I had to pursue these medical organisations so as to have ��
۳ access to further laboratory evidence. ��
۳ I've always resented my work being associated under the catch-all phrase��
۳ "alternative medicine". My treatment involves an extremely focused ��
۳ hybrid of what is considered "conventional medicine". However, in my ��
۳ pursuit of any form of therapy that could augment or even supersede my ��
۳ own findings, I've always been interested in alternatives as opposed to ��
۳ conventional, toxic and often barbaric treatments. ��
۳ Although there is hope of finding other practitioners who have medical ��
۳ information to offer, I have yet to find any breakthroughs that would ��
۳ complement my own. ��
۳ I've been appalled to find alternative health organisations that sell ��
۳ juice drinks, vitamin C shots and laetrile powders to desperate patients��
۳ -products costing hundreds and often thousands of dollars yet only ��
۳ costing a few cents to make. ��
۳ It was in this spirit that I made this offer: US$100,000 to any ��
۳ "alternative" therapy that can prove 10 cases of full cancer remission. ��
۳ Additionally, I made this offer to the sceptical world of conventional ��
۳ medicine: US$100,000 to any reputable medical organisation that will ��
۳ test and publish the results of my AIDS and cancer vaccines. ��
۳ No one has yet come forward to make a claim on these offers. ��
۳ With the realisation that Induced Remission Therapy can offer favourable��
۳ results now, and with the assistance of additional resources, medical ��
۳ industry professionals who are truly dedicated to curing disease, and ��
۳ have the ability to catalogue, store and culture autogenous vaccines on ��
۳ a large scale, could and would alter medical treatment as recognised ��
۳ today. Historically, institutions are resistant to change. Change comes ��
۳ slowly. So for any promising therapy to be accepted into the mainstream ��
۳ of medical practice, this would require a paradigm shift in medical ��
۳ science as we know it today. ��
۳ IRT deals with maladies at the genetic level. Indeed, it is the only ��
۳ therapy now in application that concentrates on disease at this level. ��
۳ The matrix of many diseases is at the genetic level, so many types of ��
۳ illness can be treated with IRT. ��
۳ Genetic correction is the only hope for achieving a cure in such disease��
۳ conditions as AIDS and cancer, and starkly contrasts the available toxic��
۳ and inferior modalities that attack disease mechanisms and symptoms ��
۳ while leaving a damaged blueprint. ��
۳ The best demonstration of this remarkable ability can be seen in the ��
۳ cases where HIV virus is genetically removed from the cell nucleus. Not ��
۳ only is the body purged of the disease, but it is able to repair damage ��
۳ suffered during the course of the illness. This opens up a new field of ��
۳ cellular regeneration never before possible. ��
۳ The capacity to reverse age-and disease-related DNA damage opens a new ��
۳ world of therapeutic opportunity and almost limitless application. ��
۳ ... ��
��������������������������������������������������������������������������Ĵ�
%%T%%%H%%%E%%%%%%%%E%%%Y%%%E%%%%%%%%O%%%F%%%%%%%%A%%%%%%%%S%%%T%%%O%%%R%%%M%%
۳������������������������������������������������������������������������۳�
۳ ��
۳ Reference Notes: ��
۳ ��
۳ � For further details, information, Lecture tapes, etc, on Dr Chachoua's��
۳ Induced Remission Therapy, phone (213) 655 0271. ��
۳ � Dr Chachoua's book, The Challenge, The Promise & The Cure ��
۳ � Contact Independent Medical Research, Suite 401, 135 Macquarie Street,��
۳ Sydney NSW 2000, Australia, phone +61 (0)2 9247 5366, fax +61 (0)2 9247 ��
۳ 5453. ��
۳ ��
��������������������������������������������������������������������������Ĵ�
%%T%%%H%%%E%%%%%%%%E%%%Y%%%E%%%%%%%%O%%%F%%%%%%%%A%%%%%%%%S%%%T%%%O%%%R%%%M%%
۳������������������������������������������������������������������������۳�
(_ _)( ___)( _ ) /__\ / __)
)( )__) )(_)( /(__)\ \__ \
(__) (____)(_____)(__)(__)(___/
,,
W ()
|-><
| )(\_v [Is�03 End]