A Rational Approach to Cancer Treatment - and why Big Pharma isn't interested by David Bolton - HTML preview

PLEASE NOTE: This is an HTML preview only and some elements such as links or page numbers may be incorrect.
Download the book in PDF, ePub, Kindle for a complete version.

The "Baking Soda/high Alkaline Diet" Cancer Treatment

 

This theory is, in a nutshell, the following:

Most cancer patients, when given a simple test to determine the pH level of their saliva (or urine), will get a result that is well within the acidic range of the scale, or in any case, significantly below the pH of water. Pure water has a pH of 7.

The body consists of at least 60% water. The brain and the heart are composed of 73%, while the lungs are 83%, water. Kidneys and muscles are 79%, the lungs, 83%. Even the bones are 31% water. Reasonable conclusion: if pure water has a pH level of 7 on the scale, and the human body (the averaging of all parts of the body) is at least 60% water, then does it not stand to reason that it is good to have a pH level of at least 7, namely, that of water?

On the pH scale, which goes from 1 to 14, 7 is considered to be neutral. A pH less than 7 is acidic; more than 7, alkaline. It is well worth looking at this subject a bit further.

The blood will always have a pH level of between 7.35 and 7.45. What happens if the blood pH drops significantly lower than 7.35? You develop acidemia, which can lead to a coma, or death. And if the blood pH is much higher than 7.45? This can cause alkalosis, and can lead to strokes, and diseases of the central nervous system.

When reading criticisms of the "high alkaline diet", I have often seen the comment that since blood is almost always in the 7.35 to 7.45 pH range, raising the alkalinity of your diet is senseless, since the blood has a "healthy" pH level anyway. This criticism, however, is not logical. True, the blood pH lies between 7.35 and 7.45. However, if the rest of the bodily fluids and tissues have a pH level below 7, then the blood will have to extract as much alkalinity as possible from the nourishment, and the body, in order to maintain its 7.35-7.45 level. And if your nourishment is acidic rather than alkaline, the blood will have to draw so much alkalinity from the fluids and tissues of the body that they will be rendered even more acidic. Cancer thrives in an acidic environment. It would appear that even mainstream medicine is arriving at this conclusion; read this article at Sciencedaily.com for more on this subject.

 People with cancer will usually have a bodily pH (measurable with a simple pH test that you can do at home, using saliva or urine) that is well below 7. Now, if your pH is 6, this does not mean that your pH is "just a little lower than it should be". The pH scale is similar to the Richter scale that is used for earthquakes: it is a "base-10 logarithmic scale". Don't be scared by the terminology; it's really simple to understand: A 6 on the pH scale is 10 times lower than a 7; a 5 is ten times lower than 6, and 100 times (10 x 10) lower than 7.

To learn more about the "high alkaline" treatment of cancer, and other illnesses, I recommend the book "Rich man's Poor Man's Cancer Treatment", by Dr. Mark Sircus. I suggest that you learn as much as you can about sodium bicarbonate (common baking soda) as a healing agent; The site of Dr. Sircus has a number of articles that you should read, and ponder.

My views on this treatment have developed somewhat over the last few years. Yes, I do believe it can work, since I myself know two people who had cancer (one in late stage IV) who made the dietary changes necessary, and completely cured themselves of cancer. On the other hand, I now believe that calling the treatment "Baking Soda Cure", or "high-alkaline diet cure", is missing the point a bit. Yes, I do think that eating a healthy, high alkaline diet, and using baking soda to raise your pH level as quickly as possible if you have been diagnosed with cancer, is an excellent path to take.

However, please note: I am not suggesting that baking soda is a cure for cancer. Rather, it serves to increase your body’s pH level as quickly as possible. Of course, a high-alkaline general diet should also be adopted at once, because removing acidic foods from your diet will serve to help strengthen your immune system – and this is your goal, this is what can well cure you of cancer. If I were to ever receive such a diagnosis, I would certainly adopt such dietary changes, and would do everything else I could to fortify my immune system. For the reason why such treatments work is simply that they serve to strengthen your immune system. And this − the reinforcing of the immune system − is what can cure cancer.

As you can see in that last paragraph, I violated the rules of “good writing style” by using a certain term four times. I did it on purpose, since it is something that anyone with cancer should be concentrating on day and night: namely, the immune system!

Even the Medical Industry seems to have recognized this. As a matter of fact, it is the basis for the new development that they call "Immunotherapy". Don't get your hopes up just yet: their brand of immunotherapy will not tell you how to build up your immune system by natural means. After all, that wouldn't earn them any money. Instead, it is about extracting some of your healthy immune cells (T-cells) before you get cancer, so that if you ever do fall ill, they can be re-injected into you. All of this won't be cheap, however.

As you can read for yourself here, the price for a single infusion (not including hospital costs) will be − brace yourself − $475,000. Yes, you read that figure correctly: four-hundred and seventy-five thousand dollars. And there could be some rather unpleasant side effects as well: dangerously high fevers, extreme fatigue, difficulty breathing, a sharp drop in blood pressure, tremors, headaches, confusion, loss of balance, trouble speaking, seizures, occasional hallucinations, and possibly brain swelling that could prove fatal (sources: here and here . (Note: Since I wrote this page, the site of the first link, “onclive.com”, a mainstream medical site that deals with oncology, started to make people create an account with a password if they wish to read certain articles. Could it be that where articles showing the dangers of mainstream medical techniques are concerned, they wish to keep the general public in the dark? You decide! In any case, you can view the very same article by clicking the second link instead of the first.)

Gee, you sure get a lot for your half-million bucks, don't you? If you think you would like to trust Immunotherapy if you ever get cancer, I suggest you start saving your pennies now so that you may have recourse to this "cutting edge" treatment!

Oh, that's right, I almost forgot: one of the main subjects of this book is the idea that by completely changing your diet and life-style, you may well be able to cure yourself of cancer. The price for the "natural cure"? Practically free. Ah, you say, but what about the side effects? OK, I admit that there are a few side effects. However, they are all good. By abandoning habits such as smoking, drinking, and drugs, adopting a perfectly healthy diet, and exercising, the "side effects" will almost certainly be: more energy, a much better physique, enhanced staying power, an increase in attractiveness, and a boost in self-confidence, all of which will characterize "the new you". And imagine: you can get all of this while keeping your $475,000 in the bank, or safely tucked away under your mattress, if you prefer, since the "life-style cure" is indeed all but free of charge.

 I suspect that the Pharmaceutical Industry will do everything in its power (and believe me: it has power) to convince the government to declare T-cell  "immunotherapy" an "official treatment" to be covered by Medicare and insurance companies. In addition, the "cancer vaccines" they are working on could well lead to a government policy of having such vaccinations given in schools throughout the country − more billions for the Industry. (And one further step towards the bankrupting of America − as if we didn’t have enough debt already! Not to mention all the children who might well suffer long-term side effects from such vaccinations.)

 To reiterate: it should be clear that having a strong immune system would be the best way to fight cancer. Thus anything you can do to strengthen your immune system as much, and as quickly as possible should be seen as the very first step you should take if you ever get cancer.

Now, I realize all too well that natural treatments are constantly being attacked in articles funded by the Pharmaceutical Industry, or by those who simply don’t know any better. I ran across an excellent example of this last year. Typing “Alternative Medicine” into Google, the very first site that appeared was that of a mainstream doctor who vehemently attacked alternative medicine, claiming that studies showed that it doesn’t help at all when compared to “conventional” treatment methods. Skeptical of this claim, I read the fine print at the bottom of the page: it said that in the study, “alternative medicine” was considered to be any treatment out of the mainstream: diet, herbs, baking soda, talismans and amulets, witchcraft, voodoo, etc. You get the gist: in order to come up with the result they wanted (namely, that alternative medicine is a sham) they defined it by including things that are completely ridiculous, thus assuring that the final result would show that alternative medicine was not effective.

This site has apparently – and thankfully! – dropped down quite a bit in the Google rankings, since today, I am not able to find it at all. I did later read, however, that the doctor whose site it was is known to receive large sums from the  Pharmaceutical Industry to attack anyone that criticizes that industry. I mention this case merely to point out that when doing your own research, you must not only read as much as you can, but read it critically, and don’t ignore the fine print!

*** 

In April, 2013, when my mother was diagnosed with cancer (soft tissue sarcoma), I spent all my free time searching the web for possible alternative treatments. Having found information on the so-called "Baking Soda Treatment", and read of the theory behind it, I thought it seemed sound. In any case, since all my mother's doctor had to recommend was chemotherapy, and she did not want that at all, I figured that the high-alkaline method would be worth a try.

 I bought a roll of pH paper (cost: about $12), and had her do the test. Result: her pH level was about 5: one hundred times lower than that of water! This is just what Dr. Mark Sircus, and others who recommend this treatment, say: cancer patients almost always have a low pH level.

I immediately wanted her to get on an alkaline diet, and also drink several glasses of baking soda water per day, in order to raise her pH as much, and as quickly, as possible. Unfortunately, she simply didn't believe that this would do any good at all, and refused, saying she didn't want to give up her favorite foods, and that she didn't like the taste of baking soda. My mother, like practically all Americans, had been largely "hypnotized" by years of indoctrination by the "Medical-Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex" to believe that only doctors "know best"; that only health-care professionals have the knowledge needed to cure.

True, my mother had read enough to know that she did not want to resort to chemo. Nonetheless, and no doubt due to her weakened state and terrible fear of cancer, she was very docile in many ways. For example, she went to see an oncologist who was a chemo specialist merely because her physician had recommended it − even though she had no intention of accepting chemotherapy.

I'm sure this is a common phenomenon in such a situation: even if a person is normally self-assertive, and somewhat of a "fighter" (which, in all truth, my mom wasn't at all), he or she may, after receiving the dreaded diagnosis of cancer, well become very passive, and willingly accept anything "the doctor orders". And in alltoo many cases, this is like the sheep being lead to the slaughter, for many treatments not only will not lead to a cure, but will worsen the condition of the patient instead of improving it. In such cases, the patient often dies after months of suffering, and the family is left to grieve the loss. Yet even in the midst of tragedy, there are winners: namely, the physicians and the Pharmaceutical Industry, who have earned many thousands of dollars before the patient passes away. (Forgive my sarcasm, but the more I learn of the horrors that are going on in the name of "healing", the harder it is to trust the system.)

Every day, we are bombarded with TV ads, magazine articles, and the like, that suggest that "modern medicine" has all the answers − or if not, that only they will find those answers in the future; that "alternative medicine" is akin to charlatanism, and can't really be taken seriously. Sure, even "normal" people with cancer might go to an alternative physician, but usually, only when their cancer has reached stage IV, when neither chemo- nor radiation therapy has helped at all, and when they are already at death's door. Then, and only then, would many people even consider visiting an alternative physician who knows the importance of nutrition and diet, and who may recommend serious changes in life-style as a means of treating cancer.  But by then, it is often too late to do anything at all.

How much better would it be if, instead of waiting till the last minute, more people would visit an alternative physician, and follow his or her advice, as soon as cancer was diagnosed?

But then, insurance companies generally do not pay for visits to alternative physicians, and many people feel that if they need treatment, they should go to "regular" doctors, these being "official" healers whose high prices will be covered by insurance. Ironically, even if your regular physician does know the importance of nutrition, and believes that a complete change of life-style could well cure your cancer, he or she might be reluctant to recommend such changes as a line of treatment, since it is not "officially recognized", so that if you then die of the disease, your physician might be the target of a lawsuit. On the other hand, if he recommends chemotherapy and you die (probably all the more miserably, suffering from the many horrible side effects of chemo) such a lawsuit cannot be brought, since it is officially recognized.

Thus the Pharmaceutical Industry, like a huge octopus, has its tentacles extended throughout the country, and reaches down into our very personal lives. Thanks to their powerful lobby in Washington, they have seen to it that only those treatments will be "officially recognized" that they will be able to earn billions of dollars on. After all, if cancer were curable simply by changing your diet, and making other crucial changes in life-style, the industry would lose tremendous amounts of money every year. And that is the last thing they desire − even if it costs you your life. Of course, they could do a large-scale study to discover whether a mere change in nutrition and life-style could actually cure cancer, but then, why would they want to do that? For if they discovered that yes, such a line of treatment actually does work, they would end up losing over 150 billion dollars per year.

If you have trouble believing these admittedly strong statements, I think that you should seek out all the information you can on the abuses of this industry, either on the Internet, or at your book store, so that you may be able to competently judge the situation for yourself.

In any case, this is the sorry state of affairs in what we like to call the greatest country on earth!

Could it be that chemotherapy not only doesn't help many patients with certain common forms of cancer, but in fact, can even hurt them?

In an earlier chapter of this book, I presented you with a major scientific study done by proponents of standard medicine, that shows quite clearly that yes, it is true that in many cases, chemotherapy does nothing whatsoever to help patients. And that being the case, it is easy to conclude that due to its side effects, it is almost certainly doing much more harm than good.

To repeat the most important points in this chapter:

1) Cancer patients normally have a pH level well below 7.

2) The body is mainly water.

3)  Pure water has a pH of 7.

4) Therefore, a pH level of about 7 is ideal for the body.

5) Cancer thrives in an acidic environment.

6) If a person's pH level is below 7, it is in the acidic range. 

7) The more acidic, the better cancer cells can thrive.

8) Therefore, if you raise the pH level of your body into the range well above 7, you will have a good chance of killing the cancer cells, eliminating them, and can become healthy once again.

About point 5). If you search the Internet using the keywords "cancer" and "acidic", you will find many sites advocating alternative medicine that will tell you that an alkaline diet can indeed be used as a treatment for cancer. On the other hand, you will find sites on traditional medicine that say that this isn't true. So what in the world are we to believe? Is it possible to cure cancer with diet and life-style change alone? As indicated elsewhere in this book, there are no large-scale studies to support this claim; yet I have also pointed out that the reason that such studies don't exist is that it is not in the interest of "Big Pharma" to do those studies in the first place, since if it is true that diet can cure cancer, that industry would stand to lose billions per year.

But let's look at the situation from the point of view of someone who has been diagnosed with cancer, and must decide how to go about recovering his health − if at all possible.

Now: As to the question of whether adopting a healthy "alkaline" diet will help you or not, there are in fact, logically speaking, three possibilities:

1) It will help in some way or another, either by curing you completely, or at least, by extending your life, and/or helping you cope with the pernicious effects of chemo or radiation therapy, etc.

2) It will not help at all, either for healing you, or for prolonging your life.

3) It will hurt you.

I think we can safely rule out 3) at once: the idea that an optimally healthy diet could ever hurt you is, as doctors both alternative and mainstream would agree, ridiculous.

As for 2), that would also be hard to believe. Diet definitely has some effect on the body, most probably a great effect. But even if its effect were to be weak, there is some effect, and that would naturally have to be a good effect, not a bad one.

That leaves us with 1): It will help you in some way or another.

So let's analyze this point more closely from the logical perspective.

Many alternative physicians maintain that a complete change in diet and life-style can actually cure people of cancer. I myself know two people who actually did this. My sister knows two others who also did it. On the Internet, you will find the testimony of many people who did the same thing: cured themselves of cancer using diet and life-style change as their treatment. (See the site of Chris Wark for testimony of people who cured themselves.) Therefore, I feel I can say that yes, this can work. Would I say it always works? No, I would not. Most probably, there are some people who made these diet/life-style changes, yet whose lives were not prolonged. In other words, I am not saying that this course of treatment is always effective.

However, what I am saying is that if indeed a healthy diet can strengthen our immune system (and who could ever doubt this?), then adopting such a diet should definitely be done if you have cancer, for even if it doesn't cure you, it will at least give you a fighting chance, and will most likely extend your life.

I have a friend whose father had cancer back in the 90s. The doctors gave him six months to live. Not wanting chemo, he and his son designed an optimally healthy diet plan. In the end, he did die − but not within six months. Rather, he lived another four years, eight times what the doctors had predicted. Would he have lived so long if he had been eating the "normal" American diet instead of a healthy one, while submitting to chemotherapy? I highly doubt it.

Adopting a healthy diet will not be a significant extra expense. You simply buy different foods. The truth is, you have nothing to lose by adopting a wholesome diet and life-style. It is all but free. And even if you opt for chemo or radiation therapy, you can still make the dietary/lifestyle changes, as this will strengthen your immune system, which will need all the help it can get once it is being bombarded with chemo drugs and/or radiation.

I do hope this is clear: if you have been diagnosed with cancer, and you truly wish to survive, you simply must do everything you can to help yourself; therefore, immediately adopting a maximally healthy diet and lifestyle is absolutely essential.

This point is so important that I will repeat it again and again until I can feel fairly certain that just about anyone reading these pages will have understood it. Let me use a little metaphor that should make it even clearer...

Imagine that one day, you are walking down the street carrying a bag of groceries, when suddenly, you hear a dog barking in the near-distance behind you. You turn around and see, about a hundred yards away but closing in quickly, a vicious Doberman racing towards you, snarling, and obviously very aggressive.

There is no-one else in the street, so you know it is chasing you!

Panicking, you look ahead of you and see a shop about 30 yards away that should be open now. It is the only place you see where you might be able to take refuge, so you know you must reach it before the raging beast catches up to you and tears you apart, perhaps even killing you.

So now, the question. Which of these things would you do in such a situation?

 1) Think: "Oh well, I guess I should walk a little faster and get into that store.”

 2) Think: "I guess I should jog over to that store".

 3) Not think much at all, but rather drop that bag you are carrying and run as fast as you possibly can towards that shop!

I assume that you chose 3), right? What fool would not run as fast as he could to reach that shop and put its door between him and the mad dog chasing him? Can you even imagine thinking: "Oh well, maybe I should walk a little faster?” No! You would instinctively run with all you might. True, you may have to drop your groceries, and some things might break. True, if you're not used to running, you might pull a muscle, and that could hurt for weeks. But assuming you do reach the store in time, enter it, close the door, and are then watching the dog on the other side of the heavy glass jumping up and barking at you, would you think: "Oh, maybe I shouldn't have run so fast... now my leg hurts!” No, of course not! You will instead be thanking God that you made it to safety in time.

What does this little story have to do with cancer?

Well, I have seen people who were diagnosed with cancer, yet who acted like the person who chooses to walk "a little faster". That is, after receiving the diagnosis, they think: "Oh, I guess I should eat a few more vegetables every week". Or: "Now that I have cancer, I'll cut back on smoking". Or: "Maybe I'll drink more water instead of soda."

Come on now!! If that dog were chasing you, what would you do? You would do everything possible to get to safety as quickly as you could.

And if you have cancer, you should do everything possible to help yourself. No half-measures. No "a little bit more of this" or "a little bit less of that". No, no, NO!

Rather: immediately stop smoking; immediately cut alcohol, and illegal drug use; immediately change your diet; immediately plan an exercise program to strengthen your body.

For in your case, the ferocious Doberman that is bent on tearing you limb from limb has a name, and its name is cancer. Don't walk... run, and fast! Do everything in your power to beat it, and render it harmless. Right now, as soon as you finish these lines, search for the optimal, high-alkaline diet on the Internet. And don't just read about the diet. Begin it at once. If you smoke, stop right now. Throw away your cigarettes, and tell your family to do everything they can to stop you if you are about to relapse. Smoking weakens the immune system. Therefore, even if the type of cancer you have been diagnosed with is not apparently related to the lungs, smoking is still bad for you, due to its negative effect on the immune system. Thus, no matter what sort of cancer has afflicted you, smoking should be given up at once.

If you are out of shape, you won't be able to do any heavy exercise at once, but you can do something. Take daily walks, building up the distance, and your speed, day by day. Do sit-ups and push-ups if you are able. If not, do lighter exercises, but do something. Exercise not only has a positive effect on the body, but also on the mind. Studies have shown, for example, that people suffering from depression are almost always helped if they adopt an exercise program. And since emotional issues can well be contributors to cancer, anything you can do to improve your psychological welfare should be adopted at once.

Write down the exercises you do every day; keep an agenda. Also, keep a written record of the foods you eat, and what you drink. And I mean write down everything you eat and drink, even before you consume it. Why? Because that way, if you are about to fall back into your old habits, and eat something unhealthy "just this once", the act of first writing it down will hopefully shame you into not eating it! Be sure to increase your water intake as well, for it will help to cleanse your system (preferably, drink only higher quality water that is not chlorinated).

I say again: I am one of the growing number of people who believe that cancer can be beaten by totally changing one's diet, and life-style. If I were diagnosed with cancer, I would certainly not want my system to be poisoned by chemo drugs; nor would I simply give up and patiently await death. Not at all! I would do everything possible to cure myself. That would begin with the adoption of a truly optimal diet. As for the lifestyle-changes, I wouldn't need to do much, since I neither smoke nor drink, and do regularly exercise. Nonetheless, there are also other factors to take into account, namely, emotional factors. Thus, if I had cancer, I would give a lot of thought to my general emotional state. Am I really happy in life? Do I see a meaning in life, one that gives me a reason to live a lot longer? Am I getting along with others as well as I should? Is my work fulfilling, or does it merely fill me with boredom?

***

In the end, only you can decide which path of treatment you should take. However, in order to make a truly informed decision, you should not obediently and unquestioningly do what doctors suggest, but rather, you should learn as much as you can about alternative, natural treatment methods. And it should be obvious by now that no matter what you choose, you should in any case adopt a maximally healthy diet, and life-style, right away, in order to increase the probability of obtaining a cure. As a matter of fact, to not do so would be a moral crime, for here, we are talking about saving a human life − namely your own!

*****

If you survey the opinions of "mainstream" physicians on this treatment, you will no doubt come across sentences such as "There is no scientific evidence to support such claims". And this is true. Yet this is true not because such a diet could never work, but rather, because there have been no "official", large-scale studies to support this theory. To put it more clearly, by way of example:

Suppose you personally knew thirty people who ha