All I think about is CANCER…am I a “conspiracy theorist?”

The ridiculous diatribe I read by an M.D., against all things non-medical, acts as if those who don’t subscribe to “modern medicine” are all quacks because they are conspiracy theorists. (Caught in his net include those utilizing means other than chemo to treat cancer, those wanting to avoid amalgam fillings, those wanting to avoid mercury in vaccines, etc.) The man resorts to the classic non sequitir logical fallacy.

It’s not a conspiracy theory. The problem isn’t that docs individually are denying people good information that could save their lives, rubbing their hands together greedily while cackling, “I’m going to let this person die of heavy-metal toxicity destroying multiple organs! That way I earn more money this month!”

It’s more complicated than that. (Doctors individually are good people, trying to help people.) It’s a systemic problem: a macro-level issue rather than a micro issue.

It’s the fact that doctors are not trained in anything related to prevention, including nutrition. They are taught a copious amount of detail, and they can perform only procedures that fall within the big book of insurance codes.

That codified system is very exclusionary: drugs, surgeries, and technologies are allowed IN. Homeopathy, natural treatments, nutritional therapies (anything not sold by a drug or tech company) are very purposefully left OUT.

Too many Americans naively think, “If it could heal me, my doctor would know about it.”

Medical doctors are well meaning people who want to serve and help the public. I’m sure many docs are frustrated that people don’t actually get well, using their hard-won education and skills. My friend Rich just finished his PhD in pharmacology and tells me, glumly, of his new career: “Now I get to go push drugs on children and the unsuspecting public.”

They just have no training in much beyond anatomy, surgical interventions, and pharmacology. (Those subjects all by themselves comprise a tremendous amount of information.)

Major industries fund medical schools. Tuition alone doesn’t even come close to supporting a medical education. Big Pharma underpins not only the schools themselves, but also research programs, and curriculum development. I don’t know if the drug companies are still holding contests for docs to win stuff if they prescribe the most drugs, but I knew an OB/GYN 15 years ago who won a cruise for his wife and himself because he prescribed the most Prozac of anyone in his drug rep’s sales district.

The “half life” of a medical education is only a few years–the practice is constantly changing. So who do docs rely on for continuing education? Again, mostly, it’s drug reps. And medical journals. Which are full of drug-trial research—again, funded by Big Pharma.

Why would medical schools, then, spend a great amount of effort and money to teach people about the power of FOOD on cancer risk and cancer cures?

In the 1930’s and 1940’s, medicine was being directed very specifically towards allopathy: attack of the symptoms of disease. There was a concerted effort away from midwifery, homeopathy, whole-systems approaches, dietary treatments, and homeopathy.

After oil was discovered in the mid-1800’s, everything began to change. I collect antique lamps, and whale-oil lamps are expensive and rare. When kerosene came on the scene, people were thrilled, because whale oil’s light was very dim, and of course you had to kill a whale to get it, which isn’t particularly easy.

Along with new energy sources, oil lent itself to the use of drugs made from the byproducts of refining. Most medical drugs, by 1980, were made from petroleum! Petroleum is not food. It cannot be digested, assimilated, or eliminated by the body. Chemicals (drugs) are trapped in our tissues and organs, and they cause a wide array of long-term problems.

One way of practicing ‘medicine’ is profitable. The other ways are not. You can call me a conspiracy theorist, but it’s really simple. And where are we now, since this shift starting in the 1930’s?

We are, as a culture, still a long way from health.

If there are answers at the Issels Clinic or at True North, in the Budwig Diet, from Dr. Burzynski in Texas or Dr. Nicholos Gonzales, the Incurables Program, the Block Center for Integrative Care, the Living Foods Institute in Atlanta (thank you, readers, for these leads), or any of the places I mentioned on Day 2 of this blog series, I’d like to find out.

Tomorrow, I finish this blog series with an open letter to Oncology practitioners.

5 thoughts on “All I think about is CANCER…am I a “conspiracy theorist?”

Leave a Comment
  1. I’m so intrigued with this series of posts. I look forward to reading each new one! I admire you so much for your bravery and passion in tackling such a huge issue. I can’t wait to read your findings.

  2. See Tammie standing and cheering and saying, “GO GO GO Robyn!” I have loved this series of posts! I just love to read your blog because you do such a good job of putting the right words to so many of my thoughts! 😉 As someone who has a strong history of cancer in her family, I’m so glad you are taking this issue of alternative treatments on! I’m cheering for you Robyn keep up the great work!!!!

  3. On that note, has anyone heard about the doctor in Brigham City who is on trial for prescribing unnecessary painkillers? And people wonder why I’m not filled with an overwhelming confidence in the medical profession. I should think it’s obvious.

  4. Robyn, I am very interested to hear when you report on the Budwig protocol. I am a little discouraged because things moved so fast when I was diagnosed, and here I am nearly finished with chemo before I am learning of some of these options. Budwig especially is interesting to me, but I am glad to hear about all of them. Thanks for reporting and can’t wait to hear more.

Leave a Reply