Unfortunately, the vast majority of newly diagnosed cancer patients have no clue that they have viable options for treating their cancer. These viable options are using natural medicine or alternative medicine. Generally, these people die without ever knowing the truth about their options. The other common scenario is that before they know they have any options, their body has already been damaged beyond repair by orthodox treatments and they have been sent home to die. Neither common scenario is very attractive.

Why does orthodox medicine hide the truth that their patients have viable options for treating their cancer? Why do they lie when they are asked? Some would say that individual doctors are only doing what they have been trained to say. I disagree.

Many, many people who have successfully used alternative cancer treatments have told several people in orthodox medicine about their successful treatment. The fact is that orthodox doctors don't want to know the truth. And why don't they want to know the truth?

It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
Upton Sinclair

While it may be human nature for someone to not know the truth about alternative cancer treatments, because it would affect their income, from the perspective of the cancer patient, it would seem logical that they would want to know the truth.

Lesson number one, if you want to know the truth, don't ask someone whose livelihood depends upon his ignorance. This is true in many, many areas of life.

Let us be bold and assume that someone who has not yet been diagnosed with cancer wants to know what to do, should that dreadful day ever come. Or perhaps someone who has just been diagnosed with cancer wants to know what to do.

First, of all, the decision of whether to go with orthodox cancer treatments or alternative cancer treatments is a two step process, not a one-step process.

Most people use a one-step decision process and think like this: “I am not going to go with alternative treatments unless I am absolutely certain I will be cured of my cancer.”

That is exactly the logic the medical community wants you to use because no one can guarantee they will be cured of their cancer if they go with alternative treatments. There are simply too many variables, the biggest variable being: “are they picking the right combination of treatments for their situation?”

But asking the question I just mentioned is not the right way to think about the issue. As I said, the correct way to think about this decision is a two step process.

Step 1: The First Question

The first question that should be contemplated by someone trying to decide between orthodox and alternative cancer treatments is this: “if I go with alternative medicine, will I have a better combination of living longer and having a higher quality of life than if I go with orthodox medicine?”

The answer to this question is also a two step process.

First, will a person who does absolutely nothing about treating their cancer (i.e. they don't use either orthodox or alternative medicine, they do nothing) live longer and have a higher quality of life than someone who goes through orthodox treatments? There have been three major scientific studies which sought to answer this very question. All three of them concluded that a person who does nothing to treat their cancer will have a better combination of longer life and higher quality of life. In most cases, the patient will actually live longer if they do nothing.

The most extensive of these three studies was done by Dr. Ulrich Abel:

A German epidemiologist from the Heidelberg/Mannheim Tumor Clinic, Dr Ulrich Abel, has done a comprehensive review and analysis of every major study and clinical trial of chemotherapy ever done. His conclusions should be read by anyone who is about to embark on the Chemo Express. To make sure he had reviewed everything ever published on chemotherapy, Abel sent letters to over 350 medical centers around the world, asking them to send him anything they had published on the subject. Abel researched thousands of articles: it is unlikely that anyone in the world knows more about chemotherapy than he.

The analysis took him several years, but the results are astounding: Abel found that the overall worldwide success rate of chemotherapy was ‘appalling' because there was simply no scientific evidence available anywhere that chemotherapy can ‘extend in any appreciable way the lives of patients suffering from the most common organic cancers'. Abel emphasizes that chemotherapy rarely can improve the quality of life. He describes chemotherapy as ‘a scientific wasteland' and states that at least 80 per cent of chemotherapy administered throughout the world is worthless and is akin to the 'emperor's new clothes'–neither doctor nor patient is willing to give up on chemotherapy, even though there is no scientific evidence that it works! (Lancet, 10 August 1991) No mainstream media even mentioned this comprehensive study: it was totally buried.
Tim O'Shea, The Doctor Within

Other experts on chemotherapy would state that his conclusion that “80 percent” of all chemotherapy is useless is far too low. Some would peg the number at 97 percent or higher, especially if you factor in the very poor quality of life of chemotherapy and radiation patients.

For example, even if cancer patients had their lives extended by 20 percent by surgery, chemotherapy and radiation (the Big 3), the physical and mental damage done by these treatments would not justify the use of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation. It is torture, plain and simple. It destroys the immunity system, can make you blind, can damage your brain functions, can make you sterile, and so on and so forth. A logical person would say that a life extension of 20 percent – 50 percent would not justify the use of orthodox treatments.

However, there is no scientific evidence that the Big 3, or any other orthodox treatment, can extend life at all. The “cancer industry” uses a myriad of statistical tricks to make it appear that the “war on cancer” is being won. But in fact, their cancer research is a total waste of money (see my article: “Introduction to Alternative Cancer Treatments” and my eBook on the war between orthodox medicine and alternative medicine to learn more about their fancy statistical tricks.)

Second, we must ask a similar question about alternative medicine. Will a person who does absolutely nothing about treating their cancer live longer and have a higher quality of life than someone who goes through alternative treatments?

We must first ask the question: what are the side-effects of alternative treatments? There are none. No extra pain, no extra nausea, no brain damage, no sterility, no intense suffering of any kind. The only thing people who take alternative medicine notice is a massive change in their diet. They may not like wheatgrass juice as much as chocolate milk shakes. Other than that, a person on alternative medicine really doesn't know they are on alternative medicine.

But this does not answer the question. Will a person on alternative medicine live longer than if they did nothing? The answer to this question is this: “it depends on whether they did their homework.” If they use treatments that kill their cancer cells, protect their liver, kill the fungus, yeast, and mold in their body, build their immune system, etc. the answer is that they will probably live much longer than if they do nothing. But what they eat and drink is just as important as their treatment plan. They must not eat any foods that feed their cancer cells, interfere with the alternative treatment, and so on.

So let us repeat the first question: “if I go with alternative medicine, will I have a better combination of living longer and having a higher quality of life than if I go with orthodox medicine?” Because the answer to this question is a profound ‘yes' for those people who refuse all treatments, it is obvious that the answer to the first big question is also a resounding ‘yes' for those who go on alternative treatments.

How much better the person's length of life is, and quality of life is, however, really depends on two key things: have they done their homework and stuck to following their chosen treatment plans and diet?

Step 2: The Second Question

The second question is this: “can an alternative cancer treatment cure my cancer?”

The ultimate goal of alternative medicine is to rid the body of cancer cells, either by killing them or converting them back into normal cells and to build the immunity system so any future cancers can be handled by the body routinely. Is this achievable?

The answer to this question obviously depends on the treatment plans chosen (i.e. did someone do their homework?) and the ability of the person to follow the treatment plan and diet.

However, there is another issue here. The issue is this: “what was the condition of the cancer patient at the time they started their alternative treatment?” Many cancer patients had their bodies mutilated and severely damaged by orthodox medicine long before they started their alternative treatment. They have not only lost valuable time by first going the orthodox route, but their immunity systems, lymph systems, and key organs of their bodies had been severely damaged by orthodox medicine before they even started their alternative treatment.

An alternative treatment, as one example, can heal a partly damaged liver, but it cannot heal a dead liver.

Some orthodox medical doctors keep their patients on chemotherapy and/or radiation until they have only days or weeks to live. Such patients have little chance of survival even using the best alternative medicines.

One of the key reasons for making the correct decision now is “time.” Time may be short, and to make the wrong decision can cost a cancer patient life-saving time. Even alternative treatments take time and the better the condition of the patient when starting, the better the chances of survival.


While it is true that many people who take alternative cancer treatments do die, it would be extremely rare when a person using alternative treatments did not have a much higher combination of longevity, and quality of life.

Even when a person on alternative treatments does die, it would be rare when a similar patient on orthodox treatments survived longer than they did. In other words, if a person dies using a good alternative treatment, it is a virtual certainty they would have died even sooner if they had gone the orthodox route. Furthermore, it is absolutely impossible that the person on orthodox medicine had a higher quality of life.

People use alternative treatments to prevent cancer because natural substances build the immunity system without any side effects. Can you imagine someone dumb enough to us chemotherapy and radiation as cancer prevention? This is an indication of the vast superiority of alternative cancer treatments and their ability to improve the quality of life of a cancer patient, while they are being treated.

But here is the clincher. Alternative medicine, when the right treatment is used, and when the person sticks to the right diet, and when the patient is not too far gone when they begin, can cure cancer, even cancer that has metastasized.

If 10,000 newly diagnosed cancer patients, who had never had any orthodox treatments, visited Dr. Kelley, his cure rate would be at least 93 percent. This fact is documented by his treatment of 33,000 cancer patients. And that is not using the medical profession's tricky definition of “cure rate.” But in my opinion, there are even better alternative cancer treatments than the Kelley Metabolic program.

No one knows the true “cure rate” of orthodox medicine. It is so bad they hide this number behind a barricade of deceptive numbers and statistics.

The conclusion of this article is simple, there is no known situation where a person would be better off using orthodox medicine instead of alternative medicine. Orthodox medicine always makes a person worse than they were than the day before.

When orthodox medicine puts a person into “remission,” all they have done is damaged the body so much that the “symptoms” of cancer are gone (e.g. a tumor is no longer there). But being in remission does not mean that the cancer is gone, all it means is that the person's immunity system has been destroyed. But orthodox medicine cannot cure cancer that has metastasized. Period. All they can do is pretend that they have extended a person's life by talking about the symptoms of cancer.

One last note. Orthodox doctors are now giving their patients more and more natural substances during orthodox treatments. These natural substances are not the same natural substances that are used to treat cancer. They are natural substances designed to diminish the symptoms of chemotherapy and radiation.