Return to Chapter Index
Next Chapter

The Claim There is “No Scientific Evidence” for Alternative Treatments

The budget for people doing serious research on alternative treatment plans is virtually zero. One reason for this is that the FDA will not give formal permission for anyone to do research on alternative treatments on live patients. In other words, the government cronies of the pharmaceutical industry do everything in their power to stop alternative treatment research. That way they can claim there is “no scientific evidence” for alternative treatments.

Because the FDA, NIH (National Institute of Health, a government agency) and NCI (a division of the NIH) refuse to do legitimate and honest research into alternative treatments, they are artificially manufacturing a situation where there is “no scientific evidence” for alternative treatments (according to their definition of “science”), and because there is “no scientific evidence” for alternative treatments, these agencies, along with the AMA, have legal power to suppress and harass alternative treatment practitioners, thus making sure there is “no scientific evidence.” It is a “self-fulfilling prophesy.”

In other words, it is like Jim predicting John is going to die within 5 hours, and then Jim pulls out a gun and shoots John, thus fulfilling his own prophecy. The pharmaceutical industry's cronies claim there is “no scientific evidence” for natural treatments, then they do everything in their power to ensure there is “no scientific evidence.”

But that is not all. In a jury trial, one or two witnesses is enough “evidence” for a jury. But with the FDA, NIH, and NCI, the tens of thousands of witnesses, who have been cured by alternative treatments, are not allowed to testify. Their testimony is not admitted as evidence. Nor are the hundreds of scientific studies on natural treatments for cancer.

The ultimate goal of the FDA, which they have achieved, is to only allow scientific evidence that comes from the pharmaceutical industry. Since the pharmaceutical industry does not research alternative treatments for cancer (because it is not profitable), by limiting “research” to the pharmaceutical industry they have stopped any possibility that there will ever be any “scientific” evidence for alternative treatments for cancer. On top of this, the pharmaceutical industry are the biggest scientific liars on earth. Many, many of their studies have been shown to be fraudulent. On top of that, the FDA has made the approval process so expensive, there is no way that any natural product manufacturer can afford to get a natural product approved.

There is absolutely nothing more important for our corrupt government agencies to accomplish (from the perspective of the pharmaceutical industry) than to ensure there is “no scientific evidence” for alternative treatments. With this great lie in hand, everyone on the side of orthodox medicine has the tools they need to crush alternative medicine and perpetuate the great lie that there is no scientific evidence. Ignoring the evidence and suppressing the truth about the scientific evidence of alternative treatments are to the conspiracy, what an engine is to a truck.

To be technical, the official job of the FDA and other “health” agencies of the U.S. Government (i.e. this is why they were created in the first place) is to protect the profits of the big pharmaceutical and chemical companies, which have had, and still have, enormous influence in the U.S. government. That is the typical job of all government agencies when they are created, each has a sector of the corporate world to protect, and each is created because of the influence of big corporations.

I will be more specific. A corporation has no police powers. The FDA was specifically created to give Big Pharma police powers. Whenever Big Pharma wants something, they simply go to one of their departments (the FDA in this case) and have the FDA “take care of it.”

When they are not using their police powers for Big Pharma, their assigned task is to suppress all truth and all scientific evidence for alternative treatments for cancer, heart disease prevention, etc. etc. Of course, their real objective is masked behind the facade of pretending to be concerned about the health of the American people. No doubt many of the lower level employees of the FDA really are concerned about the health of the American people, but lower level employees have no influence with the top executives, who are the main beneficiaries of the pharmaceutical money pot.

The hypocrisy of the FDA, AMA, Big Pharma, etc. is unbelievable. They claim that they do not want patients to be exposed to alternative treatments for cancer on grounds of their great humanitarianism. Then they suppress all truth about alternative cancer treatments and glorify worthless drugs.

My Challenge to the FDA

Let us suppose there were two groups of recently diagnosed cancer patients. Each group has 1,000 patients. Each group is similar in terms of the age of the patient, the type of cancer, the stage at diagnosis, etc. No one in either group has had any cancer treatments, and no one is over 65 years old (because this is a ten-year study). Finally, each person must have at least Stage III cancer at the time of diagnosis.

Now I challenge the medical establishment to a contest. I will put together a team of M.D.s, alternative cancer experts, etc. and we will treat one of the groups. Orthodox medicine will treat the other group with orthodox treatments that are commonly used by oncologists. There is an understanding that the patients in the orthodox group are not allowed to take any natural substances for the treatment of their cancer (they can take well-advertised natural substances for the symptoms of chemotherapy, however).

In ten years, which group will have the most people still surviving? Our group will be guaranteed to have at least 80 percent still living, but probably over 90 percent will still be living. The other group will probably have less than 10 percent still living, and likely less than 5 percent.

The contest will be decided by 10-year survival rates and will have absolutely nothing to do with symptoms (e.g. tumor shrinkage).

You would think that our diligent government agencies would welcome such a contest. Don't kid yourself. The NIH would never fund such a study. The FDA would never allow it on live patients. The AMA would yank the license of any M.D. that participated on our side. Various governments would jail any other person on our team for “practicing medicine without a license.”

In short, only Congress could legislate such a contest. However, there are more Big Pharma lobbyists than there are congressmen and congresswomen.

Do you see the picture? Organized medicine doesn't want anyone to know the truth about alternative treatments for cancer because they are not profitable to them. For example, there are more than a dozen nutrients in purple grapes, with their seeds and skin, that orthodox medicine admits selectively kill cancer cells. But they don't want any studies with purple grapes (as my article talks about them) or any other alternative treatment for cancer.

Ponder this carefully, there has never been, and will never be a legitimate side-by-side study between alternative treatments and orthodox treatments (where alternative treatment experts control the alternative patients). The one study that did that (Pauling and Cameron) was so distressing to orthodox medicine that they did three bogus studies at the Mayo Clinic (which receives millions of dollars in cancer “research” money) to suppress the truth.

They do everything in their power to crush the evidence for alternative treatments for cancer, so they can say: “there is no scientific evidence for alternative treatments.” The logic they present to the public is this: “there is no scientific evidence for alternative treatments, so we will not allow any studies of alternative treatments, even though purple grapes contain more than a dozen nutrients that selectively kill cancer cells.”

It is absolutely critical to the many billions of dollars in profits every year of orthodox medicine that there are no valid studies using alternative treatments for cancer. The most important thing for our totally corrupt federal government is to protect the profits of the big corporations.

The Big Picture

Now let's suppose that I manufactured a pill that contained two dozen nutrients, all proven to selectively kill cancer cells, and that this pill cures cancer (in conjunction with a good cancer diet). Consider this:

If I put anything on the bottle (i.e. the label) that stated these pills cured cancer, the totally corrupt Food and Drug Administration would shut me down for selling unapproved cancer treatments (chemotherapy is, of course, approved).

If I didn't put anything on the label about cancer but put the information on my website, the equally corrupt Federal Trade Commission (FTC) would shut me down for advertising unapproved cancer treatments. (Note: Actually, the FDA has the authority to enforce the key FTC law.)

Thus, information about my product could not be put in any proximity to the product itself.

Now let's suppose that an M.D. recommended my product to a cancer patient. The totally corrupt American Medical Association would yank the license of the doctor for recommending “unproven” treatments.

Now let's suppose that an alternative health doctor recommended my product to a cancer patient. The totally corrupt American Medical Association could have the person arrested (in a sting operation) for “practicing medicine without a license.”

Now let's suppose a person wrote a book on how to cure cancer, and it was a very viable treatment. No one could touch him – right? I will tell you what happened in one instance. Someone was hired to plant explosives on his property, then the feds came in and arrested him (or the feds brought the explosives with them when they searched his property – I don't know which happened) for having illegal explosives on his property. That was in Utah.

In Oklahoma, a lady cured many cancer patients with botanicals. She also wrote a book about the FDA. She was arrested by the FDA, all 10,000 copies of her book were destroyed and she was murdered the first week she was in jail.

Someone should write a book on the more than 100 instances where the things I just mentioned really happened. Yes, the feds did shut down some real quacks. But the feds couldn't care less whether the person cures cancer or not, they will shut down everybody, even the people who do cure cancer. And yes, people have been murdered (e.g. one just mentioned, plus an associate of Royal Rife, plus a laetrile doctor, to mention but three), labs have been burnt to the ground, etc.

Our own government has very cleverly blocked almost all forms of communication about alternative treatments for cancer, and it has all been done in total secrecy because the press has sold out to the highest bidder – Big Pharma.

Here is the really scary part. It doesn't matter whether the President is a Republican or a Democrat. It doesn't matter whether the House is controlled by the Republicans or the Democrats. It doesn't matter whether the Senate is controlled by the Republicans or the Democrats. The suppression of the truth about cancer treatments continues in force, with few pyrrhic victories of those interested in truth. Do you remember my discussion on “hard issues?”

L-Tryptophan and Prozac

While the major job of the FDA is to suppress all scientific evidence for alternative treatments for cancer and heart disease prevention, that is not all they do. It is also their job to suppress the availability of alternative medicines. They are masters at that too.

Everyone is aware of Prozac and the many other drugs used and approved to treat depression and other mental illnesses. In the July 2003 Reader's Digest (who else) there was an article on teenage depression and drugs like Prozac (this was not the only pro-orthodox article in this issue). The article originally appeared in Newsweek, yet another magazine loyal to their advertisers.

This article talks about the growing number of teenagers who are depressed. The solution? Of course, it is to run to your doctor and get prescription drugs and/or therapy if there is even the slightest hint your child might be depressed. (Obviously, a suicidal child should see a professional.)

The article, of course, doesn't talk about alternative treatments for teenage depression. How about parents spending more time with their children? How about parents talking to their children and actually listening to their children? How about parents becoming friends with their children? How about parents setting a better example for their children and teaching them by example not to worship popularity and money? How about parents putting less pressure on their children “to succeed” in school and in life? The article mentions stress as a cause but makes no effort to explain how to reduce stress by using the family.

Then there are the food substances and additives that cause emotional disturbances, such as aspartame, Monosodium Glutamate, refined sugar, food dyes, food allergies, etc. etc. Of course, they didn't mention any of these things either because orthodox medicine treats symptoms, not causes. Newsweek and Reader's Digest want your children to get hooked on prescription drugs.

As it turns out, there are alternative medical treatments for depression. Foremost among these is L-Tryptophan, a critical amino acid the body cannot manufacture for itself. Both L-Tryptophan and Prozac work with serotonin, a chemical that has to do with how we feel.

Elevated levels of serotonin in the body often result in the relief of depression, as well as substantial reduction in pain sensitivity, anxiety and stress. Prozac, as well as other new anti-depressant drugs such as Paxil and Zoloft, attempt to enhance levels of serotonin by working on whatever amounts of it already exist in the body (these drugs are known as selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors). None of these drugs, however, produce serotonin. In contrast, ingested L-Tryptophan acts to produce serotonin, even in individuals who generate little serotonin of their own. The most effective way to elevate levels of serotonin would be to use a serotonin producer rather than a serotonin enhancer.
Dean Wolfe Manders, Ph.D. in

Thus it is clear that L-Tryptophan and Prozac are in competition with each other. Prozac is a drug that fools the body and L-Typtophan is an amino acid that creates more serotonin. Prozac, and similar drugs have been shown to have deadly side-effects. But I won't get into that.

So what is the FDA going to do? It is deadly Prozac versus harmless and far more effective L-Tryptophan. This is what they did:

In the fall of 1989, the FDA recalled L-Tryptophan, an amino acid nutritional supplement, stating that it caused a rare and deadly flu-like condition (Eosinophilia-Myalgia Syndrome — EMS). On March 22, 1990, the FDA banned the public sale dietary of L-Tryptophan completely. This ban continues today.

On March 26, 1990, Newsweek featured a lead article praising the virtues of the anti-depressant drug Prozac. Its multi-color cover displayed a floating, gigantic green and white capsule of Prozac with the caption: “Prozac: A Breakthrough Drug for Depression.

The fact that the FDA ban of L-Tryptophan and the Newsweek Prozac cover story occurred within four days of each other went unnoticed by both the media and the public. Yet, to those who understand the effective properties of L-Tryptophan and Prozac, the concurrence seems “unbelievably coincidental.” The link here is the brain neurotransmitter serotonin — a biochemical nerve signal conductor. The action of Prozac and L-Tryptophan are both involved with serotonin, but in totally different ways.

You need to understand that it takes far more than 4 days to get an issue of Time out the door. Thus, Time magazine was working on the Prozac article weeks before the FDA issued their order. You should also understand that the FDA did not prove that L-Tryptophan was dangerous. They banned it because a drug company issued a contaminated batch of L-Tryptophan.

Normally, when a drug company issues a bad batch of a product, which is quite common, the FDA fines the company and may have some other punishment for the company. But the FDA does not ban the product. But in this case, the FDA banned the harmless and useful product. Is it real crime? Competing with Big Pharma.

This “double standard” is standard operating procedure for the totally corrupt FDA.

Thus we have a situation where Congress has allowed for several decades for tobacco products to be manufactured and sold, which are known to kill hundreds of thousands of Americans every year, but at the same time Congress has allowed the FDA to ban L-Tryptophan.

The public availability of L-Tryptophan is too important an issue only to be argued and shrouded within a scientific debate that remains, ultimately, mystifying to the vast majority of Americans. There are many obvious facts worthy of public attention, and public concern. For example, consider the following:

  • On February 9, 1993, a United States government patent (#5185157) was issued to use L-Tryptophan to treat, and cure EMS, the very same deadly flu-like condition which prompted the FDA to take L-Tryptophan off the market in 1989.
  • Notwithstanding its public ban and import alert on L-Tryptophan, the FDA today allows Ajinomoto U.S.A. the right to import from Japan human-use L-Tryptophan. Distributed from the Ajinomoto plant in Raleigh, North Carolina, the L-Tryptophan is then sold to, and through, a network of compounding pharmacies across the United States. Purchased by individuals only under a physician's order, L-Tryptophan emerges as a new prescription drug in the serotonin marketplace; one hundred 500 mg capsules cost about $75 — approximately five times more than if they were sold as a dietary supplement.
  • Since the FDA holds the political mandate and power of a public regulatory agency established, ostensibly, to protect people from raw corporate interests in drug production and distribution, the actions of the FDA in concert with Ajinomoto U.S.A. are illuminating. By publicly banning L-Tryptophan from its dietary supplement status and price, while allowing L-Tryptophan to be sold as a high-priced prescription drug, the naked duplicity of FDA L-Tryptophan policy is revealed.
  • During and after the 1989 EMS outbreak, the FDA did not totally ban the use of L-Tryptophan in humans — then, as today, the FDA has granted the pharmaceutical industry the protected right to use L-Tryptophan in hospital settings. Manufactured by Abbott Laboratories, the amino acid injectable solutions Aminosyn and Aminosyn II contain as much as 200 mg of L-Tryptophan. (Moreover, L-Tryptophan has never been removed from baby food produced and sold within the United States.)

While the FDA has banned the public sale and use of safe, non-contaminated, dietary supplement L-Tryptophan for people, the United States Department of Agriculture still sanctions the legal sale and use of non-contaminated L-Tryptophan for animals. Today, as in the past, feed grade L-Tryptophan continues to be used as a nutritional and bulk feed additive by the commercial hog and chicken farming industry. Additionally, L-Tryptophan is now available for use by veterinarians in caring for horses and pets. Outside of the United States, in countries such as Canada, the Netherlands, Germany, England, and others, L-Tryptophan is widely used. Nowhere, have any serious or widespread health problems occurred.”

Import Alerts

You may have noticed that L-Tryptophan was on an “import alert” list. An import alert is a way for the FDA to suppress the importation of a natural substance that competes with Big Pharma. Imagine this: a critical amino acid is put on an import alert because a pharmaceutical company made a contaminated batch of it. Meanwhile, cigarettes are still legal and only require a warning label.

There have been important alerts issued for virtually every useful cancer supplement. For example, here is a short list of potent alternative cancer treatments that have been found on import alerts:

Two things you should know about import alerts. As you might guess, the justification for these alerts is virtually always because there is “no scientific evidence” these treatments work. Are you surprised? But there is something else you need to know. Anti-alternative organizations, such as quack watch, use the import alerts as their evidence that a particular treatment doesn't work. In other words, the corruption of the FDA, and their lust for a piece of the pharmaceutical money pie is used as evidence an alternative treatment plan doesn't work. How is that for coming full circle?

Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC or simply: Codex)

What the FDA is to the U.S. government, Codex Alimentarius is to the United Nations. If you know anything about the U.N. then it should come as no surprise to you that Codex is just as corrupt as the FDA, if not more so. I say that because of the way Codex is organized. Pharmaceutical company employees can and do sit on the key governing committees of Codex. Corruption in Europe and other countries is far more open than it is in America.

I quote from Dr. Rath, who has both cancer treatment and heart disease prevention protocols:

Dr. Mathias Rath, one of the most vocal and credible of opponents to the CAC is, according to many, also among the leading American researchers in cardiovascular disease. The German-born California resident was a co-worker of Nobel prize winner Dr. Linus Pauling. Dr. Pauling, for those requiring testimony from the most heavily credentialed of scientists, won two Nobel prizes and is the only scientist to have ever done so in different, unrelated categories.

Dr. Rath, addressing a conference on alternative medicine in Chemnitz, Germany, outlined the various dangers inherent in the Codex document. Among them are the commission's recommendations that vitamins and minerals be placed, along with herbs and “botanicals”, in the category of controlled prescription substances. The only purpose for this, Rath and others maintain, would be to provide a seemingly viable reason to raise the price of food supplements to prescription levels. This, Rath also claims, stems from the pharmaceutical company's unrestrained greed for profit and the elimination of the public's easy access to effectual natural remedies that would “rob” the drug companies of exorbitant profits. As an example of this he cites his research into the simple use of vitamin C, in concert with other substances, for the virtual elimination of cardiovascular disease from test subjects.

Rath claims that after his clinically-controlled therapy produced astounding results in the reduction of cardiovascular disease and, subsequently being endorsed by Linus Pauling, the Roche Corporation, anticipating an increased demand for vitamin C, artificially elevated the price of its raw materials for production of that vitamin. This action on the part of Roche, “the German Bayer Corporation and the U.S. firm Archer-Daniels-Midland (ADM),” resulted, Rath claims, in the formation of a cartel for the purpose of “criminal price fixing.” This claim is strongly substantiated by the U.S. government's subsequent prosecution of ADM for that very crime.

The U.S. Congress, who will sell-out to anyone walking by their office building with money in hand, passed a law that states that American sovereignty is irrelevant and that Codex should have control over what can and cannot be sold and how it is classified. The FDA vehemently denies Codex has any authority over it, and the soap opera goes on and on.

It Gets Worse

The medical establishment loves it when someone on alternative treatments dies. I remember looking at a website owned by an orthodox medicine cancer clinic. It told the story of a person on hydrazine sulfate (one of the top 50), who died of liver complications. It is a typical example of only telling one side of the story. For example, assuming the story is true (and there are significant reasons to believe it is not true):

  1. They didn't tell you how damaged the person's liver was before the person started alternative treatments. No alternative treatment can fix a liver destroyed by cancer and chemotherapy before the treatment even begins. (Note: Just because a person has liver cancer does NOT mean that the liver is damaged beyond repair.)
  2. They didn't tell you the dosage of hydrazine sulfate the patient used. It is well known that a person should not take a higher dose of hydrazine sulfate (H.S.) than advised (hopefully, the patient got good advice from their vendor). There are some treatment plans where “more is not better,” and H.S. is one of them.

The fact of the matter is that H.S. has an incredible safety record when taken in recommended dosages (its safety record is far better than any chemotherapy drug). But more importantly, why didn't this same website talk about the nearly 33,000 people cured of cancer by Dr. Kelley. Why didn't they post testimonials of local people who were cured by natural means (e.g. Essiac Tea, the Raw Food diet, etc.).

But there is more to it than that. Why did this person die? Was it because the medical establishment suppressed important information about alternative treatments, and because of this, this person chose the wrong treatment plan for his situation? For example, if this person had advanced terminal cancer before he went on alternative treatments, hydrazine sulfate would have been a very poor choice for his situation. If the medical community supported alternative treatments for cancer, someone could have told him that information. Did he die because he was prevented from being monitored by a medical doctor by the AMA?

The chances are, the main reason this person died is because good information about alternative treatments for cancer are suppressed by orthodox medicine. Did this clinic talk about that? Obviously not. It is simply part of the ongoing propaganda campaign to discredit alternative treatments to get money.

The FDA and the rest of the medical establishment has not only stopped you from knowing the truth about alternative treatments, they have also stopped you from knowing exact “cure rates” (alternative definition) for: specific types of cancer, for specific types of treatment plans, diagnosed at specific stages. Furthermore, they have virtually stopped you from being able to be treated by a licensed medical doctor. Thus, if you want to use alternative treatments, you are probably going to have to treat and monitor yourself. Furthermore, you are going to have to pick a treatment plan yourself, without the benefit of a lot of good statistical information.

Thus, let me summarize what the job of the FDA, AMA, NIH, NCI, ACS, cancer research organizations, ad nauseum, is:

  1. Suppress any attempt by anyone to produce “scientific evidence” for alternative treatments for cancer,
  2. Suppress the availability of natural products to patients,
  3. Suppress the importation into the United States of natural products that treat cancer,
  4. Suppress any useful statistical information about alternative treatments for cancer.

But there is another way to summarize the job of the FDA, ad nauseum: The job of the FDA is to suppress all information about alternative treatments so that people will not know that alternative treatments for cancer even exist. But if they do find out alternative treatments exist, they won't know the truth about how good alternative treatments are. Or if they do try to use alternative treatments they will pick the wrong treatment protocol because the FDA suppresses any possible good statistical information about alternative treatments for cancer.

They have covered all of the bases quite well and they have a wide array of sophisticated “tools” to do their job. And it is our tax dollars that fund their protection of Big Pharma's profits. A top executive of the FDA can expect to be a millionaire within three years of quitting the FDA.