LifeForce Hospitals

02.gif (21371 bytes)

Home
Up

Chemotherapy  Report

Do We Need a New Approach to Cancer?

In 1971 Richard Nixon announced the War on Cancer, and promised a cure by the 1977
bicentennial.

In each of the 28 years since, more Americans have died of cancer than the year before.

The failure of chemotherapy to control cancer has become apparent even to the oncology
establishment. Scientific American featured a recent cover story entitled: "The War on Cancer
-- It's Being Lost." In it, eminent epidemiologist John C. Bailar III, MD,Ph.D., Chairman of the
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics at McGill University cited the relentless increase
in cancer deaths in the face of growing use of toxic chemotherapy. He concluded that scientists
must look in new directions if they are ever to make progress against this unremitting killer.

Adding its voice, the prestigious British medical journal The Lancet, decrying the failure of
conventional therapy to stop the rise in breast cancer deaths, noted the discrepancy between
public perception and reality. "If one were to believe all the media hype, the triumphal ism of
the (medical) profession in published research, and the almost weekly miracle breakthroughs
trumpeted by the cancer charities, one might be surprised that women are dying at all from this
cancer" it observed. Noting that conventional therapies -- chemotherapy, radiation and surgery
-- had been pushed to their limits with dismal results, the editorial called on researchers to
"challenge dogma and redirect research efforts along more fruitful lines."

John Cairns, professor of microbiology at Harvard University, published a devastating 1985
critique in Scientific American. "Aside from certain rare cancers, it is not possible to detect any
sudden changes in the death rates for any of the major cancers that could be credited to
chemotherapy. Whether any of the common cancers can be cured by chemotherapy has yet to
be established."

In fact, chemotherapy is curative in very few cancers -- testicular, hodgkins, choriocarcinoma,
childhood leukemia. In most common solid tumors -- lung, colon, breast, etc. -- chemotherapy
is NOT curative.

In an article entailed "Chemotherapy: Snake-Oil Remedy?" that appeared in the Los Angeles
Times of 1/9/87, Dr. Martin F. Shapiro explained that while "some oncologist inform their
patients of the lack of evidence that treatments work...others may well be misled by scientific
papers that express unwarranted optimism about chemotherapy. Still others respond to an
economic incentive. Physicians can earn much more money running active chemotherapy
practices than they can providing solace and relief.. to dying patients and their families."

Dr. Shapiro is hardly alone. Alan C. Nixon, Ph.D., Past President of the American Chemical
Society wrote that "As a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that
physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than
good."

In 1986, McGill Cancer Center scientists sent a questionnaire to 118 doctors who treated
non-small-cell lung cancer. More than 3/4 of them recruited patients and carried out trials of
toxic drugs for lung cancer. They were asked to imagine that they themselves had cancer, and
were asked which of six current trials they themselves would choose. 64 of the 79 respondents
would not consent to be in a trial containing cisplatin, a common chemotherapy drug. Fifty eight
found all the trials unacceptable. Their reason? The ineffectiveness of chemotherapy and its
unacceptable degree of toxicity.

Famed German bio statistician Ulrich Abel Ph.D. also found in a similar 1989 study that "the
personal views of many oncologist seem to be in striking contrast to communications intended
for the public."

Breast cancer activist Rose Kushner wrote that by 1981 "indiscriminate, automatic adjuvant
chemotherapy was replacing the Halsted radical mastectomy as therapeutic overkill in the
United States." Thomas Nealon MD, Professor of Surgery at NYU School of Medicine,
Concluded in 1990 that "The treatment of this tumor now has slipped from too much surgery to
too much adjuvant therapy."

Why so much use of chemotherapy if it does so little good? Well for one thing, drug companies
provide huge economic incentives.

In 1990, $3.53 billion was spent on chemotherapy. By 1994 that figure had more than doubled
to $7.51 billion. This relentless increase in chemo use was accompanied by a relentless increase
in cancer deaths.

Oncologist Albert Braverman MD wrote in 1991 that "no disseminated neoplasm (cancer)
incurable in 1975 is curable today..Many medical oncologists recommend chemotherapy for
virtually any tumor, with a hopefulness undiscouraged by almost invariable failure."

Why the growth in chemotherapy in the face of such failure? A look at the financial
interrelationships between a large cancer center such a Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer
Center and the companies that make billions selling chemo drugs is revealing. James Robinson
III, Chairman of the MSKCC Board of Overseers and Managers, is a director of
Bristol-Myers Squibb, the world's largest producer of chemotherapy drugs. Richard Gelb,
Vice-Chairman of the MSKCC board is Bristol-Myers Chairman of the Board. Richard
Furlaud, another MSKCC board member, recently retired as Bristol Myers' president. Paul
Marks MD, MSKCC's President and CEO, is a director of Pfizer.

 
Home ] Up ]

 

Send mail to medmail@usa.net with questions or comments about this web site.
Copyright © 1999 LifeForce Hospitals Webserver Location Italy