How will your oncologist respond to this page?
"Hearsay? Anecdotal? Unscientific?"

Effectiveness of chemotherapy for the majority of cancers

Colorectal: no evidence exists that survival is improved by chemotherapy.
Gastric: no clear evidence.
Pancreatic: largest study "completely negative." Longer survival in the control group.
Bladder: no clinical trial done.
Breast: no direct evidence that chemotherapy prolongs survival. Use is "ethically questionable."
Ovarian: no direct evidence, but probably a small advantage from cis-platinum regimens. But non-randomized comparisons "almost worthless for assessment of therapy.
Cervix and corpus uteri: no improved survival.
Head and neck: no survival benefit, but occasional "positive effect" from shrinkage of tumors.

Who is Dr. Glenn A. Warner?
After graduation from Central Washington College of Education, he did a two-year stint as medical corpsman with the United States Marines and then got his medical degree from George Washington University in the District of Columbia. He did a surgical residency at Cook County Hospital in Chicago, followed by a pathology residency at the Tumor Institute of the Swedish Hospital. Feeling the urge to be with actual patients, he gravitated from pathology slides to the patients themselves and eventually headed the immunotherapy department of the Tumor Institute under Orliss Wildermuth, MD.

Chemotherapy and radiation can increase the risk of developing a second cancer by up to 100 times, according to Dr. Samuel S. Epstein.
Congressional Record, Sept. 9, 1997

Samuel S. Epstein, M.D. is professor emeritus of Environmental and Occupational Medicine (University of Illinois School of Public Health)

...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.
Alan C Nixon, PhD, former president of the American Chemical Society

Many medical oncologists recommend chemotherapy for virtually any tumor, with a hopefulness undiscouraged by almost invariable failure.
Albert Braverman MD 1991 Lancet 1991 337 p 901
"Medical Oncology in the 90s"

Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon, or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade, yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors.
Allen Levin, MD UCSF

How can that be true of the main cancer treatment in the U.S.? Fact is, no solid scientific studies or clinical trials prove chemotherapy's effectiveness, except in a small percentage of very rare types of cancer. For solid tumors of adults, the vast majority of cancer, or anything that has metastasized, chemotherapy just doesn't work.

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 percent 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 Aug 91

If your friend touches chemotherapy, he's a goner.
Chemotherapy expert Ernst Wynder, former professor at Sloan-Kettering Hospital and recipient of a medal from the American Cancer Association, in a warning to a friend.

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 (in 2006: $15 billion.) This relentless increase in chemotherapy use was accompanied by a relentless increase in cancer deaths.
”Chemotherapy Report”

"I believe that we will look back at today's medicine, especially today's oncology, as part of an ignorant and barbaric time, when patients were administered highly toxic doses of expensive drugs, while a gentle technique ... was being widely ignored."
From the book by Dr. Ross A. Hauser MD

"What you are about to read will shock you. It is a story of oncologists lying to parents about the efficacy of their therapy and using coercive tactics such as threats of court orders to take children and submit them to treatments that they know are torturous and ineffective.......We were told, not asked, but told that we had 30 days from Alexander’s surgeries to start chemo. We were told that chemo would offer Alexander a good chance of survival. We were told that he would be getting a new chemo protocol with "state-of-the-art" drugs. And we were warned that if we did not bring Alexander in for chemotherapy a court order would be forthcoming so that the oncologists could take him from us and administer these poisons without our approval. We were lied to and threatened so that oncologists could fill our son with deadly ineffective poisons that simply shortened his life and made his last days on earth a living hell.
    The oncologists did what they were trained to without challenging the death that surrounds their treatments. The FDA took away Alexander’s freedom to use a non-toxic and potentially life-saving therapy. The drug companies received their chemotherapy profits. Alexander lost his life. And we have to live with the knowledge that we never gave our son a fighting chance to survive his disease." No Rights for a Child Diagnosed with Cancer------Raphaele & Michael Horwin

"Two to 4% of cancers respond to chemotherapy…." Ralph Moss, Ph.D. 1995 Author of Questioning Chemotherapy.

"A study of over 10,000 patients shows clearly that chemo’s supposedly strong track record with Hodgkin’s disease (lymphoma) is actually a lie. Patients who underwent chemo were 14 times more likely to develop leukemia and 6 times more likely to develop cancers of the bones, joints, and soft tissues than those patients who did not undergo chemotherapy (NCI Journal 87:10)."—John Diamond, M.D.

Children who are successfully treated for Hodgkin's disease are 18 times more likely later to develop secondary malignant tumours. Girls face a 35 per cent chance of developing breast cancer by the time they are 40----which is 75 times greater than the average. The risk of leukemia increased markedly four years after the ending of successful treatment, and reached a plateau after 14 years, but the risk of developing solid tumours remained high and approached 30 per cent at 30 years (New Eng J Med, March 21, 1996)

The New England Journal of Medicine Reports— War on Cancer Is a Failure: Despite $30 billion spent on research and treatments since 1970, cancer remains "undefeated," with a death rate not lower but 6% higher in 1997 than 1970, stated John C. Bailar III, M.D., Ph.D., and Heather L. Gornik, M.H.S., both of the Department of Health Studies at the University of Chicago in Illinois.

"The five year cancer survival statistics of the American Cancer Society are very misleading. They now count things that are not cancer, and, because we are able to diagnose at an earlier stage of the disease, patients falsely appear to live longer. Our whole cancer research in the past 20 years has been a failure. More people over 30 are dying from cancer than ever before…More women with mild or benign diseases are being included in statistics and reported as being "cured". When government officials point to survival figures and say they are winning the war against cancer they are using those survival rates improperly."---Dr J. Bailer, New England Journal of Medicine (Dr Bailer’s answer to questions put by Neal Barnard MD of the Physicians Committee For Responsible Medicine and published in PCRM Update, sept/oct 1990.)

I wouldn't have chemotherapy and radiation because I'm not interested in therapies that cripple the immune system, and, in my opinion, virtually ensure failure for the majority of cancer patients."---Dr Julian Whitaker, M.D.

I have a doctor who called me last year. He listens to the show and personally he lives a healthy life. And he was angry. And he didn't know what to do. He wanted to know whether or not he could expose the situation without getting himself involved. He said, "I'm giving cancer patients over here at this major cancer clinic drugs that are killing them, and I can't stop it because they say the protocol's what's important." And I say, "But the patient's not doing well." They say, "The protocol's what's important, not the patient." And he said, "You can't believe what goes on in the name of medicine and science in this country."
Gary Null, Ph.D., health researcher, film producer

In 2002, the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that in the previous year, the average oncologist had made $253,000 of which 75% was profit on chemotherapy drugs administered in his/her office. Yet, surveys of oncologists by the Los Angeles Times and the McGill Cancer Center in Montreal show that from 75% to 91% of ongologists would refuse chemotherapy as a treatment for themselves or their families. Why? Too toxic and not effective. Yet, 75% of cancer patients are urged to take chemo by their oncologists.

Don't be fooled by terms like "response rate" or "5-year survival." For metastatic cancer the success rate of chemotherapy (defined as long-term remission) is 3%.

Forbes magazine:
In the world of modern medicine there are few more imprecise and drastic measures than chemotherapy as a treatment for cancer. In most cases the process involves poisoning a patient's system with toxic chemicals in an effort to kill malignant cancer cells. Anyone who has personally suffered through chemo or seen a loved one suffer can attest to its destructive and debilitating side effects.

What do the Europeans say about chemotherapy?

Excerpts from

German Magazine Der Spiegel Blasts Chemotherapy
by Ralph Moss, PhD

While I was in Germany last October an article on chemotherapy appeared in Der Spiegel, which is Germany's - in fact Europe's - highest-circulating news magazine. On average, over one million copies are sold every week, making it the German equivalent of Time or Newsweek [with the major distinction that Der Spiegel has always been a left-leaning magazine]. The article, highly critical of chemotherapy, created quite a stir.

(It) shows that for patients in the advanced stages of the major forms of cancer, chemotherapy has no appreciable effect on survival. The title of the article is "Useless Poisonous Cures" (Giftkur ohne Nutzen). The article reads as follows:

Increasingly sophisticated and expensive cellular poisons are being given to seriously ill patients with colon, breast, lung and prostate cancer. Now an epidemiologist has analyzed the actual rate of life extension in such patients. His findings are that despite all the alleged progress, patients do not actually live a day longer.

For the full article, click here.