Cancer Survival Rates from One Alternative Doctor

A while back I did a blog about the fascinating Cancer Summit that was all alternative doctors doing various treatments, mostly on patients that are stage four.  Unfortunately people only seem to go to alternative paths when they see the "regular" treatments aren't working for them.  In fact, Dr. Burzynski in Houston who has a fabulous treatment for brain cancers and was shut down several times by our wonderful government, is only ALLOWED to treat people if they have done all that they could FIRST in the chemo/radiation protocol.  How frustrating for him.  So many more would be cured if they weren't half dead from the chemo/radiation before he gets a shot at them.

Anyway, I found a transcript from a doctor in Mexico that has pretty good results versus the conventional treatments.  This is part of his presentation - I read it through but did not edit, you'll get the gist of it.  I wish we could organize funding for people like him rather than this pink ribbon stuff.  In 50 yrs. conventional medicine cannot produce the statistical results most of the alternatives do and if you ask me, funding is being sorely misdirected!

DR. CONTRERAS: Well, I’m very proud of this work because this is very, very important work that very few hospitals of our size, we are a small hospital in Mexico that has no governmental support, and so everything that we do, we do on our own. But it is always important to show to yourself first and then to the rest of the world the fruit of your work and the results of your hypothesis. That is we begin with a hypothesis of what cancer is, how we need to treat it and then we design a protocol and then we view the results. And so this is a combination of five years of work in four different types of tumors that are the most common.

 Now, that doesn’t mean that our therapy doesn’t work in any other types of tumors just that it’s very difficult to do a study like this in all tumors. We don’t have the funding unfortunately for it. So we did the study in the most common tumors and show our results. As I was mentioning to you, it’s very important to show results because everybody it doesn’t matter what you use, you will have, you will have good results. I mean if you are treating cancer with water there is somebody that is going to be cured with water, okay. The important thing is how you do in groups of patients with the same disease and with a certain protocol. And as I mentioned to you, it is important to note that we do make some very important differentiations between patient to patient, that is we tailor-make. But the basic results are – I mean the results are based on a basic therapy that we give to a number of patients.

So, what we did is first, we designed our protocols for a cancer of the breast. All of our patients are stage four and so for cancer of the breast, for cancer of the lung, for cancer of the ovary and for cancer of the colon. I think that it would take a long time to talk about all of them. But let me concentrate on cancer of the breast because this is. So we have a number of patients with the same diagnosis and the same staging, which is terminal cancer of the breast. And we compare them to two people that have published and there is very, very few. The one that we are using is the steer which is results of a number of it is a meta analysis, that is a large amount of number of studies, a large number of patients from a large or a good number of studies done in different hospitals with the same protocol. And then they provide results.

And so those are from the NCI the National Cancer Institute. And these are results from the typical conventional therapy. Then we compare it to our therapy, which is the IRT meaning, Integrative Regulatory Therapy. So those are all the therapies that we do for our patients where I talked about the preparation, the diet, the emotional and spiritual support everything is included on that. And so we compare them also to the cancer treatment centers of America. Now we did out study for five years, the cancer treatment centers are providing only for one or two years. Again, because it’s very difficult to follow patients and very expensive to do it for five years but we wanted to do the thing as the NCI. So if you see on our breast cancer patients that were treated before they came to us. We have about 98% of our patients are alive after five years. In comparison to 65% from the conventional therapy, that is very significant. If you look at the next one, when the cancer comes to us for virgin to treatment, without any treatment a 100% of our patients are alive after one year. And so, obviously because there is Stage 4 cancer patients very complicated as years go by the numbers start to drop. But at the end of 5 years we have, almost three times as many patients alive that the conventional therapy.

And this is with therapies that the patients virtually suffer no side effects and their quality of life is excellent. In very, you know a lot of alternative centers do not like to give the statistics because obviously then the other 60% did not make it. And a lot of people feel that you know, 45 or 50% is nothing to write home about, it is, especially when you compare it to 20% from conventional therapy alone. And these patients suffer a tremendous amount of loss of quality of life during those five years.

So we rather give information as is and we’re not, this way we’re not claiming that we cure everybody because we don’t. We do not have the answer to cancer. I think that what we are telling here the public is that we have a very, very good option and there is a lot more hope in integrating therapies than in conventional therapy alone.

And so that’s what our statistics show and you will find results as I mentioned to you for cancer of the lung, is where we have our best results. It’s you know, they claim that 1% of the patients are alive after five years with stage 4 cancer of the lungs, I have not found one study yet that shows that. 99% of the patients die within the first year. And we have 20%, 19% of our patients alive after 5 years with stage 4 cancer of the lungs. That’s our best result. So the difference is from 1% to 90% almost 20 times better results with our therapy than with conventional therapy alone. In cancer of the breast it is about three times, in cancer of the ovary also about three times, in cancer of the colon is almost two times.

But here it is, a big difference in cancer of the lung. The sear report is all stage four cancers of the colon and they say that it is 10%. Now, all of our stage 4 cancers of the colon are with metastasis to the liver. The median or the average lifespan with conventional therapy with metastasis to the liver is four months. And we have 17% of our patients alive after 5 years. And on the sear it’s combining all of the cases. So if you have stage 4 cancer of the colon but without metastasis to the liver then your chance of surviving five years is that 10%. But with metastasis of the liver is zero. So all of our patients are with metastasis to the liver and we have you know this 17%. So even though it looks small it is very, very significant. For us what is important is we want to let people know our results as they are and we want them to know that we are an option and that we are going to do everything possible to help them. But we are not curing. We do not have the cure for cancer.
This audio is part of the Healing Cancer World Summit