Being married to a cancer sufferer, any article that makes an appearances on the internet, always attracts my attention. The articles that are appearing more and more, are those concerned with cures, that the big pharmaceutical companies have no interest in.

When Colon cancer struck my wife years ago, I immediately assumed the worst, that death was to follow shortly. Internet research convinced me differently. The fact that the Doctor said she was cured, carried no weight in that decision. Consequentially, when she later developed further cancer, in the form of Breast and Ovarian, I trusted the research I undertook on the net. (maybe incorrectly!)

One of my main interests over the years has been the amount of alternate cures, that have been successfully bench tested and proven to work, yet no interest or excitement shown by the big pharmaceutical companies. Now I am no expert on the inner working of the FDA in America or their policies, but what is apparent, is the call for proof of the trials and tests to the highest degree. There is no “beef” against that, God forbid a drug be legalised without proof of possible side effects (remember thalidomide?) But what is obvious is that it requires “BIG” money for approval of the drugs that cure ailments.

Alternates that have drawn great interest by me, is the use of pH corrective therapy (Cesium chloride), the oxygenating of the blood, the Budwig diet, and the many herbs reputed to have shown curative properties. The question that need be asked is, “why are the big pharmaceuticals not interested in these discoveries?” The alternates are cheap or fairly cheap, accessible, and that the ground work done for them. Is the lack of interest due to the financial implications of a cheap drug, costing too much to test, to obtain FDA approval? This would seem so, the returns to the coffers must surely be a major decision of Board members, after all is this not why they occupy these positions? PROFIT!

Now the articles covering the discovery of the cancer curing properties of Dichlorocetate (DCA) by the University of Alberta, seem not to have attracted an interest from the media or pharmaceutical companies. Why I ask? It is a chemical compound used to treat metabolic disorders, so it has, or must have, already received the approval of the FDA, or is my assumption incorrect? There are articles, compounding the fact that there are no side effects to the use of DCA, as it is known, and that studies undertaken on a few cancer patients extended the lives of 80% of those tested. I have to admit that the test group was small, only 5, but the tissue sampling tests, or bench tests, proved it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, without any effect on healthy cells.

The University of Alberta is undoubtedly without the funds to continue with the testing and trials that would be required to obtain FDA approval, as attested to by their appeal for funds or donations on a scientific web site. The fact that DCA has no patent, and can be produced at extremely competitive prices, leads me to believe that this is the first reason for a lack of interest from the pharmaceutical companies, and secondly as these companies advertise their products in the media, the media is probably afraid interest show by them could affect future income revenue. This tends to have a “bad taste in the mouth” effect, money and profit the only consideration. Why are millions, nay trillions, of dollars spent by governments on developing weapons of war? whilst Cancer kills more per day, than the very wars that they create to be able to use these weapons.

Is it that the pharmaceutical and armament producing companies control the very governments that lead the countries? Is this not the conspiracy theory blamed for years on the Masonic institution, the illuminati, and other such institutions? (This theory, of course being absolute garbage) I do not know, yet I want a cure for Cancer to be found, the mental anguish and trauma associated with the disease, not only for the patient, but also the families involved, has proven too much for some to bear.