Radiation “Therapy”

“The greatest derangement of the mind is to believe in something because one wishes it to be so.” — René J. Dubos, 1876

The accidental discovery of x-rays by William Konrad Roentgen in 1895 provided cancer therapy with its second most widely used treatment (radiation therapy, radiotherapy, irradiation) and medicine with a primary diagnostic tool (radiology). X-rays were not defined as separate particles until five years later.

Modern radiation therapy, sometimes called radiotherapy, x-ray therapy, radiation treatment, cobalt therapy, electron beam therapy, or irradiation uses high energy, penetrating waves or particles such as x rays, gamma rays, proton rays, or neutron rays to destroy cancer cells or keep them from reproducing.

Very little of the properties of radiation were known until well into the twentieth century. This ignorance did not prevent their use in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer. In 1896 the first patients were irradiated for carcinoma of the breast and gastric cancer; they did not survive. Dr. F. W. Forbes Ross observed in 1912: “The first trial of x-rays as a treatment of cancer was the blindest of blind leaps in the dark by even the most orthodox”.

Before World War I, physicians who had used x-rays indiscriminately began to lose fingers and hands to the mysterious radiation; by the 1920s, they were losing their lives to radiation-induced cancers without even suspecting it posed a danger to them. Some of the more pronounced radiation victims were medical patients who received severe burns from radiation overdoses that left them painfully mutilated or dead from acute radiation poisoning.

The use of x-rays and radiation therapy provides classic examples of iatrogenesis. A physical disorder caused by diagnosis or treatment by a physician or surgeon. The fact that radiation causes cancer is well documented.

Much of the current understanding about radiation-induced cancer is based upon longterm observation of the Japanese survivors of the World War II atomic bombings in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan. The incidence of leukemia in these victims was found to be directly related to their distance from the center of the blasts. Leukemia also occurs more frequently in radiologists than in other physicians. In the 1930s and 1940s, thousands of children were given radiotherapy to shrink enlarged adenoids and tonsils. Years later, one-quarter of these people had developed thyroid tumors; and one in three of the tumors was malignant.

Radiation is toxic at every level – not only toxic to cancer cells but toxic to all healthy cells. There is no level of radiation that does not cause mutations in every living organism ever tested. Still, many are shocked to learn that radiation itself actually causes cancer.

If you have cancer, the subject of radio “therapy” will come up. For certain cancerous tumors, radiation is effective in temporarily reducing the size [debulking] of the tumor. Most of the time the side effects are significant and very harmful. Radiation does not distinguish between cancer cells and normal cells. Despite being technically packaged, radiation is equivalent to burning your cancer into extinction.

Cancer is a “systemic” condition, with your whole body involved. Reducing the tumor size does not equate to curing the cancer.

As radiation doses have been defined and refined, the cancer establishment continues to proclaim it as a successful and major treatment therapy. Yet the statistics have been manipulated to cover up what has really happened to irradiated patients. For instance, patients with progression-free survival of 5 years (or less) are often listed as successes even if the same cancer later returns.[1,2]

Even more disturbing are statistical methods that ignore lethal side effects such as radiation necrosis in the brain that kills the majority of its victims, but are not normally officially tabulated as cancer deaths.[3,4] This enables statisticians to say the radiation “cured” the patient of cancer, while omitting the fact that the therapy itself killed the patient.

[1] September 17, 2016.

[2] Accessed September 27, 2016. Understanding Statistics

[3] Dirix, P., Nuyts, S. (2008). Organ-sparing radiotherapy in head and neck cancer. Belgian Journal of Medical Oncology, 2 (4), 212-215.

[4] Welch HG, Black WC. Are deaths within 1 month of cancer-directed surgery attributed to cancer? Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 2002 Jul 17;94(14):1066-70.

It’s really no surprise that when doctors use radiation to treat breast and prostate cancer, the evidence shows it increases your danger of more cancer in the area of your body that was exposed to the radiation.

Diagnostic X-rays cause cancer: It has been estimated that diagnostic X-rays over a lifetime cause up to 3.2% additional cancers in a population. [5].

Radiation therapy damages bones: The scientific world has been shaken by a report that a single therapeutic dose of radiation can cause significant bone loss. Years later, osteoporosis, bone necrosis or bone cancer can develop [6].

More radiation danger: Exposure to ionizing radiation is known to result in genetic damage that can make cells cancerous. Now a new study has revealed that radiation can alter the environment surrounding cells so that future cells are more likely to become cancerous [7].

[5] LINK


[7] LINK Berkeley Lab study

For instance, a study by researchers at Columbia University and Mount Sinai Medical Center LINK showed that prostate cancer patients treated with external beam radiotherapy were in HIGHER DANGER of bladder cancer and rectal cancer.[8] Men’s bladders and rectums are both exposed to radiation during radiation treatment for prostate cancer. What’s more, studies in breast cancer patients suggest that radiation treatment can INCREASE the danger of lung cancer.A researcher at the National Institute of Health and Medical Research studied more than 4,000 breast cancer survivors and found that the more radiation they’d received, THE HIGHER THEIR DANGER OF LUNG CANCER [9] Women’s lungs also absorb radiation from the rays aimed at the breast cancer.

[8] Wascher, Robert A. MD, FACS. (2008) “Health Report: Radiation Treatment of Prostate Cancer & Risk of Second Cancers.”

[9] Rubino C. et al. Radiation Dose, Chemotherapy and Risk of Lung Cancer After Breast Cancer Treatment. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, Volume 75, Number 1, September 2002, PP. 15-24(10).

Radiation “treatment” causes new cancers!

A study of 13,472 breast cancer patients in France revealed that an horrendous 84 PERCENT of women who developed secondary cancers had undergone radiation treatments. [10] These “secondary cancers” can mean additional breast cancers or even lung cancer. In that French study, 93 percent of the breast cancer patients who came down with lung cancer had submitted to radiation.

[10] Radiation therapy for breast cancer increases the risk of secondary malignancy Nature Clinical Practice Oncology (2007) Radiation therapy for breast

The U.S. government misleads the public about radiation’s safety
The deception began with the famous Fitzgerald Report presented to Congress in 1953. The report revealed damning research evidence from Sloan-Kettering that proving that patients who got no radiation actually LIVED LONGER than those who did! Most alarming of all, the Fitzgerald Report accused the medical establishment of actively working to bury safe, alternative therapies.

What happened after this shocking revelation? Absolutely nothing. “Experts” dismissed the Fitzgerald Report as a “nonsense”, while mainstream medicine and the Federal Government continued to promote radiation as a safe cancer treatment.

In 1974, research confirmed the Fitzgerald Report’s findings. A study published in The Lancet revealed that radiation treatment after breast cancer surgery actually increases a woman’s danger of dying!

The Lancet, Decreased Survival Related to Irradiation Postoperatively in Early Operable Breast Cancer. Stjernsward, Jan, The Lancet, 30 November, 1974.
“An increased mortality in early breast cancer can be correlated to the routine use of local postoperative irradiation. The decreased survival is statistically significant. Of controlled clinical trials so far published, all six, including more than 3400 patients, demonstrate decreased survival of between 1 and 10% in irradiated patients when compared with those treated by mastectomy alone.”

In 1989, similar research appeared again in an article called “Doctors Persist with Outmoded Cancer Therapies” in the journal Cancer Forum.

Cancer Forum, vol. 9, no. 7-8, Winter, 1988-1989, p. 11.
Doctors Persist With Outmoded Cancer Therapies, By: Mark L. Fuerst
Dr. Umberto Veronesi, director and chief surgeon of the Italian National Cancer Institute in Milan stated that; “Several clinical trials have shown that radiation given immediately after a radical mastectomy is useless. Yet 50 percent to 60 percent of cancer specialists still do it..”

It’s really tragic to think that for MORE THAN 60 YEARS, government knowledge of the dangers of radiation have been by and large concealed!

Radiologists Don’t Know and Rarely Even Share the Dangers

In a landmark study reported in the journal Radiology, 7 percent (five of 76) of patients reported that they were told about risks and benefits of their CT scan, while 22 percent (10 of 45) of emergency room physicians reported that they had provided such information. When further interviewed, 47 percent (18 of 38) of radiologists believed that there was increased cancer risk, whereas only 9 percent (four of 45) of emergency room physicians and 3 percent (two of 76) of patients believed that there was increased risk. All patients and most emergency room physicians and radiologists were unable to accurately estimate the dose for one CT scan compared with that for one chest radiograph.

Radiology, 2004 Sep;232(3):735-8. Estimated radiation risks potentially associated with full-body CT screening. By: Brenner DJ, Elliston CD.

Ionizing radiation induces cancer because of at least two factors. First, they do physical damage to the body which triggers the production of trophoblast cells as part of the healing process. Second, they weaken or destroy the production of white blood cells which constitute the immunological defense mechanism, the body’s front-line defense against cancer.

On the average, there is little or no solid evidence that radiation actually improves a patient’s chances for survival. The National Surgical Adjuvant Breast Project conducted studies on the effect of radiation and found in summary:

From the data available it would seem that the use of post-operative radiation has provided no discernible advantage to patients so treated in terms of increasing the proportion who were free of disease for as long as five years. (Fisher, B., et. al., “Postoperative Radiotherapy in the Treatment of Breast Cancer; Results of the NSAPP Clinical Trial,” Annals of Surgery, 172, No.4)

This is an embarrassingly difficult fact for a radiologist to face, because it clearly shows that there is little justification for their existence in the medical business. If they were to admit publicly what they know privately, they would talk themselves right out of a job! You simply won’t hear these facts being discussed by radiologists or those whose livelihood depends on the construction, sale, installation, use, or maintenance of the multi-million-dollar radiology equipment.

British Medical Journal, 1995, 310:246-8
Chemotherapy for solid tumours. Routine treatment not yet justified. By: G.M. Mead
“…radiological shrinkage of solid tumours should not be overinterpreted, as it often has little or no survival benefit.”

U.S. President’s Cancer Panel, 2008-2009 annual report, “Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk: What We Can Do Now”, April 2010.
“Medicine now is the largest controllable source of radiation exposure, but it remains essentially unregulated.”

Some of the best evidence regarding the lack of effectiveness for Radiation comes from Medical Textbooks such as;

Medical Textbook
Essential Practice of Surgery: Basic Science and Clinical Evidence
2003 Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., 761 pages
By: Jeffrey A. Norton et al.

“If a surgical incision needs to be placed through an area of irradiated skin, then that incision is not likely to heal. Currently the only treatment modalities for these wounds are hyperbaric oxygen therapy or coverage with vascularized tissue flaps.”
page 83

“Both radiation and chemotherapeutic agents have their greatest effects on dividing cells. The division of endothelial cells, fibroblasts, and keratinocytes is impaired in irradiated tissue, which retards wound healing.
page 84

“Injury caused by exposure to ionizing radiation may be limited to the skin but often is deeper.
page 120

Esophageal Cancer
“Most applications of radiotherapy are for palliation, because radiation often fails to control local disease.”
page 181

Gastric Cancer
“Gastric cancers are highly radioresistant. Radiation-induced injury to the spine and other organs adjacent to the stomach preclude utilization of high radiation doses. For this reason, radiation can only be recommended for palliative purposes.”
page 195

Pancreatic Cancer
“Recent data suggest that locoregional control of tumor is enhanced by preoperative chemoradiation but that the majority of patients still succumb to systemic disease.
page 211

“The majority of patients with pancreatic cancer present with either locally advanced disease or metastases, making cure impossible at the present time.
page 211

Adenosquamous Carcinoma
“Radiation and chemotherapy appear relatively ineffective.
page 214

“…chemotherapy and radiation therapies are largely experimental efforts or directed at palliation.”
page 229

Gallbladder Cancer
“Unfortunately, radiation therapy has had no demonstrable effect on patient survival. The same conclusion currently applies to single and combination adjuvant chemotherapy.”
page 232

Small Intestine
“Radiation therapy for intraperitoneal malignancy can lead to stricture formation…”
page 257

“Resection is the best treatment for small-bowel adenocarcinoma. At present, there is no convincing evidence that adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation treatments are effective.
page 262

Leiomyosarcoma and Malignant Stromal Tumors
“There is no evidence that adjuvant chemotherapy or radiation therapy alone or in combination is effective.”
page 262

Colon, Rectum, and Anus
“…the small bowel does not tolerate radiation well.”
page 303

Metastatic Colorectal Cancer
“The average survival rate after palliative radiation therapy is about 20 months.”
page 305

Rectal Cancer
“The results for randomized trials suggest that regardless of whether it is delivered preoperatively or postoperatively, radiation therapy appears to have a significant impact on local recurrence but does not appear to improve survival.
page 306

Hodgkin’s Disease
“There is growing evidence that combined chemo–radiation therapy for Hodgkin’s lymphoma may be associated with a significantly increased risk of developing a second malignant disease.
page 328

Carcinoid Disease
“Radiation therapy is usually reserved for cases of advanced metastatic and unresectable carcinoid tumors whose symptoms have become resistant to maximal medical management.”
page 412

Radiation-induced arteritis
“Patients who have received irradiation for treatment of malignancies are at risk for the later development of radiation-induced carotid artery occlusive disease.”
page 431

Lung Cancer
“Stage IV disease is, for the most part, considered incurable and is treated with palliative chemotherapy and radiation.”
page 516

Brain Metastases
“Without treatment of brain metastasis, the survival is only 1 month. Treatment of brain metastases with steroids palliates symptoms and extends the median survival to 2 months.”
page 516

“Currently, mesothelioma continues to defy any single treatment modality including surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation therapy.”
page 536

Thymic Tumors
“Chemotherapy and radiation therapy are of no demonstrable benefit…”
page 553

The American Cancer Society admits radiation is very carcinogenic in:
X-rays, Gamma Rays, and Cancer Risk, Last Revised: 2/24/2015. On page 6,
“Do x-rays and gamma rays cause cancer?
Yes. X-rays and gamma rays are known human carcinogens (cancer-causing agents).”

A search of US National Library of Medicine of the National Institutes of Health for Radiation induced cancer yields significant results which increase daily. As of Sept. 5, 2016 it is 42,885 results.

Clinical Oncology, 1996 Volume 8, Issue 3, Page 206
Radiation therapy: are we getting value for money?
By: Barton MB1, Gebski V, Manderson C, Langlands AO.

“The survival gain (excluding skin cancer) with RT [Radio Therapy] was 16.1%”


JAMA Surgery. 2014;149(3):267-274. Effect of Breast Conservation Therapy vs Mastectomy on Disease-Specific Survival for Early-Stage Breast Cancer. By: Agarwal et al.
This HUGE study of 132,149 patients CLEARLY showed that patients who underwent radiation had increased mortality.
“…patients who undergo a mastectomy with radiation have worse survival rates than patients who undergo BCT.” [Breast Conservation Therapy]


Cancer: Principles and Practice of Oncology 6th edition (July 2001): by Vincent T. Devita, Samuel Hellman & Steven A. Rosenberg. By Lippincott Williams & Wilkins Publishers.
Dr. Vincent T. Devita, M.D.
Former Director of The NCI (National Cancer Institute) and the National Cancer Program
Current Professor at Yale Medical School
Editor-in-chief of The Cancer Journal

“Radiotherapy is clearly inappropriate in patients with widespread disease.”

The Lancet, Vol 13 April 2012 page e136
Absent benefit of accelerated concomitant chemoradiotherapy
By: Robin J Prestwich & Mehmet Sen

“A meta-analysis showed a small survival benefit of 3.4% at 5 years for altered fractionation radiotherapy in the absence of chemotherapy.”

The Lancet, 2014; 383: 558–63
Rethinking the war on cancer, By: Prof. Douglas Hanahan, Ph.D., Swiss Institute for Experimental Cancer Research.
“The war on cancer has largely focused on mutant cancer cells, via chemotherapy and radiotherapy and, more recently, targeted therapy based on knowledge of the driver mutations that force the chronic proliferation that is the basis of the disease. Most of the time, however, cancers eventually find ways to circumvent such targeted strikes, adapting and then reemerging as expansive and often more aggressive growths…targeted therapies are generally not curative or even enduringly effective, because of the adaptive and evasive resistance strategies developed by cancers under attack.”

The New England Journal of Medicine, 1995; 333: 1456-1461
Reanalysis and Results after 12 Years of Follow-up in a Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Total Mastectomy with Lumpectomy with or without Irradiation in the Treatment of Breast Cancer, By: Fisher et al.
“no significant differences were found in overall survival, disease-free survival, or survival free of disease at distant sites between the patients who underwent total mastectomy and those treated by lumpectomy alone or by lumpectomy plus breast irradiation.”

The New England Journal of Medicine, 1995; 333: 1444-1456
Effects of Radiotherapy and Surgery in Early Breast Cancer — An Overview of the Randomized Trials, By The Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group
The authors reviewed the results of all 36 randomized trials involving 28,405 women with early breast cancer. The 6% decrease in deaths from breast cancer were accompanied by a 24% increase in deaths due to other treatment-related causes, which demonstrates the damage caused by the radiotherapy. The study concluded that more radical local treatment, surgery or adjuvant radiotherapy does not have any influence on the appearance of distant disease or overall survival.

Journal of the American College of Cardiology, 2011; Vol. 57, No. 4. Long-Term Cardiovascular Mortality After Radiotherapy for Breast Cancer. By: Bouillon et al.
“Our study confirms excess mortality due to cardiac diseases in women treated with radiotherapy for a breast cancer, as compared with women who were not.”

Radiotherapy & Oncology, 1998; 48 (2) : 185-190.
Long-term cardiac morbidity and mortality in a randomized trial of pre- and postoperative radiation therapy versus surgery alone in primary breast cancer. By: Geynes G et al.
This in depth Swedish analysis found that patients who received the highest doses of radiotherapy had a

‰ 30% increase in heart failure‰
100% increase in deaths due to cardiovascular disease
150% increase in death due to ischemic heart disease
The difference became clear after 4-5 years and continued to increase up to 10-12 years.

The Journal of Clinical Investigation, May 1, 2007; 117(5): 1305–1313.
Published online Apr 5, 2007. Inhibition of TGF-β with neutralizing antibodies prevents radiation-induced acceleration of metastatic cancer progression. By: Biswas et al.
“The repopulation and progression of tumors after anti-cancer therapy is a well-recognized phenomenon,” said the researchers. “It has been shown to occur following radiotherapy, chemotherapy, and surgery.”

Treatment may fuel cancer’s spread, study finds.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Lung Cancer After Hodgkin’s Disease, By: Travis et al. (1995) Volume 87, Issue 17, Pages 1324-1327. “Patients with Hodgkin’s disease develop lung cancer at a rate two to eight times that of the general population. A portion of this increase might be related to thoracic radiotherapy and, possibly, to chemotherapy.”

Journal of the American Medical Association, 1992;267(16):2191-2196 By: Johansson et al. High 10-Year Survival Rate in Patients With Early, Untreated Prostatic Cancer
This study in the Journal of the American Medical Association of 223 patients concluded that no treatment at all for prostate cancer actually was better than any standard chemotherapy, radiation or surgical procedure.

The New England Journal of Medicine, Hodgkin’s Disease- Clinical Trials and Travails, 2003; 348: pages 2375-2376 June 12, 2003. By: Dr. Vincent T. DeVita, Jr., M.D.
Former Director of The NCI (National Cancer Institute)
Former Director of Yale Cancer Center
Current Professor at Yale Medical School
Dr. De Vita wrote, “Radiotherapy by itself increases the risk of late second solid tumors in the irradiated field, and the incidence rises steeply when radiotherapy and chemotherapy are combined.” He continues with, “The long-term carcinogenic effect of combining chemotherapy with radiotherapy has turned out to be far too severe…” He also wrote, “…radiotherapy provides no overall benefit when used as an adjunct to chemotherapy…”

Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Incidence of Second Cancers in Patients Treated for Hodgkin’s Disease, By: Jean-François Boivin et al. (1995) Volume 87, Issue 10, Pages 732-741. “Chemotherapy and radiotherapy increase the risk of selected solid tumors…”

The Ecologist, Vol 28 No 2 – March / April 1998, pages 117-121
The Diversity and Effectiveness of Natural Cancer Cures, By: Walter Last
“After analysing cancer survival statistics for several decades, Dr. Hardin Jones, Professor at the University of California,concluded in 1975 that “patients are as well, or better off untreated.” Jones’ disturbing assessment has never been refuted. What’s more, three studies by other researchers have upheld his theory.”

Scientific American, November 1985, Volume 253, Number 5, Pages 51-59.
The Treatment of Diseases and The War Against Cancer, by Dr. John Cairns, M.D. of Harvard University: on page 56 the following is written: “The majority of cancers…cannot be cured by radiation because the dose of X rays required to kill all the cancer cells would also kill the patient.”

The Lancet, Volume 355, No. 9217, p1757–1770, 20 May 2000
Favourable and unfavourable effects on long-term survival of radiotherapy for early breast cancer: an overview of the randomised trials, By: Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group
“…on average after year 2, radiotherapy reduced annual mortality rates from breast cancer by 13.2% (SE 2·5) but increased those from other causes by 21.2%…”

The Lancet, Volume 352, No. 9124, p257–263, 25 July 1998
Postoperative radiotherapy in non-small-cell lung cancer: systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data from nine randomised controlled trials, By: PORT Meta-analysis Trialists Group*
This analysis of records from 1.2 million cancer patients showed that non-cancer deaths constituted 21% of all deaths and were 37% higher than expected, and most occurred shortly after diagnosis. This excess in deaths from other causes ranged from 9% for breast and colon cancer to 173% for lung cancer. Major causes of these excess deaths were heart and respiratory failure, the types of death expected from radiotherapy and chemotherapy, so the authors attributed it to treatment.

The U.S. Government quietly admits chemotherapy and radiation cause cancer.

Patent No. 5,605,930 is for “Compositions and methods for treating and preventing pathologies including cancer.”
Assignee: The United States of America as represented by the Department of Health and Human Services.
Date of Patent: Feb. 25, 1997
Under section 22 on page 56 it clearly states,”Current approaches to combat cancer rely primarily on the use of chemicals and radiation, which are themselves carcinogenic and may promote recurrences and the development of metastatic disease.”

US Army Medical Course Nursing Fundamentals II MD0906, Page 188
Patients “receiving postoperative radiation therapy have a higher risk of wound complications and impaired wound healing.”

NTP (National Toxicology Program). 2014. Report on Carcinogens, Thirteenth Edition. Research Triangle Park, NC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health Service.The Report on Carcinogens is a cumulative report that includes 243 listings since 1980. This 13th Report replaces previous editions.

Both Chemotherapy and radiation are listed.

Is there any safe dose of radiation?

Nuclear Information & Resource Service,1424 16th St. NW Suite 404, Washington, DC 20036
From the fact sheet, Radiation: The Myth of the Millirem.
A single alpha particle, acting on a single cell, may damage that cell to the same degree as if a thousand x-rays had hit it. That is, one radiation particle can cause great damage to a single cell; that damage can even lead to a person’s death, while registering a dose to the total body of zero!

The National Academy of Sciences reported that no amount of ionizing radiation is safe.

Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation: BEIR VII – Phase 2 (2006)
Committee to Assess Health Risks from Exposure to Low Levels of Ionizing Radiation, National Research Council, The National Academy of Sciences.
“…any single track of ionizing radiation has the potential to cause cellular damage…The committee has concluded that there is no compelling evidence to indicate a dose threshold below which the risk of tumor induction is zero.”

The Lancet Oncology, A review of human carcinogens—Part D: radiation
Volume 10, No. 8, p751–752, August 2009.
WHO International Agency for Research on Cancer Monograph Working Group International Agency for Research on Cancer, Lyon, France
“…all types of ionising radiation were classified by the Working Group as “carcinogenic to humans”.

BMJ 2015;351:h5359. Risk of cancer from occupational exposure to ionising radiation:
retrospective cohort study of workers in France, the United Kingdom, and the United States (INWORKS) By: Richardson et al.
Ionising radiation is an established cause of cancer…Results suggest a linear increase in the rate of cancer with increasing radiation exposure.

Lancet Haematology 2015; 2: e276–81. Ionising radiation and risk of death from leukaemia and lymphoma in radiation-monitored workers (INWORKS): an international cohort study. By: Leuraud et al.

“This study provides strong evidence of positive associations between protracted low-dose radiation exposure and leukaemia.”
This study finds no evidence of a threshold below which no cancerous effects are seen (apart from zero dose). The study’s credentials are impeccable. It’s a huge study of over 300,000 nuclear workers adding up to over 8 million person years, thus ensuring its findings are statistically significant. Also, it’s an international study by 13 respected scientists from national health institutes in the US, UK, and France, as follows;
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, US
National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, US
Department of Health and Human Services, US
University of North Carolina, US
Drexel University School of Public Health, US
Public Health England, UK
Institut de Radioprotection et de Sûreté Nucléaire, France
Center for Research in Environmental Epidemiology, Spain
UN International Agency for Research on Cancer, France

Radiation – Induced Cancer from Low – Dose Exposure: An Independent Analysis. (1990) Dr. John W. Gofman, M.D., Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Medical Physics, University of California at Berkeley. Committee for Nuclear Responsibility, Inc. 1990:18 – 16, 18 – 18. ISBN: 0-932682-89-8
“…no safe dose or dose-rate exists with respect to radiogenic cancer. Our disproof of a threshold is based on human evidence…By reasonable standards of proof, the safe-dose hypothesis is not merely implausible — it is disproven.”

No Immediate Danger, Prognosis for a Radioactive Earth, by: Sister Dr. Rosalie Bertell, Ph.D.
The Book Publishing Company — Summertown, Tennessee 38483. ISBN 0-913990-25-2
pages 15-63.
“…there is no safe level of exposure to ionising radiation, and the search for quantifying such a safe level is in vain.”

TORCH, “The Other Report on Chernobyl” N.p., 2006.
“The current theory is that the relationship between dose and detrimental effect is linear without threshold down to zero dose. In other words, there is no safe level of radiation exposure.”

TORCH-2016, “An independent scientific evaluation of the health-related effects of the Chernobyl nuclear disaster” N.p., 2016.
“…radiobiology theory indicates that the transformation of a cell to a pre-cancerous state may result from the lowest possible dose of radiation – a single radiation track traversing a single cell nucleus. Therefore good reasons exist for supposing that radiogenic risks are directly proportional to dose all the way down to zero, i.e. there is no-threshold. This means there is no “safe” dose of radiation.”

USA Today, Updated 5/28/2008 2:12 PM
It kills thyroid cancer, but is radiation safe? By: Steve Sternberg and Anthony DeBarros
Two years ago, the National Academy of Sciences reported that no amount of ionizing radiation is safe.”

Shouldn’t the medical technology we use be rooted in a foundation of good and tested science? The answer is yes, but this just doesn’t happen most of the time.

The United States Congressional Office of Technology Assessment reviewed current medical practice in the United States to determine how much day to day practice was tested by the scientific method. Its report, Assessing the Efficacy and Safety of Medical Technologies, astonished those who believe in the myth of modern scentific medicine. It concluded that “only 10 to 20 percent of all procedures currently used in medical practice have been shown to be efficacious [effective] by controlled trial.” In other words, most of what is being done, has never been tested…

British Medical Journal, 1991 Oct 5;303(6806):798-9
Where is the wisdom. ..? The poverty of medical evidence
By: Dr. Richard Smith, former editor of the British Medical Journal and chief executive of the BMJ publishing Group for 13 years.
Only about 15% of medical interventions are supported by solid evidence…This is partly because only 1% of the articles in medical journals are scientifically sound, and partly because many treatments have never been assessed at all.”

Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, (2007), 13, 481–503
Medicine and evidence: knowledge and action in clinical practice, By: A. Miles et al.
A fundamental assumption of EBM (Evidence Based Medicine)… is that doctors who practise it provide superior clinical care compared to those who do not…so far no convincing direct evidence exists that shows that this assumption is correct…It is noteworthy that the advocates of EBM (Evidence Based Medicine) have consistently avoided the organisation of, or involvement in, this most fundamental of scientific processes – the testing of an hypothesis…its advocates do not cite this one, single fundamental and serious deficiency – the complete lack of an evidentiary basis of EBM (Evidence Based Medicine).”

In the following recent study, as many as 22% of invasive breast cancers in Norwegian women disappeared spontaneously.

Archives of Internal Medicine, 2008; 168(21):2311-2316.The Natural History of Invasive Breast Cancers Detected by Screening Mammography, By: Per-Henrik Zahl, MD, PhD; Jan Mæhlen, MD, PhD; H. Gilbert Welch, MD, MPH.
In two study groups of 100,000 women, more than one in five invasive cancers detected in the study by mammography vanished without ever being treated!

Dartmouth University story


The New York Times, “Study Suggests Some Cancers May Go Away”

Dr. Barnett Kramer, M.D., M.P.H., director of the Office of Disease Prevention at the National Institutes of Health, is quoted in the article saying, “People who are familiar with the broad range of behaviors of a variety of cancers know spontaneous regression is possible, But what is shocking is that it can occur so frequently.”

American Cancer Society, Cancer Facts & Figures 2007
Surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy are treatment options that may extend survival and/or relieve symptoms in many patients, but seldom produce a cure.”

“I have been unable to find any incontrovertible evidence that up to the present time any case of primary bronchial carcinoma has been cured by radiation therapy administered in the ordinary ways.”
Dr. Evarts Ambrose Graham, M.D., F.A.C.S.
Editor-in-Chief of the Yearbook of Surgery, Journal of Thoracic Surgery, and Co-Editor-in-Chief of Annals of Surgery.
Chief of Surgery at Barnes Hospital St. Louis
Chairman of Washington University School of Medicine Surgery Department

“All authorities agree that radiation therapy does not improve the survival of patients with breast cancer.” Dr. Richard A. Evans, M.D.

“We are not winning the war against cancer, we are losing the war. The number of Americans getting cancer each year has escalated over recent decades, while our ability to treat and cure most common cancers has remained virtually unchanged. The National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society have misled and confused the public and Congress by repeated false claims that we are winning the war against cancer – claims made to create public and Congressional support for massive increases in budgetary allocations.”
Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, Chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition and and Professor of Occupational and Environmental Medicine at the University of Illinois Medical Center in Chicago

“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, 1987

“We think that about 50 per cent of patients who undergo pelvic irradiation will suffer some radiotherapy damage.”
Dr. Jason Lester, oncologist at Velindre Cancer Centre, Cardiff.

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.
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

“I had a brain cancer specialist sit in my living room and tell me that he would never take radiation if he had a brain tumor. And I asked him, ‘but, do you send people for radiation?’ and he said, of course. ‘I’d be drummed out of the hospital if I didn’t.” Dr. Ralph Moss

“I look upon cancer in the same way that I look upon heart disease, arthritis, high blood pressure, or even obesity, for that matter, in that by dramatically strengthening the body’s immune system through diet, nutritional supplements, and exercise, the body can rid itself of the cancer, just as it does in other degenerative diseases. Consequently, 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.

“My studies have proved conclusively that untreated cancer victims live up to four times longer than treated individuals. If one has cancer and opts to do nothing at all, he will live longer and feel better than if he undergoes radiation, chemotherapy or surgery.”
Professor Hardin B. Jones, Ph.D., University of California

Dr. John W. Gofman, M.D., Ph.D., Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology at the University of California at Berkeley, estimates that “three-quarters of the current annual incidence of breast cancer in the United States is being caused by earlier ionizing radiation, primarily from medical sources.” Gofman continues,”[M]edical science…has known for 20 years that ionizing radiation is a prominent and proven cause of breast-cancer” [John Gofman, San Francisco: Committee for Nuclear Responsibility, 1995, p. 303]


Let us clarify and summarize our findings.
RADIOLOGY: Very harmful in many ways. Spreads the cancer and weakens the patient’s resistance to other diseases. Serious and painful side-effects, including heart failure. No evidence that treated patients live any longer, on the average, than those not treated. Statistical rate of long-term survival after metastasis is basically zero.


radiotherapy-originRadiotherapy – Origin (3:36)

radiation-is-not-safeRadiation IS NOT safe (0:30)

radiation-is-carcinogenic-and-we-have-known-for-125-yearsRadiation is Carcinogenic and we have known for 125 years (0:41)

chemo-and-radiation-are-killing-cancer-patientsChemo and radiation are killing cancer patients

is-stage-4-cancer-curable-using-chemotherapy-radiation-or-surgeryIs Stage 4 Cancer curable using Chemotherapy Radiation or Surgery

chemo-and-radiation-are-non-specificChemo and radiation are non specific

how-hazardous-are-chemo-and-radiationHow hazardous are chemo and radiation

am-i-doing-what-is-best-for-the-patientAm I doing what is best for the patient


radiation-is-not-specificRadiation is not specific (0:51)

treatment-resistance-of-radiation-and-chemoTreatment resistance of radiation and chemo (0:50)

radiation-and-chemotherapy-resistanceRadiation and Chemotherapy resistance (1:45)

chemo-radiation-and-surgery-are-largely-ineffectiveChemo Radiation and Surgery are largely ineffective

chemo-surgery-and-radiation-are-not-very-effectiveChemo surgery and radiation are not very effective

nci-director-and-overoptimism-about-cancerNCI Director and Overoptimism about Cancer

99-percent-of-oncologists-still-dont-understand-nutrition99 Percent of Oncologists Still Dont Understand Nutrition

how-effective-is-typical-oncologyHow effective is typical oncology

fda-has-never-approved-chemo-or-radiation-for-childrenFDA has never approved chemo or radiation for children

how-do-oncologists-sleep-at-nightHow do oncologists sleep at night

blind-obedience-can-kill-you-question-your-doctorBlind obedience can kill you question your doctor

patients-pressured-by-oncologistPatients pressured by oncologist

healing-cancer-from-inside-out-fullHealing Cancer from Inside Out Full

chemo-kills-just-as-many-people-as-cancerChemo Kills Just as Many People as Cancer

blind-faith-in-science-is-often-misplacedBlind faith in science is often misplaced

dr-desaulniers-2-percent-chemo-effective-rateDr Desaulniers 2 percent chemo effective rate

dr-lodi-conventional-medicine-doesnt-workDr Lodi Conventional medicine doesnt work

be-confident-on-your-chosen-treatmentBe confident on your chosen treatment

how-successful-are-clinical-trialsHow successful are clinical trials?

excited-about-a-clinical-trial-not-so-fastExcited about a clinical trial? Not so fast

abc-news-the-prevalence-of-hospital-errorsABC news the prevalence of hospital errors

big-pharma-financial-drivers-of-education-and-careBIG PHARMA Financial drivers of education and care

are-there-frauds-in-cancer-treatmentAre there frauds in Cancer treatment

Side Effects