September 2005 Newsletter

2 CANCER CURES LOS FEDERALES DON’T WANT YOU TO HAVE
 AND HOW TO REGAIN YOUR FREEDOM TO CHOOSE THEM!

- By Jonathan V. Wright, M.D.

Whenever I write about freedom and health care, a few readers write or e-mail complaining that they subscribe to Nutrition & Healing to read about health, not politics. But what they don't realize is that without freedom, we'll never have the best in health care-or any other field, for that matter. And unfortunately, many people don't realize that some enormous health care advances made generations ago, and many that are still being made today, aren't available because our freedom (in this case, freedom of choice in health care) is still very limited in these United States. I could fill several issues with examples, but for now I'll just focus on one: cures for cancer. If we had real freedom-especially health care freedom- here in America, by now cancer would be a minor problem. The following are just two of many, many reasons.

Tuning in to a cure for cancer

In 1934, a scientist and engineer named Royal Rife opened a clinic under the supervision of a special research committee of physicians from the University of Southern California. In the first few months of this clinic, 16 of 16 cancer patients were completely cured using technology Rife had developed.

Rife invented an optical microscope capable of magnifications so strong they haven't been duplicated to this day with any other optical microscope. Using it, he observed specific micro-organisms co-existing with many cancers and determined the unique vibratory frequencies of each. By beaming very specific interfering frequencies, he killed the microorganisms without harming normal cells. The cancers then disappeared.

Follow-up clinics in 1935, 1936, and 1937, under the same USC medical school committee supervision, had the same results. Hearing about his success, other physicians purchased some of Rife's equipment, and obtained and reported similar results. His work was described in Science magazine, medical journals, and the annual report of the Smithsonian Institution.

In 1939, with behind-the-scenes financing from the American Medical Association, a former associate sued Rife for control of his company. Although Rife ultimately won the lawsuit, in the process he had become an alcoholic and ruined his health. When another associate, John Crane, revived Rife's work in the 1950s and again demonstrated its effectiveness, Crane's offices were raided, all of his records were destroyed, and his Rife equipment was smashed to pieces. Other doctors working with John Crane were driven out of practice. Unfortunately, the Rife technique isn't available today. There are many imitators (a quick search on the Internet will turn up lots of them), but none is as effective as Rife's original equipment. If they were, you can bet los Federales would try to put them out of business.

For complete details about Royal Rife's career and his proven cure for cancers (as certified by USC physicians), see The Cancer Cure That Worked by Barry Lynes. It's available from many used bookstores and Internet sources.

Winning against brain cancer and persecution by los Federales In the 1970s, another innovative practitioner, Stanislaw Burzynski, M.D., found several natural substances present in the blood of healthy individuals that were absent from the blood of cancer patients. He took the logical step of putting these missing substances (which he called "anti-neoplastons") back into the blood of cancer patients as potential treatment. Some of these patients were cured. Over the following years, anti-neoplaston therapy was particularly effective against various brain cancers, but it also worked against many other types of cancer as well. And Dr. Burzynski's anti-neoplaston treatments were remarkably free of adverse effects.

Dr. Burzynski treated his first cancer patient in 1976. By 1983, his success was sufficiently notable that los Federales tried to get a federal injunction against him. They failed, but by 1988, he'd been charged before two separate federal grand juries, both of which refused to indict. Then, in 1995, los Federales finally obtained a criminal indictment against Dr. Burzynski on charges of violating an injunction, mail fraud, and selling his anti-neoplaston treatments-which they called an unapproved" drug-in interstate commerce.

During the trial, Dr. Burzynski's defense team tried to introduce into evidence a letter from Dr. Robert Burdick, an oncologist and faculty member of the University of Washington Medical School. Dr. Burdick had reviewed the records of 17 individuals with malignant brain cancer treated by Dr.Burzynski. Seven had experienced complete remission, nine had partial remission of 50 percent or more, and one had stabilized with no further growth. Dr. Burdick wrote: "It is very rare to get a complete remission or cure in a patient who has a malignant brain tumor, using our standard modalities of surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy." He also wrote: "I am very impressed with the number of complete and partial responses that I have seen here, compared with the number that I have seen in my personal experience.The response rate here is an astounding 81 percent, with an equally astounding 35 percent complete remission rate. Such remission rates are far in excess of anything I or anyone else has seen since research work on brain tumors began. It is very clear that the responses here are due to anti-neoplaston therapy and are not due to surgery, radiation, or standard chemotherapy."

The federal judge's response completely disregarded Dr. Burdick's letter. He said: "Whether anti-neoplastons are effective or not is not relevant.The government must prove that these are unapproved new drugs, but nothing about whether they work or not." If convicted, Dr. Burzynski could have been sentenced to over 200 years in prison. But the jury "hung" on a 6-6 vote. Los Federales convened a second trial, but this time the jury simply acquitted Dr. Burzynski.

Dr. Burzynski is still in practice in Houston, although his practice has changed considerably since his persecution by los Federales. According to a few former associates and employees, after his long ordeal, he decided to alter his treatments in an attempt to gain FDA "approval." I haven't heard one way or the other whether these alterations have altered the degree of effectiveness.

Complete details about Dr. Burzynski's anti-neoplaston treatments and his persecution can be found in the book The Burzynski Breakthrough, by Thomas D. Elias.


THE NEXT STEP TOWARD RESTORING HEALTH CARE FREEDOM:

Despite all of today's talk about "American freedom," none of us have fully experienced it in any of our lifetimes, including in the area of health care. If you and I had the freedom envisioned by America's founders and written into the Constitution, Rife machines would be curing cancers in every city and state in the country. And anti-neoplaston therapy would be available through the thousands of physicians who Dr. Burzynski could have educated and licensed in his methods over the past 20 years. If we had access to these therapies, no one would be hurt and the large majority of patients would be cured or at least put into remission. The bottom line is, if freedom was really something our government practiced, not just preached, these options would be available if you or a loved one were to be diagnosed with cancer.

The Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act (DSHEA) of 1994 was a small step toward restoring health care freedom. With only a few exceptions, it allows manufacturers and suppliers to sell any natural substance unless los Federales can prove it unsafe. (Actually, our Constitution, as written, allows this too, but los Federales' courts pretend it doesn't.) Unfortunately, los Federales continue to violate the First Amendment of the Constitution by banning natural product manufacturers from printing the truth about what a product is for on the label. But at least the products are available, and information about what natural substances can do for your health is too, in publications like this.

The Access to Medical Treatment Act (HR 2792), re-introduced into Congress in June 2005, would be another step towards restoring health care freedom. Although riddled with restrictive clauses, it would still "permit" (although truly free citizens shouldn't need a "permit" from los Federales) any individual to be treated by a health care pracctitioner with any medical treatment that the individual desires (imagine that!). This includes treatments that are not "approved," certified, or licensed by the Secretary  of Health and Human Services or the FDA. It authorizes practitioners to provide any method of treatment to any individual as long as the following requirements are met:

A conclusion by the practitioner that the treatment is not likely to cause harm. The individual to be treated must be informed that the food, drug, or device to be used is not "approved, certified, or licensed." The individual to be treated must be given a written statement that includes the statement: "WARNING: This food, drug, or device has not been declared to be safe and effective by the Federal Government and any individual who uses such food, drug, or device does so at his or her own risk." The individual to be treated must be informed in writing of the nature of the treatment, including its contents, methods, anticipated benefits, reasonably foreseeable side effects, and results of prior use of the treatment. An individual must sign a state-ment saying he or she has been fully informed and wants to be treated. The Act prohibits advertising "unapproved" treatments, although practitioners are "allowed" to communicate about them with patients or prospective patients. If a treatment turns out to be dangerous, practitioners are required to cease using it and report it to los Federales (rather than to individual state "authorities" who presently are responsible for supervising medical practice in these United States). Practitioners are also required to report (once again, to los Federales rather than to state "authorities") positive effects from an "unapproved" treatment for any life-threatening condition that are superior to presently "approved" treatments. Adding further to the reporting burden, such reports to los Federales must be made every month.

The Access to Medical Treatment Act has been introduced into every Congress since 1996 and has "died" every time, because there just hasn't been enough support in Congress for it. Why? Well, unfortunately, in large part, because you and I haven't gotten behind it sufficiently with our calls, letters, faxes, e-mails, and in-person visits to our congressmen when they're home in their districts. But it's time to get this Act passed now, while you and I are still in good health. I know you're doing everything you can to stay well, but if you do happen to get ill, wouldn't you like to have available any treatment you want, right away-especially if it's a serious illness? Unless we all work to get the Access to Medical Treatment Act passed now, it won't be there when and if you need it. You'll be stuck with "approved" patent medicine, surgery, or radiation and a very limited number of natural options. Think about your children, grandchildren, and maybe even great-grandchildren. They also deserve the freedom to use any treatment that they or their parents would like for any health problem-especially cancer, which is heartwrenching to watch in adults, let alone children. Passing the Access to Medical Treatment Act could mean all the difference between suffering with conventional radiation, chemotherapy, or surgery, or having an 81 percent chance of a favorable response and a 35 percent chance of complete cure with Dr. Burzynski's original anti-neoplastons. And the Rife technique, which could very well come out of its decades-long hiding with the protection of this Act, offers an even better chance of complete cure.

So call, write, fax, e-mail, and talk to your Congressmen and Senators! (To find their contact information, contact Capitol Advantage at 703-289-4670 or visit www.congress.org.) Tell them to pass HR 2792, the Access to Medical Treatment Act, into law in this session of Congress. Ask your entire family and all of your friends and neighbors to do the same. Our sons and daughters overseas are not the only ones who can fight for American freedom. You and I can join them in that same fight right here at home.

A SILVER LINING IN THE DARK CLOUD OVER WORLDWIDE SUPPLEMENT ACCESS:

If you've been following the news and our frequent updates, then you probably already know about the European Food Supplements Directive. The Directive, passed in 2002, was supposed to promote public safety by standardizing vitamin and mineral regulations across Europe. In reality, it threatened to remove thousands of perfectly safe products from the shelves. In January 2005, the Alliance for Natural Health (ANH), which was formed specifically to oppose the Directive, achieved a small victory in the battle to save our health care freedom. At the hearing in the European Court of Justice, the Advocate General actually said that the Food Supplement Directive was "invalid under EU law" and that many of its stipulations were "as transparent as a black box." But even though the Advocate General's comments were a breakthrough for the ANH, in the final ruling announced in July, the EU Food Supplements Directive was upheld.

The good news is that the European Court ruled that certain changes must be made. First, our contacts at the ANH tell us that they believe, according to
the judges' ruling, all vitamins and minerals normally found in or consumed as part of the diet are legal. (They do say that this point is still up for debate, but, for the time being, they're confident in their interpretation.) The judges also promised to simplify the application process for nutrients to be included on "the positive list," a list of "approved" vitamins and minerals. But unfortunately, as it stands right now, all supplements that do not appear on the positive list are effectively illegal as of August 1, 2005. That's still about 200 supplements-and any and all products containing them.

You may be wondering how all of this affects you. Well, even though this ruling occurred in Europe, the United States is part of the World Trade Organization. Members of the organization agree to adopt the laws of other member nations. In fact, according to the British newspaper The Guardian, "The judges said the directive would get rid of differing national rules liable to impede the free trade of supplements and the functioning of the internal European market." And, unfortunately, if the U.S. wants to do business with the "internal European market," we'll have to conform to their "standards."

But the war isn't over yet. According to the London Times, "the current list of which products are banned and which are approved [is] in flux." And the revisions to the application process may make it easier-and more affordable-for supplement manufacturers to have their products added to that list. Our sources at The Alliance for Natural Health have assured us that they will continue their efforts to clarify the points put forth in the EU Directive and to keep natural solutions available to consumers worldwide. So it's more important than ever to join them in the fight to protect the vitamins and minerals that you depend on-and, more importantly, to protect our health care freedom.

To learn more about the alliance and its work or to make a donation, visit www.alliance-natural-health.org. To send a letter or a donation by mail, use the following address:

Alliance for Natural Health
Unit 5, Forge End
St. Albans
Hertfordshire
AL2 3EQ
United Kingdom


Citations available upon request and on the Nutrition & Healing website