Groundbreaking Study Shows Half of Cancer Patients are Killed by Chemo — NOT Cancer

The cancer patient killer – chemotherapy. A groundbreaking study shows that up to 50 percent of cancer patients die from the drugs, not the disease. Researchers from Public Health England and Cancer Research UK, who performed the study, examined the numbers of cancer patients who died within 30 days of beginning chemotherapy; indicating the treatment, not cancer, as the cause of death.

[fvplayer src=”https://player.vimeo.com/external/181807661.sd.mp4?s=501b0b7600c2dbf06e8a886e8d9e6bd236a9e41e&profile_id=164″ splash=”https://christianjournal.net/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/cancer-cell.jpg”]

Big pharmaceuticals rake in droves of funds off of their victims directly before they are slaughtered by the “solution” not the problem. Countless times we the people get told, that Big Pharma knows best, but now for the first time – cancer research shows otherwise.

Thousands of patients were examined within this study, and within the study, they included all women with breast cancer and all men and women with lung cancer residing in England, who were 24 years or older and who started a cycle of SACT in 2014.

The researchers then calculated the 30-day mortality after the most recent period of SACT for those patients. For the study the researchers did logistic regression analysis, adjusting for relevant factors, to examine whether patient, tumor, or treatment-related factors were associated with the risk of 30-day mortality.

For each cancer type and intent, the researchers calculated 30-day mortality rates and patient volume at the hospital trust level and contrasted these in a funnel plot.

The Findings

Between Jan 1, and Dec, 31, 2014, we included 23 228 patients with breast cancer and 9634 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in our regression and trust-level analyses. 30-day mortality increased with age for both patients with breast cancer and patients with NSCLC treated with curative intent, and decreased with age for patients receiving palliative SACT (breast curative: odds ratio [OR] 1·085, 99% CI 1·040–1·132; p<0·0001; NSCLC curative: 1·045, 1·013–1·079; p=0·00033; breast palliative: 0·987, 0·977–0·996; p=0·00034; NSCLC palliative: 0·987, 0·976–0·998; p=0·0015).

30-day mortality was also significantly higher for patients receiving their fi rst reported curative or palliative SACT versus those who received SACT previously (breast palliative: OR 2·326 99% CI 1·634–3·312; p<0·0001; NSCLC curative: 3·371, 1·554–7·316; p<0·0001; NSCLC palliative: 2·667, 2·109–3·373; p<0·0001), and for patients with worse general wellbeing (performance status 2–4) versus those who were generally well (breast curative: 6·057, 1·333–27·513; p=0·0021; breast palliative: 6·241, 4·180–9·319; p<0·0001; NSCLC palliative: 3·384, 2·276–5·032; p<0·0001). We identified trusts with mortality rates in excess of the 95% control limits; this included seven for curative breast cancer, four for palliative breast cancer, fi ve for curative NSCLC, and seven for palliative NSCLC.

Across “England around 8.4 per cent of patients with lung cancer, and 2.4 per cent of breast cancer patients died within a month,” the Telegraph reported.

“But in some hospitals the figure was far higher. In Milton Keynes the death rate for lung cancer treatment was 50.9 per cent, although it was based on a very small number of patients.”

Dr. Jem Rashbass, Cancer Lead for Public Health England — the national health care service, which requested the study — said, as quoted by the Telegraph:

“Chemotherapy is a vital part of cancer treatment and is a large reason behind the improved survival rates over the last four decades.

“However, it is powerful medication with significant side effects and often getting the balance right on which patients to treat aggressively can be hard.

“Those hospitals whose death rates are outside the expected range have had the findings shared with them and we have asked them to review their practice and data.”

“The statistics don’t suggest bad practice overall but there are some outliers,” noted Professor David Dodwell of the Institute of Oncology at St. James Hospital in Leeds.

“It could be data problems, and figures skewed because of just a few deaths, but nevertheless it could also be down to problems with clinical practice,” he continued.

“I think it’s important to make patients aware that there are potentially life threatening downsides to chemotherapy. And doctors should be more careful about who they treat with chemotherapy.”

The Full Study

[embeddoc url=”https://www.dropbox.com/s/w2omed2unfop7jo/cancer.pdf?dl=1″ download=”all” viewer=”google”]

Shockingly, the chemotherapy mortality rate shows that up to 50% of cancer patients, treated with chemo, died from chemo – not cancer. Big pharma does not know best; chemotherapy is a horrific ‘solution’ to cancer. Other solutions exist, but don’t expect your mainstream doctor to prescribe them. Interestingly enough, also according to the study, the 50% mortality rate could in part be based on doctor discretion. Leaving up to question if the doctors were being paid commission by Big Pharma for chemo-patients.

For example, in West Virginia – a groundbreaking legal battle is under way; the citizens are taking on big Pharma. The legal battle is about a conspiracy that “A veritable rogue’s gallery of pill-pushing doctors and pharmacies” grew rich on the back of patients who sought medical treatment only to have their lives wrecked by addiction.

“It was a conspiracy,” said Jim Cagle, the lawyer for Hatcher and other plaintiffs. “Doctors and pharmacies were keeping them hooked. They were feeding the addiction.”

Some of the physicians and pharmacists involved have been jailed and stripped of their medical licenses while several drug distributors agreed in June to pay West Virginia millions of dollars for flooding the state with opioid pills, contributing to an addiction epidemic and the highest death rate from drug overdoses in the US.

Big Pharma can’t make money off of the healthy, we the people must be sick for their pockets to be filled. This is why the alternatives to cancer treatments are still “illegal.”