Chemotherapy Studies Prove It Is Generally Not Effective

We live in a country where children are literally taken away from parents who do not want their child with cancer to get chemotherapy. The child can be forced to get chemotherapy and the parents can be arrested. Perhaps…just perhaps…this would be acceptable if it could be conclusively proven that chemotherapy was the right thing to do. But in fact, this is not the case. Actually it is just the opposite. Chemotherapy studies show that it is positively NOT generally effective. One other interesting read you may want to see is:

Chemotherapy Statistics Can Be Misleading.

So What Are the Actual Chemotherapy Statistics?

They are right here (the full text can be viewed here). A review of all known relevant clinical trials concluded that if the average cancer patient gets chemotherapy, his or her chances of still being alive 5 years from now increases by a pitiful 2.1% in America. That is barely worth getting dressed for. And this study does not even say anything about quality of life either.

Seeing as the how current average 5-year survival rate in the U.S. is something like 65% percent, it is clear that chemotherapy contributes very little to successful cancer outcomes. Considering this study shows that chemotherapy essentially does not meaningfully improve average 5-year survival, one must realize that once you account for the patient to patient variability in this measure, that means a significant fraction of patients may actually have their 5 year survival reduced by chemotherapy. This is further confounded by the fact that studies that show negative outcomes are often never published by pharmaceutical companies. Consider another study done in England where 27% of 429 patients receiving “end of life care” were found to have their deaths caused or hastened by chemotherapy they were prescribed.

Even if chemotherapy were shown to radically improve 5-year survival rates, it would still not prove it is generally effective by any intelligent interpretation of the term. A 5-year survival rate is only one metric derived from a complete statistical distribution of patient survival times. In other words, “scientists” are taking meaningful data, and throwing out most of it. It could very well be that if studies had preserved the complete statistical distributions of survival times, that we would see that on a whole, chemotherapy decreases various metrics of survival time, such as perhaps the average survival time.

You can look at the breakdown by cancer type of this study in the chart below.

Some oncologists may argue that these statistics are not relevant to today’s drugs, and that the newest drugs work so much better than in the past. Though this is theoretically possible, first consider the fact that this is what oncologists have been saying for decades. Then consider that in the light of the present study, that on average, they have been wrong all that time! If that argument was wrong yesterday and for the 20 or 30 years before that, then why would it all of a sudden be right today?

For further discussion on the unfortunately fatal flaws of the current cancer treatment paradigm, read 18 Reasons Why Conventional Cancer Treatment is Irrational.

The End Result…

In short, chemotherapy in general is known to be not without side effects as well as typically ineffective! I am quickly learning that if society agrees on something, there is a good chance it’s wrong! Countless examples from history can be given relating to this.

If an oncologist says alternative treatment is experimental, he needs to take his own advice and analyze the statistics that show that chemotherapy is experimental (and toxic for that matter). At least alternative therapies are generally safe!

Make sure you take this study to your oncologist if you have cancer. Though you want to be respectful and always “leave them an honorable retreat”, don’t give up your life for the sake of not upsetting someone. To the best of my knowledge, this study has had a significant media blackout in the U.S., and it is likely that many oncologists have never even heard of this study. The current situation in cancer care is abysmal. I am not saying it is all the fault of oncologists, but they do have to accept a significant portion of the blame. Though many oncologists actually feel trapped in the current system and want to make changes but fear ridicule from colleagues, malpractice suits, or even loss of license. Nonetheless, braving those obstacles is always preferable to continually or even knowingly inflicting harm on patients with chemotherapy (either directly or indirectly through the lost opportunity to pursue alternatives). Oncologists need to break out of their rigid molds and start doing what works instead of what they were taught to do.

It’s not clear exactly how many oncologists would take chemo themselves, but when you put a reasonable upper bound on that number…it still ends up being not nearly all of them. Unfortunately, this constitutes significant hypocrisy on a whole.

Integrative Treatment Is the Answer

There are good options available. Everyone who educates themselves has a meaningful chance of living cancer free. Prevention is a lot easier than treatment. And yes, surgery could theoretically be a necessary part of integrative treatment. And perhaps from time to time even chemotherapy could be properly used (highly unlikely in the average case however).

As for the fraction of that roughly 80% of the population that does what their oncologists advise them (without first educating themselves and questioning their doctors on the effectiveness of chemotherapy)…they are choosing possibly needless harm or even death. I don’t mean to offend people who have lost love ones…but it is the truth and people need to stop killing themselves needlessly.

Disclaimer: This article does not contain any medical advice. This website contains opinion and is for informational purposes only. If seeking medical advice, consult a licensed physician.

Leave a Comment

Shane says:

How often are you going to use that study (a poor study at that) to scare people into not getting help? As someone who had Chemo at 14 and am now nearly 40 and loving life, and am glad that my parents were more scientically minded than you seem to be. A study of 22 people does not disprove the effectiveness or in-effectiveness of Chemo. I agree with people making informed choices and Chemo is not always the best way but this article (as well as the others you have linked to in your own sight) is just full of rubbish. You also show your hand as being very unscientific linking to sites like natural news who are just peddler of suppliments and snake oil not a source of facts.

Have a wonder-filled life, it’s the only one you get…..

Hi Shane. I see the number 22 you are referring to in the abstract is the number of types of cancer, not the number of total patients. This is a meta-analyses on chemotherapy that totals about 154,000 cancer patients. These results are very hard to refute. No one is claiming these are good results. The doctor that prescribed you chemotherapy isn’t claiming these are good results either. Basically, no one in the medical community is denying the basic conclusions of this study…because they can’t really.