Whilst there MAY be some truth in the idea that surgery is better than drugs at treating cancer, it should also remembered that surgery should be a last resort as that too can actually be a cause of cancer.

I would suggest that should any government, health authority or 'cancer research' charity be genuinely interested in slowing cancer rates, then they first concentrate on disease prevention, and secondly investigate the natural 'alternatives', for instance specific diets that have been shown to have had success in treating cancer (ie the Gerson diet), vitamin B17 (Laetrile), etc. That they have not done so - and in some cases have even suppressed such natural approaches to cancer treatment - shows that they are not the least interested in either cancer prevention or genuine treatment, their first priority being to appease the drugs industry, which of course has no interest at all in making people healthy - healthy people means a dead drugs industry.

Of course this is the sort of info the anti-vivisectionists and animal rights people SHOULD be informing the public about, but which largely instead prefers to dress up as bunnies whilst keeping the vivisection industry happy by talking about cosmetics, 'alternatives', the ineffective moral arguments, etc, etc.

Any hope of the AV movement waking up any time soon?


Steve