| The battle against cancer has been raging now for the | | | | we all know the nasty side effects and lackluster |
| better part of seven decades. In that time medical | | | | results associated with that. |
| science has progressed through any number of | | | | Maybe a more effective approach might be to use |
| treatment protocols. | | | | the bodies own inherent mechanisms to track down |
| The issue is that, without many exceptions, the same | | | | and subsequently kill these despicable invaders that |
| types of treatment protocols used in the early days | | | | we so disgustingly call cancer. |
| are still the primary treatment methods that are still | | | | How to do that? Science has long known that glucose |
| utilized by mainstream medicine today. The good ole | | | | is the energy source that cancer cells must have in |
| standby's continue to be: surgery, chemo and radiation. | | | | order to survive. Why then can't cancer be cured or |
| There is no question that the delivery of the above | | | | put into remission by just eliminating glucose from the |
| mentioned protocols have been honed and have | | | | body. |
| evolved into far better treatments over the intervening | | | | Life nor cancer was just not meant to be that easy! |
| years. Despite these impressive medical advances, we | | | | The human body is capable of generating glucose |
| are diagnosing more cancer, and survival rates while | | | | even if you eliminate most if not all carbohydrates |
| significantly improving, still aren't nearly as high as we | | | | from your diet. That is probably why cancer diets |
| need them to be especially for the more aggressive | | | | have not proven to be very successful in most people. |
| forms of cancer. | | | | Your body does have the ability to cure cancer or at |
| Why aren't survival rates much higher after all these | | | | least get rid of the cancer but it needs help from a |
| years? That is a very difficult question to answer. One | | | | variety of sources. What are those sources? Well, |
| theory could be that even though we have better | | | | most importantly you have to have your normal cells |
| early detection and more aggressive therapies, if | | | | derive its energy from a source other than glucose. |
| cancer isn't arrested or stopped in its earliest stages, | | | | Fortunately enough "mother nature" gave us an |
| then there just isn't much that can be done after it has | | | | alternate energy source which is widely known as |
| metastasized that would not adversely impact the | | | | ketones. Ketones are produced when the body uses |
| patient. | | | | fats instead of carbohydrates for its energy. |
| Is cancer just too smart and elusive an enemy to | | | | Once that transformation has occurred, in order for |
| defeat once it has metastasized? Is there a "point of | | | | your body to then cure itself of cancer, you need to |
| no return" as it relates to metastasized cancer? I don't | | | | force your body to stop producing the glucose that it is |
| think so! I think the focus has primarily been in the | | | | designed to produce, even in the absence of |
| wrong place. Currently we introduce drugs in the form | | | | carbohydrates. Doing these things along with a few |
| of chemotherapy into the body in an attempt to | | | | additional tricks should allow most cancer victims the |
| systemically track down cancer cells wherever they | | | | opportunity to "Stop Cancer And Die From Old Age |
| maybe in the hopes of finding and killing them all. Even | | | | Instead! |
| though that approach works well in some instances, | | | | |