| The war against cancer has been going on now for at | | | | works well in some instances, we all know the nasty |
| least seventy years. During that time the medical | | | | side effects and lackluster results associated with that. |
| community 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 problem is that for the most part, the same types | | | | and subsequently kill these despicable invaders that |
| of treatments first offered in the early days are still the | | | | we so disgustingly call cancer. |
| primary treatment protocols that are utilized by | | | | How to do that? Science has long known that glucose |
| mainstream medicine today. The good ole standby's | | | | is the energy source that cancer cells must have in |
| 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 | | | | Cancer nor life was just not meant to be that easy! |
| years. Despite these advances, we seem to be | | | | The human body is capable of generating glucose |
| diagnosing more cancer, and the survival rates while | | | | even if you eliminate most if not all carbohydrates |
| improving, still aren't nearly as high as we would want | | | | from your diet. That is probably why cancer diets |
| them to be especially for the more aggressive | | | | have not proven to be very successful in most people. |
| cancers. | | | | Your body has the ability to cure or defeat cancer but |
| Why aren't survival rates much higher after all these | | | | it needs help from a variety of sources. What are |
| years? That is a very difficult question to answer. One | | | | those sources? Well, most importantly you have to |
| theory could be that even though we have better | | | | have your normal cells derive its energy from a source |
| early detection and more aggressive therapies, if | | | | other than glucose. Fortunately enough "mother nature" |
| cancer isn't arrested or stopped in its earliest stages, | | | | gave us an alternate energy source which is widely |
| then there just isn't much that can be done after it has | | | | known as ketones. Ketones are produced when the |
| metastasized that would not adversely impact the | | | | body uses fats instead of carbohydrates for its |
| patient. | | | | energy. |
| Is cancer just too wily a foe for us to stop once it has | | | | Once that transformation has occurred, in order for |
| metastasized? Is there a "point of no return" as it | | | | your body to then cure itself of cancer, you need to |
| relates to metastasized cancer? I don't think so! I think | | | | force your body to stop producing the glucose that it is |
| the focus has primarily been in the wrong place. | | | | designed to produce, even in the absence of |
| Currently chemotherapy drugs are introduced into the | | | | carbohydrates. Doing these things along with a few |
| body in an effort to systemically hunt down cancerous | | | | additional tricks should allow most cancer victims the |
| cells wherever they maybe hiding in the hopes of | | | | opportunity to "Stop Cancer And Die From Old Age |
| finding and killing them all. Even though that approach | | | | Instead! |