I’m not going to lie, there is a lot of information here. It is a collection of studies on colonoscopies, alternatives, and cancer. To sum my thoughts up with the below information….Big pharma is profiting off of colonoscopies and there are lots of studies and a ton of research showing that it is more harmful than good. I personally don’t want to go through this procedure, nor the prep which I have heard is horrendous. The best way to take care of any cancer from happening in the colon or any other area of the body is to prevent it from happening. That is through a good healthy diet, lots of water, exercise, sleep (yes I said sleep), getting proper vitamins and nutrients, and prevention with medicinal herbs. Always consult your qualified health care provider, however for me personally, I would much rather prevent than to have to deal with a possible life threatening procedure that big pharma will come out in the positive for…but that is just my opinion.
Here is the article/studies/etc.:
The procedure known as colonoscopies as a prophylactic for colon cancer is a multimillion dollar industry. Every year, over 14 million perfectly healthy individuals age 50 and up, submit themselves to this invasive procedure hoping to detect colorectal cancer. But is it really effective?
It’s a Painful and Dangerous Procedure
It’s actually far more dangerous—and potentially deadly—than they’d like to admit. According The Annals Of Internal Medicine’s report on colonoscopies, an estimated 70,000 (0.5%) will be injured or killed by a complication related to this procedure. This figure is 22% higher than the annual deaths from colorectal cancer itself – the very disease the device was designed to prevent.
According to the Telemark Polyp Study I, colonoscopies actually increase mortality by 57% . For every person saved by a colonoscopy, 56 people suffer serious injury. A person can live for decades with colon cancer, but if the doctor punctures a hole in your intestine, you can die in a hurry.
Colonoscopy Does NOT Prevent Cancer
According to the American Cancer Society, up until 2009 “…there are no prospective randomized controlled trials of screening colonoscopy for the reduction in incidence of or mortality from colorectal cancer.”
From an article in the New York Times, dated 2006; “The patients in all the studies had at least one adenoma detected on colonoscopy but did not have cancer. They developed cancer in the next few years, however, at the same rate as would be expected in the general population without screening.”
Another research study published in 2006 concluded that the screened patients in all of the studies developed colorectal cancer “at the same rate as would be expected in the general population without screening” in the next few years, even though all found polyps had been removed.
Colonoscopy is a Scam
It is a scam to make pharmaceutical industry and doctors rich. The AMA has conspired to make colonscopy screening a policy for preventative care when it is an unnecessary invasive procedure. Radiation levels from a single virtual colonoscopy are similar to the atomic bomb exposure in Hiroshima, even though, according to The National Cancer Institute: “Whether virtual colonoscopy can reduce the number of deaths from colorectal cancer is not yet known.”
A non invasive test knowns as a fecal immunochemical test is just as effective.
article from: http://livingtraditionally.com/colonoscopy-dangers/
References:
http://roarofwolverine.com/archives/2772
Colorectal Cancer Screening; National Cancer Institute; Oct 2008;
How many endoscopies are performed for colorectal cancer screening? Results from CDC’s survey of endoscopic capacity. Gastroenterology. 2004;127: 1670-1677.
Study Questions Colonoscopy Effectiveness; The New York Times; G. Colata; Dec 14, 2006
Via ANYA V
“𝐂𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐬: 𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐢𝐭𝐲. 𝐑𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐠𝐨 𝐨𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐬 𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫.” -𝐋𝐨𝐮𝐢𝐬𝐞 𝐇𝐚𝐲
𝐁𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐥 – 𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞 𝐛𝐨𝐰𝐞𝐥 – 𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐨𝐧
𝐏𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐃𝐢𝐠𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐦
In the large bowel, the digestive process is already over. This is the rubbish bin. The colon keeps the organism from getting clogged up and intoxicated with the stuff it does not need. Therefore, it contributes to the respiratory process (complements the lungs).
In the colon, the body extracts and recuperates water from the food it did not digest and is going to expel. This is where the garbage collets, though some intake still takes place. Here, just like in the small bowel, the question of what must be kept and what must be thrown away persists.
In nature, to defecate is considered as a gift of excrement, a fertilizer for the earth. Excrement and money are associated in many ways. For example, in many European countries, there is a belief that to step on excrement brings luck and money.
The small bowel is associated with the process of discrimination to allow proper absorption. The large bowel is associated with the underworld, the unconscious, the realm of the dead. It is in the large bowel that decomposition takes place. It symbolizes the nocturnal side of the body.
Constipation (lazy bowels) shows that the person does not want to give, to offer. The person hangs on to what he has. It is characteristic of people who are frugal, skimpy, with money. It reflects the desire to hold on to material possessions. People who suffer from constipation are very egocentric.
Colon cancer, like all cancers, is associated with a great tension that the person experienced and did not verbalize, a tension that was kept well hidden. This tension is associated with unhappiness at home, a feeling that the person was the victim of some dirty and infamous deed.
Cancer of the colon is more prevalent in the ascending colon, in the sigmoid, and in the upper and lower rectum.
Colon tensions are almost always feminine tensions, except those that occur in the ascending colon, which are usually masculine, and those in the lower rectum, which are connected with tensions in the relationship between male and female.
Here’s more: https://learninggnm.com/SBS/documents/i_intestines.html
𝐃𝐞𝐛𝐮𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐠 𝐏𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐦𝐚 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫 𝐇𝐨𝐚𝐱: https://www.facebook.com/share/16muTtXWd3/?mibextid=wwXIfr
RJ Rodriguez is with Michelle Lynn and Maria Alfaro.
𝐃𝐞𝐛𝐮𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐢𝐠 𝐏𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐦𝐚 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫 𝐇𝐨𝐚𝐱
Ryke Geerd Hamer, M.D. discovered that every disease—not only cancer—is controlled from its own specific area in the brain and linked to a very particular, identifiable, “conflict shock”.
QUESTIONING THE METASTASIS THEORY
“How cancer cells become metastatic still remains a mystery.” Yale University (2008)
The metastasis theory is one of the most persistent dogmas of modern medicine. According to the theory, a “metastatic cancer” occurs when tumor cells of a primary cancer break away from the site and travel through the bloodstream or the lymph system to another organ where they cause a second cancerous growth.
A brief historical perspective
In the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries tumors were considered “morbid material” which, if not normally excreted, could accumulate, turn “malignant”, and cause death if it spread to other areas of the body. When the cancer was thought to have spread from one organ to another, it was called “metastasis”. Medical therapies such as lancing, purging, blistering, bleeding, and poisoning were applied to aid the drainage of the “deadly” substances.
In the nineteenth century, microorganisms were included in the catalogue of “morbid materials”, and Pasteur’s germ theory became the prevailing rationale that supported the metastasis theory. In the twentieth century, supposedly mutant, rogue, cancer cells were added to the list, joining bacteria, fungi, and viruses as disease-causing agents.
In today’s medicine, both allopathic and naturopathic, it is still assumed that cancer cells and microbes act against the human organism. To this very day, the human body is believed to be at war against evil forces trying to harm and to destroy it (see immune system theory). The most basic axiom upon which the medical theory rests, remains rooted in dark-ages of fear and superstition, ignorant of the creative intelligence that pervades Nature and the human body.
THE METASTASIS THEORY IN LIGHT OF DR. HAMER’S DISCOVERIES
The psyche-brain-organ relation
The metastasis theory entirely discounts the fact that every cell of the human body is controlled from the brain; instead, it treats each cell as a sentient organism doing its own thing. A century of medical research has confirmed that the brain is the “coordinating bio-electrical center” that regulates all biochemical processes, including “pathological” changes in organs and tissues. Even “infectious diseases” cannot progress when nerves to the affected organ are severed (Robert H. Walker: Functional Processes of Disease, 1951), which demonstrates that the activities of microbes are also directed by the brain.
Dr. Hamer discovered the psyche as a third component that interacts with the brain and the correlating organ. Through the analysis of his patients’ brain scans he found that a “conflict shock” (DHS) occurs not only in the psyche but impacts simultaneously in the area of the brain that correlates to the particular conflict. The moment the brain cells register the conflict, the information is immediately transmitted to the corresponding organ and at this instant a Significant Biological Special Program (SBS) is activated to assist the organism, both on the psychological and physical level, during that crisis. Hence, each cancer or tumor growth is a meaningful biological response to a very specific conflict situation. By comparing tens of thousands of his patients’ brain CTs with their medical records and their personal histories, Dr. Hamer was able to identify the exact location in the brain from where each type of cancer is controlled.
Firmly anchored in the science of embryology, Dr. Hamer’s findings provide the scientific evidence that this brain-mediated correlation between the psyche and the body is inherent in every organism. That is to say that all species respond to a “death-fright conflict” with lung cancer, to an “indigestible morsel conflict” with colon cancer, to an “existence conflict” with kidney cancer, or to a “nest-worry conflict” (mammals and humans) with breast cancer.
The reason why all creatures respond to the same type of conflict with the same organ is that, whether fish, reptile, mammal, or human, all organs of all species can be traced to one of the three embryonic germ layers that develop during the very first period of the embryonic stage. To be exact, the lungs or heart or bones of every living organism are formed from the same type of germ layer and are therefore of the same tissue type. This is why we speak in GNM of biological conflicts rather than of psychological conflicts.
Cancer cells don’t cross the germ layer threshold
In the course of his research Dr. Hamer also discovered that the individual brain control centers are arranged in the brain in a systematic order. The precise locations of the brain relays show that all tissues that derive from the same embryonic germ layer are controlled from the same area in the brain.
All organs and tissues that derive from the endoderm (lungs, colon, liver, pancreas, uterus, prostate) are controlled from the brainstem; all mesodermal tissues (breast glands, ovaries, testicles, bones, muscles) are controlled from the cerebellum or the cerebral medulla; all ectodermal tissues (skin, bronchi, larynx, cervix, bladder, rectum) are controlled from the cerebral cortex.
Thus, every cancer always involves a very specific area of the brain that controls the conflict-related organ or tissue. Under no circumstances are cancer cells able to “metastasize” to an organ or tissue that is controlled from a different, unaffected brain relay; neither can cancer cells “spread” to a tissue type that derives from a different germ layer. Cancer cells are absolutely bound to the specific organ for which the brain has activated the Biological Special Program.
The Third Biological Law of GNM offers, for the first time in medicine, a reliable system that allows a classification of all diseases according to their tissue type. Regarding cancer, the “Ontogenetic System of Tumors” shows that a cancer (tumor growth) develops either
a) in the conflict-active phase in old-brain controlled organs (brainstem and cerebellum), in which case the tumor has a biological significance as it enhances the function of the organ to facilitate a conflict resolution
b) in the healing phase in cerebrum-controlled organs (cerebral medulla and cerebral cortex), where the tumor is the result of a natural healing and replenishing process after the related conflict has been resolved.
Either way, and this is the quintessence of Dr. Hamer’s discoveries, cancer is always part of a meaningful biological process, and can therefore no longer be considered a “disease”, let alone a “malignant disease”.
Making sense of secondary cancers from the GNM perspective
German New Medicine does not dispute the existence of secondary or multiple cancers. As we now understand, second cancers are not caused by “spreading” cancer cells but are the result of simultaneous or further conflicts involving the organ that is biologically linked to the respective conflicts. This applies, without exception, in every case of cancer.
According to the National Cancer Institute, the most common “metastatic” cancers are those that have “spread” to the lungs, liver, bones, lymph nodes, or the brain. In light of Dr. Hamer’s discoveries, it is readily apparent why this is so.
Lung cancer is biologically linked to a “death-fright conflict”. As a secondary cancer, lung cancer is most often the result of a diagnosis or prognosis shock perceived as a death-sentence. Considering that each day thousands of cancer patients are literally scared to death by a cancer diagnosis shock or a negative prognosis (“You have three months to live”), it should not come as a surprise that lung cancer is, in modern medicine’s terms, the “No. 1 Killer”.
This brain CT shows the impact of a death-fright conflict in the area of the brain that controls the lungs. The moment the conflict impacts in the brain, the lung alveoli cells, in charge of processing oxygen, immediately start to multiply, because in biological terms the death-panic is equated with not being able to breathe. The biological purpose of the cell proliferation – the lung cancer – is to increase the capacity of the lungs so that the individual is in a better position to cope with the death-fright.
Based on the psyche-brain-organ relation, smoking cannot be the cause of lung cancer, unless smoking cigarettes is related to a death-fright (“Smoking Kills”). The toxins in cigarette smoke, however, can make the healing phase much more difficult, particularly when a healing process is taking place in the respiratory tract.
Multiple cancers also occur when a DHS has more than one aspect. If a man, for instance, loses his job unexpectedly, he can simultaneously suffer a “starvation conflict” (“I don’t know how to provide for myself”) and an “existence conflict” (“my livelihood is at stake”). Each conflict impacts in the conflict-related brain relay and in this case two Biological Special Programs will be activated. If the conflict activity is intense, a liver tumor and a kidney tumor develop during the conflict-active phase. After the conflict has been resolved (for example, with getting a new job) both tumors will undergo a natural healing process.
Bone cancer is, according to Dr. Hamer’s findings, linked to a “self-devaluation conflict”, which cancer patients typically experience because of feeling “worthless”. During the conflict-active phase, the bone(s) or joint(s) closest to where one feels “useless”, “sick”, or “inadequate” generate a loss of bone tissue (termed “osteolytic bone cancer”). This explains why after a prostate cancer diagnosis men often develop bone cancer in the pelvis or lumbar spine, which are nearest to the prostate (60% of all “bone metastases” in men are prostate related). Similarly, women who suffer a loss of self-worth because of a breast cancer diagnosis or a disfiguring mastectomy, typically develop bone cancer in the ribs or the sternum (70% of all “bone metastases” in women are related to breast cancer). Considering the physical and sexual self-devaluation that men often feel when dealing with prostate cancer or women when facing the loss of a breast, it is obvious why conflicts affecting the bones are so common in these areas. The same applies to the development of lymphomas, typically in the axillary lymph nodes as a result of a “breast self-devaluation” or in the pelvis area in connection with prostate cancer.
Contradicting metastasis theories vis-à-vis Dr. Hamer’s research
Current medical theory is that metastasizing cells are of the same kind as those in the original tumor, i.e., if a cancer arises in the breast and “metastasizes” to the bones, the cancer cells in the bones are believed to be breast cancer cells. However, in 2006, Dr. Vincent Giguère, a cancer researcher at the McGill University Health Centre in Montreal, stated the opposite: “Breast cancer cells, for example, often move to the bones. This is quite a feat, since they first have to morph from breast cells into bone cells”, says Dr. Giguère, “He and his colleagues are trying to figure out how they do it.” (Globe & Mail, November 28, 2006).
Based on Dr. Hamer’s discoveries, neither of the two metastasis theories can be scientifically verified, since both theories assume that cancer originates in the body, where healthy cells supposedly mutate – all of a sudden and for no reason – into “malignant” cells. This concept fails to recognize that cancers, like all bodily processes, are controlled from the brain and that all cancers originate in reality in the psyche as an integral part of the human biology. In view of this new understanding of the nature and the origin of cancer, secondary cancers cannot be the result of cancer cells spreading by way of the blood or lymph system to other organs, because under no circumstances are cancer cells able to bypass this well-established biological system. The standard metastasis theories (aside from their embarrassing contradictions) also entirely ignore the histological association of each and every cancer to one of the three embryonic germ layers.
Let’s look, for example, at intra-ductal breast cancer and bone cancer:
The ectodermal lining of the milk ducts, including intra-ductal tumors, are controlled from the cerebral cortex whereas the bones, which derive from the mesoderm, are controlled from the cerebral medulla. An intra-ductal breast cancer is linked to a “separation conflict” and develops exclusively during the healing phase, whereas bone cancer is an indication of conflict activity of a “self-devaluation conflict”. Thus, if the bone cancer is a secondary cancer after breast cancer, the bone cancer can only be caused by a “self-devaluation”, experienced at a time when the breast cancer is already in the healing phase!
What makes the concept of “breast cancer spreading to the bones” even more irrational is that a so-called “osteoclastic metastasis” (a primary cancer, such as a breast cancer or prostate cancer, which has “spread to the bones”) is by definition not a tumor growth but the opposite, namely a loss of bone tissue. How breast cancer cells are supposed to create “cancerous” holes in bones without the involvement of the brain, has yet to be explained.
“Metastasis” tests under scrutiny
“Over the years many hypotheses were developed trying to explain the inefficiency of the metastatic process, but none of these theories completely explain the current biological and clinical observations.”
Breast Cancer Research, 2008
Pathologists claim that they are able to detect the origin of a secondary cancer through the analysis of tissue samples (biopsies). The current practice is to use stains and antibodies to identify proteins that are typical of a specific tumor. This method is called the “immuno-histochemical technique”. A critical look at this method, however, quickly reveals that this procedure does not identify metastasizing cancer cells but only proteins, released from a tumor. A comment on the UCLA educational website admits to this obvious discrepancy: “Although the analysis may be simple, it often suffers from low sensitivity or specificity, and does not provide adequate functional measurements concerning tumor cell behavior.” From the GNM point of view, the release of proteins from a tumor is a natural part of the healing process, particularly when the tumor is decomposed by tubercular bacteria during the healing phase, in the case of a glandular breast cancer for example. As the body breaks down the now superfluous cells, proteins are released into the bloodstream (proteins are already detectible in the blood during the conflict-active phase; these constitute the real tumor markers). The immuno-histochemical technique is only tracking these proteins, and yet we are given the impression they are tracking live cancer cells.
However, there has never been an observation of live cancer cells in the blood or lymph fluid of a cancer patient. Only antibodies have been identified, and these do not prove the presence of viable, “metastatic” cancer cells (the same “indirect evidence”-method is used in trying to “prove” the existence of viruses as a cause of “viral infections”).
Cancer cells from a primary tumor have never been observed naturally attaching to another organ or tissue and growing a new tumor. Again, only “antibodies” or “proteins” have been traced to a secondary cancer.
In experiments where researchers inject millions of multiplying, “malignant” cancer cells from a growing tumor directly into the bloodstream, secondary tumors rarely occur. “Using a model in which human breast cancer cells were grown in immuno-compromised mice, we found that only a minority of breast cancer cells had the ability to form new tumors.” (Dept. of Internal Medicine, Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Michigan Medical School, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA). Source: Proceedings of the National Academy of Science of the U.S.A., 2003.
Common-sense questions we should ask:
If it is true that cancer cells travel via the blood stream, why is donated blood not screened for cancer cells, and why is the public not being warned by the health authorities of the risks of coming in contact with the blood of a cancer patient?
“Researchers at the European School of Oncology have concluded that it is unlikely that cancer is spread through blood transfusions from patients with undiagnosed cancer [emphasis added].
“Before donated blood is used in transfusions, it must undergo rigorous testing to ensure that it does not carry any disease. However, although the risk of transmitting infectious agents is well known, it is more difficult to determine whether chronic diseases such as cancer can be transmitted from a donor to a recipient.
“A team of researchers led by Gustaf Edgren relied on data relating to transfusions and cancer diagnoses in Denmark and Sweden to see if there is any connection between the two. … The team found no evidence of increased risk for patients who had received blood from people who had any of the cancers thought to carry an increased risk of blood metastases (lung, liver, skeleton and central nervous system).”
Comisión Europea, CORDIS, Resultados de investigaciones de la UE, July 23, 2007
These observations confirm Dr. Hamer’s findings (Third Biological Law)
that cancer cells do NOT use the blood as a route to “spread” to other organs,
neither within an organism nor to organs of a blood donation recipient.
If it is true that cancer cells migrate via the blood stream, why are cancers of the blood vessel walls or of the heart not the most frequent cancers, since those are the tissues that would be most exposed to cancer cells traveling in the blood?
If it is true that cancer cells metastasize to other organs by way of the lymph system, how is it possible that a “metastasizing” cancer develops in the bones (statistically one of the most frequent sites of “metastatic tumors”), although these tissues are not supplied with lymph fluid?
If it is true that secondary tumors are caused by cancer cells migrating through the blood or lymph system, why do cancer cells of a primary tumor rarely travel to adjacent tissues, for example, from the uterus to the cervix or from the bones to neighboring muscle tissue?
The “brain metastasis” theory vis-à-vis Dr. Hamer’s discoveries
Dr. Hamer established already in the 1980’s that so-called “brain tumors” are not, as assumed, abnormal growths in the brain but instead glial cells (brain connective tissue) that naturally proliferate in the second half of the healing phase (in PCL-B), precisely, in the area of the brain that undergoes – parallel to the healing organ – also a repair process. This restoration process in the related brain relay occurs during ANY given healing phase, whether it is a skin rash, hemorrhoids, a common cold, a bladder infection, or a cancer. It is a clear indication that the conflict has been resolved and that the psyche, the brain, and affected organ are healing all at once.
Questions we should therefore also ask:
If it is true that cancers metastasize to the brain, why are cancer cells allowed to pass the blood-brain barrier that functions as a vital filter to prevent harmful substances from entering the brain?
Why do we never hear about “brain tumor” cells metastasizing from the brain to an organ, let’s say, to the prostate, to the bones, or to the breast? Based on the prevalent doctrine this would translate, for example, into brain cancer cells causing lung cancer!!
Dr. Hamer’s German New Medicine is the biggest challenge the medical establishment, including today’s medical science and a profit-driven medical industry, has ever faced. Aware of this threat, the health authorities, supported by the justice system and the media, are using their power to silence Dr. Hamer’s medical discoveries and to persecute, vilify, and criminalize its originator.
Dr. Caroline Markolin, German New Medicine
When we experience trauma, our brain shifts into “survival mode” to keep us safe. This shift, meant to protect us in dangerous situations, can become the brain’s default mode in people with Unresolved Trauma (CPTSD) or Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Let’s explore what that survival brain looks like and how it shapes behavior.
In trauma, our brain is wired to respond with fight, flight, or freeze to protect us from perceived danger. This response can be life-saving during the trauma, but when it becomes constant, as in PTSD, it deeply affects behavior and thinking. In PTSD, the brain may remain on high alert, scanning the environment for potential threats, even in safe situations.
How it reflects in daily life:
1. Hypervigilance and Overreactivity: People with PTSD often feel on edge, anticipating danger at any moment. This “always-on” mode can make it hard to relax, feel safe, or focus on everyday activities.
2. Emotional Triggers and Flashbacks: Memories related to the trauma can resurface unexpectedly, leading to intense feelings, flashbacks, or emotional numbness. Everyday sounds, smells, or images can become triggers, bringing past trauma into the present moment.
3. Difficulty with Memory and Concentration: Trauma can make it difficult to remember information or keep attention on tasks. This can be frustrating for people with PTSD, impacting work, school, or personal relationships.
4. Impulsivity and Emotional Outbursts: With survival brain in control, emotional regulation becomes challenging. People might feel out of control with anger, sadness, or fear, or find themselves reacting impulsively to perceived threats.
5. Exhaustion and Physical Health Issues: Survival brain keeps stress hormones high, which can lead to fatigue, sleep problems, headaches, and other health issues. Long-term stress affects both mental and physical well-being.
With trauma-focused therapies, mindfulness, and self-regulation practices, it’s possible to retrain the brain, calming the survival responses. Over time, the brain learns to feel safe again, helping people with PTSD regain control over their lives and emotions.
Survival brain is an adaptive tool for life-threatening moments. But in the context of PTSD, understanding it can help guide us toward resilience and healing.
Psychoemotional Root Cause of Cancer
Published under Useful concepts
A cancer cell is not an agent that attacks the body from the outside. It is a cell that, at a particular moment and for a particular reason, decides to alter its job at the service of a particular organ. This cell has ceased to identify itself with the community where it fulfilled its role. It is a cell which starts pursuing its own objectives, with intense determination, and it is a lot more productive than other cells. A breast with cancer produces more milk.
And what was the reason why the cell decided to change its role? This is the crucial question that needs to be asked. The reason is that life in the organism where it performed its task is no longer adequate.
Fighting a cancer cell only makes it stronger. Let us recall what we said at the beginning of this book: Everything starts at consciousness.level. In other words, the person has created cancer through his own way of thinking and living.
We need to understand what message the cancer cell is telling us about our lives. We need to understand what we need to change in our lives. Cancer allows us to unravel our mental addiction, the causes of our suffering.
There is no space for cancer when the person respects himself just as he is, in his essence, fundamental nature, when the person does not exaggerate or annul anything in him.
Cancer is the product of deep tension in a person’s life, which, for some reason, he decided to hide and repress.
It is important to find out in which part of the body cancer occurs, and understand what that part of the body is trying to show us (see each organ separately). In any case, the less a person verbalizes his emotional tensions, the more his body will show him those very tensions in the form of a symptom, and, in the case of intense repressed tension, in the form of cancer.
It is important to persuade the cancer patient to realize and understand what is going on in his consciousness.
To be at a hospital ward where all the patients are experiencing the same type of tension, for instance, the same type of cancer, allows us to realize, by talking to those people, that all of them share a common tension in their consciousness.. There is a clear common denominator in those patients.
When there are other cancer areas subsequent to the so called initial cancer, this means that a succession of conflicts, tensions, took place in the person’s consciousness. provoked by the tension caused by the original cancer (the trigger). It is these other often cascading conflicts that give origin to problems and symptoms in different parts of the body.
Here is an example of cascading tensions in the consciousness.
Starting point occurrence, tension trigger: a woman underwent breast cancer surgery and had her breast removed. The cascade could start at this point, which, in this case, is just an example.
This woman, due to the fact that she feels less attractive, fears her husband may leave her. Accordingly, she starts thinking she has already lost a loved one. However, she will not voice it. She keeps it silent. The tension she feels in her consciousness.triggers ovary cancer (if this was a man, it would be in the testicles cancer).
The loss of her husband could lead, on the other hand, to the loss of her sexual partner, and this would frustrate her very much. Here, it would be her cervical canal of uterus that would be on the spot (if in a man, it would be the prostrate) and she would end up with cervical canal cancer.
This person could also feel undervalued as she may think she was no longer able to do the things she did before. For instance, that she would not be able to keep the house clean anymore. In this case, the muscles would be affected and develop cancer.
Or she might be afraid of dying and here it would be her lungs that would be at stake, and she would develop lung cancer.
And, in this last case, she would worry about the loss her death would mean to her children, and then she would develop liver cancer.
If the husband indeed left her, she may think this was due to the fact that she was now less attractive and feel it was grossly unfair. “Blimey, God does not exist!” If this was the case, she might develop cancer in her pancreas.
She might even develop another type of tension provoked by the worry of ending up apart from everything she loves. In this case, eczema or any other type of skin disease would develop.
This is just an example. The order in which it was presented is not important. These are potential conflict risks.
All one has to do is to ascertain if these conflicts that originate other cancers are present or not.
Let us look at another example:
A woman was dumped by her boyfriend. She feels the loss of a loved one. It affects her ovaries.
If she felt it meant the loss of a potential father of her children, then her cervical canal of uterus would be affected.
Or she may feel the nest is falling apart and, in this case, her breasts would be affected.
Or she may feel undervalued: “I am not worth anything. I am dirty.” In this case, the problem would show up in her blood.
She may feel abandoned, and here she would put on weight.
Or she may feel that the problem was stuck in her throat and here the tonsils would develop problems (angina).
Or she may feel that she was the victim of a “bastard” action, although that feeling frightens her and she tries to avoid it. Then she develops hyperglaecemia (diabetes). Or she feels she would like to run away from this awful truth, and then develops hypoglycaemia.
In short, it is very important to speak to the person and find out what were the cascading events and tensions she experienced and which affected her. This is because everything starts in our consciousness.
In fact, if we accept that everything starts in our consciousness. we will realize that we are responsible for everything that happens to us.
Responsibility, not guilt!
Extreme stress triggers off other stresses. An intense tension may come up again when the new conflict has nothing to do with it, after all. For instance, a man who suffered from liver problems for a long time but who has sorted it out and been cured, one day experiences an undervaluing conflict (which is linked to bones and muscles) and develops a problem in his bones. This is not at all related to the liver. But this person may have liver problems again.
We need to understand that what is linked to the undervaluing conflict is not the liver, realize that the manifestations in the liver are of a secondary nature and that the problems affecting the liver are not serious, since there is no loss association conflict.
What happened was that the body memory brought back the recollection of the liver conflict. What is healed will remain healed. If the symptom in the liver recurs, this is because the liver was not properly cured in the first place.
Via Luis Martins Simoes, Does The Body Lie, Heal The Person, Not The Disease
Here’s more: THE NATURE OF TUMORS – https://learninggnm.com/SBS/documents/i_naturetumors.html
If you made it to the end of all that research….kudos to you!
If you want to purchase any herbs, please consider using this affiliate link to purchase them. I highly recommend this link because of how they process and store herbs. You can’t always trust who you purchase from online, but with this company, I truly do feel it is top of the line and high quality. Just go to this link and type in each herb. I also have a limited supply of herbs listed on my website at www.theweeddoc.net.
If you would like to find out more about the author, learn about other herbs on her blog, or sign up for a wellness advice membership please consider visiting this link.
Stay natural!
~Dr. Amanda P. Cartwright