If you’ve ever taken a stand against anything, or refused to follow the crowd, you won’t need me to tell you that it can be a lonely old path at times.
No, I’m not talking about being a vegan. Well, not specifically.
I refer instead to an unpleasant, newly-arisen situation, resulting in Hippocrates Health Institute and one of its co-directors being dragged through the mud.
And unfairly so.
The story begins with a native indian girl living in Ontario, Canada, whose family opted for a traditional, native treatment path for her leukaemia, thus shunning the conventional chemo, surgery and radiotherapy options.
Not only that, but she decided to stay at Hippocrates Health Institute as a guest and to adopt the Hippocrates lifestyle route in addition, i.e. green juices, wheatgrass, 85% raw, and 100% vegan.
The hospital offering the chemo took the Children’s Aid Society to court to try to force her parents to put her on chemo.
Happily, sense prevailed, and the court ruled that the girl and her family were free to choose a treatment conducive to their native beliefs. (This ruling also got me asking the question about why cultural belief seemed to be the only defence they had: surely, people – no matter what their heritage of belief – should have a right to choose the fate of their own bodies?!)
But then the Canadian and American national media got involved and, as is their wont, decided to go for the soft option and attack the practices of Hippocrates generally, but also the reputation of Dr Brian Clement.
Included in that furore was the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), a public service broadcaster, which is government-funded. Read on a little further and you may begin to understand, in terms of the relationship between western governments and pharmaceuticals, why that point is significant and why they have taken the viewpoint that they have.
For UK readers, there is a definite feeling of familiarity about this – remember the parents initially vilified by the media for taking their child out of a Southampton Hospital to get better treatment abroad?
Again, two people who refused to toe the conventional treatment line. And alas, perfect cannon fodder for the media.
I’ve said it elsewhere on my site and I make no apologies for repeating it again:
Hippocrates Health Institute, Florida, is the first and only place I would recommend to someone I loved who had ANY form of serious disease.
If you know someone who is seriously ill, please contact me so I can tell you how Hippocrates works and how it CAN help them.
During my 9-week stay for the institute’s Health Educator Program, every week at graduation, I saw radiant, strong people stand before the room to tell the story of how they had come to Hippocrates – in many cases with stage four cancer – as a last resort, because their own mainstream medical practitioners had thrown in the towel, merely advising them “to get their house in order” and prepare for death.
And there they stood. Fit, well, and with years of good health to look forward to.
But sadly, it’s no surprise that organisations and individuals who refuse to toe the pharmaceutical line receive a bad press.
None of the big drugs companies, nor the governments which receive billions from them each year, want any cancer patient to know that something as simple – and as un-patentable – as vegetables and plants in their natural state hold the answer.
A good few years back, Johns Hopkins University (USA) tried to patent broccoli sprouts because they contained sulforaphane, a substance which they deemed to be the most potent cancer-fighting substance on the planet. In other words, they knew with this information that they’d potentially hit the jackpot.
They got away with it for a while, and the price of broccoli sprouts more than quadrupled, until a US judge ruled that vegetables and plants in their natural state could not be patented.
And that’s why we are where we are with all of this. Money. Greed. Profit. And self-interest.
Rather controversially, I also put it to you that all the big cancer research charities in the west know EXACTLY what causes cancer. And, equally, what helps to prevent it. But imagine how many jobs and fancy salaries would go down the pan if someone actually voiced what Hippocrates Health Institute has known and has been proving for decades.
And just to be clear, we’re talking to the tune of 40,000 guests with serious illness who walked away from West Palm Beach with their health and hope fully intact.
Personally, I refuse to give to any such research charity for those very reasons. Of course, I support those helping cancer patients, such as MacMillan, because that is a different thing.
And another point: did you also know that chemotherapy is actually a carcinogen?
Plus, the figures for cancer survival are COMPLETELY skewed in order to paint a rosier picture.
Because the definition of a cancer survivor is someone still alive 5 years to the day after their initial diagnosis. They could die the very next day of cancer, but they will still be logged in the stats as surviving it.
Lies, damned lies, etc, etc.
And have you noticed all the campaigns out there to get certain cancers detected earlier? The cynic in me can’t help but wonder if this is also another attempt at generating better-looking figures.
But people are surviving cancer for longer now, right?
Well, perhaps not – it could just purely be that because of earlier detection campaigns, people are being diagnosed earlier, thus cooking the books for cancer survival, because day one in the 5-year period is just happening sooner.
If you’re struggling to find any truth in what I’m saying, I urge you to watch this link. It’s the full version of Healing Cancer from Inside Out , which in part blows the lid on the whole money-spinning system. (You’ll just have to ignore the subtitles – the audio commentary is all in English).
But more importantly, it’s ESSENTIAL viewing for someone who has just been diagnosed with cancer, i.e. BEFORE they make a decision on treatment. Why?
Because it lays out all the pros and cons of conventional versus non-conventional cancer treatments in a balanced way (I lent my copy to someone working fairly high up in my local NHS, and that was their summary of it).
Furthermore, it also explains how the pharmaceutical companies behave, how they link to governments, and how they actually ADVISE politicians and DRAFT legislation about treatments.
Crazy isn’t the word.
If you know anyone this applies to, please forward this post to them – the film in particular might just save their life. But at the very least, it will enable them to make a much more informed choice about the treatment they eventually opt for.
If you’ve ever been to Hippocrates and feel that what I’m saying is correct, please share this post on as many social media outlets as you can.
No matter what you think to the views in this post, if you’re sane, you really do need to ask yourself who, in all of this, is being less than honest.
And I am willing to stake my life on the fact that it’s certainly not Dr Brian Clement.