Category Archives: Cancer & Tumors

The Effects of Heat Against Cancer

by Mauris Emeka

“Hyperthermia (also called thermal therapy or thermotherapy) is a type of cancer treatment in which body tissue is exposed to high temperatures. Research has shown that high temperatures can damage and kill cancer cells, usually with minimal injury to normal tissues.

National Cancer Institute

Harvard Medical School discovered that cancer cells are vulnerable to heat and will be destroyed by temperatures over I 06 degrees Fahrenheit. The body’s normal temperature is 98.6 degrees Fahrenheit. Unlike cancer cells, normal cells can handle a certain amount of heat, and therefore, they are not destroyed by I06 degree Fahrenheit temperatures.

Dr. Lawrence Wilson M.D. wrote the following in the publication  Townsend Letter for Doctors and Patients: “If  I were to single out one method to combat cancer, it  is the sauna. It assists with removal of chemical toxins and heavy metals, increases oxydation, and enhances the immune system …”.

Dr. Yoshimizu, M.D. is the former director of Yokohama General Hospital located in Japan.   He authored the book “The Fourth Treatment for Medical Refugees”, (copyright 2009). Chapter 3 of this book is titled “Heat the Body with Thermotherapy”, and it discusses how sufficient amounts of heat can shut down cancer cells.

How can someone challenged with cancer get enough heat into their body to turn the corner against cancer?    It has been shown that sitting is a sauna, especially  an  infrared sauna, can be of  great help. Another way to heat up cancerous  tissue deep within the body is with the use of a device called a BioMat. The BioMat is an FDA approved device that combines far infrared light and negative ion technology with the healing power of amethyst  crystals.  It puts heat as much as 6 inches into the body, and as a result it enhances blood circulation, making it easier for oxygen to circulate throughout the body. The added heat also increases white blood cells which in turn strengthens the immune system and helps detoxify the body.

Cancer cells thrive best in relatively cool temperatures of around 94 to 95 degrees Fahrenheit and NOT in temperatures of 105 to 106 degrees Fahrenheit. The BioMat can be used either professionally or at one’s home. It’s important to note that Dr. Yoshimizu’s book explains that the BioMat can be wrapped around any part of the body except for the head; and that’s because brain cells, unlike all other cells in the body, cannot handle high amounts of heat introduced deep within them.

For more information, one can go online. has several informative videos about  the BioMat  and other ways of putting heat deep into the body. There are  also well-researched articles that can be accessed online. (Incidentally, I own 3 BioMats, one full sized and two that are medium-sized, and I highly recommend them).

Mr. Emeka is a retired Army officer who has authored  2 books about  cancer  and nutrition. His website is

Rethinking Cancer Treatment

by Mauris Emeka

Cancer is commonly thought of as a tumor, and if the tumor is treated and made to go away the patient is then said to be “cancer free”. But in reality, the tumor is only a symptom (or indication) of cancer; the tumor is not “the cancer”. As long as the main focus only on treating tumor symptoms then, regrettably, cancer in all its forms  will continue  to  grow and support a multi-billion dollar cancer treatment industry.

The primary focus needs be on what causes tumors to appear. For instance, think of a fire, and smoke rising from the fire. Swatting away the smoke does not address the problem. Instead, one must deal with  the cause by putting out the fire. Fortunately, it’s possible to put out the fire (i.e.,cancer) by committing oneself to changing how the body is nourished. Extensive studies over many years make it clear that cancer is a malfunctioning (or out of control) process that thrives as a result  of  five main issues, and those issues are as follows:

1.) Toxicity and unhealthy body waste; 2.) Overly acidic body chemistry;

3.) Insufficient amounts of digestive enzymes (especially protein digesting enzymes);

4.) A weakened immune system (often resulting from chronic inflammation and stressful living);

5.) Scarcity of oxygen within the cells of the body (in part due to shallow breathing, lack of physical activity, and consumption of high amounts of refined and cooked foods).

Fortunately, with determination and commitment there is a lot we each can do to help put out the ‘fire’ called  cancer.  For  starters,the following things can be done: consume a  largely  raw  food  plant-based diet, do regular physical exercise, do daily meditation and/or prayer, be forgiving and live with less stress, laugh a lot, breathe deeply (and do it often), drink 8 glasses or more of good water everyday,  and get  proper  rest. It has been demonstrated many times over that these and other important changes in diet and lifestyle make the body a place where the process of cancer is NOT welcomed.

For more information visit


Whole Body Hyperthermia – Cancer Treatment

What is Whole Body Hyperthermia?

Whole Body Hyperthermia is a high-tech medical procedure where systemic core body temperature is elevated. When the core temperature of the body is raised many functions are accelerated and become more efficient; most significantly, the immune system becomes more active and much more aggressive. Enzymatic activity increases several fold, making the immune system a decisive weapon to fight cancer. In addition cancer cells cannot cope with high temperatures as normal cells do, making them
an easier target for our immune system to attack and destroy.

Is Whole-Body Hyperthermia safe?

Yes, we understand that one of the body’s most common mechanisms of defense is fever; a series of physiological events that raises the temperature of the body to fight and destroy infections and other processes like cancer. Normal cells withstand heat with no harm, whereas cancer cells, already metabolically handicapped, fall prey to fever’s effects.

Why is Whole-Body Hyperthermia effective against cancer?

Medical hyperthermia attacks a cancer cell on two fronts: one, by strengthening the immune system to fight the cancer cell more aggressively, and second, by making the cancer cell more susceptible to damage, because of the metabolic effects of higher temperature and higher oxygen saturation that hyperthermia and, incidentally fever, produce in the body. Medical hyperthermia mimics fever, the natural defense system to help the body regain control over abnormal cellular behavior.

“Over the space of 40 years we built an integrative, complementary protocol and procedures that support
hyperthermia’s effectiveness and safety for the benefit of our patients.”
Rodrigo Rodriguez, MD

Why should Medical Hyperthermia be “Whole-Body”?

BioCare recognized over two decades ago that Whole-Body Hyperthermia is a powerful weapon for the treatment of cancer. Back in the 1990s we created a team of highly trained professionals to implement this procedure for the benefit of our patients. This is an in-house protocol performed under professional surveillance and care to guarantee effectiveness and safety. Focal, or localized, therapy for cancer can only target pre-identified cancer activity. Whole Body Hyperthermia, on the other hand, searches for and destroys or damages every cancer cell in the “whole” body. That is why Whole-Body Hyperthermia represents a monumental achievement in the
treatment of cancer.

We have documented thousands of cases, performed with virtually no side effects. We are proud to say medical hyperthermia is a sound, very effective and safe medical procedure. We are affiliated with international medical hyperthermia groups, and have attended important medical hyperthermia seminars and meetings around the world.
Over the space of 40 years we built an integrative, complementary protocol and procedures that support hyperthermia’s effectiveness and safety for the benefit of our patients.

Am I a candidate for this procedure?

Every case is unique; our team of doctors are always available to review the medical information of your case. We invite you to share and discuss your medical information with our team of experts in the treatment of cancer, and review the benefits of every medical protocol we offer for your personalized treatment plan.

Dr. Rodrigo Rodriguez
BioCare Hospital & Wellness

DCIS – Is It Really Breast Cancer?

by  Tanya Harter Pierce

Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS) is a common breast cancer diagnosis.  In fact, it is so common that it accounts for 20-25% of all breast cancer diagnoses in the United States.  But is it really cancer?

Two Conflicting Definitions

DCIS is a diagnosis that is given when abnormal or atypical cells are detected in one or more of the milk ducts of a woman’s breast.  The “In Situ” part means the abnormal cells are “in place” and have not spread outside the ducts into the surrounding breast tissue.  However, beyond that, there appear to be two conflicting definitions as to what DCIS really is.  Many doctors and medical sites describe it as an “early form of breast cancer.”  (Which would indicate that it is cancer.)  While other doctors and resources refer to it as a “pre-cancerous” state that might turn into cancer at some point.  (Which would indicate that it is not cancer.)   Yet, countless women who receive this diagnosis are told they have breast cancer and many are scared into extreme treatment procedures that include mastectomy, radiation, and/or hormone-blocking therapy ¾ all of which can cause significant negative side effects.

The late Dr. John R. Lee, world-renowned women’s hormones expert and author of What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Breast Cancer, wrote that DCIS is a condition involving abnormal cells that may turn into cancer, but have not yet done so.  He went on to explain that DCIS is essentially a benign condition where only a small fraction of cases will go on to become malignant cancer.  Other prominent physicians agree with Dr. Lee’s stance, such as Dr. Marleen Meyers, oncologist and director of the Perlmutter Cancer Center Survivorship Program at NYU Langone Health.  On the website,, Dr. Meyers is quoted as saying, “I make sure to tell patients that, even though DCIS has the word ‘carcinoma’ in it, it’s not actually cancer.” 

Well-known OB/GYN and leading expert on women’s health issues, Dr. Christiane Northrup, is another physician who says DCIS is not cancer.  On her website,, Dr. Northrup makes this impassioned statement:

“I have friends who have had bilateral mastectomies for DCIS.  This absolutely breaks my heart because DCIS is NOT cancer, though many doctors consider it to be  ‘Stage 0 cancer.’  And, depending upon what advice a woman is then given, she may well be advised to get treatment, which she rarely needs.  This is a shame because 99.9 percent of the time DCIS is something a woman will die with but not die from!”

For those women who are still unsure as to what to think, here is a tip:

DCIS is always referred to as “Breast Cancer, Stage 0”

That’s “Breast Cancer, Stage Zero.”  It would seem that if something is Stage Zero, it is not really something yet.  Logic indicates that Stage 1 would be the first stage of a disease, whereas Stage Zero would be before the first stage of the disease.  So, women who have been diagnosed with DCIS may want to say, “Whoa, not so fast with the breast cancer diagnosis!”


There are a variety of options for treating DCIS, including a watch and wait approach or simple lumpectomy.  One helpful understanding comes from Dr. John Lee, who considered DCIS to be the result of metabolic dysfunction involving progesterone deficiency and estrogen dominance.  According to Dr. Lee, if the underlying hormonal cause is not corrected, the condition could develop in the other breast as well, or recur in the same breast after treatment.  Thus, his recommendation is to always include a focus on balancing one’s hormones and that each DCIS case should be evaluated individually as to whether surgery should also be involved or not.

How likely is it that DCIS will turn into cancer?  It seems this is difficult to assess with various sources suggesting widely varying guesses.  But the real issue is the starting definition and whether DCIS, when first diagnosed, is cancer or not.  The concern here is that great fear goes along with this very common “cancer” diagnosis and risky treatment procedures are often recommended.  Being as informed as possible may reduce the fear and allow a woman to feel she has time to look into the issues for herself and possibly get a second or even third medical opinion.

The good news is that, if DCIS is just a pre-cancerous condition, then a woman can rest easier knowing she does not have cancer and that either a watch and wait approach or a minimal surgical procedure may be all she needs!

Tanya Harter Pierce, M.A. LMFT, is the author of OUTSMART YOUR CANCER:   Alternative Non-Toxic Treatments That Work

For more information visit her website:

No Sex for 48 Hours before your PSA Test!

by  Tanya Harter Pierce

With prostate cancer being the most common cancer diagnosis among men, an easy non-invasive blood test for the cancer marker called “prostate specific antigen,” or PSA, is a useful diagnostic tool.   But it is not a perfect cancer marker.  For example, up to three-quarters of all men with an elevated PSA do NOT have cancer, and about one-fifth of men known to have prostate cancer, have normal PSA levels.  Even so, to ensure the most accurate PSA count possible, there are certain things a man can do ¾ or more accurately, can AVOID doing  ¾ before getting his PSA level tested.  Abstaining from sex for up to 48 hours before having one’s blood drawn is one of them.

A quick Internet search reveals numerous medical sites recommending that men abstain from any type of sex for 1-2 days before a PSA test (with 48 hours being a commonly recommended length of time.)  Otherwise, a man’s test results may be skewed and indicate an artificially elevated PSA count.  Such medical sites recommending this are, and NHS.UK (the National Health Service of England), among others.  Why do these public resources recommend abstaining?  Because it has been found that ejaculation is often associated with a temporary increase in the amount of PSA in the blood.

Other Activities to Avoid As Well

However, keep in mind that ejaculation is not the only non-cancer reason a man’s PSA may be temporarily elevated.  For example, it has long been known that some medical conditions, such as a urinary tract infection, can also artificially raise a man’s PSA count.  Moreover, many sources recommend that, for 48 hours before a test, men should also avoid any physical activity that puts extra pressure on the prostate gland.  This includes riding a bike or motorcycle, having anal sex, or undergoing a prostate biopsy.  Even getting a digital rectal exam (DRE), where a doctor feels the shape and texture of a man’s prostate gland by inserting his gloved fingers into the rectum, can temporarily increase a man’s PSA count due to the pressure put on the gland.  This can be particularly confounding because it is common for a doctor to perform a DRE just before his patient is sent off to get his blood drawn for the PSA test.  Thus, men may want to ask their doctor to have the blood drawn first, then perform the DRE in order to achieve a more reliable reading.

Various studies have come up with differing conclusions, however, and this has sparked a controversy over whether certain activities need to be avoided before a PSA test or not.  Stephen B. Strum, MD. is an oncologist who believes there is enough reason for concern to take a cautionary stance.  In his article on the PSA controversy, published in the December, 2012 issue of Life Extension Magazine, Dr. Strum stated:

“The numerous articles on the effect of ejaculation on PSA, and free PSA are not in uniform agreement; and in light of this unresolved controversy I recommend that men going for PSA testing should be informed that no ejaculation should occur for 48 hours prior to PSA testing.  In 30 years of work in this field, I have never had a single patient acknowledge that this has been discussed with him.  In addition, any kind of manipulation of the prostate ¾ be it a DRE (digital rectal exam) or bicycle riding should be avoided as well.  Given the lack of consensus findings on all of these issues, there is no downside to following these recommendations.”

Why there is a lack of agreement among researchers is unclear, but other experts besides Dr. Strum also believe there is enough evidence to warrant precaution.  For example, Dr. Stacy Loeb, an internationally recognized prostate cancer researcher with 290 published peer-reviewed articles and the host of the Men’s Health Show on Sirius XM110, explains that:

“Trauma to the prostate and ejaculation may affect PSA levels, so it is a good idea to avoid activities such as vigorous cycling and ejaculation for a few days before getting a PSA test.”

Why You Don’t Want an Artificially High PSA Score

Is it really worth it for a man to abstain from sex, motorcycle and bike riding, and some other activities, for 48 hours ¾ not to mention having to tell his doctor that he wants his blood drawn first before the DRE is performed?  Yes!  The most important reason may be that a needle biopsy of the prostate gland is often recommended for men with a PSA of 4 or more to check if they have cancer.  However, the needle biopsy procedure involves multiple needle pricks through the wall between the rectum and the prostate gland and there is a some risk of the procedure causing an infection that can be serious.  Also, according to the Diagnostic Center for Disease in Sarasota, Florida, if a man does have cancer in his prostate, then the needle biopsy procedure, with its multiple needle pricks, may spread the cancer cells outside the gland.  This can potentially cause a small localized tumor to turn into metastasized cancer sooner than it normally would have if left alone.   For more information, readers can go to the Prostate Cancer Foundation’s website at and download a free 2019 Prostate Cancer Patient Guide.

Tanya Harter Pierce, M.A. LMFT, is the author of OUTSMART YOUR CANCER:  Alternative Non-Toxic Treatments That Work.  

For more information visit her Website:

Cancer and Vitamin C – timely information

by Mauris Emeka

Dr. Linus Pauling (1901-1994) won the Nobel Prize for chemistry in 1954.  During his career he and his associates discovered numerous health benefits of vitamin C.  Their research in the 1950s and 60s proved that unusually high doses of vitamin C can destroy cancer cells.  The only problem was that by taking vitamin C orally, even in high doses, less than 20 percent of it actually made its way to the bloodstream, which is where it needed to get.  When it is taken orally, any form of vitamin C first gets digested in the body’s digestive system, and that causes less than twenty percent of this vitamin to pass to the bloodstream and into the cells.  Dr. Pauling’s research shows that the body needs a lot more than twenty percent of the consumed vitamin C to shut down cancer cells. (For more details, see, and, Dr. Joseph Mercola’s website).

Sometime around 2008 it became more widely known that well over twenty percent of vitamin C could be carried into the bloodstream by injecting it directly into a person’s veins. Intravenous (or IV) vitamin C bypasses the digestion process, and a significant percentage (sometimes as much as 80 percent) goes directly to the bloodstream, and on into the cells where it destroys cancer cells without hurting healthy cells. (See ‘IV Vitamin C Kills Cancer Cells’ by Dr. Julian Whitaker).

Intravenous (IV) vitamin C must be administered by physicians. Many naturopath physicians administer it, and to locate a physician in your area, go to (or call 800-532-3688).  Most medical offices charge roughly $100 to $125 per appointment to administer IV vitamin C. Therefore, numerous IV appointments can become costly.

Within the last 5 years some very helpful information has come to light regarding taking vitamin C orally to help overcome cancer.  It has been shown that something called Liposomal Encapsulated Vitamin C taken orally and in very large amounts actually bypasses the body’s digestive system and goes right to the bloodstream.  Some who are challenged with cancer have been known to get good results from taking as much as 25 to 50 grams or more of Liposomal Encapsulated Vitamin C several times a week.  As much as 80 percent of this type of vitamin C goes directly to the bloodstream and into the cells.  Some have stated that Liposomal Encapsulated Vitamin C may be even more effective than IV vitamin C for shutting down cancer cells.

Fortunately, Liposomal Encapsulated Vitamin C can be made at home in one’s kitchen.  The following 3 easily obtainable ingredients are needed in order to make it:  1.) non GMO vitamin C powder (also called ascorbic acid), 2.) non GMO lecithin, and 3.) distilled water. These ingredients must first be mixed together using a food blender, and then mixing them with a device called an Ultrasonic Cleaner.  Currently, not much is written about how to make this highly valuable and little-known vitamin C solution.  However, one can go to and view videos that explain step by step how to make Liposomal Encapsulated Vitamin C.  A very helpful video can be accessed by going online to:

Why does a high amount of vitamin C destroy cancer cells? The publication called Science Daily notes that cancer cells do not have large amounts of the enzyme called catalase. On the otherhand, healthy cells have large amounts of catalase. Once in the bloodstream vitamin C breaks down easily, it interacts with metals in the body (especially iron) which then forms hydrogen peroxide. Hydrogen peroxide damages the DNA of cancer cells.  Since cancer cells have little to no catalase enzymes they are unable to remove the resulting large amounts of hydrogen peroxide.  Therefore, large amounts of hydrogen peroxide cause the destruction of cancer cells.  (See  But fortunately, healthy cells are not adversely affected by excessive amounts of hydrogen peroxide caused by high amounts of vitamin C, and it’s because healthy cells can control the additional amounts of hydrogen peroxide with their catalase enzymes. Therefore, very high amounts of vitamin C in the bloodstream destroys cancer cells while leaving healthy cells unharmed.

It is also important to note that high amounts of this vitamin are known to strengthen the all-important immune system, plus, it reduces inflammation. (Reference, a vitamin C study done by scientists at the Riordan Clinic).

      British sailors died by the thousands from a disease called scurvy in the 18th and 19th centuries.  In 1783 a Scottish naval surgeon named James Land discovered that an unknown nutrient called vitamin C from citrus fruits prevented scurvy.  His findings were largely ignored for about 40 years.  But eventually everyone got the message that vitamin C was the answer to scurvy. (See the book’ Fear Cancer No More’, 2nd edition).  As for cancer, Vitamin C may not be the only answer but it is certainly a huge step in the right direction.

In closing, remember this: research has proven that bypassing the body’s digestive system and getting large amounts of Vitamin C directly into the bloodstream can be a significant step in halting the growth and spread of cancer cells.  Fortunately, vitamin C is known to be completely safe and non-toxic to the body in any amounts.


Additional References: Ascorbate: The Science of Vitamin C. by Dr. Stephen Hickey & Dr. H. Roberts **  Primal Panacea, copyright 2011, by Dr. Thomas Levy **  The Complete Guide to Alternative Cancer Treatments  (A publication of the Alternative Cancer Research Institute) ** IV Vitamin C Kills Cancer Cells (Feb. 2014) by Dr. J. Whitaker ** Fear Cancer No More, copyright 2013, by M. Emeka **  Health Benefits of Liposomal Vitamin C by Dr. David Jockers ** ** Research at the West Virginia School of Medicine, 1994, by Dr. Donald Lamm ** .

Mauris Emeka lives in Port Orchard, WA.  He is a retired Army officer whose wife died from cancer, and he has since authored and published two books about cancer and nutrition.

His website is  and email address is    


Prostate Cancer – Do Testosterone-Blocking Drugs Help?

November 20, 2018    |    Prostate Cancer & Hormone Therapy

by Tanya Harter Pierce, M.A., MFCC

Author of OUTSMART YOUR CANCER: Alternative, Non-Toxic Treatments that Work.

Prostate Cancer - Outsmart Your CancerProstate cancer is one the most commonly diagnosed types of cancer and testosterone-blocking drugs, such as Lupron and Casodex, are often prescribed for it.  However, conventional medicine has NOT had significant success curing prostate cancer, especially once the cancer has metastasized, and this is largely because of some common misunderstandings about the PSA and testosterone that have propagated throughout mainstream medicine.  These misunderstandings should have been challenged and abandoned decades ago.  But since they weren’t, men with prostate cancer need to educate themselves and gain a better understanding than their doctors.

First, here are some basics about prostate cancer.  For most of the past century, prostate cancer occurred primarily in older men and was slow-growing in most cases ¾ so slow-growing, in fact, that men over 65 could often simply live with their cancer without receiving any treatment at all.  This was because they had a good chance of dying of old age before dying from their cancer.  However, according to cancer treatment specialist, Dr. Contreras of the Oasis of Hope Hospital, recent years are showing more and more cases of aggressive (or fast-growing) prostate cancers being diagnosed.  Men at younger and younger ages are developing prostate cancer and the younger cases tend to have a higher incidence of aggressive forms.

Since men are being diagnosed with prostate cancer at younger and younger ages and often face more aggressive forms of it today, they don’t have the luxury of being able to ‘live with it’ as was common in years past.   Thus, there are many more men today who MUST receive effective treatment or their prostate cancer will kill them.  Unfortunately, the types of treatment offered by conventional medicine are problematic.  The four main conventional options are:  (1) Surgery, (2) Radiation, (3) Chemotherapy, and

(4) Hormone Therapy (hormone-blocking drugs).

The surgical option involves removal of all or part of the prostate gland.  This may sound good at first, but it is often an imasculating procedure with a high likelihood of some degree of impotence occurring as a result.  Also, some men experience difficulty holding their urine post-surgery.  Radiation also sounds powerful and may seem to be a good option, but can actually causes localized prostate cancer cells to mutate into more aggressive forms in some cases and provides no curative benefit once the cancer has metastasized.  Unfortunately, chemotherapy has no long-term curative effect on prostate cancer, either, in most cases ¾ especially once the cancer has metastasized.  That just leaves hormone-blocking drugs, and this is where the MOST ludicrous and dangerous misunderstandings occur in conventional prostate cancer treatment.

One of the biggest fallacies in mainstream medicine is the idea that blocking testosterone will inhibit the growth of prostate cancer!

There is no actual proof that blocking testosterone inhibits prostate cancer growth.  There is only proof that it lowers the PSA count in most cases.  (I’ll get to that next.)  Moreover, prostate cancer has always been much less common in men between the ages of 18 and 25, which is when testosterone levels are typically at their highest.  In fact, years ago, prostate cancer was virtually never seen in younger men at all and is only being observed now in young men because ALL types of cancer are showing up at younger and younger ages.  You would think that, if testosterone does in fact feed or promote prostate cancer in any way, then we’d have always seen the highest rates of this type of cancer in younger men.  Common sense tells us that testosterone is not the culprit, but we don’t have to rely on common sense.  There is plenty of scientific evidence to back this up, which I go into detail about in Chapter 20 of my book.

The really sad thing is that, not only does testosterone NOT promote prostate cancer, but lowering testosterone activity in a man always causes the man to become estrogen-dominant, and estrogen-dominance always promotes cancer growth!  If you don’t believe that hormone-blocking drugs cause estrogen-dominance, just look at the common side effects of Lupron and Casodex.  Englarged breasts, hot flashes, and reduced libido are all signs of estrogen-dominance in a man.

So, why do doctors think that blocking testosterone will reduce cancer growth?  Well, it’s because artificially reducing testosterone, does reliably make a man’s PSA count go down.  So, that’s good, right?  Wrong.  A man’s body uses testosterone to make PSA.  It’s like needing flour to make a cake.  No flour, no cake.  Likewise, reduced testosterone, reduced PSA count.  The sinister problem is that oncologists have never been taught this concept, so when they give a man Lupron or Casodex and see his PSA count go down, they think that means the cancer is going away.  It doesn’t.  It just means that the man’s body does not have enough flour to make the cake.  It’s as simple as that!

Plus, both testosterone and PSA have properties that actually help a man’s body fight the cancer.  So, by not allowing his body to utilize the full amount of testosterone and PSA he is able to make, and by making the man estrogen-dominant, the medical system is actually promoting cancer growth in men with prostate cancer.

It may be time for men to ‘just say no’ to hormone-blocking drugs.  And it may also be time for a fair evaluation of the true effectiveness of conventional prostate cancer treatment versus the much more effective non-toxic options that are available in the world of alternative medicine ¾ options that CAN even cure advanced metastasized cancer in many cases.

For a more detailed explanation of how testosterone and PSA function in regards to prostate cancer, you can read Chapter 20 of my book, OUTSMART YOUR CANCER or go to my website and blog at

The Deadly Roller Coaster of Remission, Recurrence. . .

by Tanya Harter Pierce, M.A., MFCC

Author of OUTSMART YOUR CANCER: Alternative, Non-Toxic Treatments that Work.

Most of us know of a family member or friend who got a clean scan following cancer treatment and was declared “all clear” by their oncologist.  The doctor may have even said “Looks like we got it all!”  But then, a few months later, the cancer was back.  (Sort of like they got it all, but now it’s here again.) What REALLY happened was they never got it all in the first place.

The important concept to understand is that a clear scan does NOT mean no cancer.  It just means there are no groupings of cancer cells big enough for the unaided human eye to see on a scan. 

Remember, all cells of the body are microscopic in size and that includes cancer cells.  I was told by a biochemist specializing in cancer that about 9 million cancer cells can fit on the head of a pin.  (The old-fashioned type of sewing pin.)   A tiny dot that size ¾ which could represent millions of cancer cells ¾ or even many tiny dots that size, could easily be missed when looking at a PET, MRI, or CT scan.  Thus, the first clear scan after treatment should never be taken to mean the cancer is all gone.

One might think, “Then treatment should be continued a little longer.”  But when using highly toxic conventional treatments, such as chemotherapy and/or radiation, the treatment HAS to be stopped as soon as the scans or other tests can’t “see” any cancer.  This is because continuing treatment any longer than absolutely necessary runs too high a risk of killing the patient!   For this reason, and because there also have to be breaks in the treatment in order to not kill the patient with during the treatment phase, it is almost always the case that there are still active cancer cells in the patient’s body when they get their first clear scan.  The doctors know this, even though they may allow you to believe you are free of cancer.  That’s why the phrase “You are in remission” is used so often, not “You are cured.” And, toxic conventional treatments so often depress the person’s immune system, any cancer cells left active in the body have an easy time of proliferating and spreading once again.  (Which is what they are good at.)

This is the roller-coaster of remission-recurrence-remission-recurrence . . . often until the patient dies. I refer to it as “deadly” because of how each round of toxic treatment not only kills some cancer, but it also weakens the patient’s vital organs and immune system.  Thus, every time the cancer grows back again, the person is most likely in an even weaker state.  It is a travesty that oncologists don’t take responsibility for the shortcomings of the treatment when this happens because the patient often ends up feeling that he or she has failed somehow when their cancer recurs.  In reality, they did NOT fail.  It was the type of treatment they were given that failed.

Could it be different with an alternative cancer cure?  Yes!  And the reason is because alternative cancer treatments are NOT toxic, thus breaks in the treatment do not have to be inserted, and the patient does not have to stop the treatment as soon as they get an all-clear scan.

Alternative Cancer Treatments Allow for Continual Use

Here, readers may be exasperated and want to say once more, “Yes, but don’t cancer treatments HAVE to be toxic?  How else can the cancer be killed?”  The answer is that cancer CAN be killed with non-toxic, smart approaches and the reason is because these types of alternative approaches target certain characteristics of cancer cells and also allow for continual use.

“Continual use” is an extremely important concept and the main reason why non-toxic approaches are BETTER at bringing about long-term cures than toxic ones.  Because alternative approaches are non-toxic and don’t harm healthy cells, a cancer patient can use them on a constant basis ¾ every day, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week without breaks in treatment ¾ for as many months or years as it takes to get rid of all the cancer and then for a while after scans show all clear, just to be on the safe side.

A Woman Who Avoided the Roller Coaster

A good example of how powerful the continual use of a non-toxic treatment can be comes from an Australian woman named Tricia.  Tricia did not know she had cancer until she was suddenly diagnosed in 2006 with such a late stage of breast cancer that it had already spread to most of her bones.  The cancer was estrogen receptor positive, and besides being in one breast, it was also heavily metastasized to the bones of her shoulders, ribs, pelvis, hips, legs, spine and even to her skull.  Her doctors did not attempt to cure her because they knew that was hopeless.  They simply went in surgically to put titanium rods into some of her bones so that she would not crumble.

Tricia already knew about the liquid alternative called “Protocel,” so she decided to make that non-toxic formula her primary approach.  To give Protocel time to get rid of her cancer, she also agreed in the beginning to  5 doses of radiation and 4 doses of chemo along with 5 months of the estrogen-blocking drug Tamoxifen.   Tricia was also very aggressive in her use of Protocel and took it every 4 hours around the clock every single day, including overnight.

Tricia’s recovery was laboriously slow but steady because, as the cancer came out of her bones, her bones had to heal.  She could only lie in bed at first.  Then she was able to use a wheel chair to get around.  As she got better, she was able to walk with a walker.  Finally, she could use a cane until she no longer even needed the cane and was truly cancer-free.  It took over two years to achieve completely clear scans, but she continued to take the Protocel for a long time after she was in remission to make sure that she got every last microscopic cancer cell.

Happily, Tricia enjoyed her new chance at life and loved interacting with her new granddaughter.  She helped many other cancer patients in Australia to recover and had many years of living life to the fullest.  Unfortunately, she died suddenly years later due to a blood infection from an infected tooth.  All of us who knew this loving, generous person were devastated.  Her daughter emailed me to inform me that an autopsy had been performed and Tricia had still been cancer-free when she died, which was at least some consolation.

Tricia’s recovery was truly phenomenal, given how late stage her cancer was, and not everyone at this late stage of disease will have complete success.  But the truth is that there are many case stories presented in my book of people with metastasized cancer who were told by their oncologist that there was no cure for them, who then went on to cure themselves through the use of a non-toxic approach such as Protocel, Cesium High pH Therapy, Laetrile, Flaxseed Oil and Cottage Cheese, Dr. Burzynski’s Antineoplastons, or one of the other “alternative” cancer cures out there.  I eventually lost count of how many thriving people had said their doctor told them to get their affairs in order.

Though there are never any guarantees, but Tricia’s story and others like hers tell us that these types of recoveries CAN happen in the world of non-toxic cancer treatments.  And it’s all because of two things:

(1)  Alternative approaches have powerful ways of killing or otherwise getting rid of cancer, and

(2)  Alternative approaches are always non-toxic, which makes it possible to avoid the deadly roller-coaster of “remission, recurrence, remission, recurrence . . . ” until one dies.

For more information go to


Intermittent Fasting, Ketogenic Diet and Cancer

by Mauris Emeka

Admittedly, fasting is not an easy thing to do for most of us. But if there are serious concerns about either preventing or overcoming cancer it can motivate one to consider fasting. Here’s hoping this article proves to be timely and helpful.

In the early part of the last century, before the use of pharmaceutical drugs, fasting played a vital role in healing.   Within the last five years something called intermittent fasting has been increasingly observed as a way to prevent and help overcome cancer.  Studies show that fasting is good for cleansing and recharging the body, reducing harmful free radicals, and strengthening the all-important immune system.  In effect, the body’s own healing power gets a boost.  How, then, does intermittent fasting play a role, and why is it helpful against cancer?

First, it needs to be understood that cancer cells generate energy by consuming one and only one nutrient – and that nutrient is called glucose.  Without glucose cancer cells begin starving. In addition, cancer cells consume glucose every minute of each 24-hour day.  On the other hand, healthy cells are not limited to glucose for generating energy; and healthy cells do not need to generate energy every minute of a 24-hour day.

Intermittent fasting beats cancer

Intermittent fasting involves establishing a routine of eating two meals spread over about a 6-hour period during the day. A common practice for carrying out this routine is to eat lunch at 12:30 to 1 pm, and eat dinner later that day at 5:30 to 6 pm; and then to avoid eating any solid food until the next afternoon at 1 pm. That completes an 18 to 19 hour fast. When this routine is done for several days, and assuming one eats the right foods, then this can greatly challenge the ability of cancer cells because it puts them on the road to starvation.

What are the foods we need to be concerned about?  As mentioned earlier, cancer cells generate their energy by consuming glucose, and large amounts of it.  The body makes glucose from sugar and simple carbohydrates from refined grains such as white flour and whole wheat flour. Glucose is also made from various refined foods and simple carbohydrates such as white potatoes, white rice, macaroni, spaghetti, pasta.  Any food that produces glucose and produces it fast is dearly loved by cancer cells.  Regrettably, that describes a high percentage of the food eaten in the USA.

The Ketogenic diet for cancer

As already mentioned, cancer cells need to consume glucose every minute of the day and night. That is not the case for healthy cells because they are not limited to glucose for producing energy. Healthy cells can also produce energy from something called ketones which comes from eating a ketogenic diet.  To follow the ketogenic diet one must avoid sugar and simple carbohydrates that were just noted. The ketogenic diet includes eating fresh fruits and vegetables (mostly vegetables), moderate amounts of animal proteins, and high amounts of good fats (such as unrefined coconut oil, butter, avocados, nuts). One can include small amounts of legumes such as lentils, black beans and lima beans; and since they are complex carbohydrates they are high in fiber and, unlike simple carbohydrates, they are slow to convert to glucose.  The ketogenic diet does not include highly processed hydrogenated fats. And the good news is that this diet produces ketones instead of glucose for generating energy.  Ketones are known to be much cleaner than glucose and the human body uses them more efficiently than glucose. In short, ketones can make cancer cells go by the wayside.

By following a ketogenic diet fasting routine for several days a week, and drinking lots of good water (i.e., high pH ionized water) it helps cleanse and detoxify the body and make for a stronger immune system.  The number of days to fast intermittently to get free of cancer depends on how far a particular cancer condition has advanced.

Fortunately, this fasting procedure is completely safe; also, assuming that one has commitment and discipline it can be easy to implement.  Professor Valter Longo of the University of Southern California is quoted as saying “…by undergoing a fasting-mimicking diet, you are able to let the body use sophisticated mechanisms to identify and destroy the bad but not the good cells in a natural way.”

Dr. David Jockers, DC, is an accomplished chiropractor who notes that one of the benefits of intermittent fasting is to normalize insulin within the body.  He also points out that fasting reduces inflammation and reduces oxidative stress – and that can be a great benefit for anyone challenged with cancer.

Research shows that fasting increases tumor killing T-cells, and it also strips away the covering from cancer cells, and that enables the immune system to recognize cancer cells and target them for destruction.  Dr. Thomas Seyfried, Professor of Biology at Boston College, has completed extensive study of cancer cells.  He presents proof that cancer cells can be destroyed with 5 to 10-day intermittent fasting when consuming the ketogenic diet. And since this diet produces ketones instead of glucose we can all be eternally grateful! The bottom line: intermittent fasting on its own can be a big help against cancer; and when it’s accomplished along with a ketone-rich diet this proven approach makes the body a place where cancer is NOT welcomed.


1.)  “Water Fasts as a potential Tactic to Beat Cancer” by Dr. Thomas Seyfried (from





Mauris Emeka is a retired U.S. Army officer whose wife died from cancer.  He resides in Port Orchard, Washington, and has since authored and published two books about cancer and nutrition.  

His website is

Addressing Cancer

by Mauris Emeka

“And God said, behold I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree in which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat.”   — Genesis 1:29

Suppose someone has an accident and sustains a serious cut. The medical response is to stop the bleeding, insure that no infection sets in, sew up the wound, bandage it up,  etc.. It’s about treating the cut to help insure that healing proceeds without delay.

Cancer is commonly dealt with in a similar manner. When medical tests reveal the presence of a cancerous tumor then the routine practice is to treat it like a localized injury, that is, find out just where the tumor is located, examine the size and characteristics, and proceed to treat the tumor by attempting to remove it surgically or with poisons. The focus is on the tumor, because the tumor is considered “the cancer”, and once the tumor(s) is eliminated then the patient is said to be “cancer free”.

Treating a cut as a localized injury is fine, but cancer is not a localized health problem. The tumor is not “the cancer”. The tumor is a symptom of a process that has gone wrong.  Unless we change the commonly held perception of what cancer really is this disease will continue to threaten the life of nearly one out of two people. Cancer is not a thing — that is, it’s not something that one can see or touch.  Cancer is a malfunctioning PROCESS that produces tumor symptoms.

Think of a fire, and smoke rising from the fire. The smoke is an indication or symptom of the fire. Obviously, swatting the smoke does not put out the fire. Similarly, when cancer is involved, getting rid of the tumor SYMPTOM without addressing the underlying cause is not sufficient. The focus needs to be on putting out the fire, that is, doing things to halt the underlying process that produced the tumor. That process is fueled by:  1.) a weak immune system and often excessive inflammation, 2.) a deficiency of oxygen and digestive enzymes in the body, and 3.) overall body chemistry that’s acidic (as opposed to alkaline).

The good news is that with commitment and resolve we each can positively influence the 3 points just mentioned. Let us stop responding to cancer as if it was an isolated medical problem. Cancer calls on us to respond holistically by drastically changing the environment within our body so that the underlying process that produces tumor symptoms cannot proceed. To be sure, it’s about how we nourish our body and live our life each day.

“Most cancer patients don’t die from their tumors – they die of malnutrition, toxemia, and/or infections. Proper nutrition can help address all of these.”    Hungry for Health by Susan Silberstein, PhD


Mr. Emeka is the author of “Fear Cancer No More”, copyright 2002, and “Cancer’s Best Medicine”, 2nd edition, copyright 2008.