The Secret Stranglehold The 1939 Cancer Act Has On England & Curing Cancer

Fact checked
1939 cancer act

Many residents in the UK and across the globe have never heard of the 1939 Cancer Act – or, as it is sometimes known as “The Cancer Act” of 1939.

What is it and why should you care?  Well, as topinfopost.com puts it, the 1939 Cancer Act is “a particularly restrictive and pernicious piece of legislation which prevents people from writing or speaking about the FACT that it is indeed possible to cure cancer using alternative methods.

Yes, you read that correctly:  The act is a piece of LAW that prevents people – including doctors – from writing or speaking about any other way to cure cancer than the approved method.  What is the “approved” method?  RADIATION.

Journalist John Smith writes:  The Cancer Act 1939, which you can read at www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/Geo6/2-3/13, was actually passed into British Law in 1939 to effectively give a monopoly to the emerging radiotherapy industry which believed at the time that the cure for cancer was the radioactive element radium.

As radium was hugely expensive to procure and to administer, the Act ensured that the government loan to the National Radium Trust (an independent non-governmental trust) would be secured by eliminating competing cancer treatments — it was the means of securing this business arrangement.

An Act to make further provision for the treatment of cancer, to authorise the Minister of Health to lend money to the National Radium Trust, to prohibit certain advertisements relating to cancer, and for purposes connected with the matters aforesaid. [The first paragraph in the Cancer Act 1939 introduction]

In the original Cancer Act 1939, in Section 3 (since repealed), the condition of the loan to the National Radium Trust was that “no money shall be lent under this section after the expiration of ten years from the commencement of this Act.” 

So it appears that this legislation was primarily to secure start-up capital the radiotherapy industry, which at that time was nationalized, although the loan did have provision for repayment: “Any sums received by the Minister by way of repayment of a loan under this section or by way of interest thereon shall be paid into the Exchequer.”

 This was therefore a piece of legislation principally defining a business arrangement, rather than one for public protection — the advertising restrictions are clearly secondary to the loan arrangement.

If you do any amount of research, you will find the justification of the 1939 Cancer Act was to ” ‘Protect the public from Quackery and Charlatans,’ ” – seriously, that is an excuse that has been given in the past.

A fascinating article from OrthoMolecular.com shows how the outdated acts still harshly affects people to this very day.  The article explains:

Most citizens of Great Britain are totally unaware of the 1939 Cancer Act which effectively prevents them from finding out about different treatments for cancer.

Excerpts from the UK 1939 Cancer Act:

“4 – (1) No person shall take any part in the publication of any advertisement – 

(a) containing an offer to treat any person for cancer, or to prescribe any remedy therefor, or to give any advice in connection with the treatment thereof; or 

(b) referring to any article, or articles of any description, in terms which are calculated to lead to the use of that article, or articles of that description, in the treatment of cancer.

In this section the expression “advertisement” includes any “notice, circular, label, wrapper or other document, and any announcement made orally or by any means of producing or transmitting sounds”. [1]

Publication of such advertisements is permitted to a very restrictive group comprising members of either House of Parliament, local authority, governing bodies of voluntary hospitals, registered or training to become registered medical practitioners, nurses or pharmacists, and persons involved in the sale or supply of surgical appliances. A very tight grip, therefore, is exercised on information that is fed to citizens of Great Britain; interestingly, the Act does not apply to Northern Ireland. 

That pretty much wraps it up, and wraps us (in Britain) up in the legal stranglehold that this outdated Act still exerts. Was this enacted to protect the citizens from charlatans and “quacks” or to safeguard the interests of the National Radium Trust, to whom the British Government lent money? If no one is allowed to tell us, how can we, the general public, ever find out what alternatives there are to those offered by mainstream medicine, mainly surgery, chemotherapy and radiotherapy? 

No Freedom of Therapy, Information, or Assembly

My colleague, Sarah Ling, and I unwittingly found ourselves in a maelstrom when we decided to hold a convention in Birmingham, later this year, to do just that – inform the general public about some of the other ways to tackle this hideous disease than those generally doled out to their mostly trusting, but fear-filled patients. A well-justified fear of the actual treatments as well as the disease prevails.

Last year, Sarah’s sister was diagnosed with an aggressive form of cancer. Chemotherapy was the only treatment offered, which she accepted out of fear. She nearly died within hours of having it, and very sadly died days afterwards. Sarah was determined to help prevent others from enduring such trauma and so, under the umbrella of our Institute (The Cambridge Institute of Complementary Health), we organised a convention to educate people – conventional/complementary health professionals and the general public – about different ways to treat people who have cancer. 

We quickly drew up a short list of speakers that we felt would have much to contribute, including Dr Stanislaw Burzynski who agreed to come and talk about his pioneering work on antineoplastins.

After posting our speakers on our web-site, one, an oncologist, pulled out due to a malevolent e-mail she had received, questioning her wisdom at sharing a platform with Dr Burzynski. She didn’t want to cause her team any controversy. We then discovered that we had attracted a lot of adverse attention that was derogatory, critical of our speakers, casting aspersions on them and on us as an organisation. Unfortunately Dr Burzynski decided not to come – so as not to expose us to the sort of attacks that he has suffered. Regrettably, the public lost an opportunity to hear first-hand of his pioneering treatments in tackling cancers, including inoperable brain tumours.

Two speakers down, we then found ourselves possibly contravening the archaic Cancer Act. We’ve had to be extremely careful in how we word any publications relating to the convention so that the Advertising Standards Agency doesn’t come down on us like a ton of bricks and prevent us from holding it at all. Britain cherishes its long-held tradition of freedom of speech, but in recent years that seems questionable. However, we can still hold debates, and that is what we are doing. 

We are aware that efforts will be made to stop us, from those who are not seekers of truth. If they were truly interested in the welfare of people, they would be advocating most of the alternative/complementary approaches instead of deriding them and trying to close down clinics and individuals who practise them, via the Advertising Standards Agency. This ridiculous Act affords them the guise of protecting the public and gives them ammunition that they can use against persons advocating alternatives.

We can’t hold an open day of education on treating cancer in this country: how bizarre is that? How much longer can this information be contained? 

The Cost of Ignorance
 

The UK National Health Service is overstretched and, as more and more people contract cancer (one in three presently), the rising costs of expensive and often ineffective treatments will surely mean they have to look at alternatives.

Conventional healthcare professionals are too often ignorant of the enormous value of unconventional treatments. How can they be otherwise, as those outside of their profession are prohibited from alluding to the fact that they can help treat cancer? Shockingly, even nutrition is most often totally overlooked during orthodox cancer treatment, and the very foods that promote cancers are given to patients in our hospitals sometimes in order to maintain calorie intake. There is frequently no advice on diet, that most crucial aspect of our health. [2]

Thankfully, some oncologists do recognise the benefits that alternative/complementary treatments offer. [3] Hopefully more and more will come to accept that integrating the best of conventional and complementary/alternative methods is the way forward.

It is our opinion that a reform of the 1939 Cancer Act is long overdue. The tenacious grip that it holds on treating cancer must be relinquished, so that patients and their healthcare providers can make an informed choice as to what approach may be best for their individual needs.

8 Comments

  1. Loan, funding, 100% financing for your deals!

    LOW INTEREST RATES

    Rates as low as 3%! 0% interest rates for the first 6 months

    UNSECURED/NO COLLATERAL

    Do not need to leverage any assets to acquire capital

    NO RESTRICTIONS

    Funds can be used same as cash.

    FUNDING IN AS LITTLE AS 15 DAYS

    Quick approval process

    We don’t charge for submitting an application, we are paid solely on results.

    NO INCOME VERIFICATION

    Stated income only

    LOCATION

    Istanbul, Turkey

    Contact us today via email. arsenalloancenters@gmail.com

  2. The act of 1939 states that one cannot advertise that they offer a cure that they have in their possession for a said amount of money without the procedure or cure first being proven to the surgeon general to be affective to ensure the public is protected from snake oil salesmen and body organ thieves and so on. Although it is extremely difficult to have the surgeon general be in a position where this is ever possible. First the research and experimentation would have to be sanctioned funded approved which unless the source info is from government commissioned research to begin with they wont listen. Joe Blow isn’t gonna walk in and say “I have the cure… Try this.”, and them just do it. But what did happen actually, and factually is, The Heir in Right of the Throne Named in 1992 stated at that time that he wanted to figure out just that before taking the Throne. And I did. That’s Me. I found out the cure, tested it, made sure I believed in it then had pushed for a length of time and DID have it peer reviewed, DID have it approved for prescribed treatment and DID DELIVER. The international journal of Cancer research has the peer reviewed report and a Mr Benjamin Wortors Mother in Austrailia in January was the first official prescribed patient with pancreatic Cancer. I am Andrew T . The Son of Queen Elizabeth II Named Heir Apparent in right of the throne in her own words ” No Matter What” put years of my life into this. And The People Finally Win. We have a Cure That is proving above 83 percent effective in terminal stage cancers. But not in terminal Liver or brain Cancers. These need to be screened for and caught early. Happy Cancer Victory. There has been people died for withholding medical information from the public. The WHO has been pummeled by their disgusting involvement. As well as many pharmacy giants boards of directors canned and even a CEO and wife hung in Canada by angry outraged victims. It was a struggle for me as a member off the Royal family even to get this accomplished but I did it. With the help of many many good friends. Don’t be a victim. Find me. All you need is free info which I have for you all. SPS I wish you helped but you did not. You laughed at me. Thought I’d fail, And were sure nobody would ever hear my name. It’s what a real King would do. Not fail his people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.




This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.