In Sydney recently, 31 doctors from Europe, America, Australia and Japan assembled to hold the first world congress on cancer with the emphasis being on non-intrusive treatments. Not surgery, not chemotherapy, not radiation, but natural and non-expensive treatments dealing with mental attitudes and nutrition.

The public, and especially medical practitioners, were invited to attend; however, the Australian Medical Association asked all doctors to boycott the congress. Why? A watchdog committee for the AMA was seen to be taking down the names of those doctors who dared to attend. A threat?

Jennie Burke, the daughter of a Sunshine Coast resident organised the conference. She received life-threatening phone calls. She said that no major newspaper would publicise the congress. On television, only Allan Jones took a real stand against the Cancer Institute's boycott. His show was axed within days. Coincidence?

One of the lectures given by an American doctor was on "the conspiracy of silence" regarding alternative treatments for cancer. Who gains by silencing alternative treatments? Especially those already approved by some qualified doctors and researchers? Jennie also had about 100,000 pamphlets advertising the congress 'disappear' on her. Who stands to gain by this conspiracy? Could it be the unimaginably powerful drug cartel which influences governments through the medical associations and has total monopoly of the cancer industry.

The head of the Department of Infectious Diseases at Sydney University, Ray Kearney, is on record stating that the incidence of cancer can be reduced through nutrition but he said, "Organised medicine is not interested in this. Why. I'll tell you. Because it costs nothing! That's the problem.... Cancer is an industry, a multi million dollar industry which doesn't want to give any credence to options which threaten surgery, radiation and chemotherapy."

In 1973, Dr Dean Burke, head of the cytochemistry section of the National Cancer Institute in the USA, issued an open letter to his own boss, Frank Rauscher, Director of the NCI, charging that virtually ALL conventional anti-cancer drugs in the institute's own studies had been found to CAUSE secondary cancer. "The Food and Drug Administration approved anti-cancer drugs, are toxic, immunoppressive and carcinogenic" he write. A blanket of silence fell over the American media. The most important news story of our time was squashed.

An eminent Australian doctor told this writer personally that the chemotherapy drug DTIC, which has been pulled off the market in the USA because of its disastrous effects, is still being off-loaded in third world countries AND IN AUSTRALIA.

The US Food and Drug Administration had to ban the use of Oestrogen for fattening cattle because it caused cancer in them. Too dangerous to have that in the food chain; however, five times that amount of oestrogen is used in certain contraceptive pills. Small wonder that so many surprisingly young women are going down with breast cancer. It seems we worry more about our cattle than our woman. It is frightening to note the increase of women's cancer since the advent of the pill.

Next time an appeal is made for money for cancer 'research', think twice about the Rockerfeller-Carnegie created tax-exempt foundation for cancer research which, with government grants, bequests and charity appeals and functions, already gain more than ten billion dollars a year. For fifty years we have been told "Thank you for your generous donations which have helped us move a little closer towards a cure for this dreaded disease." And we and the Government are regularly advised that "We are on the verge of a break-through in the cure of cancer." Big bucks, big business, big barbarity.