Woman, 28, used natural oxygen therapy to CURE her stage 4 mouth cancer - and now she's in remission
Sabrina Gauer was 27 years old when she learned a sore on the side of her tongue was actually stage 4 mouth cancer.
The singer had to have part of her tongue removed and reconstructed in an intensive surgery to carve out the aggressive oral squamous cell carcinoma tumor in October 2015.
When Gauer was told the next step in her treatment was radiation therapy, she opted for a controversial method against her doctor's recommendation: oxygen therapy.
Now, the 28-year-old from Rochester, New York, has been cancer-free for 20 months after spending six weeks in a hyperbaric oxygen therapy tank - and can still sing.
Controversial treatment huh?
Only pharmacological medicine would call promoting natural healing mechanism in the the body a controversial treatment. Let see hyperbolic chambers have been used in medicine longer than radiation with mild side effects that usually go away shortly after treatment while chemotherapy has dozens of side effects including nausea, vomiting, anemia and fertility problems that can be permanent.
Although hyperbaric oxygen therapy is recommended to treat burns, decompression sickness, carbon monoxide poisoning and radiation injuries, it isn't recommended to effectively treat cancer, according to the Mayo Clinic.
So these chamber cost around 10,000 to 15,000 dollars and can be used over and over again. Treatments are about 350 dollars with 28 treatments costing just under 10,000 dollars. Now Chemo can cost up to 30,000 dollars per person not include cancer drugs that can cost 1,000s more. Also, lets not forget all the surgeries people get before they try Chemo makes the pharmacology way very profitable for the medical equipment and drug companies. So it's no wonder why they don't recommend this treatment.
I bet this lady wished she would of tried the hyperbolic chamber before they cut half her tongue out.
Bet it was a big decision to go a controversial route.
It's not that big of a thing going against what is popular or standard, or approved, just look at their success rate. Then look at how much it costs to achieve that 'success'. After seeing that the establishment route is worse than doing nothing at all, the challenge becomes finding the better answer. There is tons of information out there, ready for anyone who can read and reason. I didn't know about hyperbarics when I needed something. There are many paths to health, it just requires persistence and time.
That's sounds so true.
Let's get some things straigh from the get go, shall we?
You may ask: why have secondary therapy if the surgery worked?
Excellent question. First off: in surgery you never know if you cut out all the cancer, leave some and the process will start again. Further more the cancer may have already spread to other organs and is yet undetected there. For these reasons it is recommendedd for people to undertake secondary therapy such as radiation therapy or chemotherapy. The function of this therapy is to kill the remaining cancer cells.
This oxygen therapy has, to my knowledge, not been proven to actually treat cancer. In my opinion the patient just got lucky that the surgery cured her and then spent money on a useless therapy.
The though that someone may read this choose oxygen therapy instead of radiation therapy and as a result develop secondary tumours is unacceptable to me.
If anyone has further questions I will anwser them gladly.
P.S. No i neither in the medical nor the pharmaceutical industry.
chemo kills your immune system
chemo targets dividing cells. ALL dividing cells so technically you are right. However cancer cells divide faster so they are more sensitive to it. Look I'm not saying chemo is perfect, but it has a proven record of efficacy which oxygen therapy does not.
A proven record of efficacity? lol how much is it? 3% recovery rate..
Are you relying on study from Australia from 2004 (13 years ago) that uses data from 1998 (19 years ago) because if so then may i inform you that during these two decades progress has been made.
Here is some newer data:
https://www.google.pl/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjEr9b87PjTAhVE2SwKHUTnAB4QFggxMAI&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cancer.org%2Fcontent%2Fdam%2Fcancer-org%2Fresearch%2Fcancer-facts-and-statistics%2Fcancer-treatment-and-survivorship-facts-and-figures%2Fcancer-treatment-and-survivorship-facts-and-figures-2014-2015.pdf&usg=AFQjCNHS7Gl5uLn7yAvX0Ql-Sz58iob-XQ&sig2=A8Kt-qAT_uK7sXsCYfn5tA
Check page 12 of the document tha details acute lymphotic leukemia, you can a see a large increase in the 5 year survival rate of pateints in all age groups.