If Ian Gawler did it then I can do it too | The Painful Unraveling of False Cancer Cure Claims

“If Ian Gawler did it, then I can do it too” is a worrying phrase; yet it is almost an expected mantra from patients who pursue the alternate cancer path or who have read You Can Conquer Cancer and consider taking the same approach.

Part 1:  “If Ian Gawler did it, then I can do it too” is a worrying phrase; yet it is almost an expected mantra from patients who pursue the alternate cancer path or who have read You Can Conquer Cancer and consider taking the same approach.

As someone who was personally involved in the Gawler recovery story from the very beginning; I consider I have a Duty of Care to patients and the community at large to keep on telling the story in context and correct the many errors and omissions made over the years in reporting it; even in medical journals! Being an advocate for patient rights and speaking the truth has come at great personal cost. It is also unfortunate that the young people who have been swayed by the natural cancer cure meme have paid a greater cost – they have paid with their lives.

The Ian Gawler cancer remission phenomenon is very much related to what has been happening in the Cancer “cure” news since my last blog on Survivorship where I discussed Jess Ainscough – alias The Wellness Warrior who recently died from her advanced cancer. A passionate follower of the modern Gerson Diet regimen – Jess was perhaps too young and easily influenced in her choices by elders in the “cancer movement” who should have known better. The best advice would be if you want to follow the Gerson Diet, do it in combination with the best medical treatment you can find!

Just as quickly as Social media viraling took patients like Jess to Facebook/internet fame – the materials and links associated with her Gerson diet cancer cure, have disappeared at the same light speed. I have just tried to download links to the following at: http://iangawler.com/youtube.html “A young person’s perspective- Interview with Ian Gawler by Jess Ainscough – Wellness Warrior: Jess chats on Skype with Ian informally about his experience with recovery and what was most important.” But – it has been taken down. The same of http://www.jessainscough.com/2013/03/healthtalks-speaking-at-ian-gawlers-surviving-cancer-event/ To read the actual PDF that has been removed: Select the following: JESS ainscough Gawler healthtalks

As you will read further in this blog, the same is happening with Belle Gibson Whole Pantry developer who claims she has had various cancers and, as a fundraiser, was supposed to donate large funds from her work to charity. Now the media has investigated her cancer claims – most of Belle Gibson’s 2010 – 2012 blogs are no longer available and a more in depth investigation is now underway.

Lantern Publishing stated that they published Belle Gibson’s recipe book in good faith without fact checking. For your interest, our own Grace Gawler Institute research into authors of natural cancer cure claims resulted in NOT ONE author who was able to substantiate their claims that they actually had cancer- although their books are written on how they recovered from it.  Astoundingly, no one could produce medical proof of diagnosis. There were a few others who claimed they had a natural cancer cure – but when there cases were examined  they had received medical treatments that they discounted as being helpful.

Maybe the dawn of ethics is upon us as we uncover the hidden truths about these people. Just check out the Lance Armstrong story to get a handle on that! Before publishing or promoting “stories” the media and book publishers surely have a duty to ensure that the “True Stories” they are publishing are indeed “true”.

Personally, despite the hype; in 40 years I have not seen the Gerson diet benefit cancer patients nor have I seen it create the remissions that are talked about and promoted. From personal experience; the Regimen is far too rigid and contains too many juices – I mean really; think about it –  is it natural to consume up to 9kg of vegetables in one day – juiced or otherwise?

Here is a brief summary of the story:
Early in Ian Gawler’s cancer diagnosis when it seemed that hope for his survival was exhausted; both he and I travelled the Gerson Diet path. I need to be clear that we did so because there was NO medical treatment on offer, so it wasn’t as if we had to choose one or the other……there was no other to choose from. It concerns me greatly that today cancer patients choose the Gerson Diet  INSTEAD of scientifically-based medicine.

My experience of The Gerson diet is best described in my Memoir Grace Grit and Gratitude: Contact me via the contact page and I will send you 2 free chapter downloads on this topic. We put a lot of effort into the Gerson Diet but Ian had a poor result. As Ian’s sole carer/girlfriend, at 21 years of age, it became my responsibility to organise the food and juices for him as he was too ill. It was the most stressful period of my life!

You can conquer cancer new edition
Me – Grace Gawler – disappointed with the new edition of You Can Conquer Cancer

As we progressed with the Gerson Diet and intensive Meditation that he practised according to the Meares method; his deterioration accelerated. He became bedridden. His weight peeled off day after day.  He experienced colic and severe pain with his condition deteriorating to such an extent that he was given a prognosis of 6 weeks. However, was his massive weight loss associated with his cancer? No: in reality it was a result of the Gerson Diet. We ceased the diet and over the coming months he gained weight although unknown to us at the time; he was carrying perhaps a far more silent and lethal killer than bone cancer; a condition that was to remain undiagnosed for the next 2.5 years!

To complicate things even further throughout the time of the Gerson Diet; there were other symptoms that were unaccounted for; massive night sweats, a productive cough and back pain, hydronephrosis; symptoms that were not medically related to Ian’s bone cancer. The fact is that Ian’s bone cancer diagnosis in 1975, proven by biopsy is likely unrelated to the development of the calcified masses in his groin, lung and on his chest that at the time were thought to be metastatic cancer.

Turn the clock forward to 2010, when two oncologists read my Correction of errors letter published in the MJA (Medical Journal of Australia). Once they knew there had been no biopsy for what was thought to be secondary cancer; the real diagnosis came to light. Amidst threats and controversy they eventually published their significant findings in the IMJ HAINES AND LOWENTHAL (2). What were the bony masses? They were calcified abscesses from Tuberculosis. The original TB remained undiagnosed for some time. The calcified abscesses were eventually dissolved by the body and the TB moved into his bones where it was diagnosed in 1978 and treated with conventional medicine.

I refer you to “Ian Gawler Cancer?” on the menu of this blog.

What really concerns me; I meet a lot a patients like Jess Ainscough who come to my practice with  the most horrendous of cancer conditions – mostly with weeping and  fungating tumours but also people ravaged by advanced cancer internally who have followed Gerson or similar to the exclusion of medical treatment.  Often they find me because of my “Gawler” name which I have kept intentionally to help put right the misconceptions about Ian Gawler’s recovery story. Because like Jess Ainscough they too believed they would be cured. They inevitably all say: “If Ian Gawler did it, then I can do it too!”

Moving on from Jess – yet another cancer entrepreneur hits the spotlight today and yesterday: Today’s Australian newspaper has a front page article about Belle Gibson titled: “Mega-Blogger casts doubt on Cancer Claim” by Richard Guilliatt: “A MELBOURNE social media entrepreneur Belle Gibson, whose story of miraculous survival from terminal cancer helped launch a global “health and wellness” business, has admitted that her claim of suffering multiple life-threatening cancers may be false”.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/business/mega-blogger-belle-gibson-casts-doubt-on-her-own-cancer-claims/story-e6frg8zx-1227255933051

And…..Yesterday’s Sydney Morning Herald also had an article – but the emphasis was different with funds to Charities not delivered by Bell Gibson:

http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/digital-life-news/charity-money-promised-by-inspirational-health-app-developer-belle-gibson-not-handed-over-20150308-13xgqk.html

In recent times social media has played a pivotal role in the promotion of non proven cancer “cure” cases. It has become a breeding ground for spreading false stories and raising funds. It makes it challenging for genuine people seeking funding for cancer treatment. How does one separate the wheat from the chaff?  You need to use critical thinking skills and ask trusted sources. You might not always like what you hear. It’s hard to believe that people cheat, lie, fabricate, self delude, deceive through omission etc when it comes to cancer – but they do and it is not new! They used to be called Snake oil salesmen and saleswomen.

The recent exposure of deception and fraud in natural cancer medicine serves an important community lesson – buyer Beware!

Other Links of Interest:

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/health-science/first-wife-disputes-cancer-guru-ian-gawlers-survival-story/story-e6frg8y6-1225935666765

http://www.smh.com.au/national/health/too-good-to-be-true-20120420-1xcgn.html

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/opinion/opinion-advocates-of-alternative-therapies-are-gambling-with-patients-lives/story-fnihsr9v-1227252912780

Take care and be safe with your one precious life!

Grace

Cancer Vaccines | A survivors story|From Cancer Good Things Grow Grace Gawler

I encored a recent interview with Jeffery Deslandes on my Voice America Internet radio show today for the Christmas period for a special reason. Because his story is both true and inspirational.

I encored a recent interview with Jeffery Deslandes on my Voice America Internet radio show today for the Christmas period for a special reason. Because his story is both true and inspirational. As Jeffrey quotes in his recently released ;  book; “From Cancer Good Things Grow”;  there are about 4,000 new cases of NHL each year in Australia. 1600 Australian die from NHL each year. If this were our road toll and there was an effective way of preventing deaths of even half of that number – there would be campaigns and lots of public and political interest. Why is there such little  interest in cancer immunotherapies? Jeffrey Deslandes is just one of many who have had success with vaccine treatments.

The questions begs – Have we become so conditioned to believing that cancer is a one-way ticket and there’s nothing we can do apart from try alternative medicine and throw out the “conventional medicine” baby with the bathwater?  Have we been convinced that conventional cancer medicine doesn’t work and that all big Jeffrey Deslandes Book 001pharma wants you to do is stay sick to garnish the pockets of doctors?  Have we bought into the rumour that the war on cancer is lost?  These are common statements from the Google cancer entrepreneurs whose aim is to convince patients to follow them, buy their “one size fits all” cancer products and……… take no responsibility for patient outcomes.

I know of far too many  patients who are not here to be with their families this Christmas because they used “faceless” advice from books, CDs or the internet – leaving aside treatable and potentially curable treatments for their cancer until it became obvious that their attempts to replicate the “cures” they have read about; ultimately failed them. This year I have experienced a new phenomenon, receiving many emails from parents who have taken the natural cancer “healing” path with their children using bizarre nutritional regimens, GcMAF, Budwig and Gerson Diets to name a few – most read about these treatments on blogs. Some of these children have been 3 and 5 years of age.  I try my best to influence them towards excellent sources of conventional medicine – but after a few emails – I never hear from them again. This is truly exasperating!!

Genuine, well documented  stories of cancer treatment successes are much needed. Such is the story of how Melbournian Jeffery Deslandes recovered from Stage 4 recurrent lymphoma that had grown resistant to conventional treatment found his remission – now eight and a half years clear. Jeffery did not seek Alternative medicine treatments when his lymphoma recurred again and again; rather he looked outside the conventional box to see what else science-based medicine could offer.

By purchasing Jeffrey Deslandes book (soft Cover /eBook) – you can help to promote the immune therapy he had right here in Australia. All proceeds go toward making this treatment more available for those in our region. PLEASE spread the good news. Vaccine therapies as immunotherapies go wider than just lymphoma. Successes are appearing from many cancer types including melanoma, prostate cancer and many more. If these therapies can be investigated alongside immune cycle research; we may indeed have a two incredibly power non invasive cancer treatment allies. Scroll to end of blog to see the effect of melanoma vaccine.**

Excerpts from Jeffrey Deslandes book “From Cancer Good things Grow”.

 

Chapter 7 -The cancer Returns Again and Again

Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma is a bit like buffalo grass; it is hard to get out all of the roots and it tends to grow back. I had been informed that my cancer was incurable. It was a real shock at the time.
Non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL) is Australia’s fifth most common cancer, yet has a very low profile, compared to more publicised cancers such as breast, ovarian, bowel, melanoma and leukaemia. There are about 4,000 new cases of NHL each year in Australia, with about 1,600 deaths each year. That’s about the same as the National Road Toll in this country. Each year we spend billions trying to stop idiots killing each other on the road, yet comparatively little on a disease which is poorly understood. While Australia’s economy is soon to be taxed with the introduction of a Carbon Tax to combat Climate Change. Funny that, I have never known anyone who has died from Climate Change, but I have known scores and scores of people who have succumbed to cancer. We need Governments to spend serious money on cancer research.

After my cancer had returned for the fourth time in 2006, the next mainstream cancer treatment outlined by my specialist, was an autologous stem cell transplant. An autologous stem cell transplant, refers to your own body’s stem cells being first harvested, you are then given high-dose chemotherapy to hopefully kill all cancer in your body, and your stem cells

Jeffrey Deslandes
Jeffrey Deslandes

are then re-infused to build up your white cells, which have been decimated by the chemotherapy. The other option was an allogeneic stem cell transplant; the same procedure but the stem cells are used from a matched donor who is obviously free from cancer. However, for this we would need to find a matched donor, since my brother Ron was not a match, and other brother David was no longer with us. I decided not to take the recommendation of my highly trained lymphoma specialist. I decided that I would need to take charge of my treatment, and find something with a different mode of attack. If something is not working, you don’t keep hitting it with the same old stick! Read on,,,,,,,,

Chapter 8 – Vaccine Therapy–The New Beginning

Through my association with Lymphoma Australia, a fine not-for-profit organisation dedicated to raising awareness and supporting lymphoma patients, I became aware of work being done on vaccines for cancer treatment. This work was still experimental or being proven in clinical trials, but it was not quackery, it was being carried out by highly qualified haematologists and scientists.

My diseased lymph node, and my immature dendritic cells, were processed in the laboratory to manufacture a dendritic cell idiotype vaccine to fight the cancer. It is termed idiotype, because the vaccine is grown from my own cancer cells, and is thus specifically tailored to the idiosyncrasies of my cancer. It is worth noting that there are over 30 sub-types of lymphoma alone, and it is my understanding that each and every lymphoma is going to be somewhat different in its individual characteristics. By using my own lymphoma, we got a perfect match, the exact antibody to my cancer. The laboratory grew the vaccine formulation to make 33 doses of vaccine, which were stored at minus 196 °C in liquid nitrogen, and could be kept for perpetuity. Each dose of vaccine is about 1 ml, about a fifth of a teaspoon, but it contains about five million cells. Yes, that’s five million cells, each with a message for my immune system. The message was “this is what the cancer looks like, now do your job like you are supposed to, and go seek and destroy”.  Excerpt: “From Cancer Good Things Grow”

Help save a life ……… Readers of this blog – please help us to help others through cancer education. By passing on this blog or an episode from Voice America – you could also help cancer patients to re-frame their cancer experience and learn about the nature of cancer and how to outsmart it with science-based medicine.

May your Christmas season be filled with joy, love, passion and compassion….

Until next time….

Grace

**Warning:  Below – graphic image melanoma – positive results from repeated vaccine cancer treatments.

Conclusions: Prolonged, repetitive VMCL vaccination immunotherapy appears to be a clinically effective means
of generating relatively high CR rates, useful clinical responses and long-term survivals, with little toxicity, but
remains notably under-explored. Successive immunomodulation might explain the results. Closer analysis of
repetitive dosing is required.

Melanoma vaccines
Successful application of repeated dosing with Melanoma vaccines. Research- Brendon Coventry

Out on a limb – the importance of re-examining the cause of Ian Gawler’s ‘remission’ – Grace Gawler comments

Visit:  https://theconversation.edu.au/coffee-enemas-dont-cure-cancer-reviewing-the-remarkable-claims-of-ian-gawler-5242

Hopefully this series of blogs will answer the many questions that cancer patients and the public are asking about how Ian Gawler might have been misdiagnosed?

After Meares and Gerson diet: Mid March 1976 – Ian Gawler

 After all, we would normally think of TB being associated with a ‘shadow’ on the lung, not large calcified lumps such as the those photographed on July 7 1977 – Ian’s chest wall…(below left).
In my next blog we will look at how misdiagnosis can happen and how TB can mimic even bone cancer. The following will form a background and framework for what has happened and make sense of this complex story.

Famous photos:July 1977 Advanced TB or cancer?

 I was once quoted as saying “I would rather be married to a live anecdote than a dead statistic.” At that stage I had no idea that our story would become so famous and that people would try to emulate what we did throughout the course of Ian’s illness. I had neither the maturity nor expertise to tease apart various medical incidents that had always left me wondering.

Now in 2012, having walked in the world of cancer medicine for 38 years; by logic, you would have to think that I have seen a thing or two! Add to that my experience as sole caregiver/partner for Ian Gawler throughout his illness; first in 1974 as girlfriend when he was diagnosed with osteogenic sarcoma; then supporting him throughout his assumed recurrence; marrying him when he’d been given a few weeks to live, and following through with support until he returned to full health. Given that background, you would have to think that I know a thing or two!

Coming back to current time, Ian Gawler and supporters mistakenly believe they are at war with the medical profession who are simply out to discredit because he recovered from secondary bone cancer despite them. This debate has reached the heights of blind emotionalism fanned by Gawler’s blogs calling it the Spanish Inquisition! Rather than welcoming enquiry, the Gawler Foundation has published links to these emotive blogs on their front page! Has anyone from this group stopped for moment to consider why, as an ex wife I would expose myself to public and medical scrutiny by correcting errors of fact about Ian Gawler’s ‘remission’ in a medical journal? We separated long ago – so although it makes for exciting press, there are no duelling Mrs Gawler’s as has been implied. I have been preoccupied since 1997 with a medical condition myself and family responsibilities, so could well do without the hassle. We should also ask why two eminent professors of oncology would risk their reputations publically and medically by investigating Ian Gawler’s recovery 30 years on? Bringing a tone of logic to the matter, it is recommended that Ian Gawler’s supporters read the evidence as written in the IMJ report before making assumptions about wars and conspiracies. Haines and Lowenthal’s report is well written and scientifically intelligent and for me who was intimately involved in Ian Gawler’s recovery; in 2012 ‘science-speak’ – it sure makes a lot of sense!

We must remember that medicine was a very different entity in the 1970’s. Sophisticated scanning wasn’t around and diagnostics were perhaps more dependent on the patient’s reporting of symptoms. There were very few medical practitioners involved in Ian Gawler’s case; they were not of long duration and, as well, we had much geographical relocation during his illness. No one picked up the symptoms of TB, no one knew of the BCG vaccines he had used as immune stimulants and no one knew of the tuberculin he used for TB testing cows in veterinary practice in those days. No one asked if indeed there had been a biopsy performed 11 months after amputation when a bony lump appeared in his groin. No one asked about biopsies for the duration of his illness; it was presumed they had been done. Maybe this assumption was due to the fact that Ian Gawler was a Veterinarian who would know these things. In a nutshell, this is how much of his story/history, simply passed under the medical radar without questions and eventually became a well reported ‘anecdotal cure.’

When Ainslie Meares reported Ian’s story in 1978 in the MJA – there was one missing piece to the puzzle – Meares did not know Ian had been diagnosed with advanced TB in June 1978. Meares had written and submitted the abstract when the calcifications on Ian’s Chest disappeared – he too presumed the growths had been metastatic cancer – in the absence of knowledge about Ian’s TB. He also inverted Ian’s medical timeline which has helped fuel the current confusion in terms of what happened when?

The ‘Dragon’s Blessing’, Ian’s biography was published October 2008. Dr Alistair Robertson is quoted in the book. He had reviewed Ian Gawler’s case in 1978 and made the diagnosis of TB.  This was the first time Ian had consulted him, so he had little or no background about the case. He looked at x-rays from previous years; back to 1976 and compared them with the current-time June 1978 films.  Robertson said: “TB had been evident for at least two years” however, the lung ‘shadow’ was evident early in 1976 on x-ray. I remember asking Ian’s radiation oncologist about it in February 1976 but I had never seen TB; as a veterinary nurse in wasn’t in my repertoire. Continue reading “Out on a limb – the importance of re-examining the cause of Ian Gawler’s ‘remission’ – Grace Gawler comments”

Out on a limb – the importance of re-examining the cause of Ian Gawler's 'remission' – Grace Gawler comments

Visit:  https://theconversation.edu.au/coffee-enemas-dont-cure-cancer-reviewing-the-remarkable-claims-of-ian-gawler-5242

Hopefully this series of blogs will answer the many questions that cancer patients and the public are asking about how Ian Gawler might have been misdiagnosed?

After Meares and Gerson diet: Mid March 1976 – Ian Gawler

 After all, we would normally think of TB being associated with a ‘shadow’ on the lung, not large calcified lumps such as the those photographed on July 7 1977 – Ian’s chest wall…(below left).
In my next blog we will look at how misdiagnosis can happen and how TB can mimic even bone cancer. The following will form a background and framework for what has happened and make sense of this complex story.

Famous photos:July 1977 Advanced TB or cancer?

 I was once quoted as saying “I would rather be married to a live anecdote than a dead statistic.” At that stage I had no idea that our story would become so famous and that people would try to emulate what we did throughout the course of Ian’s illness. I had neither the maturity nor expertise to tease apart various medical incidents that had always left me wondering.

Now in 2012, having walked in the world of cancer medicine for 38 years; by logic, you would have to think that I have seen a thing or two! Add to that my experience as sole caregiver/partner for Ian Gawler throughout his illness; first in 1974 as girlfriend when he was diagnosed with osteogenic sarcoma; then supporting him throughout his assumed recurrence; marrying him when he’d been given a few weeks to live, and following through with support until he returned to full health. Given that background, you would have to think that I know a thing or two!

Coming back to current time, Ian Gawler and supporters mistakenly believe they are at war with the medical profession who are simply out to discredit because he recovered from secondary bone cancer despite them. This debate has reached the heights of blind emotionalism fanned by Gawler’s blogs calling it the Spanish Inquisition! Rather than welcoming enquiry, the Gawler Foundation has published links to these emotive blogs on their front page! Has anyone from this group stopped for moment to consider why, as an ex wife I would expose myself to public and medical scrutiny by correcting errors of fact about Ian Gawler’s ‘remission’ in a medical journal? We separated long ago – so although it makes for exciting press, there are no duelling Mrs Gawler’s as has been implied. I have been preoccupied since 1997 with a medical condition myself and family responsibilities, so could well do without the hassle. We should also ask why two eminent professors of oncology would risk their reputations publically and medically by investigating Ian Gawler’s recovery 30 years on? Bringing a tone of logic to the matter, it is recommended that Ian Gawler’s supporters read the evidence as written in the IMJ report before making assumptions about wars and conspiracies. Haines and Lowenthal’s report is well written and scientifically intelligent and for me who was intimately involved in Ian Gawler’s recovery; in 2012 ‘science-speak’ – it sure makes a lot of sense!

We must remember that medicine was a very different entity in the 1970’s. Sophisticated scanning wasn’t around and diagnostics were perhaps more dependent on the patient’s reporting of symptoms. There were very few medical practitioners involved in Ian Gawler’s case; they were not of long duration and, as well, we had much geographical relocation during his illness. No one picked up the symptoms of TB, no one knew of the BCG vaccines he had used as immune stimulants and no one knew of the tuberculin he used for TB testing cows in veterinary practice in those days. No one asked if indeed there had been a biopsy performed 11 months after amputation when a bony lump appeared in his groin. No one asked about biopsies for the duration of his illness; it was presumed they had been done. Maybe this assumption was due to the fact that Ian Gawler was a Veterinarian who would know these things. In a nutshell, this is how much of his story/history, simply passed under the medical radar without questions and eventually became a well reported ‘anecdotal cure.’

When Ainslie Meares reported Ian’s story in 1978 in the MJA – there was one missing piece to the puzzle – Meares did not know Ian had been diagnosed with advanced TB in June 1978. Meares had written and submitted the abstract when the calcifications on Ian’s Chest disappeared – he too presumed the growths had been metastatic cancer – in the absence of knowledge about Ian’s TB. He also inverted Ian’s medical timeline which has helped fuel the current confusion in terms of what happened when?

The ‘Dragon’s Blessing’, Ian’s biography was published October 2008. Dr Alistair Robertson is quoted in the book. He had reviewed Ian Gawler’s case in 1978 and made the diagnosis of TB.  This was the first time Ian had consulted him, so he had little or no background about the case. He looked at x-rays from previous years; back to 1976 and compared them with the current-time June 1978 films.  Robertson said: “TB had been evident for at least two years” however, the lung ‘shadow’ was evident early in 1976 on x-ray. I remember asking Ian’s radiation oncologist about it in February 1976 but I had never seen TB; as a veterinary nurse in wasn’t in my repertoire. Continue reading “Out on a limb – the importance of re-examining the cause of Ian Gawler's 'remission' – Grace Gawler comments”

Ian Gawler: Out on a limb – science investigates a miracle ‘cure’ Grace Gawler comments

Read the latest blog from the USA – Science-based medicine: an intelligent review & comments on the Gawler ‘cure’.
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/the-cancer-cure-anecdote/

The cancer public needs to be aware of the previously inexplicable anomalies of Ian Gawler’s clinical history and the content and reason behind the  publication of a well researched report that for the first time in more than 3 decades, provides a different perspective & hypothesis for his ‘cure’.
Misinformation is being generated about the motive and intentions behind the latest e-published paper however, cancer patients have not yet had the opportunity to see or the review the full report and discern for themselves the motive and the importance of the publication for the cancer community.

If the history books have written that Ian Gawler had metastatic bone cancer, and…. if it is proven that he actually had widespread TB instead – isn’t this a matter in the public interest?  Many patients say ” If Ian did it – I can do it too!” Many give away conventional oncology believing that lifestyle medicine methods as reported by Gawler & Jelinek in the MJA Dec 11 2008 can impact cancer, and in Ian’s case; likely cured his metastatic cancer.

However that report  is chronologically incorrect with many errors of fact – most patients are not aware of this. Patients should be aware that 2 flawed versions published in the MJA are still listed on the Gawler Foundation media website, despite Ian commenting that the timeline in 1978 & 2008 articles were incorrect. He has also stated on his blog that  he never had a vegan diet…..other issues remain unadressed by the authors. Case report in the December 2008 edition of the Medical Journal of Australia

So getting back to the current IMJ paper –  there is no Spanish Inquisition, no medical profession out to get Ian, and no one in the latest scientific article  is disputing Ian Gawler personally or work wise; the paper is a professional scientific document that takes account of  previously unconnected history surrounding Ian Gawler’s medical timeline and exposes a new and likely hypothesis for his “cure’.

To also be clear – this matter of Ian’s ‘remission/cure’ is not personal. Because I was with Ian throughout his entire recovery process 24/7 – my experience is valid and first-hand. My recorded original medical history is indesputable. I have always had more questions than answers when it came to Ian’s disease process.  I too have devoted my life to assisting cancer patients and those with life challenging illness and I am interested to explore the science and know the truth as this was also a momentus part of my life. What really happened throughout Ian Gawler’s recovery and what was the relationship between his TB and his cancer? This is a scientific and now public issue – not an emotional question. Being a fan of Professor Julius Sumner Miller when I was young – I learned to question and ask his famous question: “Why is it so?”

From my perspective; there are no ‘ex-wives quarrels or duelling Mrs Gawlers’ – as previously reported in the popular press when Ian’s history was challenged previously -in fact such headlines served to smoke-screen important professional issues with regards to my corrections/refute  letter MJA 2010

RE TB – Gawler & Jelinek’s 2008 MJA states that Ian Gawler : “….developed pulmonary tuberculosis in June 1978 and was treated for this condition for 12 months.”
Actually – Ian Gawler did have TB – but he had it for 2+ years – it remained undiagnosed until June 1978.
Haines and Lowenthal’s paper titled Hypothesis: The importance of a histological diagnosis when diagnosing and treating advanced cancer. Famous patient recovery may not have been from metastatic disease” is far from an inflammatory title. Prof Ray Lowenthal and Prof Ian Haines IMJ abstract.
 To be continued….

Cancer Experts Challenge Gawler’s Cure – The Age 31 december 2011 http://www.theage.com.au/national/cancer-experts-challenge-gawlers-cure-20111230-1pfns.html

Ian Gawler: Out on a limb – science investigates a miracle 'cure' Grace Gawler comments

Read the latest blog from the USA – Science-based medicine: an intelligent review & comments on the Gawler ‘cure’.
http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/index.php/the-cancer-cure-anecdote/

The cancer public needs to be aware of the previously inexplicable anomalies of Ian Gawler’s clinical history and the content and reason behind the  publication of a well researched report that for the first time in more than 3 decades, provides a different perspective & hypothesis for his ‘cure’.
Misinformation is being generated about the motive and intentions behind the latest e-published paper however, cancer patients have not yet had the opportunity to see or the review the full report and discern for themselves the motive and the importance of the publication for the cancer community.

If the history books have written that Ian Gawler had metastatic bone cancer, and…. if it is proven that he actually had widespread TB instead – isn’t this a matter in the public interest?  Many patients say ” If Ian did it – I can do it too!” Many give away conventional oncology believing that lifestyle medicine methods as reported by Gawler & Jelinek in the MJA Dec 11 2008 can impact cancer, and in Ian’s case; likely cured his metastatic cancer.

However that report  is chronologically incorrect with many errors of fact – most patients are not aware of this. Patients should be aware that 2 flawed versions published in the MJA are still listed on the Gawler Foundation media website, despite Ian commenting that the timeline in 1978 & 2008 articles were incorrect. He has also stated on his blog that  he never had a vegan diet…..other issues remain unadressed by the authors. Case report in the December 2008 edition of the Medical Journal of Australia

So getting back to the current IMJ paper –  there is no Spanish Inquisition, no medical profession out to get Ian, and no one in the latest scientific article  is disputing Ian Gawler personally or work wise; the paper is a professional scientific document that takes account of  previously unconnected history surrounding Ian Gawler’s medical timeline and exposes a new and likely hypothesis for his “cure’.

To also be clear – this matter of Ian’s ‘remission/cure’ is not personal. Because I was with Ian throughout his entire recovery process 24/7 – my experience is valid and first-hand. My recorded original medical history is indesputable. I have always had more questions than answers when it came to Ian’s disease process.  I too have devoted my life to assisting cancer patients and those with life challenging illness and I am interested to explore the science and know the truth as this was also a momentus part of my life. What really happened throughout Ian Gawler’s recovery and what was the relationship between his TB and his cancer? This is a scientific and now public issue – not an emotional question. Being a fan of Professor Julius Sumner Miller when I was young – I learned to question and ask his famous question: “Why is it so?”

From my perspective; there are no ‘ex-wives quarrels or duelling Mrs Gawlers’ – as previously reported in the popular press when Ian’s history was challenged previously -in fact such headlines served to smoke-screen important professional issues with regards to my corrections/refute  letter MJA 2010

RE TB – Gawler & Jelinek’s 2008 MJA states that Ian Gawler : “….developed pulmonary tuberculosis in June 1978 and was treated for this condition for 12 months.”
Actually – Ian Gawler did have TB – but he had it for 2+ years – it remained undiagnosed until June 1978.
Haines and Lowenthal’s paper titled Hypothesis: The importance of a histological diagnosis when diagnosing and treating advanced cancer. Famous patient recovery may not have been from metastatic disease” is far from an inflammatory title. Prof Ray Lowenthal and Prof Ian Haines IMJ abstract.
 To be continued….

Cancer Experts Challenge Gawler’s Cure – The Age 31 december 2011 http://www.theage.com.au/national/cancer-experts-challenge-gawlers-cure-20111230-1pfns.html

Integrated Cancer Medicine requires Integrated Participants – part 2

By Pip Cornall

Grace Gawler, a vegetarian from age five, went on to work in a veterinary clinic while still at junior high school.  Thus the vegetarian interested in health and natural treatments became grounded in science, pathology, bio-chemistry, anatomy and so on. She had a desire for all things natural including an interest in natural cures for cancer in animals. Over the years, when appropriate, she experimented with natural medicine as a complement to conventional veterinary treatments. Eventually she concluded that both systems of medicine need to be utilized for the best outcome. Thus was born her integrative approach.

It followed that Grace’s cancer work, which began when her boyfriend, Ian Gawler, lost his leg to bone cancer, was a blend of both forms of medicine – conventional and alternative. Now with 35 years of cancer experience behind her, Grace describes her work as integrated cancer support medicine and is known for this stance within the medical community.

But not every cancer practitioner practices integrative medicine – there is still too much ‘either/or’ medicine. So what is needed to end the polarization between the cancer healing medicines? This is a topic we’ll be tackling in our new Grace Gawler Institute for Integrated cancer Solutions. Continue reading “Integrated Cancer Medicine requires Integrated Participants – part 2”