May I please turn your World upside down?

(Or, possibly the right way up at last?)

From Germany By Karma Singh

Cancer is a dreaded disease feared both by those who have it and by those who think they might get it.

Statistically, about 1/3rd of the population of the First World would be expected to develop cancer and most will die as a result.  Total Nonsense from start to finish…

Let’s Look At This Situation From An Entirely Different Point Of View.

Note the following points:

1) Cancer is your friend which will keep you alive in circumstances which would otherwise kill you.

2) Cancer is not a disease but a natural, short-term emergency solution for a completely different problem.

3) Cancer is not the only such: Arthritis, arteriosclerosis, osteoporosis, gout, rheumatism and a host of other well-known “incurable diseases” are, similarly, natural emergency solutions and NOT illnesses! These also affect about 1/3rd of the First World population.

4) Cancer has never killed anyone! I.e., if you don’t tackle the real problem, the cancers, perforce, become so large that they prevent normal organ function and you die from organ failure. Most cancer related deaths, however, are caused by medical treatment.

5) The real problem with cancer, arthritis, etc. is the medical profession which, instead of resolving the real problem, attacks the symptoms (the effects of the real problem) thus making matters much worse.

6) In the early 20th century, Rockefeller and Carnegie set about buying up the entire health industry to remodel it into a “cash cow” for Rockefellers pharmaceuticals and Carnegies medical (surgical) centers. A little later, they began buying up the entire news industry so as to prevent the truth reaching the public.

7) In many countries, laws have been “purchased” giving them monopoly status on cancer and some other ailments and/or liability exemption. This is because cancer is so highly profitable, running at around $50,000.00 to $70,000.00 per cancer death.

In 2018, the cartel’s co-ordinating bank, Goldmann-Sachs, declared that “there is no profit to be made in curing people so it is not going to happen.”

8) Until, in the early 20th century, the move from fresh to processed “foodstuffs” began, cancer was a very rare dis-ease. Parallel to the rise in the consumption of “processed foods” we see a rise in the cancer rate.

So, why are we not told of this very clear causational relationship?

Quite simply; there is no money to be made from teaching people to eat cleanly and so you are lied to and told that cancer is a mystery which needs enormous sums spent on “research” to find a “cure”. Purely “coincidentally” (of course) the amount of money collected by donations each year for spurious “research” is pretty much the same amount which the pharma cartel spends on suppressing knowledge of and access to effective methods of dealing with this malady.

It isn’t, of course, quite that simple or Michio and Aveline Kushi would not have died of cancer. There are other factors such as environmental toxins (Michio was a heavy smoker and Aveline would never take a break from her constant travelling and leading seminars – you could well say that they both died of self-neglect). These “other factors” are, however, readily identified and remedied.

Generally, it is poor “food” quality which provides the fuel for cancer and the other factors which determine where your body will form the tumours. Any therapy must, therefore, in order to be effective, tackle all problems simultaneously; once your body has sunk to the level of toxicity in which cancer, as an emergency solution, is switched on, not only the poisons entering through your mouth but also those which you generate internally yourself must be neutralised and countered.

When you’ve fallen down a hill, you may be able to stand again and dust yourself off but you’ve got to be very much fitter to get back up the hill!

So, where can you find a comprehensive catalogue of all contributory factors together with methods of dealing with them?

Some twelve years ago I was asked by a cancer self-help group in England to write a hand-book for their members. I must confess to not being very enthusiastic about the project but bowed to pressure from “Pink Wishes” (so they styled themselves) and from case notes and other material which I had on my computer, I cobbled a handbook together for them. Pink Wishes rejected the book out of hand because conventional medicine didn’t even rate a mention as a useful technique and what they actually wanted was a book praising pharmaceutical medicine with a few “supplementary” techniques added on.

Truth prevented me from acceding to this. It was only later that I discovered that many “self-help” groups are actually founded by the pharmaceutical manufacturers in order to keep their customers away from techniques which would free them from their maladies. As I had already written it, I decided to publish the book myself and, over the years, many have found it helpful. I, however, was never satisfied with it.

Last Autumn, I finally took the plunge and began rewriting it. Actually, I have written a completely new book, much more comprehensive in its scope and with details instructions of what to do. There is, however, one problem:

In some countries (Germany, Norway, Canada amongst others) it is actually a crime not only to heal cancer but even to say that you believe it is possible. The rationale for these laws (in Germany and Norway at least) is that such utterances could give hope to cancer sufferers in general and, especially those suffering with leukaemia. Leukaemia sufferers are, by law, to be forbidden any hope.

So, my telling you in the book how to heal cancer would be a criminal act: How to cope with this?

Well, if I tell you how to create cancer in precise detail I am not breaking any law. It is also quite legal for you to use this knowledge in order to avoid cancer. It would, however be a crime for you to apply this knowledge if you already have cancer so, of course, I would not advise you to do so. If you choose to ignore this advice and to use the knowledge to remove the causes of your cancers then it is you who are the criminal and I have specifically advised you to remain within the law. (My tribute act to Pontius Pilate.)

You can take a look at the book here:-

It is also available in the German language at

Should, however, arthritis and other maladies mentioned be your problem, then taking a look here could give you what you need:-

Blessed be

From Germany By Karma Singh

Published by

Karma Singh

Professional healer, teacher, and researcher since 1986. Author of ca. 40 books, Handbooks etc. in "alternative", i.e. true healing. In September 2014 taken up into the Ring of Merlins

14 thoughts on “May I please turn your World upside down?”

  1. Karma, That’s exactly why I have a problem with conventional medicine. If you eat healthy and organically, you will mostly never need it. It’s a shame most people won’t adhere to this fact and plain not go to conventional doctors.

  2. Thank you, Karma.

    The very existence of the UK’s Cancer Act of 1939 and its international analogs is bizarre. Does anybody else find it extraordinary that the cure for cancer was decided by the law and not by science?

  3. Once again, I can’t see the comments – I thought this problem had stopped but the last newsletter on the Bolen Report and now this one, I can’t see them.
    Is there any IT genius reading this who can help resolve this transatalntic problem?

    Fortunately, as I am the author of the article, Tim has forwarded two comments to me by email:

    Hi Suzanne,
    I last went to a doctor in 1991 as it was, then, compulsory to get a hepatitis vaccination to get a visa for India.
    Prior to that was, I think, in about 1977 when I got some sort of fungal growth on my arm after helping demolish an old building.

    Many say that I am “lucky” in that I never need to go to the doctors. I, however, say that it has absoutely nothing to do with luck but the fact that I give my body what it needs and do my best to avoid toxins. That’s why I never need a doctor.
    People are conditioned to believe that they can do nothing themselves when they have a health problem. This is so that those in charge of dispensing pharmaceutical manufactures – the doctors – will always have full surgeries (Am: offices). This is why the pharmacartel spends so much money on propaganda against healthy life-styles.

    At the time, Kuno, all that was known was that this plague had “appeared out of nowhere” and that many preyed upon the sufferers, demanding huge sums of money for nonsensical “cures” that, mostly, just didn’t work. The 1937 Act was aimed at stopping this abuse.
    Although most of the Act has been, in the intervening years, repealed, the clause “damning” books telling how to heal cancer still remains. With a maximum fine of £50 it is, however, a toothless tiger and hasn’t been invoked for many years.

    Blessed be


  4. The comments will eventually appear, they always do. My guess is it’s something to do with some internet hosts having multiple copies of sites in different locations.

    My understanding of the cancer act is it is still very much alive in the UK, and whilst you are free to invent an entire new system of medicine if you want, if you start trying to cure cancer, they will stop you, no question. Certainly I would expect to be struck off in my own field, it is considered an absolute no-no. The only natural cancer therapist I know of has to keep a very low profile indeed, and often turns down work to avoid attention.

    The story of Stan Burzinski suggests this is the same in the USA, and in Australia they discipline licenced doctors for even discussing nutrition with their diabetic patients – seriously (see the case of Gary Fettke). I imagine they would be pretty ruthless with anyone publicly treating cancer with vitamins and herbs.

    Hence cancer patients still have to go to Mexico, Thailand etc. I believe there is a Gerson centre in Germany, so perhaps things are a little more reasonable there.

    The background is a bit more political than you paint it there. The AMA had tried to buy Hoxsey’s formula in 1937. At the time, they had a habit of buying up cures and burying them, and of smearing or persecuting those who wouldn’t play ball. Hoxsey refused to sell it when they wouldn’t promise to make the treatment freely available, which infuriated Morrice Fishbein. The dirty tricks campaign that followed is a matter of history, and given the AMAs reach it was probably international.

    This incident was a really big deal, and guess what – the Cancer Act appeared in the UK two years later. Not sure what happened in the USA, but in 1939 the Flexner Report was still recent history, and its impact on anything non-pharmaceutical was considerable. It was an easy lever to shut down anything that wasn’t licenced for use from big pharma, basically.

    It is a matter of record that pharma and the AMA did everything in their power to own or shut down any and all opposition.

    Add to that, the considerable weight that IG Farben and other chemical giants threw around between the wars. When I think of that time I think of the Third Reich and medical atrocities. IG Farben later became Bayer etc, and have campaigned shamelessly to suppress natural healing. I believe they have had a hand in the Codex Alimentarius (correct me if I am wrong on any of these details, I am not checking back to source at this point).

    So, whilst I don’t have the details of the cancer act and its origins, from here it looks like a strong circumstantial case that this was likely partly the result of industry pressure on governments, and partly also protection of the radium industry, which I believe had received considerable government backing. Needless to say, such protection – which we ought really to call a coercive monopoly – would not have been needed had there not been some strong competition, I would guess.

    Any historians want to correct my homework here? Please do.

  5. Hi Kuno,
    not much to argue about in your comment except that in the UK it’s still a fairly free choice as most of the provisions of the Cancer Act restricting therapy modes have been repealed. Nowadays only the part prohibiting publishing a book claiming to heal cancer is still active which is why I explain how to give yourself cancer and then leave the choice up to you.

    Incidentally, I’m doing a Southern UK tour towards the end of this month if anyone wants to book a consultation. For details see

    Germany is very, very bad! There are people in prison right now both for having healed cancer and for BEING healed of cancer!!! One has to tread most carefully there. It is similar in Norway where, a few weeks ago, a visitor was arrested and criminally charged for saying that he knows how to heal leukaemia. In both countries, the law states that leukaemia sufferers are to be denied hope and so saying anything that might give them hope becomes a crime!
    From what I hear, it’s even worse in Australia where we had the case in Perth last year in which the so-called health minister and the medical officer both declared it to be a crime to simply ask what is in a vaccine. This hasn’t stopped Australians purchasing my books: Sales are going quite well there.

    Bayer was one of the original participants in IG Farbenindustrie and when, after the war, it was broken up into its constituent parts, they quickly put it back together “under the table” and it has been operating as a cartel ever since. The reconstituted cartel is the main power behind Codex Alimentarius and other crimes against humanity.

    As I post this, your comment still hasn’t appeared although some earlier ones now have.

    Blessed be


  6. I havent read your book but some important obstacles to cure to consider are hypothyroidism (identified by testing TSH, T4, Free T3 and rT3), focalized infections (primarily teeth, e.g. root canals, pyorea, bad caps, etc.), scars, toxins (glyphosate, heavy metals, etc.) and emotional issues. Dr Tennant found that these interfere with the maintenance of proper alkalinity (i.e. proper voltage levels) that allow the cellular fluids to maintain oxygenation. Cancer cells are anaerobic metabolizers and are rapidly trying to increase their blood supply to get oxygen and nutrients (just like a fetus building a placenta in the early stages of development).

  7. I was horrified to learn recently that glyphosate is merely the amino acid glycine with an added phosphate group. Of course, glycine is one of the 22 amino acids that make up all our proteins. As I understand it, essentially glyphosate is a fake glycine. And wherever glycine is needed in a reaction, glyphosate is used preferentially if it is available. The resulting enzyme or protein is inactive or faulty. This strikes at the very heart of our biology. The health implications are overwhelming.

  8. rT3 is a non-functional analog of T3. One of the ways that it is created is when flourine substitutes for iodine. Flourine and iodine both ionize to a -1 (as do chlorine & bromine), and flourine substitutes preferentially to iodine. Wherever it does so, it leaves a non-functional molecular analog. So avoiding flouride, chloride and bromide are essential for health.

  9. Roger’s glyphosate/glycine comment is interesting. Where I am at the moment, everybody’s talking about this ‘virus’ going around for the last month. Well, guess what – it’s spring here, and the council have been out everywhere with the Roundup, as well as all the local residents spraying their gardens in shorts and flip-flops, often while their kids play nearby.

  10. Hi Karma, yes, there’s a bit of comment chasing going on here.

    The fact is, the UK probably doesn’t need a Cancer Act, in effect, because the commercial war was won long ago. This may be a case of the grass being greener on the other side, but honestly any practitioner would not survive offering to ‘treat cancer’, except in a very low key way. Penalites for breaches of the act do look like more than slaps on the wrist to me, much more than £50, and including suspended sentences.

    Of course, like the Flexner Report, this is all painted by the victors as good reason; why would anyone object to protecting the public from exploitation by phonies?

    The thing is, a Cancer Act is actually unworkable, because there is nothing illegal about giving food, vitamins, herbs or touch to a consenting human being, and as long as that remains the case it will be legal to treat cancer (or anything else). Blocking CLAIMS is therefore the only part of the act that is workable, and is therefore self-evidently ‘needed’ in a country like the UK with its tradition of free speech, to protect people ‘from those who will say anything to take their money’ etc.

    Hence, paring down the cancer act thus is no real concession.

    Australia doesn’t have protected free speech, but I did look up their cancer laws after this discussion started, and to my immense surprise it is perfectly legal to treat cancer there, in every state, it seems. However, like so many things there it is essentially underground, because they have round about ways of stopping things they don’t like, while keeping the appearance of freedom and the ‘fair go’. Hence there is no mandatory vaccination – but there are plenty of ways to steer a society that do not involve strict dictates. And however much the vaccine avoiders there think they are free, they are living in increasingly isolated pockets. The propaganda and social engineering are massively more powerful than any blunt instrument of law, make no mistake about that. The five eyes countries have that nailed.

    What we are seeing worldwide is that the conversation about health and disease has been very effectively shaped in the image of those who hold the commercial strength. When most people lack the thinking tools and even the lexicon to discuss health and disease outside of the conventional paradigms, then they get easily set up for disease, their independence in health is stolen from them. The Flexner Report was a land grab. When the time comes to sell health back to them, they willingly get onto the medical conveyor belt; while those saying it needn’t be like that are left eeking out a modest living in the shadows of big shiny state-funded hospitals.

  11. Once again, I can’t see any comments later than Kuno at 02:20 a.m. yesterday, 8th Sept. so I’m working from the email copies.

    1) Almost all thyroid problems, Roger, are an expression of an overburdened pancreas which will naturally relieve itself via the thyroids. This is why that fantastic illness (i.e. a fantasy) Hashimoto can usually be healed within a few weeks by working to clear the emotional blocks in the pancreas. for example.

    2) Many, many thanks for the glyphosate info, Roger. I had not been aware of this but now I understand how it can open the toxin barriers in the colon and brain and support the aluminium in the so-called vaccines to create autism.

    3) Yes, Roger as early as Stalin it was known that fluorides would “calcify” the pituitary gland and reduce both intelligence and the will to self-determination. It was, for this reason, fed to all prisoners in the Gulags as far fewer guards were then needed.

    4) What “virus” is that, Kuno? Your antipodean maladies don’t get much attention here.
    What I can say is that, in December 2016, Germany’s highest court ruled that the existence of viruses is not proven. The judges said that supposition and guesswork (the basis of the virus hypothesis) are NOT evidence. i.e., they didn’t make a judgement on a scientific argument but a legal judgement as the plaintiff (a pharma-cartel mouthpiece) was unable to offer anything which conformed to the rules of evidence: Instead he claimed that “inference” (i.e. guesswork) and supposition (we can’t think what this particle might be so we’ll declare it to be a virus) were sufficient proof. The judges disagreed, as do I.

    5) I must disagree with your assessment of the UK Cancer Act, Kuno. It is much more one of those old laws which have never been removed from the books and, in the modern world, is never invoked. Even when I directly challenged them on the BBC back in 2015 to prosecute me, nothing happened.
    There are masses of such laws because, as they fall into disuse as society changes, Parliament spends no time on clearing out the rubbish. It is, for example, illegal to eat mince pies on Christmas day. A policemen cannot arrest you on 25th December because it is illegal to work on that day. Etc., etc. Lots of old laws that are never invoked because their purpose no longer exists. Additionally, in English jurisprudence, a judge rules according to the intent of the law rather than the letter thereof. It would, therefore, be a quite reasonable expectation that a judge would rule my book to be legal because it does not seek to exploit but to explain and so does not contravene Parliament’s declared intent by the Act.

    Keep up the good work everyone – we’ll get there.

    Blessed be

    Karma Singh

  12. Exactly – virus schmirus! You can’t sue a virus, so we’ve all been trained to fear the invisible instead of facing up to the increasingly tricky problem of the myriad toxins filling our environment. How convenient to be able to spray your way to a tidy garden, but how inconvenient if it were to be the spray making us sick after all! Blame the virus and don’t think! To think means to act and that can be tough.

    As for the cancer act, it isn’t the same as eating mince pies at Christmas. There isn’t a single alternative cancer treatment service in the uk that you can look up. The few that exist are adjunctive. The pie makers have gone out of business, the public have no idea what a mince pie looks like!

    Even the homoeopaths now talk the language of easing the unpleasant side effects of chemo. It isn’t alternative and I charge that it isn’t homoeopathy. Old farts like me trying to point out there are some issues with selling out thus do not make many friends. That’s a skill I could learn from you, Karma.

    As I said, the only reason the act isn’t needed is that much more effective controls exist. It’s child’s play for big business to shut down genuine competition. But it would certainly be invoked as a backstop.

    Without any common understanding of the issues, trying to build viable competition for big pharma is a non-starter.

    I admire you for taking on the powers that shouldn’t be, Karma. It’s a mountain to climb, called awareness.

  13. Throughout human history, Kuno, we see that release from usury, slavery and the like is always and exclusively brought about by men and women of courage taking the ethical high ground and standing their ground.

    In the introduction for the usage instructions for this planet (Conversations with God; Neale Donald Walsch it is written that this is a planet ruled by lies and liars. It doesn’t take much digging to ascertain that this is true – indeed, we have, in common parlance, expressions such as “professional liar” meaning “lawyer” and “political facts” meaning lies expedient to politicians.

    The problem is, therefore, not that this is unknown but that most people pretend to believe the lies so as to avoid the necessary exertion to get rid of the liars.

    Throughout history, we have seen that God will “turn up the volume” until people have no choice but to act. We have seen this happen with the papacy which, although it has not yet totally gone, is obviously on the way out: This process, however, began in the 13th century with the ethnic cleansing of the Cathars followed by the Inquisition until, led by Luther and Henry VIII’s advisors, mass breakouts from the Papal Imperium took place.

    Ghandi is also a well-known figure who led his people to remove themselves from the exploitation of the East India Company.

    Modern heroes are seen in examples such as Tim Bolen.

    The point is this: We who make the effort to see what is going on and, thereby, where things are headed have a choice; we can join the majority and pretend things are OK or we can act to bring about change.

    What is, of course, obvious to us is that not acting will only make matters much worse. So each of us, in our own way, has to both rub the public face in the shit to get people to acknowledge reality and stop lying to themselves and also show ways of doing things much better.

    God says gently, “Come to me” and the Devil serves “him” by shoving his pitchfork in your arse.

    Blessed be


  14. Great! Yes.
    So while God turns up the volume, wily characters are handing out earplugs. But I perceive more and more people realise there is something wrong with the sound. They’ve been told it’s global warming, but even a whopper like that can’t be sustained forever.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

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