Totnes Cancer Conference: shaping up for a shambles

If the March Totnes Cancer Care Conference was a farce, then the November one looks set to be a shambles.

Keen to avoid the problems that blighted the last conference, organiser Dr Stephen Hopwood has been careful to point out that the conference will not discuss treating people for cancer, but treating people with cancer. This seems to me to be a blatant and cynical way of sidestepping the Cancer Act.

His argument makes no sense whatsoever if you take a few minutes to consider the background and specialisms of some of the speakers. Certainly, it is my belief that cancer patients and their families would fail to see the distinction – people who may actually be considering treatments offered by the planned (now cancelled) speaker, Dr Andre Young-Snell, sold by the speaker Kevin Wright and advocated by the speakers Dr Patrick Kingsley, Dr Julian Kenyon and Dr Rosy Daniel.

You can watch Hopwood tying himself in knots on this point (and a few others) in this video of his recent interview on Totnes FM, where he addresses questions put forward (via Twitter) by me, @lecanardnoir, @ScepticLetters and @david_colquhoun. Topics discussed included the fact that speaker Dr Patrick Kingsley is no longer GMC registered and that the speaker Dr Sarah Myhill was banned from prescribing drugs by the GMC in 2010. As I also pointed out, Myhill has also been in trouble again much more recently – she was in fact given a warning in October of this year.

What about the rest of the speakers?

Professor Dr Michael Baum is a leading British surgical oncologist who specialises in breast cancer treatment and who has been openly critical of alternative medicine. To be honest, I’m not sure why I’m even bothering to mention him since he will not actually be attending the conference. They’ll just be showing a PowerPoint presentation of Baum criticising the breast cancer screening programme. While I believe Baum’s views are strictly based on evidence, it will be interesting to see what the attendees make of his conclusions.

Other planned speakers who will also not be attending the conference include:

Hopwood’s full explanations for these absences may be read here.

So who’s left..?

If you’d spent £70 on tickets for the full weekend you might be disappointed to find that most of the speakers are just the same ones as last time, and that four of the newly advertised speakers had pulled out at the last minute.

But what bothers me much more is the very real damage that can be done by encouraging false hope and by spreading misinformation about cancer treatments and mistrust in medical professionals.

There is no conspiracy against ‘natural’ treatments such as intravenous vitamin C, intravenous hydrogen peroxide ‘oxygen therapy’, coffee enemas, transdermal magnesium chloride, Carctol and the rest. The reason these treatments have not been embraced by mainstream doctors is that they have not been shown to be safe or effective.

People like me aren’t motivated by money. We aren’t receiving back-handers from Big Pharma.

If in any doubt about my motivation, I recommend you read “Would you kick a dying man?” That family were under no illusion that the alternative medical treatments recommended by the likes of Patricia Peat and Patrick Kingsley were merely to treat people with cancer.

The package of treatment as a whole caused harm, as it was expensive using up my parents limited life savings, took my dad away from home using up his energy and resources and caused emotional damage.

My parents were reassured by the cancer consultant, as she was previously an oncology nurse and had a positive write up from a website offering advice to cancer patients (run by an an independent charity of which she is a patron).

This blogger’s father had been told that if he were to follow the advice of this woman, he could be tumour-free in 3 to 4 years.

Trading Standards shouldn’t be fooled by Hopwood’s promise to only discuss treating people with cancer. Such promises are meaningless.


5 responses to “Totnes Cancer Conference: shaping up for a shambles

  1. Treating people “with” cancer for colds or anxiety perhaps, but not for cancer, obviously. Maybe they are just treating to them to a bun or a manicure?

  2. Pingback: WDDTY: The Editorial Panel | Josephine Jones

  3. Pingback: Ask for Evidence on “miracle” cancer cures | Josephine Jones

  4. Do you know why Dr Etienne was “languishing” in a Thai hospital. He had a major head injury caused by a fall. So Your implied negativity that he was unwell….without knowing why, was very very unkind and obviously trying to convince readers on your opinions. You should take a look at yourself and wonder why you wish to negate these peoples efforts. Are you angry about something and wishing to take it out on others?

  5. Very sad that you have done very little research yourself into alternative living proof of people ridding cancer on they’re own. .. even just juicing I know of a few who have rid themselves of cancer……. I don’t have much confidence in the conventional treatments when my father asked how much would 2 years on hormone treatment increase his survival rate…. He was told by 2 percent! !!!!@ why even bother when this can cause so much stress when undergoing this treatment! !! Something wrong somewhere. ..!!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s