Chemotherapy Makes Cancer Worse: The Evidence They Tried to Hide
A suppressed 2017 Telegraph report, cutting-edge science, and decades of warnings from natural health advocates converge to reveal a devastating truth: the treatment fuels the disease.
Every so often, the tightly sealed vault of institutional medicine cracks—and a truth long defended by the natural health community slips out into public view. This happened on July 6, 2017, when The Telegraph ran the headline:
“Chemotherapy may spread cancer and trigger more aggressive tumours, warn scientists”¹
The article, authored by Science Editor Sarah Knapton, cited research published in Science Translational Medicine showing that chemotherapy may not only fail to stop cancer—but may actively spread it. Though now behind a paywall, its implications still ripple through the scientific community. Read the original article here.
For many in the natural health and integrative oncology worlds, this wasn’t news—it was long-overdue confirmation. In fact, Truth About Cancer came out in 2015, which was watched by millions around the world, and which drove to the heart of the failing conventional oncology paradigm and its reliance on chemotherapy, and its ongoing coverup of its true ineffectiveness and devastating effects. You can watch a clip of me recently posted by Laura Loomer on X from the documentary discussing the hidden epidemic of cancer overdiagnosis and overtreatment below.
A Mechanism for Malignancy: What the Study Found
The referenced study, led by George S. Karagiannis at Albert Einstein College of Medicine, discovered that neoadjuvant chemotherapy—administered before surgery—caused a significant increase in metastatic risk.²
This occurred through:
Activation of microscopic portals called TMEM (Tumor Microenvironment of Metastasis),
Increased expression of MENAINV, an isoform associated with invasive cancer cells,
Higher numbers of circulating tumor cells in the bloodstream.
Although chemotherapy reduced the primary tumor’s size, it amplified cancer’s ability to spread—a paradox of profound significance.
Importantly, this prometastatic effect was reversible using a TMEM-blocking drug (rebastinib) or by knocking down the MENA gene, which encodes an actin-regulatory protein crucial to cell movement.²
In plain terms: chemo made cancer spread, and the researchers could prove how.
The Paradox of Chemotherapy: Toxicity That Breeds Aggression
It’s no mystery why chemotherapy might worsen cancer outcomes—the agents used are among the most toxic substances ever introduced into the human body. The Karagiannis study involved drugs like doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, and paclitaxel—well-known for their genotoxic and mutagenic effects.²
Doxorubicin intercalates into DNA and generates free radicals that cause double-strand breaks.
Cyclophosphamide is a nitrogen mustard derivative and Group 1 human carcinogen, according to IARC.
Paclitaxel impairs microtubule disassembly, disrupting mitosis in all fast-dividing cells.
As shown on the GreenMedInfo database: “Anti-Therapeutic Action of Chemotherapy”, across 120 studies these agents have a wide range of toxic and potentially carcinogenic effects including:
Promote epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition (EMT),
Enrich cancer stem cell (CSC) populations,
Impair immune function, and
Lead to increased tumor resistance and recurrence.³
My Early Warnings: Genotoxic Therapy and the Illusion of Progress
In 2012, I published “Does Chemo and Radiation Actually Make Cancer More Malignant?”—highlighting that the DNA-damaging nature of chemo and radiation selects for more aggressive, treatment-resistant cell populations.⁴
Chemotherapy indiscriminately targets rapidly dividing cells—which includes:
Cancer cells,
Immune cells,
Gastrointestinal lining,
Hair follicles,
And children’s developing cells, which helps explain higher pediatric cancer vulnerability.
But most critically, chemo spares slow-dividing cancer stem cells—those that:
Self-renew,
Evade immune detection,
Resist standard treatments,
And regenerate entire tumor
For more details on this topic, consult the largest, most extensively referenced chapter in my book REGENERATE in PART II, Chapter 4: Beyond Gene Mutation: Cancer’s Origin, Prevention, Treatment, and Lifesaving Patient Empowerment and Resilience Strategies.
Cancer Stem Cells: The Root Cause and the Road to a Cure
This leads us to the cancer stem cell hypothesis, which reframes the disease not as a mass of identical rogue cells, but as a hierarchical system led by CSCs.
In “Are Cancer Stem Cells the Key to Discovering a Cure?”, I outlined that:
CSCs are at the apex of this hierarchy,
Conventional treatments fail to eliminate them,
And they are the true source of recurrence and metastasis.⁵
The Karagiannis study supports this, showing that chemotherapy increases the expression of MENAINV, a key CSC-related isoform, and raises TMEM site activity—essentially amplifying the stem-like, invasive subpopulations.²
Natural Compounds That Target CSCs: A Hopeful Path Forward
But this story need not end in despair. My work on GreenMedInfo has cataloged over 100 natural substances that selectively target CSCs while sparing healthy tissue.⁶
These include:
Curcumin – downregulates Wnt/Notch/Hedgehog pathways.
Sulforaphane – found in cruciferous vegetables, reduces CSC markers.
Berberine, EGCG, resveratrol, quercetin – modulate apoptosis, EMT, and self-renewal genes.
These compounds:
Avoid genotoxic mechanisms,
Work in harmony with the body’s natural defenses,
And may offer a true solution by targeting the root cause—not just the symptoms.
This is precision, regenerative medicine without the collateral damage of conventional cytotoxicity.
Explore our Cancer Stem Cell Research Dashboard for more peer-reviewed, evidence-based integrative tools.⁶
Also, learn more by reading: Nature's Cancer-Fighting Arsenal: How Plant Compounds Target Highly Malignant Cancer Stem Cells
Dr. Peter Glidden: Exposing the Medical Monopoly and Chemotherapy’s Failure
Another brave voice breaking through the noise is Dr. Peter Glidden, a licensed Naturopathic Doctor with over three decades of clinical experience. A graduate of Bastyr University (1991) and long-time advocate for naturopathic medicine, Dr. Glidden has lectured globally, authored multiple books—including “Everybody Is Sick, and I Know Why”—and appeared regularly on shows such as Infowars, Coast to Coast AM, and The Leon Show. He currently serves as a board member of the Naturopathic Medicine Institute and offers consultations worldwide via Zoom or phone.
In one of his most popular video interviews, Glidden delivers a scathing indictment of the modern cancer industry and its deep entanglement with profit-driven chemotherapy use.
“97% of the time, chemotherapy doesn’t work,” he asserts, citing a comprehensive meta-analysis published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology which tracked adult cancer patients over 12 years.
Dr. Glidden explains that:
Chemotherapy is still widely used not because it works, but because it’s profitable.
Unlike antibiotics or most prescription drugs, doctors receive direct compensation for administering chemo.
For example, a doctor might buy a chemo drug for $5,000, charge the patient $12,000, insurance covers $9,000, and the doctor pockets the $4,000 difference.
He describes this as a clear conflict of interest and likens it to a business model that would be deemed criminal in any other industry:
“If Ford Motor Company made a car that exploded 97% of the time, would they still be in business? No.”
Dr. Glidden’s broader philosophical point is also critical:
Cancer is a holistic condition, not a reductionistic one.
Mainstream oncology fails to address the root causes of disease and ignores the body’s terrain.
Public donations and awareness campaigns, like 5k breast cancer runs, disproportionately fund drug and surgical research, excluding nutrition, naturopathy, homeopathy, and Traditional Chinese Medicine.
He argues:
“If every girl in this country took 200 micrograms of selenium daily, breast cancer rates would drop by 82% in one generation.”
These are staggering claims—but they resonate because they address the systemic distortions of modern medical paradigms and mirror the findings of mainstream studies like Karagiannis’s, which show chemotherapy not only fails but often worsens outcomes .
Dr. Glidden’s work can be explored further at drglidden.com, where his books, media appearances, and consultation details are available.
Overdiagnosis: When Cancer Isn’t Cancer—But Treatment Still Harms
Equally important is the epidemic of overdiagnosis—the detection and treatment of tumors that would never have progressed to harm.
In “The Overdiagnosis Epidemic: How Cancer Screening May Be Doing More Harm Than Good”, I explored how routine screenings—especially for breast and prostate cancer—have led to unnecessary interventions.⁷⁻⁸
Breast Cancer: Awareness or Fear Marketing?
Many screen-detected lesions are ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS)—a condition unlikely to become invasive.
Yet DCIS is routinely treated with surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy.
In “The Dark Side of Breast Cancer Awareness Month (Part II)”, I revealed how awareness campaigns obscure these facts, pushing fear-based diagnostics over evidence-based medicine.⁹
Prostate Cancer: The PSA Trap
PSA screening leads to detection of many indolent prostate cancers.
These are often treated aggressively, causing incontinence, impotence, and deep psychological harm.
The USPSTF has since recommended against routine PSA screening, citing overdiagnosis and poor risk-benefit balance.
Misdiagnosis as a Smokescreen for Iatrogenic Harm
While overdiagnosis is often portrayed as an unintentional consequence of mass cancer screening, the real sleight of hand may lie in something even more insidious: systematic misdiagnosis—a powerful tool for concealing treatment-caused harm.
When chemotherapy or radiation triggers a new malignancy, promotes metastasis, or accelerates a previously dormant cancer, the resulting damage is rarely acknowledged as iatrogenic. Instead, it is frequently rebranded under clinical euphemisms such as:
“Disease progression”
“Second primary tumor”
“Delayed-stage detection”
This is not medicine’s failure to recognize cause and effect—it is a kind of diagnostic laundering that hides medical harm in plain sight.
In this model:
Iatrogenic cancers become new “incidents”—boosting institutional cancer statistics.
Harm from treatment is recast as biological inevitability, not a preventable outcome.
The illusion of medical success is maintained, while recurrence, metastasis, and mortality rise silently in the background.
As I explored in 'Hidden Dangers' of Mammograms Every Woman Should Know About, even the screening process itself can increase morbidity and mortality through the psychobiological and spiritual injuries ‘mis’ or ‘false’ diagnoses can cause. Worse, it may detect harmless abnormalities that are aggressively treated, while true cases of iatrogenic recurrence go misclassified—not as “treatment failure,” but as “new disease.”
This is not just an error of judgment—it is a systemic distortion of the cancer narrative, protecting institutional credibility while patients suffer the consequences.
Breaking the Paywalls of Truth
It is unacceptable that findings like the Karagiannis study remain behind paywalls—especially when funded by public dollars. Thankfully, RFK Jr., Jay Bhattacharya, and others are pushing for NIH policy reforms to eliminate these barriers and liberate taxpayer-funded science.¹⁰
As I argued in From Censorship to Liberation: NIH Should End the Paywall on Taxpayer-Funded Research, full public access is essential to informed consent and sovereign healing, and with the new administration making major moves in the direction of liberating taxpayer-funded NIH research, the future of the open access movement looks brighter than ever.
📣 From Censorship to Liberation: NIH Just Made Science Free—Let's Make It Whole Again
July 1, 2025 will be remembered as a landmark moment in the fight for scientific transparency and medical freedom. After decades of embargoes, institutional gatekeeping, and the monetization of public knowledge, the National Institutes of Health (NIH)—the world's largest public funder of biomedical research—has enacted a profound and long-overdue reform:
Conclusion: What the 2017 Article Got Right—and What Comes Next
The Telegraph’s fleeting moment of truth-telling pulled back the curtain: Chemotherapy may make cancer worse.
But it’s only part of the story.
The deeper truth is that:
Many cancers are misunderstood and mistreated;
Cancer stem cells are the root, and must be directly addressed;
Natural compounds offer viable alternatives to toxic treatments;
And overdiagnosis and overtreatment hide the cost of iatrogenic harm.
We are not helpless. The knowledge is here. The tools are here. The question is: will we listen?
To learn more, join my upcoming FREE masterclass: REGENERATE YOURSELF, enjoyed by over 400,000 participants since its first launch in 2020. It begins on July 21st, so save your spot here.
References
Sarah Knapton, “Chemotherapy May Spread Cancer and Trigger More Aggressive Tumours, Warn Scientists,” The Telegraph, July 6, 2017. Link.
George S. Karagiannis et al., “Neoadjuvant Chemotherapy Induces Breast Cancer Metastasis Through a TMEM-Mediated Mechanism,” Science Translational Medicine 9, no. 397 (2017): eaan0026. DOI:10.1126/scitranslmed.aan0026.
GreenMedInfo Research Archive, “Anti-Therapeutic Action of Chemotherapy.”
Sayer Ji, “Does Chemo and Radiation Actually Make Cancer More Malignant?” GreenMedInfo, 2012. Link.
Sayer Ji, “Are Cancer Stem Cells the Key to Discovering a Cure?” GreenMedInfo, 2013. Link.
GreenMedInfo, “Natural Substances that Target Cancer Stem Cells,” Link.
Sayer Ji, “The Overdiagnosis Epidemic: How Cancer Screening May Be Doing More Harm Than Good.” GreenMedInfo. Link.
Ibid.
Sayer Ji, “The Dark Side of Breast Cancer Awareness Month (Part II).” GreenMedInfo. Link.
Sayer Ji, “From Censorship to Liberation: NIH Should End the Paywall on Taxpayer-Funded Research,” Substack, 2024. Link.