Terry said: There is never a shortage of false hope and distant "supressed" cures. The wealthy flock to all such rumored salvations and die along the way.
I'm well aware of Tony Abbot's view. I saw the interview this article quotes him from. Dr Holt has never said he has the cure for cancer, that's what his patients said after their treatment.
Tony Abbot refused to put the treatment under Medicare because he claims the survival rate isn't much different. BTW, he also wanted to reduce the eligibility for women to receive IVF treatment as well. He's labeled a lot of conventional treatments to not be covered by Medicare.
What this article doesn't mention is that very few people ever went to see Dr Holt initially after their diagnosis. They went to him as a last resort, after they'd been through the chemotherapy, radiotherapy etc and had been told by their doctors there was nothing more they could do for them. Any survival rate is a good thing, these people would have been dead otherwise. As I recall, Mr Abbot wouldn't answer this question when he was asked.
Why hold this treatment back?