cancer treatment net - wavy Logo-04

Breakthrough Cancer Treatment

Effective, Non-toxic and Scientific
Too low-cost to be offered by cancer hospitals. (It really is true!)

New Cancer Treatment Alternative




GEIPE - Its Scientific Basis


Scientific Publications


Inaction of Cancer Institutes


The Struggle

An Alternative Treatment

Cancer Cure?

Cancer & Genes

About Us

Contact Us


Breakthrough Cancer Therapy
Responses & Inaction of Cancer Centers

Letter of response from National Cancer Institute, and

Outcome of meeting with researchers at City of Hope National Medical Center, Duarte, Calif. (Note: City of Hope ranks in top 5% in funds received from the NIH.)

Letter of response from MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, TX.
(Note: MD Anderson is the top-most cancer center in the U.S.)

Letter of response ("a judgment call which could admittedly be wrong") from UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center, Calif., and Reply of JayiKulsh.

Letter of collaboration from Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, TX and the Outcome.

Letter of collaboration from Dr. M. A. Herbert, who reported superb results with low-level electrotherapy in 1985 (Ref. 7) and the Outcome.

Letter of supporting evidence from Paterson Institute for Cancer Research, Manchester, UK -- and an observation.

Letter of cooperation from Tata Memorial Hospital, Bombay, India and the Outcome.

Curious One-sentence Letter from Univ. of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute, PA


The top cancer institutions like National Cancer Institute, MD Anderson Cancer Center and some others have found my gentle-electrotherapy ideas to block the key enzyme in cancer progression "very interesting", and deserving of further investigation.

However, in more than 25 years, they have made no effort to explore and establish this cancer treatment, even though the funds needed to study it are miniscule compared to most other cancer studies.

The current cancer treatments, ineffective and toxic they may be, provide jobs to many around the globe. Thus there is strong resistance towards an effective, non-toxic cancer treatment that would bring little money. This is so not only in rich countries like USA and UK, but also in poor countries like India and Nigeria.

Over the years, I have contacted all major and minor cancer research facilities in the world multiple times. The response rate has been very low. In fact, with gathering evidence of the efficacy of this therapy on human patients, the response rate has gone down, and now it is at zero! They are quiet, and keep spinning their wheels. Doing so makes them decent - sometime fabulous -- living. No disruption is welcome..

Is anyone thinking about suffering and dying cancer patients? Is concern for them only for the show? In reality, it seems, their welfare has taken a backseat - very backseat indeed - to the cash-flow of companies in the field of cancer.



Note: Our GEIPE device is best suited to treat visible or palpable tumors like oral cancers (tongue, mouth, palate, lip, neck, buccal mucosa, throat), facial cancers (chin, nose, cheek, head, temple), various skin cancers, some breast cancers and lymphoma. Also, fast-growing prostate cancer.

@2014 GEIPE Cancer treatment, Inc.

A California Non-Profit Tax-exempt Charity - IRS 501(c)(3)