Celebrating the 75th Anniversary of Suzanne’s Cure from Arthritis

(L) A 1968 book by Suzanne Caum (R) William f Koch, MD (1885-1967)

by Mary W Maxwell, LLB

July 7, 2024 marks 75 years since Mrs Suzanne Caum, on that day in 1949, walked into Dr William Koch’s office in Detroit Michigan and got cured, almost instantly, of debilitating arthritis. Three weeks later she sold her crutches.

And what is so important about that lady, who was a cattle farmer without any special credentials? She spent years of hard work as an activist, a community-minded citizen, who was appalled at the way helpful medical cures can be suppressed by the US Government. In 1968, she wrote a highly referenced 700-page book, Cancer Cures Crucified.

Eleven years ago, I mentioned Caum’s book, and Dr William Koch, in my book Consider the Lilies: A Review of 18 Cures for Cancer and Their Legal Status. But I did not really “get” what Suzanne was doing. Now I get it.  Covid has helped us all to countenance the utter cruelty of “medical holdback” — to give it a quick name.

(About the holding back of ivemectin during Covid, see my recent review of Dr Pierre Kory’s work. Also, the apparently excellent Covid treatment, hydroxychloroquine, was concealed until brought out of the shadows by Dr Peter McCullough and others.)

We need to concentrate on the cruelty of these activities, not merely chalk them up to greed, conflicts of interest, party politics or whatever. They are cruel. The public really needs to hear about this. Even today there is major reluctance, by those in the know, to  open their yap and talk about the cruelty — deliberate cruelty — that is involved.

Decent doctors have come up with effective cures, which folks are then prevented from using. Amazing, no? My research has told me that the following diseases should not even be on the books anymore: cancer, diabetes, and polio. Descriptions of persons suffering from them should only be collecting dust on a shelf somewhere. (And don’t get me started on autism, which I believe was engineered for cruel purposes from Day One).

Dr William Frederick Koch (not to be confused with his uncle, Robert Koch, who created “Koch’s postulates”) was born in 1885. He got his MD degree from Detroit College of Medicine in 1919, when he was 34 years old. The reason for the lateness of graduation was that he had already had a career as a biochemist. In 1917, he accomplished his first cure of a hospitalized woman’s malignant tumor of the liver. Almost immediately the “authorities” were onto him. They offered to buy his cure, which he had named glyoxylide.  He refused to sell.

Here is just one of his many the many cured patients of Dr William Koch (I’m paraphrasing Caum’s pages79-84):

Mr John K weighed 200 pounds, was a laborer at the automobile factory [in Detroit, natch]. He entered hospital in September 1941 and by February 1942 was given a colostomy. Was down to a hundred pounds with a huge tumor sticking through his abdomen, a piece of which they cut off, mainly to relieve the horrible odor. Record: “Henry Ford Hospital. Dr Fallis: The tumor shows metastatic carcinoma of the colon…. This is entirely a hopeless case.” Sent home April 1st, 1942. On the way home, stopped at Koch’s clinic and got a cancer-cure shot. By late July he weighed 175 pounds and was back to work.

The Vow

Now back to Ms Caum. She had heard about Koch’s cancer cure from the community, and also knew of his successful treatment of mastitis in cattle. In fact, the provincial government of British Columbia commended Koch for that particular contribution to Canada’s farming economy.

Caum also seems to have been sincerely religious. On the way to her appointment of July 7, 1949, she vowed to God that if Koch relieved the pain of her arthritis, she would “devote her life and energy to binging this treatment to others” (page 8).

Boy, did she stick with the program. Many pages in her book, Cancer Cures Crucified, are taken up with transcripts of court cases. We’d never have known the courtroom tactics involved, in pounding down on the curing doctors, if she had not bothered to tell us.

I do believe Caum’s work will come into play in prosecutions against some of the connivers in the 2020-2024 pandemic.  Hopefully it happens before the next pandemic, predicted by Bill Gates, comes into force — complete with Lockdowns and re-education camps for people who distribute misinformation.

It is heartening to note that Suzanne’s interest in cures did not bog down in blaming, say, the AMA for its sins — though she certainly did discuss that. Rather, she emphasizes the way in which this chicanery went against the people. She frequently mentioned to her readers that the money they were donating to “cancer organizations” was not ending up in the right hands, so to speak.

“Not one cent is ever allotted to sponsor a double-blind test of the unorthodox therapies that have shown a proven value.”

The FTC

The article at hand will emphasize one particular factor in the persecution of Dr Koch, viz., the way the FTC Federal Trade Commission brought him to court. I must postpone for a further article the actual contents of Koch’s cure. It has to do with oxygenation of blood, and accords well with the theory of Otto Warburg who won the 1934 Nobel Prize for his ideas about oxygenization.

(Note: If I don’t “get there with you,” please take it up yourself. It is exciting.)

Readers have heard me natter on about the Commerce Clause of the US Constitution which enables legislation in the area of interstate, but not intrastate business. The wording in Article I, section 8, Clause 3, is: “Congress shall have Power to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations and among the several States…. “

“Commerce” means buying, selling, and transporting goods. Going by what was debated at the Constitutional Convention in 1787, the point of “regulating” commerce among the states was to make sure one state was not obstructing business in another state. There were no railroads until 1827, and no trucks until 1910; goods were made and sold locally. But with the growth of the United States, and wheeled transport instead of horses, goods made in one state could be marketed in a distant state.

Thanks to the work of the muckrakers (reformers), Congress gave the Federal Trade Commission, the FTC, power to enforce honesty in labeling. If you said the package that you are selling, interstate, contains 10 pounds of potatoes, it had better contain 10 pounds of potatoes. The laws did not say they had to be delicious potatoes, but the FTC could refer to other laws about food purity, handled by the Department of Agriculture and the FDA. The FTC was allowed, for example, to seize rotten meat in transit.

Caveat: I am not clear on the amendments, if any, that permits FTC to actually critique the quality of the goods. I learned only recently that the FDA, Food and Drug Administration, was given the power to evaluate the “safety and efficacy” of medicines. I am sure this is unconstitutional. It is a major blessing of American’s constitution-mindednes that Congress can be checked when it acts ultra vires — beyond its powers. For the feds to be in charge of our health is 100% anti-parchment.

David (Koch) against Several Goliaths

A valuable part of Suzanne Caum’s book shows us the energy that the FYC expended doing things, mostly illegal, to persecute the good doctor. (Don’t forget that we are good at that in Oz, too. See my 2023 book Society Is the Authority: Law and the Russell Pridgeon Case.)

A quick list. Recall that harassment of Koch began in 1917 when he did his first cure (which he says was accidental!):

The “baddies” got a Grand Jury in Michigan to indict Koch by telling those grand jurors that Koch was a crook and as soon “as the indictment was made,” they would reveal the evidence against him. [!]

In 1942, the indictment was sent to police in Koch’s then-home of Delray, Florida where, on Good Friday, he was arrested. He was taken to a jail cell that was, shall; we say, Fecal City. He got bail of $10,000 which was illegally high in Florida. Later he was tried (for “falsely” claiming that his product could cure cancer), and this ended with a hung jury.  In 1946 he went through the same routine. The most crucial support he got was from the head of the DOW chemical company, who averred that Koch was a genius.

Outside forces included his cured patients being threatened with death if they testified; a most helpful Dr Arnott of Canada being summoned to be a witness against Koch (and was almost extradited when he refused); a spy moving into the house in back of Koch’s office; and a suspicious death of a helpful bureaucrat. Check this from page 196:

“One juror was a little crippled woman who was reportedly beaten into submission in the jury room…. [This] was corroborated by another juror.”

During preparation of the FTC’s file, “officials” marched into the hospital that harbored an essential proof of Koch’s work, in the form of the biopsy of a patient, Mrs Trapp.  They took it away, and never admitted that it was they who showed up to collect it.

In other words, the familiar litany of how a government, because it wears the badge, can cancel all of a citizen’s rights to a fair trial. Would that we all had a Mrs Caum to dig for it and express it in a rational way.

Long story short, the FTC The FTC invoked a cease-and-desist order against Koch Laboratories, Dr. Koch, and his brother. It legally required the parties to discontinue use of allegedly false advertisements. Per 15 USC  52(a):

It shall be unlawful for any person… , to disseminate, … any false advertisement—

(1)m By United States mails, or in or having an effect upon commerce, by any means, for the purpose of inducing, … the purchase of food, drugs, devices, services, or cosmetics; …

Koch more or less stopped feeding the cure to other doctors, although for a while he was welcome in Brazil where the government wanted him to cure patients until the US interfered down there, too. In 1948 TIME magazine did for Koch’s theory what the MSM did for ivermecin theory.  A complete smear job, taken seriously by the whole population.

Can the Bureaucracy Prosecute?

Finally, Suzanne Caum did a very good job of exposing the way in which the FTC could, legally, be almost the prosecutor itself. It had the authority to hand to the judge and jury its facts, even if they were based on “experts’ opinions” which are not facts. And it could legally — I am using that term in a devil-may-care fashion — decide to NOT put into the file some pieced of evidence that were fabulously in Koch’s favor.

For now, I do not know if the recent SCOTUS case, overturning “the Chevron doctrine” will prevent federal agencies from having such outrageous powers. If yes, that may help us a lot with matters Covid. I will try to report on this as it develops.

In sum, best wishes to the late Suzanne Caum for her 75th anniversary of being cured of arthritis by Dr William Koch, and massive thanks to her for never backing down, and for fulfilling her beautiful vow.

Constitutionality

A word must be said about the Commerce Clause. Courts have mostly given the nod to federal takeover of state’s prerogatives. (States don’t seem to care about this!) It is often done by the funding gig. For example, the feds have no role in Education, as none of the 18 grants of power in Article I, sec 8, has anything whatsoever to do with education. But somehow, Congress says “Hey, States, we will send you a kazillion dollars if you incorporate such-and-such into your schools.”

I can say from my experience with the Boston Marathon bombing case (in which I am an amicus curiae) that US prosecutors bring charges against a person by claiming that the crime committed is federal if “interstate commerce” is even slightly involved. Jahar Tsarnaev was accuse of causing damage on Boylston St, Boston, which Massachusetts could prosecute, but the excuse for federalizing it was that the Marathon brings in spectators, as tourists, from all over the place.

By the Year 1995, in a 5-4 decision, the US Supreme Court, had said “Excu-use me. Why are we stretching the Commerce Clause?” The case is US v Lopez. The ruling was that “commerce” could not be invoked to involve the feds in the regulating of handguns.

Justice Clarence Thomas has said Maybe we should re-open the whole issue of stretching Article I, section 8, Clause 3 too far. We can also talk about that in regard to the FDA.