CANCER CLAIM CURE: BRAUND STILL PRACTISING

Greymouth Evening Star, 6 April 1948, Page 7

CANCER CLAIM CURE: BRAUND STILL PRACTISING

(From C. B. Mentiplay. Special Press Association Correspondent.) SYDNEY, April 5. Though the committee set up by the New South Wales State Government to investigate Mr John Braund’s claim that he can cure cancer has found his case unproved, he has announced that he will continue to treat cancer patients. Sydney newspapers are pressing for publication of the full report of the committee. It has also been suggested that Mr Braund should not be permitted to continue practising while his claims are not upheld. When, after newspaper reports of Mr Braund’s claims, the Government announced the formation of the committee, with a medical sub-commit-tee, Australian citizens were pleased with this approach to what they felt might prove one of the most important medical discoveries of the century. Some disillusionment was felt during the next few weeks, as the papers told of a series of squabbles between the elderly Mr Braund and members of the investigating committee. Mr Braund was reported as saying that he disliked and distrusted doctors, whom he considered had failed where he had succeeded. Four members of the committee, including three ejectors, were his own nominees. The committee was carefully selected in order to obtain a balanced opinion and at the same time to avoid giving offence to Mr Braund. During the investigation he gave further evidence of his dissatisfaction by claiming that the medical sub-committee had rejected some of his most important cases. “Bare Announcement Not Enough” Now the medical sub-committee has concluded its investigations, its report has been adopted unanimously by the full committee, and the full report will be tabled in the State Parliament on Thursday. “Whatever its nature, it should be published promptly and fully,” says the Sydney Morning Herald. “Only thus can the thousands of cancer victims, so vitally and eagerly interested, be enabled to foi’m an accurate estimate of Mr Braund’s capabilities. The bare announcement that his claims have not been substantiated is not enough.” A growing body of opinion, however, is asking why the law cannot prevent Mr Braund from practising until his claims are proved. During the week-end a New Zealand boy, Roderick Nairn, received treatment, and Mr- Braund reported “a noticeable diminution of the swelling.” He is one of many patients treated since the committee” concluded its investigation, and apparently there will be many more. Uses No Surgery As Mr Braund uses no surgery, he cannot be restrained by*law unless it is proved beyond doubt that' his treatment is directly responsible for the death of a patient. “Patients have come here from abroad in a last desperate hope against hope,” says the Sydney Daily Telegraph. “If an impartial, qualified investigation has proved Mr Braund’s claims to be false, he should not be allowed to sell them to people who are prepared to grasp at any straw.”