A well-defended, somewhat scientific argument about the power of positive thinking.


A physician unfolds his theory about curing cancer—not by fighting it with hatred but by correcting it with love.

The “war on cancer” is a familiar phrase to many. But what if the solution involves loving your cancer instead of battling it? This is the heart of Rushenas’ (Le Sang-Graal, 2011) work. Readers are the gods of their cells, and the emotions they radiate “will lead to specific changes at the cellular level, for better or for worse.” Using intense personification, the author explains that projecting hatred to cancer cells (or “orphan cells,” as he compassionately calls them) will cause them to violently retaliate whereas sending them unconditional love can restore harmony. So does this mean people can just think their way out of having cancer? Though the whole book seems to head toward this, in the end Rushenas asserts that traditional cancer treatments (chemotherapy, radiotherapy, etc.) are still the answer. But they should be viewed as lovingly correcting the cancer cells, not resentfully destroying them. Just as near-death experiences often give people feelings of sublime love and joy and a desire to change, this cellular near-death experience can have a momentous, positive effect on cancer cells. The author notes, however, that emotional visualization (imagining being healthy) must be coupled with corresponding actions (maintaining a beneficial lifestyle) to be effectual. Rushenas efficiently builds his theory one principle at a time, establishing each idea so that it’s fully understandable, and even quite believable, before moving forward. Unfortunately, the price he pays for clarity and persuasion is verbosity: The topic of cancer doesn’t take center stage until Page 91, and readers must plod through extensive autobiographical details and thick metaphysical musings to get there. As a doctor, Rushenas elevates the discussion of human energy to a new level with his scientific observations, especially concerning cell biology. Readers who are open to pseudoscience (like the Emoto water experiments the author refers to) will be most receptive to Rushenas’ theory, though others will likely still be intrigued by this novel perspective.

A well-defended, somewhat scientific argument about the power of positive thinking.

Pub Date: Oct. 1, 2018

ISBN: 978-1-4834-8734-2

Page Count: 164

Publisher: Lulu

Review Posted Online: Nov. 24, 2018

Did you like this book?

No Comments Yet

Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis...



Privately published by Strunk of Cornell in 1918 and revised by his student E. B. White in 1959, that "little book" is back again with more White updatings.

Stricter than, say, Bergen Evans or W3 ("disinterested" means impartial — period), Strunk is in the last analysis (whoops — "A bankrupt expression") a unique guide (which means "without like or equal").

Pub Date: May 15, 1972

ISBN: 0205632645

Page Count: 105

Publisher: Macmillan

Review Posted Online: Oct. 28, 2011

Kirkus Reviews Issue: May 1, 1972

Did you like this book?


Possibly inspired by the letters Cleary has received as a children's author, this begins with second-grader Leigh Botts' misspelled fan letter to Mr. Henshaw, whose fictitious book itself derives from the old take-off title Forty Ways W. Amuse a Dog. Soon Leigh is in sixth grade and bombarding his still-favorite author with a list of questions to be answered and returned by "next Friday," the day his author report is due. Leigh is disgruntled when Mr. Henshaw's answer comes late, and accompanied by a set of questions for Leigh to answer. He threatens not to, but as "Mom keeps nagging me about your dumb old questions" he finally gets the job done—and through his answers Mr. Henshaw and readers learn that Leigh considers himself "the mediumest boy in school," that his parents have split up, and that he dreams of his truck-driver dad driving him to school "hauling a forty-foot reefer, which would make his outfit add up to eighteen wheels altogether. . . . I guess I wouldn't seem so medium then." Soon Mr. Henshaw recommends keeping a diary (at least partly to get Leigh off his own back) and so the real letters to Mr. Henshaw taper off, with "pretend," unmailed letters (the diary) taking over. . . until Leigh can write "I don't have to pretend to write to Mr. Henshaw anymore. I have learned to say what I think on a piece of paper." Meanwhile Mr. Henshaw offers writing tips, and Leigh, struggling with a story for a school contest, concludes "I think you're right. Maybe I am not ready to write a story." Instead he writes a "true story" about a truck haul with his father in Leigh's real past, and this wins praise from "a real live author" Leigh meets through the school program. Mr. Henshaw has also advised that "a character in a story should solve a problem or change in some way," a standard juvenile-fiction dictum which Cleary herself applies modestly by having Leigh solve his disappearing lunch problem with a burglar-alarmed lunch box—and, more seriously, come to recognize and accept that his father can't be counted on. All of this, in Leigh's simple words, is capably and unobtrusively structured as well as valid and realistic. From the writing tips to the divorced-kid blues, however, it tends to substitute prevailing wisdom for the little jolts of recognition that made the Ramona books so rewarding.

Pub Date: Aug. 22, 1983

ISBN: 143511096X

Page Count: 133

Publisher: Morrow/HarperCollins

Review Posted Online: Oct. 16, 2011

Kirkus Reviews Issue: Aug. 1, 1983

Did you like this book?