I am confident you can find endlless quotes supporting your point of view but I notice you don't respond to my questions, not that I have any expectation you will.
Here are two scenarios:
1) Person accepts chemotherapy as the treatment, receives a negative biopsy after treatment, is told chemotherapy worked.
2) Person receives a negative biopsy after refusing chemotherapy, biopsy is sent to a lab in the United States to "verify" results.
In my view we are observing propoganda at work, the "evidence" is framed to dismiss any results other than those supported by the cancer industry.
rhubarb, I posted Connie Walker's article because she's a FN woman who is also an investigative reporter, one who has been in direct contact with both JJ and her mother and with the quack who is killing her. In this article Connie employs a lot of her own perspective. There have been a lot of allegations about a lack of respect for aboriginal perspectives, so I've provided one that seems to be knowledgeable on all counts.
JJ had chemotherapy, therefore your scenario #2 is irrelevant to this discussion.
I don't have much to respond with to your rejection of evidence. All I can point to is that you've provided no evidence at any point in this very lengthy thread. You've emplyed hostile ad hominem arguments, claimed non-specific anecdotes, accused posters of racism and cultural insensitivity and howled about offense. You've spouted some of the favourite tropes of the worst kind of fraudster there is, the medical quack. But not one, single, documented case of alt med curing leukemia.
So before you demand I answer any more questions, how about you pony up some evidence more substantial than your feels and then we can compare and contrast. In the meantime, you've got nothing but hot air to add to the conversation.