To this writing no one successfully does that. Although many well-meaning people carry them, no cross obviously heals or fixes anybody. So in looking for a saving symbology, the observer pounced on the Genesis story of God having Moses erect the famed caduceus in the Sinai for Israelites to gaze upon and be healed. That story also turns out to be an unsubstantiated fairy tale added by bible revisionists; one not corroborated elsewhere in the bible.
Such stories easily lead one to ponder if the ‘power-of-the-cross’ is really real, or is it like the imaged caduceus merely a hope of things unrealized?
Well, since people still daily attend churches neither enriched nor made well by the all the crosses displayed around and waved over them, we obviously have a hung jury on this one, mostly of people who want-to-believe versus those who know better versus mockers who wear little crosses on pierced, tattooed body parts as if that were veneration.
As recalled from reading Old Testament, if the later cross was actually as holy as was the ark-of-the-covenant—which killed people tampering with it—the insolent wouldn't be able to get away with mocking the cross as they do.
But then again, neither should priests and churchniks get away with 'crossing' themselves at every opportunity as if to protect themselves. It seems that crossing-oneself is an inherently cowardly act of hiding behind an imagined greater propriety. In ideal situations, shouldn't the-so-called-power-of-the-cross be used to protect everyone else around the crosser instead ... if its believers could be assured of God's protection over them, and if the cross was holy and if they weren't pusillanimously power-mad little trolls themselves.
Back when earnestly fact-checking the Christian faith, a first good clue about God's actual intentions came from writings of the blessed Corrie Ten Boom of "The Hiding Place" fame, whose body of work confirmed God as patiently proving Himself to us whereas Lucifer's fallen angels rush us into the guilt of false commitments.
Fortified by her observations plus absorption of Brother Andrew's fabulous book "God's Smuggler," the observer became bold enough to question all that the church told him of the faith. And frankly, the many answers he received from church authorities stank.
This hard piece of intelligence certainty leads to another, more straightforward issue about the death cross that no one seems to grasp, of medical evidence that no Cross is an effective eradicator of humans. In better words – no cross don’t kill no one.
Being thrifty and efficient, it was enough for Romans to run someone with a sword or feed them to hungry animals for amusement, so a cross wasn't efficient enough for the thrifty Romans because it took several days of pain and exposure for a man to die upon one. One could be nailed to a rock for the same effect.
However, the Son-of-God's death is much more gruesome, as he was impaled in the manner of the real-life Sparticus, where the tied body's anus is penetrated by a sharpened pole for that person to then slide slowly down the erected pole, piercing it organs. Extremely painful, it is something the hateful would do to anyone ruining their partying with Godly facts of life. Facing this sort of death would certainly anguish anyone the night before, such as was the human Son-of-God anguished at Gethsemane.