I know that REAL drugs made my cancer go into remission. Things like experimental chemo and radiation and pills and shots cured me. And I am 100 , no 125 percent sure that if I just ate fruit and did these other nutjob cures id be dead rightnow.
Printable View
I know that REAL drugs made my cancer go into remission. Things like experimental chemo and radiation and pills and shots cured me. And I am 100 , no 125 percent sure that if I just ate fruit and did these other nutjob cures id be dead rightnow.
First of all, I'm truly sorry that you have cancer and are made to go through chemo. But, sure, you are cured, but at what cost? Do you feel good after chemo? How much money does it cost your family/insurance? If it could be done at a fraction of the cost and discomfort, would you not opt for that treatment? Specifically, how do you feel about this
Seriously, do you have any proof other than "I know in my mind that their methods cured me and other methods wouldn't have." Do you think those Nobel Laureate doctors are quacks?Quote:
In one Unproven Methods list, of sixty-three methods on the list, 44% of them were not investigated at all by any independent agency before making the list. In 11% of the cases, the investigative results were positive.[199] In only one case that I am aware of, was an Unproven Method subject to a medical double-blind study, which is the only way, according to the medical establishment's own rules, that it could be proven or disproven (something that the orthodox treatments have never really been subject to).[200] In that case, with laetrile, the trial was arguably rigged.
Why don't more doctors speak out? Because they are black listed, lose their license, or get thrown in jail. Medicines' the name and money's the game.
Look, I'm not even arguing about whether or not the alternative methods work. I just want to know why the American Cancer Society feels the need to suppress information and testing of said methods, and in the case of laetrile, why "the trial was arguably rigged?" This alone should cause people to question the establishment.
I was watching Leno and he had as a guest an old woman, I think she was 104, who had shot a hole in one in golf. Leno asked what her secret was to a long and healthy life. She replied, "stay away from doctors" and everyone laughed. She looked a little puzzled by the audience reaction. Like, what's so funny?
At this point you're being rude and annoying. No offense.
In what way?Quote:
Originally Posted by BabyFacedAbortion
Well I know that my docotors at childrens hospital used the experimental chemo and the radiation and such b/c it does work. B/c of the doctors that treated me and others like them the rate fro my cancers survival rate is huge! 10 years ago it was a death sentance but thanks to the wonders of science im fine, my kids will be fine, and ill (hopefully) live a nice, long life. Now why would I go and risk my life to all these radical treatments? Especially when I know the doctors know what their doing with what they have. And yes, I did feel like shit after chemo. My hair fell out, I was puffy, the steroids made me lose a bunch of weight but you know what? It was really worth it at the end. Im healthy now, my hairs back and long and im a normal young adult.
Once again, I am sympathetic to your condition. And, I know that chemotherapy does work at various levels of success, and I'm happy that you beat your cancer.
I never said to risk your life, and I wouldn't expect you to. All I'm saying is that there could be, and should be, more testing and study done on alternative methods. As it is now, the American Cancer Society does not even allow it.
B/c almost all of that crap, like light therapy and shit doesnt work? Why fix something that works so damn well?
You're saying chemotherapy works so well we don't even need to look for anything better? Sorry, we will have to agree to disagree.
No im not saying that. What I mean is that they have tested the other stuff and it just doesnt compare to what they use now.