Cancer is DEAD: Cancer cures from A to Z

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss

PART ONE

The only thing that can cure cancer or any ailment is your own body!

From the words of the late Dr. Isabelle Moser, ND

Dr Isabelle Moser, How and When to be Your Own Doctor
Hygienists usually inform the patient quite clearly and directly that the practitioner has no ability to heal them or cure their condition and that no doctor of any type actually is able to heal. Only the body can heal itself, something it is eager and usually very able to do if only given the chance. One pithy old saying among hygienists goes, “if the body can’t heal itself, nothing can heal it.” The primary job of the hygienic practitioner is to reeducate the patient by conducting them through their first natural healing process. If this is done well the sick person learns how to get out of their own body’s way and permit its native healing power to manifest. Unless later the victim of severe traumatic injury, never again will that person need obscenely expensive medical procedures. Hygienists rarely make six figure incomes from regular, repeat business.
...
This aspect of hygienic medicine makes it different than almost all the others, even most other holistic methods. Hygiene is the only system that does not interpose the assumed healing power of a doctor between the patient and wellness.

12 months ago, I discovered Natural Hygiene (NH) and have been putting it into practice in my life with good effect. Fortunately, I've not suffered from any major disease so I can't say that I've put it to a serious test but it has made a significant difference to my health and well-being. My longstanding digestive complaint is a thing of the past and the chronic muscle pain in my hip disappeared.

There's a library of reference material for NH and on-line forums for discussions with INHS members. But the one book that I definitely recommend everyone read is Dr Isabelle Moser, How and When to be Your Own Doctor. NH is well over 150 years old and over that time, the world has become an even more toxic environment in so many ways e.g. lifestyle, radiation, processed food and the additives, vaccinations for everything. Dr Moser's book is the best account of modern day practice that I've found so far and she pulls together so many related threads in an extremely readable manner. It's free, can be read on-line or downloaded as PDF or I believe that you can buy a printed copy should you wish.

The beauty of NH is it's simplicity although it requires accepting a different paradigm of the relationship between the body and disease. From there, all the pieces just start fitting together. Staying healthy means achieving the right balance of rest, exercise, work, play, nutrition and the avoidance of toxins.

On the other hand, "curing" a disease requires a different approach and this is where the advice from an experienced Hygienist can be crucial. To my understanding, the approach is always to help your body do what it wants to do - achieve perfect health. To do that, an Hygienist will tend to recommend fasting and resting which will allow your body to focus all available energy into resolving the cause of your sickness.

One caveat - If your body has lost all vitality (life force) or if you've lost the will to live, no amount of food, medicine, chemicals or radiation will help.

To put this into perspective, consider that from one fertilised ovum, a human being in all its complexity develops. No intervention is required from doctor, scientist, or for that matter, the mother. As long as the mother keeps herself healthy and properly fed, the baby will develop to the best of its ability. With that power, what can we teach the body about healing itself? Idotwhat mentioned using nano tech and micro machines to fight disease but that will be the equivalent of letting doctors loose inside of you to hack away as they see fit. If anything it will add to the burden that the body already has to deal with.


Having read through 15 pages of replies, I see two fairly common themes in this thread:

1. SHOULD I TRUST MY MEDICAL DOCTOR OR AN ALTERNATIVE PRACTITIONER?

Here is what Moser has to say about medical doctors

Dr Isabelle Moser, How and When to be Your Own Doctor
Doctors obtain an enormous sense of self-importance at medical school, where they proudly endured the high pressure weeding out of any free spirit unwilling to grind away into the night for seven or more years. Anyone incapable of absorbing and regurgitating huge amounts of rote information; anyone with a disrespectful or irreverent attitude toward the senior doctor-gods who arrogantly serve as med school professors, anyone like this was eliminated with especial rapidity. When the thoroughly submissive, homogenized survivors are finally licensed, they assume the status of junior doctor-gods.

...and about the freedom of doctors

Dr Isabelle Moser, How and When to be Your Own Doctor
But becoming an official medical deity doesn’t permit one to create their own methods. No no, the AMA’s professional oversight and control system makes continued possession of the license to practice (and the high income that usually comes with it) entirely dependent on continued conformity to what is defined by the AMA as “correct practice.” Any doctor who innovates beyond strict limits or uses nonstandard treatments is in real danger of losing their livelihood and status.

But Moser doesn't blame the doctors... (nod to rogerstigers)

(CONTINUED)

reply to post by JohnJasper


PART TWO

Dr Isabelle Moser, How and When to be Your Own Doctor
When I was younger and less experienced I thought that the main reason traditional medical practice did not stress the body’s own healing power and represented the doctor as a necessary intervention was for profit. But after practicing for over twenty years I now understand that the last thing most people want to hear is that their own habits, especially their eating patterns and food choices, are responsible for their disease and that their cure is to only be accomplished through dietary reform, which means unremittingly applied self-discipline.

One of the hardest things to ask of a person is to change a habit. The reason that AMA doctors have most of the patients is they’re giving the patients exactly what they want, which is to be allowed to continue in their unconscious irresponsibility.

I was amazed at how many people read the OP and then wanted to have these food items condensed into supplement form (All Seeing Eye, hawaiinguy12. This confirms the mindset mentioned by Dr Moser above.

How about alternative therapies?

Indellkoffer and mnmcandiez asked where are the success stories?

Well,

pajoly posted a personal success story.

ReginaAdonnaAaron posted the documentary The Beautiful Truth on Page 3 of this thread. IMO this documentary is a must-see! It confirms a lot of information that I discovered in my independent research but it added interviews with cancer survivors thanks to the Gerson method. Gerson was not specifically an Hygienist but was close enough to get great results with his treatment program.

Moser relates several case studies in her book but unfortunately is no longer with us. There are several Hygienists available for consultation and many will answer questions in the on-line discussion forum. Many members will relate personal experience as well.

Any therapy that ignores the basics of nature and professes to cure you without you taking responsibility for your own health should be eyed with suspicion. Otherwise judge them on their merits.

2. HOW DO I APPLY THESE CURES TO MY BODY?

Although there may be some advantage to be gained from applying substances to your skin or using non-food items internally as palliative treatments, I'm very much in favor of just leaving the body to get on with it. Healthy eating is a great idea and including many of the food items on the list into your diet on a regular basis makes sense. I use the scattergun approach of eating a variety of natural foods that way I don't have to be an expert in which foods provide which nutrients. I've also learned that for instance a carrot can only be as nutricious as the soil that it's grown in and not all soils are equal so I eat natural foods from various sources.

Good nutrition is a difficult topic . Raw/cooked?, meat/vegetarian/vegan?, seafood?, how much?, when to eat?

Dr Isabelle Moser, How and When to be Your Own Doctor
For the moment, lets ignore individual genetic inabilities to digest specific foods and also ignore the effects stress and enervation can have on our ability to extract nutrition out of the food we are eating. Without those factors to consider, it is correct to say that, to the extent one’s diet contains the maximum potential amount of nutrition relative to the number of calories you are eating, to that extent a person will be healthy. To the extent the diet is degraded from that ideal, to that extent, disease will develop. Think about it!

Dr Isabelle Moser, How and When to be Your Own Doctor
What is common between meat-eating Eskimos, isolated highland Swiss living on rye bread, milk and cheese; isolated Scottish island Celts with a dietary of oat porridge, kale and sea foods; highland central Africans (Malawi) eating sorghum, millet tropical root crops and all sorts of garden vegetables, plus a little meat and dairy; Fijians living on small islands in the humid tropics at sea level eating sea foods and garden vegetables. What they had in common was that their foods were all at the extreme positive end of the Health = Nutrition / Calories scale. The agriculturists were on very fertile soil that grew extraordinarily nutrient-rich food, the sea food gatherers were obtaining their tucker from the sea—the place where all the fertility that ever was in the soil had washed out of the land had been transported. Sea foods are extraordinarily nutrient rich.

There's a lot to get your head around with NH and it will pay to start studying it before you desperately need it. I've only glossed over some of these points and will gladly discuss further items in more detail if requested. Good health to all of you.

PS: I too would like to congratulate the OP for such an immense achievement in collecting this valuable information and I certainly hope that it proves beneficial to a great many people.

i love this comunity when one person does a study like yours and posts it for all to see and use it makes me want to share info and fight for the human beings that populate this site

xploder

ps im going to ask the mods to set up and award winning threads page and request your thread be the very top s+f my exceptional friend

Anybody heard of Dr. Burzynski?

www.burzynskimovie.com...

Burzynski is the story of a medical doctor and Ph.D biochemist named Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski who won the largest, and possibly the most convoluted and intriguing legal battle against the Food & Drug Administration in American history.
His victorious battles with the United States government were centered around Dr. Burzynski's belief in and commitment to his gene-targeted cancer medicines he discovered in the 1970's called Antineoplastons, which have currently completed Phase II FDA-supervised clinical trials in 2009 and will begin the final phase of testing in 2010.

When Antineoplastons are approved, it will mark the first time in history a single scientist, not a pharmaceutical company, will hold the exclusive patent and distribution rights on a paradigm-shifting medical break through.

Antineoplastons are responsible for curing some of the most incurable forms of terminal cancer. Various cancer survivors are presented in the film who chose his treatment instead of surgery, chemotherapy or radiation - with full disclosure of medical records to support their diagnosis and recovery.

One form of cancer - diffuse, intrinsic, childhood brainstem glioma has never before been cured in any experimental clinical trial in the history of medicine. Antineoplastons hold the first cures in history - dozens of them.

Burzynski takes the audience through the treacherous, yet victorious, 14-year journey both Dr. Burzynski and his patients have had to endure in order to obtain FDA-approved clinical trials of Antineoplastons.

Dr. Burzynski resides and practices medicine in Houston, Texas. He was able to initially produce and administer his discovery without FDA-approval from 1977-1995 because the state of Texas at this time did not require that Texas physicians be required to adhere to Federal law in this situation. This law has since been changed.

As with anything that changes current-day paradigms, Burzynski's ability to successfully treat incurable cancer with such consistency has baffled the industry. However this fact has prompted numerous investigations by the Texas Medical Board, who relentlessly took Dr. Burzynski as high as the state supreme court in their failed attempt to halt his practices.

Likewise, the Food and Drug Administration engaged in four Federal Grand Juries spanning over a decade attempting to indict Dr. Burzynski, all of which ended in no finding of fault on his behalf. Finally, Dr. Burzynski was indicted in their 5th Grand Jury in 1995, resulting in two federal trials and two sets of jurors finding him not guilty of any wrongdoing. If convicted, Dr. Burzynski would have faced a maximum of 290 years in a federal prison and $18.5 million in fines.

However, what was revealed a few years after Dr. Burzynski won his freedom, helps to paint a more coherent picture regarding the true motivation of the United States government's relentless persecution of Stanislaw Burzynski, M.D., Ph.D.

You gotta think outside the "physical" box. Cancer is physical.
'YOU' are forever my friend. Pay cancer no attention for it will
never return the favor.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by keithallenlaw
As far as doctors and big pharma are concerned. They have
one use and one use only. The ER room and that's it!
For one to constantly visit doctors and place their life
into their hands, and the hands of big pharma is foolish.

Think so? Cuz they cured my cancer with no appreciable side effects. Somehow I have difficulty seeing that as foolish, but perhaps you know best, eh?

Hopefully you will never find yourself in position where you have to bet your life, or that of a loved one, upon this particular opinion.

Have you considered that, while cautioning folks away from seeking medical help for cancer, you might be depriving them of a narrow opportunity for successful treatment by conventional means...effectively killing them?

A self-edit to include the fact that it was through regular visits to my doctor that my cancer was discovered early and treated successfully.

[edit on 25-8-2010 by JohnnyCanuck]

I applaud this thread. I feel the OP's pain. I just found out two days ago that my grandmother is going to die soon. She has lung cancer. About a month ago, I lost my great grandmother to cancer. And a year before that, I lost my other grandmother to cancer. A couple years before that, I lost my uncle to it. I've had a few other relatives with cancer, but they got treatment, and are just fine for now. I too am tired of losing loved ones to this horrible disease. And to top it off, I go in tomorrow to find out if I have cancer. If I do...I'll probably go with the treatment that includes electricity and vitamins. I'll also start breathing exercises to help with oxygen levels. To hell with chemo. I won't touch it.
As for my grandmother, she's opting to let the cancer take it's course. She's in her 80's and she says she's had a good run, and she's ready to get some rest. She refuses chemo, or any other treatment. I love her and I respect her choice. I'll sure miss her though...

reply to post by Jomina



I can vouch for stinging nettle. It definitely helps calm down asthma and allergies.
I'm sure it does even more good in the body.

[edit on 27-8-2010 by luminev]

Originally posted by keithallenlaw
You gotta think outside the "physical" box. Cancer is physical.
'YOU' are forever my friend. Pay cancer no attention for it will
never return the favor.

Well...the mind controls the body. Cancer is physical but it starts on a mental level.
Emotional and psychological health must accompany wise nutrition and lifestyle choices.

reply to post by JohnJasper


Wow truly outstanding posts! If only I had one of those "Applause" buttons...

reply to post by XPLodER


Hey thanks!

There ought to at least be a way to list threads in order of most flags & posts, so that highly flagged threads don't disappear into obscurity when nobody posts to them in a while.

reply to post by Ventessa


At least try to get her to eat large amounts of berries everyday. Get her a good juicer perhaps...

Originally posted by luminev
I can vouch for stinging nettle. It definitely helps calm down asthma and allergies.
I'm sure it does even more good in the body.

Stinging Nettle
en.wikipedia.org...

Antiproliferative effect on human prostate cancer cells by a stinging nettle root (Urtica dioica) extract
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

In the present study the activity of a 20% methanolic extract of stinging nettle roots (Urtica dioica L., Urticaceae) on the proliferative activity of human prostatic epithelial (LNCaP) and stromal (hPCPs) cells was evaluated using a colorimetric assay. A concentration-dependent and significant (p < 0.05) antiproliferative effect of the extract was observed only on LNCaP cells during 7 days, whereas stromal cell growth remained unaltered. The inhibition was time-dependent with the maximum of growth reduction (30%) at a concentration of 1.0E-6 mg/ml on day 5 compared to the untreated control. On day 4 and 6, the reduction in proliferation of LNCaP cells showed the minimal effective dose at 1.0E-9 mg/ml. No cytotoxic effect of ME-20 on cell proliferation was observed. The antiproliferative effect of ME-20 of stinging nettle roots observed both in an in vivo model and in an in vitro system clearly indicates a biologically relevant effect of compounds present in the extract.

Effects of Nigella sativa L. and Urtica dioica L. on Lipid Peroxidation, Antioxidant Enzyme Systems and Some Liver Enzymes in CCl4-Treated Rats
onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

This study was designed to investigate the effects Nigella sativa L. (NS) and Urtica dioica L. (UD) on lipid peroxidation, antioxidant enzyme systems and some liver enzymes in carbon tetrachloride (CCl4)-treated rats. ...The CCl4 treatment for 45 days increased the lipid peroxidation and liver enzymes, and also decreased the antioxidant enzyme levels. NS or UD treatments (alone or combination) for 45 days starting day 46 decreased the elevated lipid peroxidation and liver enzyme levels and also increased the reduced antioxidant enzyme levels. Live weights of the rats decreased in group A, and increased in groups B, C and D. It is concluded that NS and UD decrease the lipid peroxidation and liver enzymes, and increase the antioxidant defence system activity in the CCl4-treated rats.

Damn in vivo even. Good find!

[edit on 27-8-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Fireweed
Epilobium angustifolium (plant)
en.wikipedia.org...

Characterization of the Effect of Epilobium Extracts on Human Cell Proliferation
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

We have previously shown that extracts of different Epilobium species, a phytotherapeutic agent used in folk medicine as a treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia, inhibit proliferation of human prostate cells. The selectivity of this effect was evaluated in four different human cell lines (PZ-HPV-7, normal prostate cells; LNCaP, transformed prostate cells; HMEC, mammary cells, and 1321N1, astrocytoma cells). Different extracts of Epilobium species (E. rosmarinifolium, E. spicatum, and E. tetragonum) had similar growth-inhibitory effects in all cell lines tested, indicating a lack of specificity for prostate cells. Inhibition of DNA synthesis was mostly due to the nonpolar fraction of the extracts which is expected to contain flavonoids and sterols. Polar fractions were devoid of activity with the exception of that from E. rosmarinifolium. This species is the most potent in the antiproliferative effect and contains the highest concentration of oenothein B, a hydrolyzable ellagitannin. Oenothein B inhibited DNA synthesis in all four cell lines tested. Extracts of E. angustifolium (the Linné denomination of E. spicatum) and of E. spicatum from different sources were compared for their ability to inhibit DNA synthesis and for their oenothein B content. The E. angustifolium extract contained an amount of oenothein B 40-fold higher than the other extract of the same species and was ten times more potent in inhibiting DNA synthesis in a human prostate cell line. These results indicate that Epilobium extracts inhibit proliferation of prostate cells in a nonspecific manner. Oenothein B may play a role in this effect, but other active compounds are also present. The difference observed between extracts from the same species underscores the importance of determination and standardization of active ingredients in phytotherapeutic agents.

Anti-proliferative effect on a prostatic epithelial cell line (PZ-HPV-7) by Epilobium angustifolium
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Symptomatic benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) is a common condition in elderly men and has a significant impact on their daily lives. The drugs prescribed for treatment include alpha1-blockers, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitors and plant preparations. Epilobium angustifolium L. is deemed to be helpful in BPH therapy, although there is less information regarding the mechanism of its biological activity. The present study evaluated the effect of E. angustifolium extract on human prostatic epithelial cells (PZ-HPV-7). The exposure to E. angustifolium extract induced a marked inhibition of cell growth in all tested conditions. The anti-proliferative effect observed in in vitro systems clearly indicates a biologically relevant effect of compounds present in the extract. Considering these results, the use in traditional medicine of E. angustifolium extract against BPH seems to be justified. However, further experimental studies are needed to determine the biochemical mechanism of the action and the clinical value of the E. angustifolium extract.

Extracts of various species of Epilobium inhibit proliferation of human prostate cells
onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

This study examined whether various species of Epilobium, a phytotherapeutic agent used in folk medicine as a treatment for benign prostatic hyperplasia, may have an antiproliferative effect in PZ-HPV-7 human prostatic epithelial cells in-vitro. The MTT (3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5-diphenyl-tetrazolium bromide) test, [methyl-3H]thymidine incorporation into DNA and flow cytometry analysis were used to evaluate cell proliferation. Ethanolic extracts of E. spicatum, E. rosmarinifolium and E. tetragonum inhibited DNA synthesis in PZ-HPV-7 cells. While at high concentrations all extracts were cytotoxic, DNA synthesis was also decreased at levels that caused no or little cytotoxicity. Treatment of cells with Epilobium extracts did not result in a formation of DNA fragments (evaluated by the TUNEL assay) or chromatin condensation (assessed by Hoechst staining). Flow cytometry analysis indicated that Epilobium extracts inhibit the progression of the cell cycle from the G0/G1 phase. These results suggest that extracts of Epilobium inhibit proliferation of human PZ-HPV-7 cells in-vitro by affecting progression of the cell cycle. This study provides some initial biological plausibility for the use of Epilobium extracts in benign prostatic hyperplasia.

[edit on 27-8-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by keithallenlaw
As far as doctors and big pharma are concerned. They have
one use and one use only. The ER room and that's it!
For one to constantly visit doctors and place their life
into their hands, and the hands of big pharma is foolish.

Think so? Cuz they cured my cancer with no appreciable side effects. Somehow I have difficulty seeing that as foolish, but perhaps you know best, eh?

Hopefully you will never find yourself in position where you have to bet your life, or that of a loved one, upon this particular opinion.

Have you considered that, while cautioning folks away from seeking medical help for cancer, you might be depriving them of a narrow opportunity for successful treatment by conventional means...effectively killing them?

A self-edit to include the fact that it was through regular visits to my doctor that my cancer was discovered early and treated successfully.

[edit on 25-8-2010 by JohnnyCanuck]

.


Is to bad today all we hear on TV is about this pill and that pill that helps us with everything . This post brings into our attention that there are other ways ...not pills after pills for each little thing . That is the cause of later cancer an abused body with all sorts of pills since we are babies .

Is the food the pills and the way we live that gives us cancer in later life. If doctors saved one person more power to them but is the same doctors that pump us up with pills all our lives ..This is the problem .Even when there are minor issues that could be solved with plants or natural medicine They still gives us pills !!!!!!

All the best to everyone who chooses to open the eyes and see what is best for the souls and for the body.

[edit on 27-8-2010 by lisa2012]

reply to post by lisa2012

Is the food the pills and the way we live that gives us cancer in later life. If doctors saved one person more power to them but is the same doctors that pump us up with pills all our lives ..This is the problem .Even when there are minor issues that could be solved with plants or natural medicine They still gives us pills !!!!!!

Too right, lisa2012! And even before we show any sort of illness, they whacking us with multi-vaccine after multi-vaccine. It's amazing that any of us survive our childhoods.

I never mentioned that part...

Last October my mom had to take the nasal H1N1 vaccine per her job. (she reported that she sneezed as soon as she took it, and that she had breathing problems ever since)

November: Fire Safe Cigarettes showed up.

This August: Lung Cancer (tumor at the top of her lung).

Cause & Effect???

Well, she has smoked forever, definitely a stage set, but they could have dropped the curtain over the stage.

On a positive note: After 3 weeks her tumor is only 25% of what it was a couple-few weeks ago!!

[edit on 28-8-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

So it turns out my tumor is not cancer. However, I had some other tests come back funny, so I have to go back for more blood work, and another set of tests. So far I've been lucky and it looks like my worst case scenario would be a hysterectomy. It's ok with me, I've already been blessed with two amazing kids.
As for my grandma, they did more testing on her as well and found out the cancer is actually just in her lungs, and it is a kind of cancer that is easily fought. My grandma actually agreed to try chemo on it. I hope it does more good than harm for her.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
reply to post by glitchinmymatrix

 

Originally posted by glitchinmymatrix
Acai berries? They aren't even a "superfood" much less a cancer cure.

Oh?
en.wikipedia.org...
Nice try.

Anyways...

--------------------------------

I'll tell you what: don't eat any of that stuff, either before or during cancer. Just eat fries cooked well done and smothered in oyster sauce, drink cola, and smoke fire safe cigarettes. Avoid all of that snake oil. It doesn't matter anyways. Let's all just be cynical pessimists.

Originally posted by glitchinmymatrix
I hope nobody here really goes on to cure anyone with some cinnamon and vanilla tea sweetened with honey while smoking a joint!

That's an interesting statement. You "hope" that nobody does manage to do that? Vile.

[edit on 24-8-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

You left out THIS information FROM YOUR OWN SOURCE (wiki):
wiki superfuit src

This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. It needs additional references or sources for verification. Tagged since June 2009. It needs sources or references that appear in third-party publications.Tagged since June 2009. It may contain an unpublished synthesis of published material that conveys ideas not verifiable with the given sources. Please help add reliable sources about this topic. Tagged since June 2009. An editor has expressed concern that it is unbalanced. Tagged since June 2009.

The superfruit category is a relatively new marketing approach for promoting common or rare fruits used as raw materials and ingredients for the global industries of functional foods, beverages and nutraceuticals.

The fact that you think acai berries as a "superfood" cure anything should be a HUGE warning sign to anyone. It shows you have NOT used critical judgement.

As far as the rest, I made a mistake in my post. I meant to say that I hope that nobody "tries to go on to cure" as in, insists on completely refusing conventional treatments in favor of the all natural ones you mentioned.

And, it's like I said. I can't even debate this with you, because you mentioned way too many. Some of them I do agree may have potential, and I'd consider trying them myself. BUT, you made such a huge list, nobody can bother to address it.

I do not eat the way you described and advise against it as well.

I'm not a cynical pessimist, but here you are promising cures and just listing some things that definitely are bogus combined with some that have potential to help people BUT not necessarily to cure ANYTHING.

You're taking advantage of angry, desperate people who think you're some savior here to rescue them and everyone they love from cancer.

You're misinformed, and like I said, I hope that nobody abandons and refuses conventional care to rely on these unproven methods, especially "superfoods" (marketing ploy).

NONE of these has in single been proven to cure cancer, and your idea that somehow (:puz together they would, is invalid.

Like some others have already said,
Every week or so, cancer and AIDS find new cures!

reply to post by glitchinmymatrix


The thing is you're the only one who ever mentioned superfoods/superfruits, and now your pissing and moaning that it isn't even a real class of foods.

You seem to be bitching about people abandoning conventional treatments as if I told people to do that.

I didn't "mention" 'too many' cancer killers, I cited scholarly papers that showed both in vivo and in vitro successes in fighting and even killing cancer, for basically every single one of them.

What is "definitely bogus"?????

There are rabid snake oil claims out there about Acai and Goji berries being the cure-alls of ALL TIME, claims that acai alone will end obesity and so on. But does that mean that acai is all hype, totally useless? That kind of black and white is right out of DC. The fact is UF proved it kills cancer in vitro. Period. There's no disputing that fact. We can argue over delivery methods, lack of human trials, and so on. Since it has been shown in vitro yet there haven't been human trials is the real issue, much like the rest of those in my list. That is the big story.

NONE of these has in single been proven to cure cancer,

Same thing can be said of your chemo and radiation. They're treated like the "cure", yet about the only real cure is physically chopping the nasty out of there... oh but first it has to be shrunk... and ONLY Big Pharm synthetics are capable of shrinking a tumor.
Right?????

Ok, so I should have titled the thread "Cancer Killers", as it is at my new site:
www.cancerisdead.com...
But too damn bad you go spend 10 days non-stop building a 100 page presentation like this and lets see how fantabulously flawless and perfect it is.

May I ask what profession you're from? I'm in electronics, and not medical ones. Can't wait to hear what you do for a living...

[edit on 29-8-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Same thing can be said of your chemo and radiation. They're treated like the "cure", yet about the only real cure is physically chopping the nasty out of there... oh but first it has to be shrunk... and ONLY Big Pharm synthetics are capable of shrinking a tumor.

Wrong...radiation cured my cancer. Early detection found it (so much for the useless doctor theory) and radiation burned it out. Depriving people of that opportunity by distracting them with UNPROVEN therapies is morally reprehensible.

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Note: Early detection.

Consider yourself lucky.

Are you sure it won't come back?

When people are told they have a year to live following the medical establishments narrow methods, I guess I'm a profitless snake oil bastard for showing them the full armory of weapons at their disposal?

Please quote me where I told people not to do conventional treatments.

[edit on 29-8-2010 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss]

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

 

Note: Early detection.

Consider yourself lucky.

Are you sure it won't come back?

Are you sure you won't get hit by a bus tomorrow?

How sad that feel the need to bolster your argument by dismissing someone else's success story...especially as it regards human life.

Sorry to have let you down, eh?

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck


Early detection usually ensures success. Late detection usually means death. How nice of you to tell potentially terminal people to stick it out with the Doc's narrow approaches after they've been told they have a short time left to live. Rock on, eh.