Cancer: The Forbidden Cures

Cancer: The Forbidden Cures

2010, Health  -   646 Comments
Ratings: 8.01/10 from 597 users.

Cancer claims the lives of thousands of Americans every day, but it also results in tens of billions of dollars in revenue for the medical and pharmaceutical industries. Why would these industries champion a cure for the disease when they enjoy such stratospheric profits in its treatment? This is the premise of the documentary titled Cancer: The Forbidden Cures, a cynical indictment of medical establishment ethics.

The film opens with a rudimentary examination of the disease, including how it develops and spreads in the human body, and the damage it inflicts along the way. The filmmakers' main focus lies in the three mainstays of modern cancer treatment - surgery, chemotherapy and radiation. Their points of view on each of these options are damning. Chemotherapy alone is a toxic compound that has been shown to produce severe illness, diminished immune system capabilities and cognition malfunction. Meanwhile, many suspect that prolonged exposure to radioactive therapies can inspire the same cancers they're employed to treat. Are these really the best solutions we have at our disposal?

Leaders in the field of oncology over a hundred years ago prescribed a treatment regimen that was largely free of toxicity and heavily reliant upon nutritional value. The film contends that all of this changed when the wealthiest members of society began making sizable donations to medical universities in exchange for placement on their boards. The financial prospects of cancer treatment started to outweigh humanitarian concerns almost overnight, according to the film's interview subjects. Drug companies prospered, the cost of additional treatment resources such as radium doubled many times over, research dollars were devoted to pharmaceutical endeavors instead of those aimed at finding a cure, critics within the medical community were discredited as "quacks", and promising alternative therapies were never given an opportunity to succeed.

The filmmakers seem too eager in their willingness to endorse those who claim to have discovered the next miraculous alternative therapy. Largely absent are the voices of those who work tirelessly and with great compassion to defeat the scourge of cancer in our lifetime, and do so while operating within the confines of the same medical establishment the film criticizes. Still, the film's premise of rampant greed working to impede the tides of true progress is valid and worthy of exploration.

Directed by: Massimo Mazzucco

More great documentaries

646 Comments / User Reviews

  1. Thoroughly research information at 1:03 Mark. Dr Ryke Geerd Hamer (German New Medicine) His findings are scientifically sound. Those CT Scan centric rings don’t lie. 🙌🏼

  2. How many of you who are against alternative treatment actually have cancer or have watched a loved one die from cancer and suffer from the side effects of chemo and radiation? I watched my father suffer through chemo and I am currently watching my mother suffer from long term side effects of radiation to her neck 7 years ago. Her teeth are currently falling out and she is having constant pain in her jaw. I am a Registered Nurse but I am totally open to alternative treatment. Learn how your cells work. Learn how your body works. Maybe then you might understand why I believe in alternative treatments. God gave us these natural resources for a reason. The pharmaceutical industry doesn’t care about you. They only care about how much money they make.

    1. One can make that same claim about any and all industries. Especially corporations. Corporations are legally bound to seek the greatest profit per investment.
      The pharmaceutical profit margins are well within the average.
      Oncologists have parents, siblings, spouses, and children. Would they not provide to their own families the treatment that works?
      I was dx’ed with Pancreatic Cancer in November last year. There seems to be new hope for an overall cancer cure in the near future. Hopefully pretty dern near!

  3. Read “The Cancer Cure that Worked”. Then rethink the Western Medicine paradigm. Big Pharma, profit and greed kill.

  4. My wife was diagnosed in January of 2017 with Stage 3a breast cancer.

    Treatment with B17, B15, NO Sugar diet and only fresh greens for 60 days killed 99% of the cancer.

    An additional 60 days (to present with the B17 and B15 and reduced sugar and greens and a semblance of normal foods) and the cancer is gone.

    Biopsy and a test for Nagalase in the blood shows the range well within the normal area.

    Say what you will but an all natural way to cure cancer is 100% true. Diet is the culprit. Cells go crazy and start using sugar to operate instead of O2. For whatever reason this happens, it does, but B17 has two glucose molecules, 2 analgesics and ONE Cyanide molecule. When you starve the cancer cell of sugar it grabs the B17 and kills itself.

    1. Why do you think they inject you with “radioactive” sugar when you have a PET scan? The cancer cells absorb the sugar. CANCER EATS SUGAR.

  5. I think that 90% of you all are "self medicating" with some kind of "unCOOL-AID" read what you all have been carping on each other about, put down the UNCOOL AID, think about it and keep your BS to yourself. NUFF SAID

    1. What on earth are you going on about man!!!!!

  6. Well its true but recently i have heard about a cancer treatment , according to them taking 1 Table Spoon Sodium Bi carbonate for three to four weeks well cure Cancer.

  7. Medical student here with my take.
    The video uses analogies of planes and phones and the progress of technology to imply that cancer research has intentionally been manipulated for profits.

    Several mutations have to occur in a cell so that it's tumor surprising genes and genes that control mitotic capacity are changed in function and where the cell isn't killed with apoptosis. This will create the first cancerous tumor but in these regulatory genes going beyond regulatory control where the epithelial cells that make up over 90% of cancers, can now grow outside of the membrane that healthy epithelial cells cannot grow outside of. In the fact that these regulatory genes don't work, they are more likely to have additional mutations that will create entirely new strains of cancer within the same individual. The more advanced a patient has cancer the further the heterogeneity of strains of cancer cells will exist in the body and can easily be seen by a cancer pathologist trained to do so. THIS IS WHY CANCER IS SO NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE TO TREAT.

    The analogies to a phone or plane fall apart when you realize that mutation is so inherent in biology that the idea of fully eliminating or preventing cancer is impossible. The quickest we can even detect cancer right now in January of 2017 is when a cancer tumor is already a billion cells in size.

    I will say that I personally do not like the pharmaceutical industry for a multitude of reasons but lets not use this as an excuse to decent baseless conspiracy theories. These alternative cures peddled so often have yet to been shown under laboratory conditions using the scientific method to be more effective than traditional therapies. If there is a miracle cure out there I personally would love to see it because I haven't yet and as soon as someone can find one they will be billionaires a hundred times over. Of course nobody has come up with actual evidence in spite of these incredible incentives and this is why I am skeptical until the evidence actually comes forward.

    1. Your “billionaire” comment is the problem. Those who HAVE found cures, do not want the money, they want to save lives. Did you even watch the documentary? Don’t be ignorant

    2. Dr. Sebi cured cancer a thousand times over with natural herbs and inhabiting an alkaline diet. In 1988 he won a Supreme Court case in NYC proving his methods to work, were he stated that there is only one disease in the body and that is mucus.

  8. Why is "full body hyperthermia" not available in North America (i.e. Canada and USA)? Drug companies? Go to Dr Herzog germany or enter "Hyperthermia Mexico" on your browser and read all about it! I have a sister who went to Dr Herzog some 9 years ago. She is cancer free at the age of 87.

    1. It is allowed in the US, but only in conjunction with Chemo and Radiation. Ha! It’s so f’d.

  9. over the edge;
    You are a Troll. You fail to see that the current system is broken, hence the reason for all the concern and discussion. Most people want nothing more than quality research and development toward some kind of progress. The current institutions have been using one method of treatment for decades. Do you honestly think that people would go out of their way to search out alternative forms of treatment if the current methodology was working well.

    These snake oil treatment people you talk about are the conspiracies that big pharma likes to exploit the uneducated with. The doctors that are trying to help are the ones we never hear about because they are being silenced.

    Cancer is an industry in and of itself.

    Many people are trying to get through to you on here with no luck.

    Seems to me you need to open your eyes and do some self exploration. Maybe read a book and inform yourself, because it truly is important to have a detailed look at all sides before running your mouth.

    You act like cancer is only affecting you, you ignorant SOB.

  10. If chemotherapy is so good why is it that a recent survey was taken of american physicians who were asked one question. If you had advanced cancer would you continue with chemotherapy? The overwhelming answer was....No!!!!
    So why do physicians expect their patients to do the opposite and endure horrific chemotherapy until they're dead?

  11. The issue is, the huge pharmas, and through them the Gov will lose trillions of dollars, not to mention the increase in cancers from the chemicals we spray on our crops, GMO foods etc etc. The pharmas do not want to cure you, they want you taking their expensive pills for as long as you live. Research the increase in cancer rates from 1900 to 2017, you will be horrified

  12. Western medicine is so full of BS. Notice they are always demanding the double blind studies that prove a treatment is better? They really don't believe that as there is no shortage of regular treatments that have no studies(read the insert to the flu shot-no studies no proof it even works). Ok I had hypothyroidism and studied it for years. The standard treatment for it is synthetic T4 which replaced the former treatment of dessicated thyroid(dried ground pig thyroid made into a pill) as the treatment for hypothyroidism based on zero studies. Seriously take a look at how many articles are written by doctors telling you to synthetic T4 and a list of 10 points of why you shouldnt take desiccated thyroid. Now if you actually look at the studies that have been done 5/5 show that desiccated is superior.2-1 patient preference, and 1/2 to 1/3 of the negative side effects across the board(which wouldyou prefer to try just based on those two statements?) 100% is a very rare thing in medical studies. Synthetic T-4 was so successful it became the number one drug in the US at one point. Their makers got nailed once because they had commissioned a study to show their drug was better than the generics-it wasnt. So they tried to hide the study and got caught doing it. Class action lawsuit and the lost millions. So here is the history of how a drastically inferior treatment made it to number one. Is it really so hard to believe they really don't want a cure for cancer? Doctors sold out to Big Pharma just to make a little more cash on a pill.

  13. Hm, they seem to left out what cancer is. Odd.

    It's almost as if they want the viewer to believe that there is ONE cure for the numerous different cancers that all behave differently and cannot be treated the same without also attacking the body.

    A well... Popcorn, soda and tinfoil hat at the ready. Play!

  14. I never get why people are so against industrial medicine. They create the medicine according to how the body works. Natural remedies my a**. You can take a natural remedy and make it better by simply looking at how the mechanisms works. Period. Molecules are molecules, everything is natural.
    By the way, there is no 1 magic cure for cancer, every cancer works different. You have to optimize your medicine for different patients. If you can prove your stuff works, if your medicine can pass double blinded studies, if you have a better medicine than the one available, the scientific community will accept it. If your sh*t works you don't have to call Big Pharma to ask if you can throw it out in the open.

  15. 2 minutes on the work of Dr Hamer and that's it??! Very disappointing. And making people believe that sharks are supercreatures who don't get cancer is exactly why most of them have been killed. Other than that, it's a somewhat relevant documentary. Thanks for sharing.

  16. Who wants to be a millionaire?

  17. I think that the research for cures, should be taken out of the hands of the Pharma's who have a vested interest in repeat business.
    There has in the past, been interesting results that have been sabotaged by the medical professions with connections to the pharma interests, and using toxins is not a natural way of curing an affliction in the human body, how many animals in the wild die from cancer or other un-natural causes, they do die off from pesticides and herbicides.
    And peer review is nothing more than like minded idiots who agree with common wisdom, that isn't so common.

  18. Toutmosis,

    Thanks for your information! My research indicates that what you've encountered and been willing to share is accurate. But the biologic detail that that you have is more extensive than I was fully aware of. Like you, I have come across the same suppression techniques used in a broad range of fields: energy, medicine, politics, etc. Thanks for all your efforts to share it with people. Some, like your negative commenters either aren't willing to do their own research or are likely trolls posing as truly interested parties, or their strong defense of the sad standard AMA sanctioned medicine available to most Americans wouldn't be so intense. Having to translate everything into english would be time consuming. I have not encountered the possibility of electrical microcurrent applied to the wrist before. I have encountered foot baths using microcurrent that results in extensive detoxification. Have you heard of Harvey Bigelsen who also has had much success with his protocols based on Antoine Beuchamp's Cellular theory of disease, among others. He was also driven to Mexico as well as Gerson, and Hoxey. My mother and I have had good results with a derivative of Rife's machine. Beuchamp's approach seems to me, from my research and personal experience to be considerably more accurate than the Allopathic approach, germ theory.

    Keep up the good work! Brad

  19. One should go for alternative cancer treatments as the natural ways can be way to better.

  20. **I meant to say that like the origins of many medicines, the cure lies in the hands of Mother Nature

  21. I do believe that there are things big businesses don't want to cure for fear of losing money (which is, of course, more important than the lives that could have been saved), and I think that like many medicines, the cure for cancer lies in natural remedies. However, my questions is, if all of these people were so magnanimous that they wouldn't sell their cures unless they would be distributed free to everyone, why didn't they just make the recipes available to the general public? That would have removed any power that their opponents held.

  22. To quote Dr. Brush, president Kennedy's personal physician: Essiac is a cure for cancer, period.

  23. I have read everything that everyone said. I have to add that it is a pity that people love money so much to watch their fellow human perish every day in diseases that can be easily cured with safe natural medicines. I started researching natural medicine when my 94 years old mother was told to go on dialysis 4 years ago when she was 90 years. I was on dialysis myself and had a kidney transplant once before . I believed so much in the doctors and the hospitals, I did not know that much about natural medicines. I started researching natural medicine because I thought that my mom will not survive dialysis because of her age. I found that there were several options of natural medicine that are not toxic and have no side effect. I decided to try one for her. Six months later we went to the hospital for testing. The doctor said that my mom was healthy and her kidney function was normal. She has been on that natural medicine she drinks with juices every morning for over 4 years.

    Recently, she had abdominal pain and was bleeding. She was diagnosed with cervical cancer. I was told that it is risky for her to have surgery because of her age. Because of my extensive research, I know that chemo and radiation kill most of the cancer patients and not the cancer, so, I told the doctors that there will be no radiation or chemo for my mom. They advice me that if she has any problem I should not bring her back to the hospital. I disagreed with that.

    I started my mom on several natural medicine. I am not sure if I can mention them here. I got something to help gain body weight and muscles, another to detox the liver pathway and get the liver ready to get out the dead cancer cells, something to help direct oxygen into the cells and then started her on pure vegetable diet, no animal protein, no carbohydrate. Just two weeks the bleeding was gone completely and the pain was gone. She does not even take tylenol. Just this simple change of diet I read has cured stage one cancer for many. I just added natural medicine to help reduce tumor, another to help remove the protein from cancer cell so that it can be identified and destroyed by the natural killer, she is taking another that will help lock up the toxic that cancer cell produce when it ferment carbohydrate and sauger for energy. The toxic will be lock up inside the cancer cell and it will prevent those toxics from affecting normal cells and turning them to cancer cell and those toxic build up will also kill the cancer cells when it gets too much. She takes another one to help strengthen the immune system and keep the body strong. She takes high dosage of vitamin D and another natural medicine to help with the heart rate. For months now the pain and bleeding has been gone.

    Natural medicine works. Hospitals should try and incorporate them with their treatment instead of trying to stop it. Everyday, people are getting the awareness that these natural medicines are safe and they heal. A time will come that people that have cancer will stay away from hospitals. In the future, maybe about 40 years or less, Chemo and radiation will be a thing of the past that it supposed to already be.

    There are wonderful safe natural medicines for various diseases . Thank God for internet, you cannot keep them away from us anymore.

    1. Hey, what were the supplements you gave to your mom. My mother is going through treatment for breast cancer and is having difficulty gaining weight. And she also wants to try natural medicine. Could you please let me know what supplements you gave your mom please? thank you.

    2. Please tell me the natural medicine you used sir... I need it for my mom and myself

  24. So many victims of our federally funded education system...Even when you are confronted with the obvious...(The US Govt sold its citizens out when the "Banking Cartels" of 1913 managed to create (without the vote of Americans btw) a central banking system. Which is its the money that is the smoking long as there are massive amounts of funds going towards: "finding the cure", scientists being funded, universities, etc...then we will continue to people dying of cancer. It's not conspiracy...when there's facts to back it up...why would ANY government make it ILLEGAL to treat cancer using any alternate methods? Wake up are being fed the lies manufactured for you, enlightened through the media providers that are reporting only what they are given to report...if you can't see past the lies and the social conditioning to see that we are indeed slaves in a prison created by our "leaders" and paid for by US...then go back to watching your American Gladiators...let the rest of us plant the seeds so the future generations aren't nearly as fluoridated into passivity.

  25. Dr. Gerson was poisoned at least twice, and he died from the last poisoning. His nurse took over his practice and wrote books to keep his reports alive! When Dr. Gerson came into the USA legally and he properly setup an office, the G0V ram-sacked his office, taking his patient files, and they detained him several times. This doctor's record was clean and exemplary for healing patients of various diseases including cancer with herbs and natural organic food.

    If only we had the internet then, perhaps Big Pharmaceutical Companies wouldn't have been as trusted, and rightly so. How many people do you know that has been taking chemical drugs most of their life, and now are ailing with other symptoms? That's the power of chemical drugs.

    Natural remedies can cure you. Chemical drugs treat the symptoms and cause new ones over time. GOD gave us natural medicines for a reason!

    Now, that doesn't stop me from taking cold medicine when I need it. I've just not found the right natural remedy to give me enough relief, yet.

    However, in 1992, when a doctor was concerned about my enlarged thyroid, the test came back positive for Hypo-Thyroidism. The doctor said that I would have to take a pill everyday for the rest of my life. But, when the Holy Spirit received this news, I instantly and rather boldly laughed in the doctor's face! I was almost as embarrassed as I was amazed. I had no idea what was going on until I had left the office. Then it hit me!! I just knew that I was not thyroid sick, as that old devil tried to give to me, and I did not fill that prescription. Instead, I followed up with a new doctor, after I moved to Celina, and I asked him to test my thyroid too. He asked why and I told him of my results just a few months ago. So, he ran the test, which came back negative. Then he told me that something must have been wrong with that test because Thyroid issues just do not disappear. I replied, "All things are possible when you know God!", and he looked at me strange. I told him that he should request those test results because I believe that God wants to show him something. He replied that he has seen some of God's work. I answered, "Me too, that's why I'm drug free!!"
    ~ Rebecca aka. Respect2Glory

  26. Simoncini lost his license because he left a trail of dead patients all across Europe! He did not go to prison because he used an unapproved treatment he went to prison and lost his license because he was killing off his patients with his quack treatment. Simoncini never cured anyone of cancer with soda bicarb. The entire thing preposterous.

    1. Maybe so, but the same thing was said about salicylic acid. Go read up on its history & you'll find it killed 100% of its patients - but it reduced their fevers.
      If it weren't for persistent doctors, we would never been introduced to acetyl-salicylic acid AKA aspirin!

    2. Simoncini and his use of soda bicarb to cure cancer bares no resemblance to the ancient use of salicylic acid. Salicylic acid has been used as an analgesic and anti pyretic among other things since Hippocrates. I did a brief search for any information about it historically killing 100% of its users, but I couldn't find anything supporting this assertion.

      Simoncini's claim that ALL cancer is a fungus is so preposterous it doesn't justify a response! It'a not a question of him being some brave and brilliant pioneer who was on to something new and ground breaking. By the way we have VERY effective anti fungal drugs so if Simoncini's theory that all cancer was a fungus were in any way true, then giving the patient these drugs should cure their cancer. Simoncini was not a trained oncologist. He was a con-man who preyed on desperate cancer victims. A despicable man.

    3. "other things since Hippocrates" - glad you can read up on your wikipedia. Studying Chemistry at the University, all sophomores had to extract salicylic acid in Organic Chem lab & while preparing for your 5hr labs, all wannabe Chemists read up on the history & how salicylic acid was shelved for a number of years until another curious mind took it to the next level.
      Apparently SusanG, you do not read & comprehend well. NEVER in my post did I praise Simoncini, but thank you for sharing with my your insights on the subject.
      We all have to remember the likes of such individuals like Thomas Alva Edison who received MINIMAL FORMAL EDUCATION, but possesses over 1000 patents. One doesn't need to be a medical doctor or possess a PhD in any studies to be exceptional!

    4. Wow! Pomposity AND a personal insult.
      Thanks for that.

      I was hoping you would direct me to the information that supports your claim that 100% of the patients taking salcylic acid died, but died afebrile. I guess thats not going to happen.

      No where in my post did I say it wasn't possible to be exceptional without and education. Although I would hope you would admit that in this day in age it certainly helps. Medicine has become highly specialized and it's impossible to be an expert in every area. Just the info to be learned on the genetic level is mind boggling.

      But back to your insult and my according to you poor reading comprehension. My interpretation of what you initially said

    5. Sorry my Disqus is acting wonky.

      But anyway my interpretation of what you initially said was, that you were comparing Simoncini to salicylic acid. You seemed to be implying that Simoncini may be like the early understanding of salicylic acid. That is that initially it wasn't well understood and people died from it too.

      I hope you aren't comparing Simoncini a convicted felon to Thomas Edison.

      I would still be interested in reading about salicylic acid and how it initially killed 100% of its users. From what I could gather, which I admit was a very cursory search, is that its been used very efffectively by many different cultures across a wide span of time.

    6. Pompous - I can be.
      Personal Insult - if that's how you take it!

      Source - not sure if digging up my Organic Lab textbook, scanning it & posting it worth it. I may further look around & try to match the source to another on the Internet, but at this point, like ObamaCare - don't count on it!

      "exceptional without and education. " & somehow I knew you would go there. Now we are just ping-ponging because that was my initial post was about, you negated that post & hence my response. So, I stop it here.

      & the rest, of course I agree with you. If I didn't keep my mind open, I would only be a pretty face.

      "poor" reading comprehension - you are really stretching it. You jumped to a conclusion because you thought I was backing your fav "con-man." C'mon, you can admit it - you jumped at the bait I didn't realize I set. My original post was only to question the readers who solely believe that you require a MD or higher formal education to matter or produce results.

    7. "Apparently SusanG, you do not read & comprehend well."

      "Personal insult if that's how you take it"

      LOL! And how would you take a comment like that? You certainly can't say you were being complimentary. If as you claimed 100% of the people using salicylic acid died I expected to find that mentioned somewhere. Not even in "The History of Salicylic Acid" Wiki did it mention this. So I thought you might know of a source.

      No, you didn't praise Simoncini outright. But you did make a comparison of him and his cancer treatment to Edison. Edison was a brilliant and creative man. Simoncini is a criminal. He did things to his patients that would make your toes curl! The man was a ghoul a monster. Here's a sampling.

      He inserted a catheter directly into the brain of a poor man with brain cancer. He then injected soda bicarb through the catheter into the brain! That's right! You read that right. The man almost instantly went into cardia arrest and died.

      He inserted a tube into another man with colon cancer. He carelessly perforated the man's bowel, and fecal contents leaked out into the man's peritoneum and the man died a few days later of sepsis.

      It's several cases like these that resulted in him being convicted of fraud and manslaughter. IMO it should have been murder.

      Because I am aware of the horrible things this man has done, perhaps you can understand the strong reaction on my part to anything said about him that is positive. He's not deserving of any positive remarks. The fact that this film portrays him has having credibility is sickening.

      If you were addressing "the readers" then why did you address your post directly to me?

    8. because I felt the love...
      "If it weren't for persistent doctors" - was not a reference to him, but to doctors / scientists who went back to review the trial notes of the group of patients which all died from. This pool of patients wasn't 20K like it maybe today, but rather a much smaller group.

      "but thank you for sharing with my your insights on the subject." - I thought THAT was genuine! Most just babble, but from your initial post, I knew you were involved in the field & certainly knowledgeable on the subject.

      Just because I've enjoyed our tit-tat, I will go back 30+ yrs & find out the source for you. My brother took the same course at the same University & actually is a practicing Chemist today. So, if he hasn't killed off the majority of his brain cells during his lab days, he may just remember the Organic Lab we did!

  27. Suzanne Somers is a liar. She was diagnosed with a very early breast cancer. She had a lymph node biopsy and lumpectomy followed by radiation. She was offered adjuvant (in addition) chemotherapy which she declined. Most woman diagnosed with an EARLY breast cancer and negative lymph nodes like Suzanne would decline chemo. The tiny increase in being cured wasn't worth the risks associated with chemo. The reason she is alive today is because of traditional mainstream medicine! She had surgery and radiation.

    How dare her try to rewrite history and claim that her natural b.s. cured her. She should be thanking her doctors.

    Simoncini the i*iot in the doc. that claims ALL cancer is a fungus is beyond a joke. I guess he missed the lecture on cancer that described how a patients tumor is made up of the bodies own cells. Oh by the way, Simoncini is no longer a doctor. He killed several patients by giving them soda bicarb and causing fatal electrolyte imbalance. His cancer theories are laughable. But then again he NEVER was a trained oncologist.

    1. Surgery and radiation does not cure cancer. Cancer is only temporarily removed until poor lifestyle choices including the SAD diet, lack of exercise, and toxic environmental conditions allow the cancer to regrow.

      Thus since she educated herself about the causes of cancer and then replaced them by changing her lifestyle, diet, and included exercise it has not returned. Therefore it is clear that what she is doing is working since the cancer has not returned. Though your claim that she is lying about her cancer free life is unproven.

      If surgery and radiation was a cure then everyone should schedule prophylactic surgery and cut off body parts that may get infected with cancer like Angelina Joe lee. Though the last time I went through my university text book on anatomy and physiology I didn't notice any extra body parts.

      In conclusion, if surgery and radiation was the one and only cure as you claim then body parts could be removed and irradiated without serious side effects such as killing the patient.

    2. Surgery is the most effective type of treatment for solid tumors. For instance a lumpectomy for an early, non metastasized to lymph nodes breast cancer has a success rate in the 85% range. Adjunctive radiation will improve it even more. This is in fact what Somers had done.

      Yeah she's really educated herself! LOL! She educated herself right into the emergency room at death's door. The doctors couldn't figure out why in the world she was so immunosuppressed, as immunosuppressed has an advanced AIDS patient (this was the origin of the doctors told me I had total body cancer comment). She finally admitted to her doctors that in her perpetual quest to try and stay young she was ingesting more than 160 supplements along with a massive dose of HCG (human chorionic gonadotropin). She pled stupidity to the doctors. She said she didn't KNOW taking massive doses of HCG could wipe out her immune system! Once the doctors knew what she had done to herself they could treat her and she recovered. So then what does she do? She's now going around telling anyone who will listen to her that she was MISDIAGNOSED by those horrible doctors. She's saying "Wah wah they told me I had total body cancer!"

      Your little quips about women having a breast removed was rich. Yeah Angelina Jolie had a prophylactic mastectomy because she knew she had an at least 80% chance of getting breast cancer like her own mother died from at an early age. But then you probably don't believe in the genetic component to breast cancer do you Mikeysbro? You think it's all caused by those toxins. You sound like that i*iot Mike Adams from that crackpot site Natural News! Mike is that you?

    3. Your funny, Susanne's education in health didn't start until she already had cancer. Thus your statement is straight out of left field.
      Obviously you are ignorant of xenoestrogens which adversely effect reproductive organs that may cause complete or partial sex reversal among other complications such as precocious puberty (you should know what the relevance of this means).
      These xenoestrogens are found in the water supply and are concentrated in animal life and marine life such as fish. Forget other insignificant substances such as ddt, dioxin, bpa, pcb's and several hundred others that are commonly found in the water and food supply. One can easily google Wikipedia for further information concerning the world wide contamination of these substances and chemicals and how they are linked to cancers.
      Oh and the amount required for these xenoestrogens to have a measurable effect in some cases 2-5 parts per billion and others .1 part per billion. Thus if one drop is .05 of a ml x 1, 000,000,000 =50000000 ml aka 5000 L. Therefore 1 drop in 5000 L = 1 part per billion or 2-5 drops per 5000 L or over 1100 gallons.
      Furthermore, we haven't mentioned cancer causing substances found in various personal care products such as shampoo, toothpaste, tampons, clothing, cleaning chemicals, soaps, and so forth. Although I am willing to provide numerous citations if this would educate someone.
      Then one must not forget various containers such as water bottles, herbicides, fertilizers, plastics, pesticides and much more than contain xenoestrogens and other toxins.
      Xenoestrogens are found in milk, meat, fish, eggs, water, pregnant women (ie found in the fetus), and much more.
      Don't forget estrogen is in birth control pills.
      Genetics do influence cancers this is well known but what you fail to admit is that genetics are influenced by numerous factors including diet, exercise, environment and so forth.
      One would be conceding to defeat by admitting to the fact that toxins exist everywhere and that they couldn't possible be the major cause of cancer. Just like doctors denied the existence of germ contamination.
      Though toxins are found throughout the environment in the; air, water, food, in drugs, homes, at work, clothes, bottles, personal care products, soaps, and even on top of mount Everest! In fact it is impossible to avoid them on planet earth.
      Though it is a fact that toxins cause cancer and it only takes small amounts consumed on a regular basis in some cases. Although you adamantly refuse to admit that these toxins which are surrounding you where ever you go, are in what you eat and drink, and are found in the area that you sleep on could not even remotely be a major cause cancer?
      Now you are calling me an id*ot for recognising that it is impossible to avoid toxins on planet earth. Including the fact that these unavoidable toxins have been proven to cause cancer which you are consuming, have you surrounded 24 hours a day and seven days a week but are only some minor insignificant cause of cancer?
      LOL You are surely joking as no one could dismiss such an obvious connection found in the air, water, food, home, work, care products, drugs, and so forth unless they deny the facts.
      Finally as far as decreasing and eliminating cancers is it not true that chemotherapy decreases the size of cancers? I wonder if you even know where chemo originates from. Though I highly doubt that you do by reading your comments.

    4. See below

    5. Please tell me where I claimed that surgery and radiation are the only cures for cancer.

      Do you have any idea how many people have been successfully treated with surgery alone? I'm one of them. If the tumor hasn't spread surgical removal is the most successful kind of treatment. The newer more pin point targeted radiation treatments are more and more successful without damaging non-cancerous tissue.

      Eventually ALL cancer will be treated and cured at the genetic level. It's all about the oncogenes!

      But Mikeysbro will be saying it toxins.

    6. "The reason why she is alive is because of traditional mainstream medicine. She had surgery and radiation...How dare her try to rewrite history and claim that her natural b.s cured her !"
      Do you know how many people who have died from cancer surgery, chemo, and radiation ? Including the fact that cancer returns after such treatment if one survives?
      Do you realize that if you continue to engage in poor lifestyle choices your cancer will return given time? Therefore it doesn't matter which organs or body parts you cut, burn, drug and throw away?
      Are you aware that genetics are influenced by your diet and lifestyle choices?
      Ignore toxins if you choose perhaps you think that your genetics will adapt to toxic chemicals and will not become abnormal cells.

  28. Out of the Wood of Ignorance toward Light of Knowledge!

  29. one can research garlic and cancer there are hundreds of studies
    not to mention other foods ..
    nutritional facts dot org is a great site for learning the top ten causes of disease. Nutritional science is fantastic...he has two lectures one is called the leading causes of death..

  30. my dad cured his own cancer... he refused chemo and drugs, He did it his own way with herbs and weeds and onions.He was 80 when he was pronounced as cured, He is 90 now and fit as a fiddle

    1. Hi Guest, just saw your post..can you please give me some information on how your dad cure his cancer by herbs, weeds and onions?...greatly appreciated your help..

    2. DO you mind sharing here how he did that , what herbs did he use etc.Cheers!

  31. Wow, so many mainstream medical apologists, especially a_no_n. Doctors and they fan base are such dicks, virtually every time. Always knowing it all even though their treatments SUCK and FAIL most of the time. The hubris of humans "educated" to believe they have superior wisdom.

    1. So you think Mainstream medicine SUCK and FAIL most of the time?

      You really need to get yourself better informed. Too much Natural News produces this kind of ignorant opinion!

      By any chance do you know how many children diagnosed with leukemia 60 years ago survived? The answer is nada, zero, zilch! Today with modern protocols the success rate is between 85-90%. I'd hardly call that a FAIL! For some kinds of lymphomas the success rate is 90%. Today overall a woman diagnosed with breast cancer has an 80% success rate. And guess what? The numbers have steadily improved every year. But of course this is something you will never be aware of if you only watch movies like this one. Even the title is disingenuous. These quote "forbidden" cures aren't forbidden at all. You are free to use any of them, with the exception of hemp oil (technically illegal but still can be obtained) and Laetrile (banned because it was found to be very dangerous). All the rest the teas and diets are readily available and have been known about for decades. Don't you think if ANY of these worked then everyone would be curing their cancer with them by now!

      The fact is they don't work and this is why they never became mainstream. Especially nowadays with the Internet, if they really worked the word would spread so fast there would be no stopping it!! Everyone would be curing their cancer with it.

    2. You are wrong, I'm in the Medical Prof. and I know that Doctors are not ALLOWED to tell their patients that there are natural cures that will work or they will be JAILED. My fiance cured his cancer, he had lung, lymph, testicular, prostate, and a closed head injury. He cured all of these with all natural means, food and juicing. The reason that people still don't use these more often is that there isn't any money to be made from this route. Why would a Childrens Hosp in Northern Ohio try to force an experimental treatment for Leukemia on a 10 yr old Amish girl. The family had to flee to Canada when they refused the hospitals treatments and wanted to try natural methods, which BTW cured her, the hospital is trying to force the parents to let them give the girl these treatments she no longer even needs. Read all about this it is on the web.

    3. I'm calling bull sh_t on you!

      I'm in the medical profession and doctors have the freedom to tell their patients about any treatment that has been studied via clinical trials, double blinded, peer reviewed and proven to be safe and effective studies. In other words it WORKS! If they recommend treatments that HAVEN'T been proven to work i.e the quackery presented in this film, then they would be considered as practicing medicine BELOW the standard of care. They would be opening themselves up to malpractice suits and possibly action by the Medical Board. But they would not be jailed! This is the ranting of an ignorant ignoramus who has not a clue how things work.

      As to your claim that your fiancee cured lung,testicular,prostate,lymph (what is lymph? do you mean a type of lymphoma?) and a closed head injury (could have gotten better on its own) by eating certain foods and juicing! All I can say is do you really think people are that stupid? Seriously? You CAN NOT cure cancer with food and juice! You just can't. It's idiotic to think you could. Do you have any understanding of what cancer is? I doubt it.

      Your claim that no one uses natural cures is because there is no money in it is stupid. First of all there are hundreds and hundreds of drugs and treatments that come directly from natural sources. Anything that works can be synthesized, tested for safety and efficacy, and patented. One of the most successful cancer drugs Taxol comes from the Pacific Yew tree.

      Yes I'm familiar with the little Amish girl. She doesn't have leukemia by the way. She has a very aggressive form of lymphoblastic lymphoma,
      She received one round of chemotherapy which is why her tumors began to shrink. Now her parents have stopped her treatment and fled. They mistakenly think she is cured by the quackery, when in fact it's the residual effects of traditional treatment, Make no mistake her cancer will come back and sadly it won't be very long before it does. The type she has has a 100% mortality rate without proper treatment.

      Yes the Children's Hospital is truly EVIL for trying desperately to save this little girls life. Yeah they are fighting so hard to keep her in treatment why? Oh I know! They really need the negative publicity by wack jobs like you!

  32. You know, this is an excellent documentary. I only watched it after reading the blogs going back and forth between several bloggers from the another cancer related documentary. Ultimately, people will believe what they want, but I think this one hits the head directly on the nail. TDF should put this on their main page. Of course, this is my opinion, and people who view it can decide for themselves!

  33. There are a couple of inconsistencies in the posts. On the one hand, antioxidants are proposed as a cure to starve cancer: on the other, hyper oxygenation (using free radicals) kills off the cancer cells.
    Anybody care to comment

  34. There are numerous very effective natural cures for cancer, all requiring the same common components: organic diet, exercise and natural supplements to rebuild the immune system. Radiation and chemo suppress the immune system, hence the secondary cancers caused by those treatments.

    I have never understood why conventional medicine would even consider using carcinogens (like chemo & radiation) to treat cancer. Makes no sense unless you're trying to build a sustainable source of income.

    1. except Cancer has nothing to do with the immune system. Cancer spawns from you, your immune system can't attack it because it's a part of you!
      Chemo and radiation work by reducing the cancer down to a workable size where it is either able to be operated on or rendered harmless...nobody ever said chemo was a cure for cancer!

    2. funny if pathologies have nothing to do with the immune system then why are they encased, eaten and attacked by the body as foreign materials?
      chemo+rad shrinks tumors but does not cure one of toxins which cause cancer.

    3. Toxins cause cancer?

      Citation please.

      Oh and what EXACTLY are these mythical toxins you speak of?

    4. You don't understand that toxic materials like asbestos, drugs, paint fumes, lead, pesticides, herbicides, artificial chemical sweeteners, IGF and so forth cause cancer ? You think these products are mythical ?

    5. Yes I know that exposure to certain things can cause cancer. But correct me if I'm wrong you are saying ALL cancers are caused by toxins.

      This is not true.

    6. So lets review, you at first question the fact that toxins cause cancer "Toxins cause cancer ? Citations please" and request citations LOL. Then later admit that toxins cause cancer "Yes I know that exposure to certain things cause cancer". Now you change your tune and state that not all cancers are caused by toxins. These are very interesting statements and only prove how confused you are on the subject of cancer.

      Perhaps in your obviously confused state you would like to enlighten the readers as to which cancer would not be affected by a toxic liver and a toxic blood stream ?

      The assumption that cancer is separate from the blood stream and digestive systems is ludicrous. One cannot have a filthy plumbing system aka digestive system without pathogens growing. This idea that cancer is separate from the internal condition inside the body is insanity.

      Sorry but I do have to correct you. Toxins are the major cause of cancers. Virtually anything causes toxins; dietary choices cause toxins, lifestyle choices, lack of exercise, environment and more. Peoples ignorance cause toxins to accumulate. Negative emotions from a toxic relationship causes various hormones to be produced which are then digested by the liver since they are chemicals. Though if the liver is toxic those emotions are not digested.

      Excessive hormones cause cancer and pathological conditions to occur.(I seem to remember a post of yours scoffing at the notion that toxic relationships could have any effect on cancers. Which only serves to prove that your ignorance of physiology is astounding.)

      Thus cancer is directly linked to lifestyle choices that cause toxins to accumulate. In fact I challenge you to list which cancer is not affected by a toxic liver and blood stream. I patiently await your answer.

    7. wow that was a lot of claims. can you show me proof that ALL the things you listed cause cancer?

    8. If you have difficulty understanding how toxins cause pathological conditions I suggest that you may want to consider a pathology course.

    9. i never stated that i "have difficulty understanding how toxins cause pathological conditions" i asked you to back up YOUR claims. can you? i have had discussions with you before. so burden shifting and changing the subject and rewording your statements is nothing new to me.

    10. These are not "MY claims" as you claim. Toxic substances cause cancer this is common knowledge. Thus if you were truly ignorant of "MY claims" I might be sympathetic to your questioning. Though I have read many of your comments posted to me and others and do not believe that you have a sincere desire to discover the truth. Therefore answering a question which is common knowledge serves no purpose other than giving skeptics fodder to pick apart word by word.

    11. so you went from : Toxins are the major cause of cancers." to "toxic substances cause cancer this is common knowledge." two totally different claims. like i said rewording your statements. insult me all you want but that doesn't change the fact that you seen unwilling/unable to back up your claims. i will refer you to Christopher Hitchens "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence"

    12. Like I mentioned previously if you are interested in truth then you would ask inquisitive questions.

      Though you are doing precisely what I mentioned by continuing in skeptical questioning tactics. "Toxins are the major cause of cancers" and "toxic substances cause cancer" have the same meaning.

      There is no purpose in providing proof of common knowledge since truth is not your objective. Though continuing in the same tired out skeptical reasoning is.

      If you decide to use your axiom of reasoning with common knowledge then you choose to remain ignorant. Evidence exists if one chooses to look for it or admit it.

    13. no they do not have the same meaning. i agree that there are cancer causing toxins. but you claimed they are THE major cause. you also seen to imply that cleansing of these toxins will cure the cancer. that i need demonstrable repeatable proof for. i will let you have the last word.

      the following is your words "Your failure to provide proof means that your theory is not factual truth as claimed and is nothing more than a superstitious belief. Everything else is just your opinion." now that we agree on

    14. I disagree, "toxic substances cause cancers" and "toxins are the major cause of cancers" are two different meanings. Both statements state that toxins cause cancer. The only question is to what extent.

      Well if you need proof that the internal environment of the human body can be toxic yet free of pathological conditions which includes cancer then why do hospitals use charcoal to remove over 3000 known chemical poisons which are incidentally employed with cleansing? Poisons are known to cause abnormal cell growth as are other toxins. Hospitals routinely use charcoal to neutralize and remove poisons. This is repeatable and demonstrable proof that toxins are removed. Toxins cause cancer.

    15. yes the extent is the difference. so please provide proof that they are "the major cause". this is like pulling teeth. answering a question with a question is avoidance not an answer.

    16. If you persist in skeptical questioning I agree that it's like pulling teeth since the flow of the discussion is entirely disrupted with each word of every sentence precisely observed under a microscope and dissected. This does nothing for the promotion of discussion but rather is only a tit for tat session which is a complete waste of time.

      Now at least I feel that I am hearing a genuine question. I will answer your question by expounding on the original statement that toxins are the major cause of cancer.

      I believe we can agree that toxins cause cancer though the only question is to what extent they cause cancer.

      Well here is where I am coming from.

      Ones choice of diet will either promote cancer or inhibit cancer. Various foods contain more toxins than others ie plant foods vs animal foods. Some foods (plant) have anti cancer properties while others do not (sugar, meat etc) Thus ones dietary choices either increase toxins or decrease toxins.

      Ones level of exercise directly effects the lymphatic system. Movement causes lymph to flow via muscles hence removal of toxins and promotes phagocytosis among many other things.

      Ones exposure to various environments changes the amount of toxic exposure. ie nuclear power plants, asbestos etc. Even toxins have been studied inside houses coming of the walls (ie paint), fumes off rugs, glue from flooring, that are higher than being generally outside.

      The water that one drinks has been found to contain ddt (decades after its use), pesticides, herbicides, fluoride, Prozac, and hundreds of other chemicals. Only minute amounts of some chemicals disrupt the hormonal system hence humans and various animals change sex or have two sexes etc.

      Relationships can create toxins (too much acidity) since bad relationships cause hormones to be produced and excessive amounts of hormones cause pathological conditions.

      Poor inherited genetics from people who choose bad lifestyle choices such as dietary, exercise, alcohol consumption etc.
      Perhaps out of ignorance ,or environmental conditions. Maybe even toxic soil conditions.

      Therefore humans are surrounded by toxins either in the food, environment, lifestyle choices, relationships and much more. (ie the air one breathes in etc)

      Now what cause of cancer is greater than toxins ?

      Thus I argue that there is no greater factor than toxins in the formation of cancers.

      People can disagree but there is nothing that one does that can compare to the continual toxic conditions that one is exposed to on a minute by minute daily basis for a lifetime.

      Therefore the only logical conclusion is to reduce the amount of cancer causing toxins through dietary, lifestyle, environment, and relationship choices in conjunction with consumption of known scientifically proven toxin removers such as charcoal.

    17. while i agree with much of what you stated. it is only opinion. as of yet you have provided no proof. there is our dilemma.

      also the idea that cleansing these toxins (if possible as we are constantly exposed to them) somehow cures cancer is a dangerous thing to either imply or claim as you have provided no demonstrable proof. your implied correlations, opinions and baseless claims hold the same weight with me as homeopathy and crystal therapy.
      we can agree that a healthy lifestyle is a very good way of protecting ourselves from disease. that does not make us immune or that that is all that is needed to cure disease

    18. Well what more proof do you require ? It is an established fact that toxins cause cancer and this is not an opinion.

      In addition, the quantification of the amount of some toxins required to cause cancer is very small and has been proven by science re xenoestrogens.

      Furthermore, toxic substances have been identified and found throughout the world such as pcb's, ddt, other xenoestrogens and don't forget other toxic substances by researchers. Thus there is no place on earth that toxic substances are not found.

      Its interesting to note that you have accepted factual data that toxins cause cancer but are questioning the fact if those toxins are removed then the cause of cancer is removed as well. (All toxins are not completely removed since they are part of the polluted environment we live in but by taking appropriate measures one can reduce the amount of toxic substances to levels where abnormal cell growth is not the outcome)

      I gave an easily understood reference of charcoal and poison as a clear example of how toxins are removed. Though for some reason you seem to link charcoal (aka natural remedies) that remove toxins proven by hospitals world wide on a daily basis with crystal therapy and homeopathy. I guess you are under the impression that doctors must be using crystal therapy and homeopathy to remove deadly poisons and not scientifically proven natural remedies.

      You also state that by recommending cleansing that I am somehow endangering peoples lives when hospitals run by medical professionals such as doctors use charcoal to remove toxic substances thus saving the patient's life. If dangerous chemicals are neutralized by charcoal that would otherwise kill a patient in a number of minutes to a few hours can you not fathom that cancer which takes a greater amount of time to develop and grow would not be inhibited by the removal of the cause itself ?

      Your dismissal of factual demonstrable evidence only proves that you persist in remaining ignorant by choice rather than learning from factual science. This is only an opinion based on your belief that natural remedies are scientifically unproven and should be classified with crystal therapy and homeopathy.

      Finally, if you read my comment above I mentioned not only a healthy lifestyle but natural remedies which are included within dietary and lifestyle choices. Such notable examples include consumption of garlic and other herbs that have been scientifically proven to deal with toxins and destroy/inhibit cancer.

    19. you have analogies. personal testimonials and leaps of faith nothing more. there are toxins that cause cancer, but removing the cause is not a cure. also you have not provided demonstrable proof that your practices actually remove the toxins. you link the ease of exposure to the causality without providing any proof for such a claim. to use your type of proof i could say . we all know the sun causes cancer and everyone is exposed to the sun so it must be " the major cause" or we know radiation (i know sunlight is also radiation) causes cancer and we are constantly exposed to radiation so it must be the "major cause". do you see the flaw.
      as for charcoal filters. i do not know the specifics and i am not arguing their effectiveness either way. but again it is a failed analogy. hospitals also sterilize most items to protect us from disease. that does not mean that sterilizing the patients would be effective.

      i already agreed that a healthy lifestyle is a good thing and provides many benefits including a reduced chance of some cancers. that we agree on. but you have not provided any actual scientific evidence that your proposed approach actually "cures" cancer. i am sorry nut your idea of proof falls far short of mine. i will respond further when and if you provide actual test data and evidence free from analogies, personal testimonials and leaps of faith

    20. Well if you deny toxins that toxins exist and that they cause cancer and removal of those toxins removes the cause of cancer and thus prevents it from occurring then that is your opinion.
      I on the other hand have personally witnessed cancer removed by cleansing including by the use of various natural remedies such as garlic which is scientifically proven to destroy cancer. Thus if you choose to deny factual science which can be easily researched on the web then it is your choice.

      Its well known that sunshine influences cancer but for centuries man has lived in the sunshine but has not died in pandemic numbers because of it. Thus is it really the sun that causes the cancer or is it the poor dietary and lifestyle choices such as the SAD (standard American diet) which is filled with cancer causing substances and is lacking in antioxidant properties which are well know to inhibit cancer?

      You claim its the sun I claim its poor lifestyle choices that caused the cancer to exist and grow and the sun is merely brings out the cancer because of a poor diet and lifestyle choices. (One also must remember the decreasing size of the ozone layer caused by modern man which acts like a thin filter. Which is man made caused from toxins)

      Charcoal is scientifically proven to remove toxins despite what you claim that it is only a poor analogy to use in order to remove toxins that cause cancers. Thus if it was true as you claim that this is a leap of faith then why do poisoned patients recover ? To believe that toxins are only removed in some pathological conditions and not others because you claim that they are is not science its an opinion based on your belief that it is unproven.

      There will never be any so called "scientific proof" that you so desire because the current medical and research paradigm do not use natural remedies to cure serious pathological conditions in the way herbalists use them. There are several serious flaws in the research methodology like omitting the patients previous health condition, the severity of the condition which requires different dosage and more. Thus natural remedies do not fit into your scientific research model.

      Though there is plenty of research done with individual plant chemical components and those components have been proven to inhibit/ destroy cancers. One must remember that good herbalists do not use isolated chemical components.

      Now you can deny that plants have anti cancer properties though this unfounded statement is false. In addition, there are plenty of studies showing that components that make up garlic destroys/inhibits cancer. Though this is not what you are seeking. I can list dozens if not hundreds of studies proving the anticancer properties of Garlic though you will just claim that these chemicals are a "leap" of faith to believe that they actually work.

      Thus the question is do plants have chemicals which many drugs originate from ? The answer is yes. Do drugs work? Yes. Why, because they are made from chemicals that originated from plants but are currently synthesised from petro chemicals and other toxic substances.

      Thus we know that chemicals work in both plants and drugs. To argue that one set of chemicals in plants do not work while others in drugs do is denying basic scientific biochemistry. Therefore to argue the fact that plants and various substances like charcoal are ineffective because the "scientific research" has not been done extensively with each particular pathology because of the current medical paradigm is truly ignorance and nothing more.

      Now you can attack my posts and say there is no scientific evidence that chemicals work all you want but biochemistry backs up my claims. Thus all of your assertions are just unfounded opinions based on nothing but you're own ignorance. Therefore to continue in this discussion is pointless because you deny basic science and will only request "scientific studies" that fit your particular biased opinions.

      Scientific factual studies exist that plants contain chemicals and chemicals have been proven by science to effect the human body as witnessed in drugs that in many cases originally came from herbs. To deny chemistry is to deny science thus continue to comment based on your ignorance as it only proves that you are truly ignorant.

    21. Toxins have been proven scientifically to cause cancer. Charcoal is scientifically proven to remove various toxins. Herbs have chemicals that have been scientifically proven as having anticancer properties. Thus removing toxins that cause cancer and destroying cancers with anticancer herbs which have proven anti cancer chemicals has already occurred and is currently ongoing.

      If you consider chemical constituents in herbs that are now found in many commonly used drugs as a leap of faith then that is just your unbelief.

      Though I know chemicals are proven by science since I have studied about them. As does any biochemist, pharmacist and many other medical professionals.

      For anyone to say there is no proof that herbs destroy cancers when drugs are made from the very chemicals that were originally found in plants which are used to do the same thing is beyond reasoning.

      Thus your belief is not based on any reasonable reasoning nor is it accepting scientific factual data that already exists.

      All the skeptical tactics in the world that you continue to regurgitate cannot convince me that scientifically proven chemicals found in both herbs and drugs do not work.

      Why, because science has proven that they do work, billions of people experience them everyday, including anyone who hasn't though is willing to try.

      In fact, you have certainly experienced the effects of herbs or drugs in your life as well. Especially if you have ever taken any drug, eaten any medicinal foods or drunk any herbal tea.

      Thus this is not some limited personal experience as you claim as an excuse to defend your persistence in your superstitious beliefs. Including your outright denial of scientific facts already known but is rather the largest clinical study in the world that has been on going for thousands of years.

      Therefore if you reject science while looking for the studies that you prefer you will be doing so by your own choice.

    22. hmm I thought I had a post to your comment.
      Perhaps my mind is a bit foggy these days from toxins in the environment.

      I think we can agree that toxins cause cancer since they are scientifically proven to do so.
      The two statements have the same meaning in that toxins cause cancer thus the only question at hand is the amount.

      I find it interesting that you accept the scientific fact that toxins cause cancer but at the same time question if toxins are removed then cancer would be as well.

      I will give you a classic example of how toxins are removed by doctors in hospitals for poisoning its called charcoal.

      It is scientifically proven to remove(adsorb) over 3000 known chemical toxins that can kill a person from a matter of minutes to several hours or days.

      Thus doctors remove toxic poisons saving the patient's life. Though cancer which is caused by toxins that takes much longer to form and kill someone cannot ? I find it strange that you cannot fathom this concept.
      This example is used routinely everyday world wide to save people's lives. Demonstrable repeatable proof.

      Furthermore, toxins surround us in the environment, including in the food, water and air. They are found in homes, work place, bottles, plastics, food (meat, dairy, milk), pesticides, herbicides, drugs, personal care products, in fact there is not one place on earth that is not affected by toxins. (they are even found on mt Everest ).

      Toxins are created by emotions(hormones) in that they must be digested by the liver or they create pathological conditions. Thus bad relationships cause toxins especially if the liver is toxic.

      Toxins are created by a lack of exercise in that exercise moves the lymph there by increasing white blood cell counts and removing toxins. Thus lifestyle choices can create toxins.

      Toxins are found in the food supply only one can of tuna is now found to contain your usda requirement of mercury for the entire week.(see nutritional facts dot org Search for tuna and mercury for confirmation of tuna contamination by mercury by scientific studies) Not to forget mercury fillings as well.
      Xenoestrogens are found in the water supply.

      The decreasing ozone layer caused by man made activities causes toxic conditions.
      I could go on and on for days but needless to say I believe there is certainly enough evidence to back up my claim that toxins are a major cause of cancer without referring to the holy grail of truth in citing double blind peer reviewed studies even though these "claims" are not mine. These substances have already been proven to cause cancer.

      If one thinks that they are not exposed to enough toxins to cause cancer by eating, drinking, breathing, sleeping, living, and working 24 hours 7day a week they are only fooling themselves.
      Xenoestrogens commonly found in food and water require only small amounts to cause cancer like 2-5 drops in 5000 L of water. Thus if anyone is thinking that the amount of these toxins are somehow insufficient to be a major cause of cancer I suggest thinking again.

      Therefore toxins surround us everyday of every week. In addition to the fact that they are accumulating in many cases.

      Accumulation of toxins in animals and humans cause serious pathological conditions to occur such as abnormal cell growth this is a scientific fact..

    23. This is factually incorrect. The eukaryotic cell (cells with nucleus, after bacteria, the cells we are made of) have an organelle known as the mitochondria. The mitochondria is responsible for powering the cell and regulating cell apoptosis (cell suicide/self destruction) when a cell has been detected as unhealthy/abnormal. In cancer cells the mitochondria is switched off meaning it can no longer trigger apoptosis.

      The mitochondria powers the cell through aerobic respiration using oxygen to oxidise components in the production of adenosine triphosphate (ATP) the energy used by the cell. But in cancer cells without a functioning mitochondria the cell uses glycolysis as a means if energy production not requiring oxygen just carbohydrates.
      Because cancer cells require carbs to survive, these cells can be starved by restricting sugar and carb intake. Just because the cells belong to our own body does not mean our body can not attack or resolve the issue, viruses use our own cells to,replicate themselves yet our bodies eventually work out how to attack these.

      Abnormal cells are,usually destroyed by the mitochondria but being switched off in cancer cells this function becomes defunct. DHA is a conventional drug which turned the mitochondria back on in cancer cells causing them apoptosis. Yet because this drug can be easily made by anyone and because it has been around to treat other illnesses for so long, big pharma has been unable to patent it meaning no profit. Despite its conventional background and success.

  35. "the only thing that has not changed in the last hundred years is the apparent incapacity of medical science to understand and conquer a disease like cancer"...

    I'm about to watch 29 minutes of ignorance!

    1. "no one has been able to prove that the official theory is the correct one"...

      I don't think the producer of this film understands how scientific research works. The official theory of cancer has survived scrutiny since at least the 50s, therefore, it is still the official theory.

      How much scientific scrutiny have "alternative theories" survived? I don't know if I can make it through this documentary.

    2. Why not watch the film before trashing it? How do you think the results of "scientific scrutiny" come to you? Directly from the lab of the scientist doing the scrutinizing? No, there are multiple hoops such scientists have to jump through before even obtaining the funding to do the testing, let alone get it published in any "reputable" (i.e., AMA-controlled) publication.

    3. Yeah, they have to provide all this rubbish, like evidence and what not.

    4. I have to say one has to wonder, when this documentary interviews a man named Simoncini who used to be a doctor. I say used to, because his medical license was permanently revoked . He was convicted of fraud and manslaughter. He left a trail of dead patients all across Europe, until he was finally stopped.

      He made the ridiculous claim that ALL cancer is a fungus! Funny how all those pathologists examining cancer specimens millions of times all around the world missed that little fact.

      Any film maker who presents a convicted felon Simoncini as someone to be respected for his cure for cancer looses all credibility IMO.

  36. There seem to be more supporters of the "possibility" of success of alternative treatment (or preventive approach) than this thread.
    I think this speaks volume of what humans know deep down or perhaps it's a result of all the mishandling of pharmaceutical money power.

    1. don't get me wrong i support the "possibility" of success of alternative treatment". but i do need to see the demonstrable evidence for these treatments before i support exposing the general public to these treatments. in my opinion that is the major issue for most posters.

    2. I think anyone who has any sense including physicians, values the prevention approach. Unfortunately this is after the fact for people diagnosed with cancer. That's not to say the lifestyle/nutritional recommendations can not help, they most certainly can. But this can never be a 'cure'

      Alternative treatment is something entirely different. It means instead of or at the expense of other treatments, which is at the very least foolhardy when the efficacy of said treatments (conventional medicine) is well documented and understood. Why throw the baby out with the bath water? Why not 'complimentary'?

    3. It speaks more about how little people understand biology and are prone to use conspiracy theories to explain complex issues in the simplest way possible.

  37. I appreciate all of your comments, its too bad most of the links you gave have been removed :(

    1. Links are allowed here. If messages are deleted by mods then rules have been broken (repeatedly and after warning normally). If Disqus suffered an error then tough luck, but simply post again. There is a way to avoid links being recognized as links using spaces or some such but I have never quite grasped that. Suffice to say each and every link I ever posted on this site has appeared shortly afterward (links must be approved by a moderator).

      Sometimes my post gets deleted if I suffer an anger/frustration/exasperation failure and post a blatant shine on, but you won't hear me complain about that - since it merely saves me from the regret I might feel afterward.

  38. Toutmosis my heart goes out to you. You remind me of the person that broke free in Plato's cave, argueing against the people that have been looking at shadows on a wall for such a time they have come to belief the truth of those shadows. It even comes to a point that they get angry and agressive defending their own ignorant beliefs about truth, because they are scared of the things they don't know, which is a great amount i'd imagine. That fear is still no reason to build a mental prison for yourself. The way some people on this forum seem to bask in their own intellectual farts is just baffling. I would reccomend philosophy to the people that study science because it gives lovely insights in epistemology the discipline of knowledge and how we say that one has knowledge or can obtain it(and how fragile that knowledge seems to be once obtained) and metaphysics (and its relations to math and physics, read Kant or Descartes and don't agree with them(or do) just read it and add it to your own wonderfull syntesis). I find it seriously amazing to see sertain 'scientific' people denounce philosophy as 'mumbo-jumbo' while it contributed so much to scientific and critical thinking, I would dare say that it gave birth to modern science or atleast stood at its cradle and helped it mature(in some cases). In any way, please be humble and try to be less cynical, I know it is a common side effect when you study science without having a clue 'why' you where accually studying it. Toutmosis ones again I don't know you and I haven't read all your posts, still the way you precent yourself gives me hope, my little Nicola Tesla is what you are<3

    1. Hi Travis,

      Ahh the aroma of intellectual farts...who has not smelt this distinctive perfume before, especially by those who bathe in their own brand of it and splash it all over liberally. The grate smell of brute.

      While I agree that philosophy is important I kant agree that people should not denounce it, on the contrary, I want people not only to attack it but try to destroy it on a regular basis.

      Kant and Descartes were great minds but still made glaring errors in logic and were not good reads. I would recommend Nietzsche and Marx instead.

      Why would you request people be humble and less cynical? I’m guessing you’re not english?

      The Crucified One

    2. Hey AntiTheist666,

      Thank you for your responce. No i'm not english, and I want to apologize for any damage my horrible spelling and grammar caused to your brain.

      I agree with you on Kant and Descartes, they are hardly my favorite philosophers I have studied some of their texts last week so it was the first thing that came to mind.

      Marx is simply amazing, it profoundly changed my perception about many things . I'll be reading Nietschze's beyond good and evil next week for class, and I can't wait judging by the bits and pieces i've come across so far.

      People should indeed attack philosophy, atleast in a non-physical way, don't start stabbing poor philosophy students like myself. But besides from that I try to attack philosophy on a regular basis, without trying to be cynical though.

      I just think a humble and non- cynical attitude towards others helps them to open up and express, and it helps me to really listen and respond in a way that benifits the discussion. Should there really be a reason to ask for less cynicism and more humility? It doesn't mean you can't feel like you are on top of the world or really special, it just means you interact in a respectfull way or something like that.


    3. Thanks for your reply and answers Travis, there’s no need to apologise my friend, my brain has been damaged beyond repair already and apart from a few little spelling mistakes your english is good.

      I’m so pleased that you are keen to study philosophy and hope that it brings you as much pleasure and understanding as it did for me. Even though I don’t agree with all he had to say Nietzsche is by far my favourite philosopher and perhaps the philosophy I try to live up to the most. He is not the easiest to understand though and from what you’ve said I would recommend “Twilight of the Idols” as a better starting point. Nietzsche wrote this for those new to him. The Ludovici translation is best in my opinion. He has a lot to say about humility and cynicism so I’ll leave that for you to discover.

      I hope you get a chance to watch the “Beyond good and Evil” doc here at TDF, it’s very good and might give some insight and a prelude to a philosophy of the future.

      All the best and good luck with your studies.

      The Crucified One

    4. ironic that you're saying that to a man who can't prove what he says and has to cast shadows of his own onto the metaphorical cave wall to try and distract away that fact.

  39. Of course anyone who has not studied ethnobotony, pharmacology, or biochemistry would not understand that herbs have chemicals which give them various properties such as antiviral, antimicrobial, antineoplastic and so forth.

    Herbs have chemicals, though drugs are usually one isolated chemical. Both work. The difference is how they work. Sugar is really a drug... sucrose is not found in nature by itself and as such destroys health. Why? because everything that assists the sucrose to be digested and utilized in the human body is removed. Now fresh squeezed sugar cane juice is beneficial because it has various nutrients that build up the human body such as enzymes, calcium, iron etc. Since these nutrients have not been stripped away the sucrose is mostly neutralized (much more so inside a plant with fiber) . Foods and herbs are a symbiotic package that work symbiotically within the human body.

    Conversely, drugs are synonymous with sugar. Drugs have only one chemical component without that symbiotic package that assists the body in utilizing those chemicals that are within the plant and they become a poison. Why? because studies have been done with isolated components of foods (bioflavonoids aka phenols)/herbs (isolated chemicals) and caused disease including death when injected. Furthermore, studies have been done showing that bioflavonoids (rutin, hesperidin etc) contained in various citrus fruits help chemical components (in this case vitamin c) be utilized and absorbed by the human body. The difference is that once components are removed they become problematic (hence gmo crops). Bioflavonoids have been isolated and injected and they have caused disease.

    All drugs are measured on a chart to determine their toxicity(as they all are toxic thus the reason for the chart) in ml/mg/ug and then the ideal amount within a very narrow range is then administered. Though this chart is very dangerous as it does not consider in hepatotoxicity, immunology and more of the individual patient. Furthermore only a small amount of overdose can cause death.This is crucial as many drugs are cumulative in nature and patients die every year because of these omitted factors. If one limits their use to benign herbs and foods this is not problematic.

    Thus understanding that herbs have chemicals and these chemicals in herbs and foods contained within the whole plant possess healing properties such as antineoplastic, antimicrobial, antiviral and are safer than drugs is quite simple.

  40. Its funny when they are talking about "combination of herbs". I am skeptical of these "formulas" that cure cancer. I am sorry but its not as simple as that. I look at cancer this way, its a lot like war and violence around world, we know its "bad", we always try to figure a way to promote peace through negotiation or force. There are just so many factors that revolve around these complicated situations, but it just takes time, be patient. It is unfortunate that we can only help cancer patients to an extent, but I believe we have to learn to accept that there is no absolute cure. That is why some researchers began identifying as cancer being specific to each and every one of us. If you really wish to seek the truth, then dedicate your entire life to understanding cancer. Don't make arguments about throwing random numbers from studies, nobody cares what those numbers mean. Experiments are not proof, it is just a journal publishing their ideas and results, does not mean it is the truth. Talking about the politics behind cancer is irrelevant, good luck wasting your time because it gets us no where. We complain about cancer politically more than we do biologically. Come back in 50 years just don't start complaining about FDA this and that. Tell me that you've uncovered some molecular structure specific to this mutated gene and can be degraded with this molecule blah blah blah and discuss that with everyone else we might just become a little smarter instead of spreading conspiracies and making everyone a dumb f*cking politician.

  41. Anyone who has seen chemo works knows its not a cure. Why because it does not remove the cause. What are some causes of cancer; a bad diet(aka sad standard north American diet; meat, sugar, junk food,deep fried potatoes,etc), bad relationships, toxic working environment, toxic living environment etc Any child can understand chemo and radiation does not remove these causes of cancer and as such they are a failure. Conversely, a good vegan diet, exercise, cleansing with herbs, living and working in a non toxic environment, and having a non toxic relationship will promote health and prevent cancer. Just because cancer is in remission for a couple years does not mean its a cure.

    1. so what then for those who already have cancer? prevention is no longer an option, so should we just let them die, no point researching ways to 'cure' them?

    2. Cancer is a can't nessescarily "cure" a mutation, you can only try your best to prevent it, and then treat it if it comes.
      The hope and aim is that one day, conventional medecine will get to the point where cancer removal is as easy as the removal of a mole...It may take a few hundred more years, but if anything can find out how to do it, science can, given the time and the money.

    3. you have no idea what your talking about as my ex mother in law died from cancer and through her faith she followed the vegan diet so I think that is enough proof for me to say in my opinion your wrong

    4. From his post you can see he doesn't understand the difference between prevention and cure.

    5. From your post its obvious that you don't believe that prevention actually prevents anything.

    6. How's that? I didn't elaborate on my thoughts about prevention.

      If you mean stress is a cause, then why call it relationships? It's not only relationships that cause stress. Do you mean only 'relationship caused stress' causes cancer? It wouldn't seem so, I could be wrong though.

      "Relationships can cause cancer in many ways." Ok, a cause of stress is one, that's logical. What other ways do you mean? I'm hoping you won't say someone's relationship with 'god' is one?

      How does something being 'patient dependent' have any effect on whether something is a cure or not? That would suggest that someone can't cure themselves of anything, as that'd be a 'patient dependent' cure.
      You also said;
      "Thus taking herbs, eating good, and so on is not a cure by itself."
      How does that match up with your statement 5 days ago;
      "I also have seen cancer beaten with juice fasting, and cleansing with herbs."
      Those 2 statements are mutually exclusive it would seem.

    7. There are different kinds of stress and just because one is in a relationship doesn't mean that one automatically experiences good stress. If one wasn't in a toxic relationship(lets say someone who is either verbally of physically abused among other things) then they would not experience toxic stress. There are other things than can cause toxic relationships such as different religions, money problems, sexual problems, mental problems, two of the same personality type, selfishness, cheapness, irresponsibility, adultery, addictions, disorders and more. Many problems may have toxic stress or other toxic emotions involved such as anger, hatred, jealousy, excessive worries, hurt, etc. These emotions can do have consequences if experienced for lengthy periods of time. Thus is it the relationship or the stress that is the problem?

      Cancer does not disappear by itself magically it takes hard work this work includes lifestyle changes including the diet, cleansing, removing toxic relationships, and removal from toxic environments as well. Thus the patient has to do the work as no one else can help them to change their lifestyle. Just like in AA programs a person has to WANT to change. Until that point there is nothing anyone can do. Then when the person is in the program they have to continue with the program. Hence the program is totally patient dependant if they decide to follow the program or not.

    8. taking one remedy by itself is not usually powerful enough to remove cancer though combining all remedies is.

    9. Thanks for your answers. Would I be correct in assuming by 'good stress' you mean exercise etc?
      In most cases I'd say that any treatment is patient dependent, anyone that has the choice that is.

    10. you have to spend a fortune on all the quackery forany of it to work...that's awfully convenient for the people selling it.

    11. First of all you have an obvious problem with comprehension. Where in the above post have I said that a vegan diet cures advanced cases of cancer? Secondly, where have I stated that anything cures cancer? I think you need to reread my post again. Cancer can be cured only if the CAUSES are removed. Most of the causes of cancer stem from diet, relationships, and environment. Thus cleaning all three areas produces a healthy environment where cancer will not grow. Now did I mention anything about curing.. no. Why because most people will not adhere to these principles. In addition, I have not mentioned one magic bullet, but rather a combination of things that need to be done. Furthermore, damage sustained by not following these principles unless caught very early on (ie first stage cancer) cannot be reversed by eating vegan.
      I have seen when the causes are removed cancer is cured only if one follows all healthy living principles. In fact, it was a golf ball sized tumor on a woman's head. Thus you are sadly the one who is wrong.
      The only thing a vegan diet will do is to HELP PREVENT cancer, reduce greatly the OCCURANCE OF THE top ten diseases, and remove most constipation. The diet by itself is too weak, and too slow to remove diseases or even repair damage.

    12. I missed that conclusion, louder please.

      A 'proper vegan diet' will also leave you with a B12 deficiency, which causes health problems.

      "Now did I mention anything about curing.. no. Why because most people will not adhere to these principles." lol.

      Your opening sentence to the post before sets up for exactly that point. "Anyone who has seen chemo works knows its not a cure. Why because it does not remove the cause."

      That whole post was about the 'definition' of cure, where you attempt to attach prevention as being part of the 'cure' definition.
      And you're not talking about a cure? lol.

      Relationships cause cancer? 1 of your 3 main causes. How exactly do they do that?

    13. Actually there are foods that contain b12 such as various seaweeds, algae's, and one can always supplement with nutritional yeast. I know many vegans who have not taken supplements on a regular basis and have no b12 deficiency aka pernicious anemia. Funny thing my dad who ate meat all his life until his death from a stroke was diagnosed with pernicious anemia and was treated for it. Please explain how this is possible?

      Yes chemo is not a cure like the AMA forces doctors to mention. Nor is a vegan diet. Removing the causes will be a cure only if one decides to follow health principles. Thus taking herbs, eating good, and so on is not a cure by itself. In addition, adhering to health principles is patient dependant.

      Prevention is part of removing/reducing the causes of cancer though like I previously mentioned a vegan diet is not powerful enough to remove damage already sustained from living a poor lifestyle.

      Relationships can cause cancer in many ways. Only one such example is when people don't get along and are fighting all the time. This constant high level of stress produces hormones like adrenaline. If one is already toxic from eating the SAD diet this hormone cannot be digested by the liver as hormones are chemicals. (the liver detoxifies chemicals )

      Just imagine if adrenaline is circulating in your blood all day long. Stress consumes vitamin b, and c like crazy. Very quickly one will be deficient in various vitamins in this situation.

      In addition, try sleeping when you are ready to fight. Sleeping is paramount for many of your body's systems such as the immune, detoxification organs such as the liver (it regenerates before 2 am), hormone producing organs/glands ie serotonin etc. Just a reminder that the most violent criminals are deficient in serotonin. Interesting that serotonin is found is squash seeds hmmmm.

      Thus if one eats a toxic diet, and has a bad relationship they will be toxic and will have problems with but not limited to; the immune system, liver, kidneys, hormonal system, reproductive system, etc

      This is only one way that a bad relationship can effect ones health.

      You can laugh all you want but the fact remains most people are not vegan, do not exercise regularly, most certainly do not cleanse with herbs regularly, and more. In fact, most people cant even juice fast for only one day. These are only a few things that most people don't do.
      Thus its no surprise to me that 99.9+% of the population will have some sort of disease by the time they are in their middle age (50) years.

    14. Vitamin B12 deficiency is very common in the elderly. Vitamin B12 deficiency isn't just caused by lack of B12 in the diet. It's far more complicated than just that. But I wouldn't expect you to understand the causes of cobalamin deficiency in the elderly.

      The funny thing is you think you know so much, when in fact you know so little about pathophysiology and human bio chemistry.

    15. Yeah, tell that to my dad who ate meat every day but was diagnosed with pernicious anemia. But I wouldn't expect you to understand how a meat eater could be deficient.
      oh and he ate meat for three meals daily so don't bother with low HCL levels.

    16. You are full of sh1t my ex mother in law followed an extremely clean lifestyle as she ate healthy didn't drink or smoke and live basically how you have discribed in your post and still got cancer so as I said earlier I think from the first hand experience I have witnessed in my opinion you are wrong.
      My son has just under gone surgery to remove a tumour about the size of a tennis ball in width from his brain and all your BS about non medical cures are meaning less when your own child's life is on the line. The last thing any parent wants to do is bury one of their children and as such will do what ever it takes to ensure that everything possible is done to prevent that. I've already had to bury one of my children and I would not wish that type of pain on anyone.

      It appears to me that most of the post here have not understood the fact that there are so many different types of cancer that no cure will ever be able to cure or prevent them all eg. skin cancer main cause is the sun so to prevent that we must keep out of the sun in basic terms.
      The problem appears to be by what I've read here is that most seem to have the opinion that it is either one way or the other yet it appears that a combination of both may have a better success rate than just one way or the other. I've read all the posts on this thread after watching this documentary and it appear that the pro alternative medicine camp are to blinded by their own self importance to except that science has so far have made a lot more progress than we would have been with out it

    17. Sorry but your excrement is yours don't try to give it to me. Everyone thinks they have a good lifestyle but they don't. Most people think they eat good by eating the SAD standard American diet but I'm sorry that's not good enough. I had a friend that was vegan since the 1960's and he died a couple years back because of prostate cancer. Why? because the circulation was cut off to the area, he never exercised, and never cleansed. Thus even eating vegan is not good enough and I really doubt any of your family has been eating vegan. By the way he was a bus driver sitting on his behind all day which created the problem.

      That's unfortunate that you have had a bad experiences with cancer but I have witnessed a golf ball sized cancer disappear by doing cleansing, fasting, and natural remedies. If you don't believe that chemicals in herbs are strong enough to destroy cancers well that's your problem. If you think natural remedies are some weak treatments that shows truly how ignorant you are about natural healing. I know alternative healing is powerful as I have seen it work and have experienced it myself. All your BS about what you think about natural healing you can keep to yourself.

      People are so brainwashed about cancers they actually think they know something by reading articles written by doctors who don't use natural healing. Everyone thinks cancer is caused by the sun but does anyone ever think that going into the sun actually prevents cancer and is beneficial? In addition, no one ever mentions eating antioxidant rich foods that stop/prevent free radical damage from the sun.
      Eat a toxic diet, live a toxic lifestyle, constipated with toxins and then blame it on the sun.. yup forget taking responsibility for your own health.
      Although, this doesn't mean that one should go out and burn yourself. If anyone should have skin cancer its me as when I was a kid I would go out daily and get burned every summer for years, all over my face and back. So much of a burn my mom would pull off the skin in big sheets larger than an adults hand. Though I have no skin cancer today? why because I have juice fasted drinking antioxidant foods so many times I have forgotten how many, while cleansing with these herbs that have been proven to remove radiation.
      Thus its unfortunate that you continue to remain ignorant about natural healing but don't try and tell others that it doesn't work because of your ignorance.

    18. Dickhead I'm not a yank for a start so before you jump to anymore conclusions take a step back and think of the world as a bigger place than the USA

    19. I don't care where you come from, the standard North American diet is the diet that most of the world has adopted. Just because America is in the name has nothing to do with where you happen to live. In case you haven't noticed meat, dairy, sugar, white flour, white rice, is now common throughout the world and makes up the majority of diets consumed. Mcdonalds, Burger King, Coca Cola, etc is world wide. Therefore, unless you live in some dark amazon jungle eating monkeys brains on tarantula crackers these fast food restaurants or similar kinds are everywhere. Even if one doesn't eat at these junk fast food restaurants the chances are most people are eating these non-foods regularly in large amounts. By the way if you have a d*ck in your head please keep that to yourself and don't express your desires while posting.

    20. "i have witnessed a golfball size cancer dissapear through cleansing"


    21. ahh pretending to be an omnipotent GOD lol and knowing what I have seen and witnessed....liar!

    22. extraordinary claims, demand extraordinary evidence.
      I don't believe for a second that you saw anything...because if you did, you would be a multi millionaire, not a ranting lunatic on the internet.

    23. These are no extraordinary claims. If one chooses to adhere to health laws and eat healthy, cleanse, and rebuild with rebuilding foods and herbs then it can be done. Humans can rebuild houses and cars, that they have built. Why is it so far fetched to think that if the human body was given the proper nutrients to grow and rebuild that it could not be done?
      If animals can rebuild and regrow why cant humans? Is it that humans are too skeptical (from reading propaganda and never actually trying anything themselves)? However, animals aren't smart enough to be skeptical though they actually go and do things and regrow body parts.
      If I saw something and I told others such as yourself how would I become a millionaire? This truly would be a miracle and I am not a miracle worker. Thus the assumption of becoming a millionaire because I have seen what tens of thousands of others before me have witnessed is only an assumption.

    24. lol. mikey, that post is hilarious. Thank you for that laugh mate. So humans can 'regrow body parts' if we somehow get past some skepticism that holds us back? Somehow our biological health is analogous to rebuilding cars or homes?
      Dude, get off the drugs, your 'combination of herbs' is making you lose it.... lol.

      Maybe your millions lay in comedy?

    25. so your so stupid that you don't know that skin can grow back? what happens when you get a scar?

    26. ?? Wtf are you on about? What's that got to do with regrowing body parts? Other animals can, we're an animal, so..... You're funny mate.

      I've heard the only part of the human body that can't repair itself in some way is our teeth. I've not heard of the 'lightning strike teeth regrow' before. Interesting IF it's true.
      A scar is the end result of the body repairing the skin. Skin cancer can come back, (is it come back, of another case appear), and that's why it's like rebuilding a car? Or regrowing a body part?

    27. wtf you just said body parts cant grow back isn't skin a body part ?well what is it ? maybe an organ , hello?

    28. What drugs are you on right now?

      Yes, skin is our largest organ actually, repairing something is different to growing a new one.

    29. how is growing skin not growing a body part?

    30. Why is there a scar left if it's 'regrown'? As I already said, repair is very different to regrow.

      As over the edge already said, you've made a claim that is absurd and are now back peddling. Silly man.

    31. he said as he licked the window of his special van.

    32. Hey, mikey also believes relationships (whatever that means) can cause cancer.

    33. are you actually claiming that people can regrow body parts?

    34. If a person has enough of said body part left why not just like animals do? skin regrows back, broken bones grow back both are body parts

    35. how long does it take for the end of a finger to grow back as mines been gone for about 12 years and it hasn't appeared to have grown at all..

    36. i'm sorry...but "i can cure cancer with fruit juice" is the textbook definition of an extraordinary claim...You seem to be under this really wierd impression that if you talk enough you can change the definition of a word...i'm afraid it really doesn't work like that.
      "If animals can rebuild and regrow, why can't we?"
      simple answer to that question is Evolution...we didn't evolve that way.
      Skepticism is the one thing that people have to protect themselves from charlatans and fools.
      The ability to ask questions isn't a character flaw, unless ou're trying to push something...Since we#re making wild and irrational links to things, Drug dealers and pedophiles don't like people being skeptical and asking questions either, mostly to hide their wrong doings from society!

    37. LOL hehe haha prove it

    38. Is this funny to you?
      people die from this illness that you're sat here making a joke out of.
      How many times do i have to explain how the burden of proof works?

    39. now I'm making jokes of cancer patients ? I don't think so. I told you before and I gave my reasons why and once yet again you reject them. What is the point of going on ? you don't accept what I have to post so time is wasting....nuff said

    40. well, the hahaha hehehe as you continue to knowingly lead me around in circles kinda gives that impression yeah...It certainly doesn't display any sort of concern for the truth or the wellbeing of others

    41. After I picked myself off the floor and have to compose myself from the fits of laughter from reading your latest post.
      I've lost the end off one fingers there is no chance of it ever growing back it would not matter what I ate or what my lifestyle is.
      On the other hand (pun intended) due to a motorcycyle accident, man through medical science were replace the bone with artificial ones. but that is as close to man being able to replace bone to my knowledge

    42. i believe that medical science is able to replace an entire arm, i saw a documentary not long ago where an amputee had donor arms attatched.
      Modern science is truely one of the greatest achievements of mankind!

    43. It has also occurred to me that with out modern science this debate would not be critical of the claims evidence, but nothing to back it up.

      The circular arguments and replies are no better than the religious fool do in my opinion.

    44. it's exactly the same as religeon! nail hit on head. There's very little difference between these people and faith healers.

    45. I was just roaring after your last one that was great!
      I had to take a dump even whew!
      your knowledge is lacking that's all I have to say

    46. His knowledge about himself is lacking? You're full of the one liners today mate, you're on a roll.

    47. What? i have a lack of knowledge about occurrences that have happened to

    48. mikey,
      The human body is not a house. The human body is an incredibly complicated organism! The idea that you would use such an analogy only goes to show your complete lack of understanding of immunology, cell biology, pathophysiology, molecular genetics, just to name a few areas of expertise. It is so typical of those who lack education and understanding of these subjects to reduce the human body down to a simple form that's understandable to them.

    49. susan g
      If you fail to realize that by; eating poorly, living in a toxic environment and not exercising destroys the "house" aka human body then you will likely experience cancer. This is very typical of those who believe that modern medicine cures with drugs and surgery while ignoring basic physiology. Its common knowledge that diet, environment, and exercise can increase or decrease your risk of growing cancers. This denial of basic physiology proves your lack of education.

    50. funny how the ones that don't believe in this doc, stay here just to put it down. if these people are looneys and don't trust in the medical doctors. why would you stay here just to argue with them. why would you want to hear of cures from looneys when your family has died from it. I know i wouldn't want to hear that, it would just make me angry. no animal dies of cancer in its natural environment. if it was me i wouldn't be having no conventional therapy. id rather just die than look an feel like what people suffer from off that nasty s*it. how can we have all this advanced technology but we can't look after our selfs, nothing seems right about this world. i dont see many people in power get sick, or some of the best biologist who dont eat junk. they live well lives. it does make sense to say all this manmade food is junk. we are not natural anymore were all screwed up. sorry for all the cancer sufferers...

    51. "No animal dies of cancer in it's natural habitat."

      This is absolutely FALSE. In fact animals die from cancer at about the same rate as humans.

    52. sure prove it!

    53. mikey,
      You've got an awful lot of theories with regard to what causes cancer and how to cure it. Do you happen to have any science to back them up? Starting with any proof that not cleansing (whatever that's supposed to mean) having the circulation cut off, and not exercising causes prostrate cancer.

    54. Constipation ( lack of circulation, nutrients, oxygen, etc) of any body part causes pathological conditions to occur. What is cancer ? Abnormal cell growth. Basic anatomy and physiology 101.

    55. I''m sorry for your brush with this awful disease, it must be difficult to see idiots making such harmful claims as the ones being made here, considering you actually know what you're talking about!

    56. Where in my post did I mentioned cure so you seem to have a reading problem on top of your BS problem you have shown by your post

    57. looks as the chemo post is gone or was altered

    58. "Most of the causes of cancer stem from diet, relationships, and environment."

      Relationships cause cancer? Really?

    59. Yes relationships that are dysfunctional and abusive cause excessive amounts of hormonal production. If hormones are not digested by a toxic liver due to a poor diet etc then pathological conditions arise.

    60. A golf ball sized tumor on the head sounds like a lipoma not a cancerous tumor. LOL.

      There are several kinds of lumps and bumps that are benign and go away on their own.

    61. You are funny, she was diagnosed by doctors as having cancer.

    62. My mother died from cancer through her faith in doctors, she went fast after the Chemo :(

    63. So your mother had an aggressive cancer which is very sad to here however it appear from how I have read your post your blaming the treatment and not the cancer.

    64. Yes, I do blame the treatment, she was told that her cancer was not aggressive and I did try to get her to not use the Chemo. I did not know about any other cancer treatments at that time.

    65. you misunderstand what Chemotherapy is for!
      Chemo isn't a cure, it's a part of a complicated and well thought out treatment. The isdea is that the targeted radiation kills off the cancer cells and makes the cancer either benign, or small enough to be operated on and thus removed if such a procedure is possible.
      Nobody said Chemotherapy was a cure...ever. It's a treatment.

      Goes to show how much you actually know. Lot's of big words but little to no meaning or value to them. You make assumptions and consider them truth.

    66. ha I've seen chemo and radiation up close at work your teeth fall out, your hair falls out, etc. This treatment does nothing for your immune system. According to the ama and doctors it is a cure and the only cure.
      This shows how much you actually know lots of hot air but no substance. No knowledge of the immune system at all otherwise you wouldn't defend something that destroys it. Everyone knows its your immune system that fights off disease except apparently you. Thus your assumptions are just assumptions nothing more.

    67. it's radiation...what do you expect?
      Killing cells isn't something you can sugarcoat, it's a dangerous procedure.
      No doctor anywhere has EVER said that Chemotherapy is a cure for cancer. Doctors also inform their patients that the procedureis dangerous beforhand...Howerver no alternative therapist is honest enough to admit to their 'patients/victims' that their therapies have absolutly no evidence of effecasy.
      Cancer by it's very nature as a mutation is not something that can be cured in the traditional sense.
      If the immune system could effectively treat cancer, nobody would ever die from cancer, it wouldn't be such a big problem would it?
      The immune system has literally got nothing to do with cancer, because cancer isn't a foreign object it's a part of you, it spawns from you it doesn't attatch itself, how can your immune system fight off a part of you without attacking your entire body?

    68. precisely the point radiation and chemo destroys the immune system as well as the patient.
      your assumption that the immune system is stronger than what a person eats, drinks, and does/exposed to is not supported by science.
      Thus its a circular argument that proves only that one does not understand the immune system.

      thus I would rather boost my immune system with good vegan foods and herbs known to fight cancer, improve the immune system, and live toxic free. Rather than destroy myself with poisons.
      One is not cured from eating junk food, watching junk tv, and living in a toxic environment. Thus chemo+rad is not a cure but only temporary relief until cancer grows again despite any forced ama corrupt legislation.

    69. You've seen chemo and radiation up close?

      And I've seen untreated (except for "natural treatments") breast cancer up close and believe me untreated (except for natural cures) isn't pretty! There is typically a painful, fungating, necrotic, smelly, oozing , bleeding, tumor that breaks through the chest wall. Of course by now the cancer has spread to all the lymph nodes and to the organs beyond.

      This is what happens to the patient who refuses proven science based medicine for natural cures.

      Cancer is a formidable opponent! It would be lovely if your diets, herbs and spices could cure it, but it's just not the case. Cancer is more than 200 different diseases and you alties think you can cure them all with a diet and supplements. It would be laughable if it weren't so tragic when people forgo real medical treatment for this malarky. The fact is mainstream medical treatments are the best we have at this time.

    70. Yes I have seen cancer and the effects of chemo and rad destroy the immune system. Hair falls out, teeth fall out and so much more.

      Proven science? Chemo and Rad is considered a success if the patient only lives for a short time after treatment. I wouldn't call that success.

      Furthermore, since the causes of cancer have not been removed such as the SAD diet, poor lifestyle choices, lack of exercise, and so forth cancer will come back in time.

      Cancer is not a formidable opponent but rather ignorant people are formidable opponents since they refuse to live healthy. Especially when they have been propagandised to believe the four "food" groups are scientific which they are not.

      I know that healthy lifestyle, exercise, herbal cleansing, a clean environment and vegan diet will create the proper condition for the human body to thrive cancer free. Especially since witnessing it occur first hand.

      Its pathetic that people believe that they can live unhealthy, eat unhealthy, and then take toxic drug treatments to restore health.

      Drugs do not restore health, repair damage sustained from cancer nor do they assist the immune system. Drugs are indiscriminate and cause additional problems in conjunction with the original pathological condition.

      Though at the same time herbs and foods are scientifically proven to stop cancer, rebuild the human body including assisting the immune system. There are hundreds if not thousands of studies on garlic and cancer alone. Many herbs and foods have been scientifically proven to boost the immune system.

      Thus just because one is ignorant of the thousands upon thousands of studies showing that various herbs, foods, and natural remedies destroy cancer doesn't mean they don't work. It only means that one is ignorant of proven scientific facts that they work. Especially since it is obvious that one has never used them correctly.

      Thus to say that Chemo and Rad is the best treatment while being ignorant of how and what to use naturally is a false statement. Though a more correct statement is that according to your limited knowledge of natural remedies Chemo and Rad is the only recognised treatment for cancer by those who practice allopathic medicine.

      ps untreated cancer is not treated cancer with herbs, diet, exercise and natural remedies correctly. If it was then the cancer would be destroyed.

    71. had enough of listening to you a_no_n. for your information chemo is a carcinogenic and it causes cancer so do your homework before you mouth off. Cancer survivor

  42. Don't people and their loved ones in large corporations and government regulatory agencies get cancer, too? Why would they be blocking effective treatments to consolidate money and power? Although science tends toward entrenchment, as it reflects the human nature of its occupants, there is a long history of unpopular ideas eventually finding acceptance through empirical data. Much of alternative medicine and conspiracy theories seem like pseudoscience embraced by those who do not understand the scientific method or peer review process, which is unfortunately a huge part of the population. Some notable exceptions exist, however, including the cigarette industry and GMOs, which provide credible examples of the power of corporate influence. I just don't find this particular topic regarding alternative cancer treatments compelling.

  43. As far as I understand the only way to find out the truth is to change the world medical industry to the old Chinese way. Doctors and medical stuff only get paid if their patients are healthy.
    Contempt prior to complete investergation will enslave a man to ignorance.

    1. Chinese medicine is younger than Traditional medicine. Chinese medicine is only about 200 years old.

  44. If you you use Essiac as an example to describe a working anticancer drug,then I know this film is nothing but paranoid malarkey.

  45. Can't see the documentary... Entertained by the comments.... Bravo Toutmosis .

  46. it took hundreds of years to convince Dr to wash there hands before seeing another patient, many DR's went from the morgue to the hospital bed with out washing their hands and despite glowing evidence and reduced numbers of dead victims they refused to obey the rules. .

    One DR hundreds of yrs ago was classed as insane and carted away.

    Just ask your self WHAT IF???

    1. actually the "doctor" you're talking about was a nurse in the Crimean war called Florence Nightingale, who was able to convince medical practitioners to wash their hands regularly in the course of her career. so yeah, it wasn't one doctor campaigning for hundreds of years as you hilariously suggest, it was a nurse in the mid 1800's.

    2. Actually the "Nurse" you're talking about was a doctor called Semmelweiss and he was not able to convince other doctors to wash their hands despite all the evidence.

      Also you will find most doctor don't live for hundreds of years.

      Your nurse was nursing in 1854 the Doctor above was 1847 but Pasteur was given the credit for discovering germs in 1852. But any one could have worked it out maybe centuries before.

      The doctors story is in here some where he was put in a mental home because they thought he was mad and could be a distant relation of your good self.

    3. I was unaware of that, and shall consider myself schooled in the matter...Although Nightingale was involved in the process.

  47. i would like to have a copy of this video.... but i can find it any were... where can i get or buy it...but i went on line and found some of the recipes from the video...

  48. I don't believe the stupidity here. You people are absurd, you go out of your way to defend charlatans and you gang up on anyone who dares to have a rational opinion that doesn't cater to your rebellious anti-government anti-everything mindset.

    America is being "dumbed down" because people can no longer filter the information they consume. The only thing people like y'all care about is being able to consume it non-stop 24/7.

    You are worse than sheep, you people are like zombies. You just need to feed your paranoia, to h-ll with the truth.

    Unbelievable. I'm outta here and I'm going to make sure none of my friends visit this website. It's a shame too, I always thought a documentary site would attract people who have the capacity for rational thought. People who care more about the truth than they care about how palatable it is.

    1. Don't let the twits get to you. Continue to think for yourself, express your opinion whether it's popular or not, learn from the responses. If all you learn is that person/persons is a twit, so be it. Don't let them stop you from enjoying this site.

    2. "I'm going to make sure none of my friends visit this website".
      And why would your friends listen to you?
      Aren't your friends smart enough to decide for themself?
      There are thousands of subscribers/reader/posters on TDF...not just the 6 or 7 you have been exchanging in a confronting way.
      It is different ideas that help people make choices.
      You may post on a different subject and be the one who makes no sense to someone what?
      Plus i see you're back!

    3. Yeah, I got carried away. Dealing with conspiracy theorists is like dealing with racists who sit at home and memorize their talking points. It's like bashing your head against a wall. It drains you emotionally and makes you think there's no hope left for the human race. Especially when you're passionate about things like objective truth, evidence and history. But you're right, I'm sure some of the stuff I write (or the way I write it) may be offensive to others so it's all good. Point taken.

    4. It'swhat Snake oil salesmen do. It's quite an odd phenomena that is exclusive amongst 'woo-woo merchants'. You'l get Homeopaths supporting faith healers, even though both alternative remedies contradict one another. You'll get steiner school advocates supporting Homeopaths, even though both philosophies are miles apart.
      It's because of a general anti-science concencus. But don't let the fact that the idiots shout the loudest put you off...there are plenty of sane people here who as you've discovered for yourself could use the reinforcements lol

    5. You are so right. You can have a whole room full of woo peddlers, homeopaths, juicers, Gerson followers, naturopaths, chiropractic's, nutritionists, etc. etc.

      One says you can cure the cancer with diet, the other says align the spine, yet another says all raw food is the answer and they can't ALL be right! Yet they won't criticize each other. It's like a respect among thieves.

  49. When I see things like this it makes me physically ill to know people
    could be helped if it weren't for our very,very crooked, greedy
    government & the powerfull greedy AMA. They have destroyed more
    lives than many wars over their selfish greed and no respect for anyones
    life but their own! They're all just a bunch of scumbags that prey on
    the ignorant Americans that are too lazy or brainless to notice what
    they have done and are doing to our people and country everyday!!

    People just need to WAKE UP! Get your head out of the sand for Gods sake!

  50. toutmosis, an advocate of natural health here too, and i focus entirely on nutrition for self-healing.. can you shed me light on the alternative methods you used that were effective in curing diseases like cancer. i'm eager to learn more. you can PM me on this twitter acct. thanks in advance

    1. I've explained it at other places in this conversation. So if you have the time, take a look at it...Its near the end i think...Difficult to move through these conversations...

    2. Pedes i've been talking to Toutmosis for quite a while...He has absolutly noidea what he's talking about. All of his assumptions about cancer are dead wrong. He isn't a healer, he's deluded. And if you follow advice he gives, you're also just spreading irresponsible assumptions...If you want to heal people, go to medical school, don't play dress up and pretend with charlatans like Toutmosis.

  51. Steve Jobs lost valuable time playing with "alternative cures" until it was too late. He paid with his life but we all lost.

    1. What did we all lose?

  52. The fact is there are a few hundred varieties of cancer, each with its own causes, possible cures and pathologies. What works for some cancers is completely useless for others. Pancreatic cancer has an over a ninety percent death rate, yet testicular cancer has a ninety percent recovery rate. We want a cure, a simple pill that cures it all. It is too complex a disease for this to happen. We want to blame the experts for not coming up with an answer. It even angers us and emotions get in our way and we start to think irrationally. However, even doctors and big pharma people get cancer and they want a cure, too. We hate to think that someone is profiting from our misery but we fail to understand that if they don't make profits their ability to offer us anything diminishes to the point where we may never find an answer. Life is very complex and we don't even come close to understanding it. Until we do, we will not begin to understand the things that will most assuredly kill us, either.

    1. 'However, even doctors and big pharma people get cancer and they want a cure, too.'

      Excellent statement, I absolutely agree.

      1 in 3 will suffer cancer. If there is anyone without experience of a friend or family member suffering from cancer by the time they're adult, then they're very very lucky.

    2. I do believe that most of these doctors and big pharma people does not take things like.... vaccines! So the chance for them to actually catch something is drastically reduced!

    3. You are absolutely wrong about doctors and pharma employees. They do vaccinate their families and themselves.

      Your assumption that you will "catch something" from vaccines is ignorance. Billions not millions, BILLIONS have been vaccinated. Serious reactions are RARE, however the chances of an unvaccinated child contracting a serious disease and having serious and even life ending consequences is much higher.

    4. Hi, there, thats just super! You go girl and get as many vaccines you can!

    5. I assume you are being sarcastic.

      It's not a question of getting "as many vaccines as you can". It's a question of being vaccinated against diseases that will and have already become epidemic again because misinformed people aren't vaccinating their children. My father contracted polio during the polio epidemis of the 50's. I still remember the relief when a vaccine for polio became available.

      Vaccines save lives. Their benifits so outweigh the small chance of harm, that it isn't even close.

      Presently because of the high vaccination rate parents who don't vaccinate will get away with this irresponsible behavior by hiding amonst herd immunity. At some point as herd immunity drops there will be outbreaks of disease, like we are seeing in the Uk and parts of US.

    6. It's not a question of getting "as many vaccines as you can". It's a question of being vaccinated against diseases that will and have already become epidemic again because misinformed people aren't vaccinating their children. My father contracted polio during the polio epidemis of the 50's. I still remember the relief when a vaccine for polio became available.

      Vaccines save lives. Their benifits so outweigh the small chance of harm, that it isn't even close.

      Presently because of the high vaccination rate parents who don't vaccinate will get away with this irresponsible behavior by hiding amonst herd immunity. At some point as herd immunity drops there will be outbreaks of disease, like we are seeing in the Uk and parts of US.

    7. It's not a question of getting "as many vaccines as you can". It's a question of being vaccinated against diseases that will and have already become epidemic again because misinformed people aren't vaccinating their children. My father contracted polio during the polio epidemic of the 50's. I still remember the relief when a vaccine for polio became available.

      Vaccines save lives. Their benifits so outweigh the small chance of harm, that it isn't even close.

      Presently because of the high vaccination rate parents who don't vaccinate will get away with this irresponsible behavior by hiding amonst herd immunity. At some point as herd immunity drops there will be outbreaks of disease, like we are seeing in the Uk and parts of US.

  53. Sorry to say that I'm one of the gullible people out here. My boyfriend has cancer and if I thought I could take him to someone who could cure him with electric I would. One problem though, I expect they charge more than I can afford.

    1. Bring him to Quebec if you can. I'll try to help if i can... No charge

    2. I would like to express my sympathy and support for you and your partner, I understand it is a very tough deal, you will need all the strength you can muster. Trust in the doctors, they are doing their best - and many will have personal experience similar to yours, if you can find one to talk about it with. In my experience, the most important thing is to remember to care for yourself properly above all. After 3 years caring for my father I found that my sense of self worth and motivation had become severely depleted, as a direct result of being utterly focused on him. You are important too, your life, your career, your friends etc.

      Anyway, my thoughts are with you, your partner and your families, sincerely best wishes to you all.

  54. anticdotal evidence can not be considered effective until the mechanisms can be explained and repeatably proven under controlled conditions. Until then it's comes down to a case of 'because I said so'.

    1. When you see success and success again, and again, and again. After a few times you realize that you've got something there...This ain't all coincidence...If i see something working 20 times in a row, somethings definitely working. The five studies after that are only to prove it to others...

  55. I'm not qualified to experiment on myself, nor am I brave enough. I certainly wouldn't experiment on my kids. I'll stick with the tried and tested. good food is good for you, just don't see how diet can cure cancer alone. If herbal remedies worked as some wish they would, why would we have ever bothered with all the tinkering? Why all the tinctures, lotions and potions? Why the efforts to improve them? I don't have a problem with complimentary medicine as long as it's complimentary and not an alternative. People live in pain and with worry, if a witches brew makes them feel better and does no harm, what's the problem? The only advice I would give is talk it over with your doctor, make sure it's not going to mix badly with any other medicine they might be on. My only concern is that people might inflict their choices on others, their kids for example. What you do to yourself is your own business. Other than that, as the song says, ''whatever gets you through your life'' ;)

  56. Quack or not, we should be allowed the choice to be 'suckers'

    1. That's what Mexico is for.

    2. They are more free I guess

    3. wow... do you speak like that about other countries? That speaks bad of you.

  57. Hello doctor. I am very interested in yur cancer treatment. Please canyon provide me a email so I can talk to you and explain what I think the issue may be? Thanks

    Adrian Achonwa. My email is ( edited by moderator) no e-mails allowed. I also live in Canada

  58. I love the stats

    " 1 person out of 3 will be faced with cancer at one point in their life;
    and 1 million Americans are diagnosed with cancer every year"
    We are not all Americans and do not have the same diet or life style

    1. Cancer is mostly a disease of older people. Countries with high life expectancy tend to have higher cancer rates. For example, the numbers in Japan are very similar to the USA, even though their died and life style is quite different.

  59. This doc shows little proof of much, around 1/3 of the way through, they've already simplified cancer so much trying to explain it that it's pretty much wrong. Lot's of holistic people on here claiming lots of things. Found little on here relating to the inhibition on telomerase. Things like that. This doc is straight bunk. Lots of conformation bias I also keep seeing. Knowing one person who takes a holistic route and does well does not mean that it is a cure. It also does not mean that everyone else should go this route. Lots of times simply the "Changing" of these people's lives is often what saves them, not the specificities of the change itself.
    Also Chemo kills cells. It is like aiming a shotgun at the disease and hoping you come out better. It works sometimes, others not. There's also a lot of research on labeling cancer better for surgery. Certain cancer cells uptake radioactively labeled material faster than normal tissues, and can be used to glow and surgically remove these cells quickly, and often removes much more than without the dye, which only labels cancerous cells. Another important thing in development is the inhibition of angiogensis. If you stop blood cells from being made then the tumor will not grow in size, and will not metastasize well. The tumors cannot get larger than a marble, and eventually atrophy from the inside.

    But keep taking your snake oil's and cod livers. They may not do anything, but they make you feel better, which also does a huge deal to help you. Honestly, I'm just a student, but I've seen quite a few members of my family go through it, and those who wanted to live and believed their treatment was going to work came out and those with doubt did not. The mind is stronger than we believe.

    Most of you need to quit with your childish fear of everything around you and willingness to embrace the counter theory, simply because it's a counter theory. The lack of medical knowledge on this board shows, I'm just a student, but I can already see past some of what this is implying.

    1. I agree with you. Most people fail to understand the difference between medicine (science) and healing (craft). Anybody can practice healing on anybody else or even themselves. But if a doctor offered me a medicine with the words "I have no idea how it works, but I gave it to my last patient and he was OK", I would walk out.

    2. I like your sincere comment. However, are you as skeptical about your studies and the stuff you learn as a medical student as you are of alternative medicine? That would be good.

    3. Honestly, no I am not. Simply because science has a rigorous methodology of proving it self. For any one theory to become poignant it must first be covered extensively by one team, who starts the experiment, and then submitted to a journal, which often includes 3 or more (there are exceptions, and bad science does happen, this is just what's expected, nothing is infallible) different teams confirming the other's results with similar conditions and variables. Science makes things so that they stand on their own merit. Now a holistic or alternative healer does not go through this process, because things are more akin to his style rather than sheer methodology of results, which science has. Science and modern medicine are a practice which is very critical. Many scientists spend their entire lives working to publish a paper that maybe, just maybe might break the news, and often these people are extremely intelligent, often working decades on their ideas alone. That's the process of science, it requires you to be extremely specialized, or extremely clever/inventive to become successful, because other people have probably already done what you've done.

      Alternative medicine simply does not have these rigors in testing. It relies more on theories and results from a doctor to patient view, rather than a testing point of view, and if anything scientists realize that people may be manipulated to far ends, and that there is a huge deal of illusion in both choice and opinion of a treatment. I'm not saying alternative medicine is all wrong, in fact modern medicine could use a more patient oriented approach, and more wild ideas, because those are what change the future.

      I simply cannot be as critical of my fellow scientists studies for the fact that if I was another scientist and I saw something that was not reproducible under certain standards or is an outrageous scientific claim then I would jump down their throats and do everything I can to make sure that they could not purvey such information to the public at large.

      The difference is how the two disciplines are trained, modern medicine is honed like steel, while alternative medicine is grown like Mendel's peas. It requires a deal of know how of what to expect, and a deal of how to manipulate the results, where modern science is held up to a battering of criticism.

  60. My simple question may be simplistic to some-after all these decades of research, after all the (fill in the amount here) of dollars spent why has there been no cancer cure found? Again, I am a simple person, but haven't we "cured" so many other death sentence diseases over the course of human existence, yet "cancer" is a non-starter for a final, solidly performing cure. Why?

    1. Because it cost something like $150 millions dollars to complete the process of clinical testing necessary to bring a cure to market. If it isn't something from which massive profits can be obtained it will not get the necessary funding, and in the US and Canada at least, alternatives to the standard approach of synthetic drugs and treatments will likely be ridiculed by the medical establishment regardless of its promising affects on cancer. This applies to any disease for that matter, and it's no wonder theres an attempt by bigpharma and the FDA to classify vitamins and nutrients as drugs as more and more we are learning that ultimately nutrition is a big part dealing with disease.

    2. For one reason, because "cancer" is catch-all for hundreds of illnesses. Many are now quite treatable, other less so. Second, most diseases involve foreign substances/bacteria/viruses that can be targeted. Cancers do not. Third, by the time cancer produces obvious symptoms, it is often very advanced and difficult to treat.

  61. So when are the official double blind experiments going to begin to determine and compare the effectiveness of all of the natural and man made patented cancer treatments that have been shown effective in curing cancer.

  62. it is all about money, power and control. If western medicine actually cured cancer then there would be no need of the whole economic infrastructure of cancer treatment. The standard treatment protocols are often worse than the disease. A friend of mine who survived the five year window but then died of heart failure. (We're told it was brought on by radiation weakening of the artery walls).. It was intimated to us that It happens far more often than we know because such data is not recorded. It was shocking and eye opening... at this point I don't trust modern medicine since they seem more interested in their bottom line than in my health..

  63. As far as i know these alternative therapies are not dangerous, cancer is what is dangerous.... and money.

    1. Not to mention radiation and chemotherapy.

    2. This documentary is ridiculous. Anyone who has dealt with cancer knows that chemo and radiation, as horrific and uncomfortable as they are, actually save lives.

      This anti-western medicine movement is part of a greater movement of conspiracy theorists that think the United States is running a eugenics program.

      So yeah, it IS dangerous when these snake oil salesmen try to convince people that are terminally ill with cancer that they can be cured by these impotent alternative therapies, knowing full well that they won't work. It's also cruel.

      I am so fed up with this anti-government, anti-everything mindset people have these days. The Zeitgeist movement, Alex Jones, the Venus project, Julian Assange, Wikileaks.. makes me sick. It's creating an entire generation of ignorant fools.

    3. I'm going to have to disagree with you on Wikileaks and Julian Assange . . . he's merely reporting things and helping whistle-blowers leak information out to the public.

    4. I disagree. Assange, Wikileaks, Anonymous and AnonOps all started out good but went sour. That's what happens when you become paranoid and overzealous, you become obsessed with delegitimizing American power and influence. You begin to see the world through the eyes of a vigilante. You end up becoming anti-American. These people have no problem putting our brothers and sisters in uniform under direct threat. They have no problem antagonizing our closest allies while working with our enemies (like Hamas in Gaza). That is unforgivable and it's turning smart people into paranoid consrpiacy theorists and anti-Semites. In fact, one could argue that Assange, Wikileaks and Anonymous have created an entire generation of people that hate America and Israel.

      And it's unfortunate too, they had all the potential in the world and I used to donate to both Anonymous and Wikileaks. I've even helped Anonymous a few times, back in the day when they almost took on the Cartels.

      Oh well, what can you do.

      Btw, great avatar pic ;)

    5. " In fact, one could argue that Assange, Wikileaks and Anonymous have created an entire generation of people that hate America and Israel". That statement is as floored as your goverment, the reason that most people dislike America is because of their big brother approach and attitude toward the rest of the world. The sooner the USA learns to mind its own business the better the rest of the world would be. The problem with the USA is you all believe that the rest of the world owes you and your bullying tactics are wearing thin with the rest of us. You would have a more positive effect on the world if you cleaned up your own back yard first rather that think your the world police.

    6. Clearly you've categorized a massive and confusing array of topics and groups in to neat little sweeping generalizations so as to basically dismiss them all under an "anti-government" heading. You clearly need to learn more about ALL the topics you mention.

    7. You used the phrase, "delegitimizing American power and influence."

      Where, other then in the US itself, is your 'American power' legitimate? And legitimate by whose/what standard?
      Guantanamo, is that legitimate?
      Abu Ghraib, was that legitimate too?
      And that's just for starters from more recent history.

      Everything is 'legitimate' when you make your own rules.

      Assange and co. didn't create this generation that dislikes your country's actions, contrary to your claims. Your governments have worked hard to create your reputation, and you've been disliked by much of the world far longer then the 'current generation', well before Assange was even born.

      And btw, at least CanResPub has an avatar pic. ;) lol

    8. No. It's people like you who have created an entire generation that have grown tired of the American way to think and act. People so self-righteous and cocky like you. And what does the anti-what? have to do with anything? All peoples are equal, are human beings are our fellow equals. Are you Americans taught such thing in schools? ALL PEOPLES ARE EQUAL. Any soldier from any country is a brainwashed individual whose right to live peacefully in his/her own land has been taken away. Oh! and the cartels... they are subsidized by your government (money, arms, intelligence...), that's no conspiracy theory. Wow... I'm disheartened by every word in your comment. C'mon Americans you might still have a chance to be likeable. Go live in another country for 20 yrs and hope to have your horizons expanded.

    9. If anyone builds hate towards America and Israel, it isn't Wikileaks' fault, it only states the truth. If hate is built towards these two countries, it is for their practices and actions towards others.

    10. Yeah, USA is not running a eugenics program which is why they collect peopleès birth at blood and dump it into a international database controlled by the un. tuskgee, and those black guys injected with syphillis by the government, those blacks who were sterilized against their will and poor whites in the south, has nothing to do with eugenics, just the government trying to clean up the gene pool. Hitler didnt fly in american scientist to help him with eugenics.

      Yeah Eugenics is just a myth

      "As a social movement, eugenics reached its greatest popularity in the early decades of the 20th century. At this point in time, eugenics was practiced around the world and was promoted by governments, and influential individuals and institutions. Many countries enacted various eugenics policies and programs, including: genetic screening, birth control, promoting differential birth rates, marriage restrictions, segregation (both racial segregation and segregation of the mentally ill from the rest of the population), compulsory sterilization, forced abortions or forced pregnancies and genocide"

      "Eugenics became an academic discipline at many colleges and universities, and received funding from many sources.[7] Three International Eugenics Conferences presented a global venue for eugenicists with meetings in 1912 in London, and in 1921 and 1932 in New York. Eugenic policies were first implemented in the early 1900s in the United States.[8]Later, in the 1920s and 30s, the eugenic policy of sterilizing certain mental patients was implemented in a variety of other countries, including Belgium,[9] Brazil,[10] Canada,[11] andSweden,[12] among others. The scientific reputation of eugenics started to decline in the 1930s, a time when Ernst Rüdin used eugenics as a justification for the racial policies ofNazi Germany, and when proponents of eugenics among scientists and thinkers prompted a backlash in the public. Nevertheless, in Sweden the eugenics program continued until 1975.[12]"

      Nope no Eugenic by the government, its all just conspiracy and Alex Jones paranoia.

    11. I know... some things are right on people's noses and they still dismiss them.

    12. I've personally treated 15 patients with cancer with alternative methods. Mainly used electricity to filter the blood along with a change in diet. They didn't have to go through archaic methods like radiation and chemo. Many other strong alternative methods exist out there but
      people like you, uninformed people, keep trying to say they don't work or exist. As for snake oil salesman, if you had read just a little on the subject, you'd know that the government agencies( FDA, AMA, etc...) actually love charlatans. They leave them alone and use them on TV once in a while to ridicule alternative medicine. The ones they attack are the ones that found methods that work. They're the scary ones...So my suggestion to you is : READ. You could actually learn something. Real
      research, not magazine reading...Always fascinating to me to see that its the people who know the least about a subject who have the more to say about it...Again, Read, please.. So i guess i'm part of "a greater movement of conspiracy theorists" now ? Come on!

    13. you state "people like you, uninformed people, keep trying to say they don't work or exist." okay then inform me. show me the repeatable demonstrable scientific proof so that i may become informed.

    14. Your response actually says it all. You think that doctors,or others, who use alternative methods will be simply free to do so and not get attacked in any way? Your not serious i hope? Do researchers need funding? What happens when they use their funding to try out alternative methods? They don't get funded anymore. As simple as that. And not only that, they can't get a job in their fields anymore either...My advice to you is to follow the trail of murders in medicine from the latter part of the 19th century to now. Brilliant people working hard to find cures and they did. Most of them mysteriously died from an overdose of Valium and alcool in their hotel rooms while away from home...Hmmmmm. Biologists who don't know not to mix alcool and narcotics or ...??? A guy like Royal Raymond Rife did find a way, and he invited the best doctors of his time from all over the world to a demonstration in the 1920's or 30's if i remember correctly. He had a special cocktail he injected to rabbits that produced tumors. There where 32 rabbits in all. 16 for the docs and 16 for himself. He asked them(about 30 doctors) to use whatever methods they had to save the rabbits; to make the tumors dissapear. Needless to say they couldn't. He destroyed the tumors of his rabbits simply by putting them between 2 special electric antenna that produced his research frequencies on cancer cells. Radio Frequencies he tested that obliterated cancer cells in minutes... His rabbits were tumor free in minutes and he took the rabbits from the other team and treated them also. 14 got cured and he worked a little longer on the 2 ones that were left. Cured them also...100% result. While we have 3-4% cure rate with Chemo and radiation...Those are the real numbers by the way. The doctors were so impressed that they all signed there names of a gigantic white board on which was written : "THE CURE FOR ALL DISEASES" ,cause his machine worked on pretty much anything. There are radio frequencies to destroy everything out there...Its pretty simple, Pharmaceutical compagnies don't make money if your cured. Capiche? It costs hundreds of millions of dollars to get something approved so they sure as hell won't invest in cures now will they? They work on relieving symptoms that's all. Keeping you taking there drugs for as long as they can...Hell, they didn't even know how aspirin worked until 1982 when research on eicosanoids came out. But they were giving them to patients nonetheless... History is filled with these stories...Of course there are charlatans, but you don't hear a lot about them. The ones you hear about found techniques that usually work...It takes years of research just to learn about them so buckle up my friend, you've got a lot of reading to do...

    15. Actually, you forwarding Rife as an example of 'alternative cures that work' says it all.

      If you're correct, why not point out some decent evidence, rather then disjointed conspiracy theories in a feeble attempt to gain credibility. Where are your 15 patients testimonies and medical history showing you did anything for them other then rip them off?

      No, instead you claim it takes years to even understand evidence of a treatment working. He's not trying to re-invent the thing, he's asking for evidence it works, which you conveniently don't answer, instead claim it will take years to even look into it.
      I call you out on your BS. Prove it works, prove my feelings you're a con wrong. I bet you won't even try, but if anything come back with more con-artist BS.

      You want to hope none of your 'patients' die because of your interference, you wouldn't be the first charged and convicted over your claims and actions with promises over the 'Rife cure'. Shame on you for taking sick and desperate people's money. You're obviously full of sh1t, can't/won't answer simple questions, but revert to your con. Unlike your usual marks, I'm not desperate to want to believe in you. I'll look past your BS talk to try to find substance. You've given nothing other then practiced BS so far, which seems to be the totality of your substance.
      If I'm wrong I'll gladly eat my words, but you, you're full of sh1t, and deserve the contempt that someone that preys on the weak elicits.

    16. Never took a cent for what i did ! And everything worked fine. I'm actually friends with all my patients...But thank you for asking...And what are your qualifications if you don't mind me asking? I studied in that field? What did you study in? Why would i lie when i don't need to...And the evidence is everywhere...It would take hours to find the references and still you'd simply try to bring it down. Your on this post to do just that...You need the right qualifications to read the research and understand it. And you need a lot of it to filter out the BS from the truth...My conscience is clear... I don't need to convince anybody. Words gets around that what i do works...Who's getting preyed on exactly? This ain't a cop movie...WHY ARE YOU POSTING HERE? Your not saying anything that the mass media isn't saying? Don't worry, your message is said over and over again. Mine isn't...So please, if you're interested in the subject, read a lot and you'll find what you need. Don't ask me to do the research for you. Do the work...

    17. Ohh, so it's up to me to prove your claims is it? lol. Nice try, but wrong. You come on saying you can cure cancer, when asked for some evidence you go all vague, tell people to go work it out themselves, it takes years of research.
      Why am I posting here? Because I can, because reading BS like yours will often raise questions in my mind, and because I fkn felt like it. You won't intimidate me out of asking you to back up your BS. If you presented decent evidence I'd be sincerely interested. But you don't when asked, you deflect and distract.

      So the mass media is saying you're a con man too is it?

      So you study for years, develop a cancer cure, then don't charge anything at all for treatments? Yeah, that sounds real plausible and likely.

      Obvious inconsistencies like your, "And the evidence is everywhere...It would take hours to find the references and still you'd simply try to bring it down." suggest you're full of it. And contrary to your statement, if it was accurate and compelling evidence I'd not try bring it down, it'd be able to stand on it's own regardless of anything I'd say.
      Didn't ask for you to read it to me, lol, just where to look for it, which is too hard for you to answer. Once again, not trying to re-invent it, just look at the evidence it works. Someone with the knowledge, history and education on this matter that you claim should be able to come up with something better then misdirection as you have. And as I said, if you proved me wrong I'd eat my words and apologise. You've not even tried. The truth doesn't need BS to stand up, so if you're speaking the truth, why dance around providing any evidence?

    18. ah, the cool refreshing breeze of common sense!

    19. There's this cool new thing called crowdsourcing, you may have heard of it. There's s*itloads of people on this alternative bandwagon, get some to help you fund a clinical trial, run by an independent lab in another country with no ties to the US or big pharma. Take a human analogue and treat one cohort with traditional cancer treatment and the other with your electrical treatment and see which ones survive. If it works and is repeatable, sit back and wait for your Nobel prize. Until you do this, you're just running off at the mouth.

    20. Raymond Rife was working with John Crane at first. The units Crane made never worked correctly because he didn't understand the science completely and made a seemingly similar device which didn't work. These devices are the ones mostly used today. One of the original ones was found eventually and was copied and worked perfectly and consistently... Some companies make some good ones...Truerife seems good. But i've not tested any of these machines or technology...But i trust Dr. Rife. He invented the best microscope of his time and was a true genius...

    21. You mean the machine that he basicly marketed as a pyramid scheme? Rife is condemned as a fraudster by the American Cancer society!
      there were also several deaths linked directly to Rifes machine, because the murderer had convinced people to come off of their regular medication.

      He is just another in a long list of conmen scamming money from sick and desperate people, and leaving a trail of corpses in his wake!

    22. I don't use Rife methods boy ,but i'm pretty sure they're sound...And Yeah, the guy just invented the best and strongest microscope of his time. And nobody even came close to it for at least 10 years...Yeah, a real nut-job...I mean, anybody can do that right? His labs where destroyed as well as his machines exept one, who was found in the closet of an old lab, about 20 years later...The ones who followed tried to make their machines with their understanding...They missed...

    23. i see, so when people tried replicating Rifes box, they were unable to...that might have more to do with the fact that he was found to have fiddled his results and was called out as a fraudster by the American Cancer Society.
      You'd be quite shocked to see just how many of your colleagues and heroes are convicted fraudsters.
      But let me guess...It's not that those few people are fraude, it's the rest of the world that's lying right?

    24. Try a copper bracelet, just for good measure - and a rabbit's foot, which wasn't very lucky for the rabbit.

    25. If the iron in your blood was magnetic, MRI scans would pull a human body to pieces in an instant. so the copper theory is bunkum too i'm afraid.

    26. Read what is the question. You said you've treated 15 patients, how many were cured? (by you) Treating and curing are different things.

      What did you filter from their blood that helps treat cancer?

      Would I be correct in concluding that as you're posting this on an open forum, you're not worried about the government agencies you mentioned. And if that is the case, based on what you said, it would follow that they've decided to put you in the 'charlatans' group, as you're not one they're worried about then? Which would then mean you're not one that found a method that worked?

      P.S. How much did you charge them for your treatments?

    27. First, did you know that elements in your country put a ban on the word "Cure".? Or a restriction if you will. That word can only be used by the "proper" autorithies to describe a situation in which a patient is free of "symptoms" for 5 years. If they get cancer or anything, back after that, they are still counted as "cured". Now, I'm betting you didn't know that? Am i wrong? Don't worry, that's what i'm there for...Now, getting back to my answer...My patients are all cancer free and in better shape then they were before...And i will treat as many as i can. But thank you for asking...I studied in Biology and was pretty much at the top my class. Electricity "is" used by the body to defend itself. Certain immune cells stun and open the cell membranes of bad cells with a little jolt just before eating them...There you go! You just got a small free course in Bio. I just put electrodes over the artery on your wrist or ankle, with only microamperes of juice and it filters the blood naturally, that is, just killing the bad organisms( parasites, fungi, cancer cells, microbes, bad bacteria, etc...) not the good ones, and voilà...The body repairs itself...That's called "the immune system". And it kills cancer cells everyday on its own. But it some cases, when people don't eat right and don't exercise and the stress levels are high, this system weakens. I just help it a little... Nobody put me in the charlatan group, i live in Canada. Were less aggressive and barbaric in these matters, but not much...My treatments up to now are free...

    28. Lol, you flatter yourself, you just lost your bet. I was aware of the 5 year window for it being counted as cured or not. More then one person in my family has had cancer in the last decade, that's not classified information.
      Interesting, all you need to cure cancer is a little immune boost hey?
      So, in Canada the government lets people research and find then use cancer cures? Kind of makes your whole story contradictory then.

      Are you harassed and persecuted by the government, or not? Either way your story contradicts itself. A clear sign of BS.

    29. Judging by your cynicism this is nothing more than an ego contest for you isn't it? You dismiss everything outright.

      Immune boost? Obviously. Then there's stage and type of cancer, overall physical condition, perhaps genetic predisposition, among other things I'm sure, as these are just off the top of my un-overly educated head. Stuff that should be obvious to anyone who stops and thinks about it for ten seconds.

    30. My cynicism comes from logic first, but also from watching my mother die from cancer and her actions over her last few years. If you don't like me asking someone claiming they have a cure to please show me something substantial or I'll have to just think he's another quack offering as you said, obvious starts towards better health, mixed with other 'bait's' and claims and BS arguments that's your prerogative. If you want to see things as an ego contest go hard mate, IDGAS.

    31. O my ... this is where I stop reading your attacks. If you do know your stuff then you are too stupid (or proud, same as stupid) to even accept it. If you don't like this doctor because of what he says, why attack him? Because truth makes uncomfortable? It's great that your relative got better with whatever the doctor said. Please know that we all know that there are people who get better with chimio, radiation and medicine. Similarly, please know that the majority don't. Including my aunt whose body was totally destroyed not by the cancer but by the treatments. My sister, who had cancer as well, refused the treatment (to which her doctors attacked her legally, can you imagine? She had to get a lawyer so they would allow her to choose!) She took natural remedies and has been able to live to give birth to two more children ever since and her body is healthy. She had cancer at the same time as my aunt and they each decided to take different treatments. My aunt is now dead, she died a very painful dead because of the treatment.

    32. "You must be an American" lol how many kangaroo's have you seen lately in America.

      And by the way, I agree with docoman's posts.

    33. I have edited my comment, but not my opinion. I care not about who you agree with, although I respect people's opinions. Attacks are not opinions.

    34. What are your medical qualifications? How did you filter the blood, did you remove the blood as in a dialysis machine? How did you use electricity? any invasive procedure of the body has to to be fully sanctioned by the medical profession by someone that has the medical qualifications to do so.

    35. So weird you would go straight to that? Why be interested in that? Isn't the cure much more interesting? Who do you work for exactly? Small electrodes on the skin, directly over the ulnar artery branch at the wrist..You need only 150 microamperes to reach the blood. Some of the current gets diffused by the skin...Otherwise you'd only need 50 microamperes. So small a current that you barely feel it...Does that answer your question weird boy?

    36. Well I take umbrage to your condescending remarks to me by calling me weird for one, very unprofessional in answer to my queries.

      What does my credentials have to do with anything?

      Electricity? we all live by electric current generated by our bodies, and external ambient sources "electro-smog" so how can applying amps on the skin adjacent to a blood vessel possibly filter any blood in a closed system? And by you toting you have a cure for cancer on a public site by applying electric current on the skin in my books makes you out a Quack!

    37. I asked your credentials because i'm asked mine. And you're supposed to have knowledge in this specific field to say what you say...You don't. And how much do you know about the effects of electricity(alternating and direct currents) in differents frequencies and modulations an amps on cell activity, metabolism and so forth...Toting to have a cure? There are hundreds outhere! I'm using 4 methods myself to make sure the job is completly done...Please don't use the word quack. Makes you sound like a quack. When you have a couple of post-doctorate years on anything regarding biology and research don't hesitate to let us know what you think. Then, it will be relevant...You sound like the Noam Chomsky haters... You really don't know what your talking about but you have to say it to " protect those poor people from alternative medicine". At least get the stats on the deaths attributable to "modern" medicine. You won't talk much after that...

    38. And you sound like a Chomsky apologist.

    39. Chomsky needs no apologist ;)

    40. 3 years in Micro-biology, 2 years in cell biology, post- doctorate work in biolectromagnetics on mitochondrial metabolism...What are your credentials sir?

    41. Certainly if you had this much schooling you could adequately describe the EXACT mechanism in very specific terms of what your treatments do, and how they both treat, cure, and prevent, as you claimed, cancer.

    42. I can show you entire metabolic pathways...But it won't show you how some substances prevent cancer... I'll try...Let's see...Electricity applied to blood, that is, 7.83hz or it's lower harmonic, kills pathogens, parasites, fungi, some bacteria, viruses and there mutation...We understand only part of the mechanism...It lends electrons to macrophage and nk cells for one part and they use it to destroy organisms by stunning them and opening their membranes and liquifying the insides before absorbing them...That's a great oversimplification but would take to long otherwise...And keep in mind i'm translating from french, which is not easy...Patients are encouraged to take good minerals or Colloidal silver because it raises the conductibility of the blood and tissue... Electricity also generates oxygen in the blood and Cancer cells can't tolerate good or high levels of oxygen. I also use a high powered magnetic pulse generator to get the electricity to the internal organs and lymphatic nodes where some parasites and viruses hide... The magnetic pulse turns into electricity when it hits tissue... I also use a little bit of Ozone. That's O3. The molecule is unstable and only works for a while and then separates really quickly into a more stable form=O2 and O. The O2 helps raise the oxygen levels even higher while the single atom of Oxygen is unstable and goes on a killing rampage but only with anaerobic organisms, leaving the good organisms intact...O3 carries negative electrical charges that specifically counteract free radical damages, scavenge crosslinking and recharge depleted cells...Ionic silver colloids assist this rejuvenation process by restoring free electrons...O3 rapidly converts(oxidizes) all know toxins and wastes long present in your body cells to H2O and CO2 which flushes out easily out of your body...The rest goes into deeper physics and sadly i'm not qualified to go into that in detail...The ozone also help with the detoxification that occurs afterwords...But the main thing is :it works...The results clearly show it...The whole process lasts 40 minutes building up to 2 hours each day for 4 to 8 weeks. I can describe the protocols i use but that's about it... You look at all i've said so far it should be clear that i'm not bullshiting anybody...Hell, I've even shown patents...It takes me hours to write these things... Wouldn't have wasted your time and mine...

    43. But this does not prevent cancer it eliminates it. To prevent you use nutrition respecting wha'ts right for each bloodgroup...Plus vitamins, minerals, exercise...

    44. what institution?

    45. What happened to those 15 patients?

    46. Perfect shape...One got a bad PCR test once, but never again...

    47. You're either a liar or dangerously stupid and arrogant. Are you really telling me that using alternative methods -alone-, you managed to cure 15 patients with CANCER?

      You beat cancer, one of the most complex and brutal diseases a human being can get, with alternative medicine?

      If you are telling the truth, this is nothing short of a breakthrough. If you're lying, and I bet you are, you should be in prison.

    48. It isn't a breakthrough and its not even difficult. No challenge there...Cancer is the end product of an accumulation of parasites, viruses,fungi,microbes,bacteria and heavy metals in some circumstances. .I'm just using old technogies that actual geniuses built...Just really happy i found them...And they can be used for other purposes too. I've had a tooth ache for days now. I use a device that puts out strong pulsating electromagnetic pulses and has a range of 9 inches from the tip of the handle...It was conceived to get the viruses, cancer cells, fungi and parasites that hide in organs and lymphatic nodes...I can't get to them with just electricity in the blood so i use the other one locally directly over the area i need to treat. The electromagnetic pulse transforms into electricity when it comes into contact with living tissue...The electricity then does the job. For my tooth ache it kills the bacteria that produces the pain...It's the only method i know to releave that kind of pain for a few hours and is much more powefull than over the counter medicine...

    49. Then why doesn't every cancer patient follow your perfect treatment program?

      Why do I still see poor little rail thin kids without any hair from chemo in hospitals when all they have to do is get some electroshock therapy :P

      You're a liar. And yes, you should be in prison. Shame on you.

    50. Because most people, especially those in charge of medicine hold belief systems similar to your own. Automatically you go off the deep end and assume he's a liar and should be imprisoned, when all of these sorts of approaches and techniques are no real secret. There's nothing dangerous about what he's proposing, so why do you go to such extremes in your reaction? There's something comparable and important in your reaction and the way the medical community automatically react as well.

    51. Ok... lol. First, you, docoman and others are attacking him like hell, then you want him to cure all the little kids that have cancer? I can answer your question: it's people like you who don't want him to do help other patients. Doctors of alternative medicine are attacked and demonized by people like you and docoman, so that no body would go see these "con artists". That's why...

    52. I read the radio transcript and looked for some other more general information on this oxidation therapy. Now, I do consider myself a fairly open-minded and curious person, but after hours of reading I still can't find a satisfying explanation of how running your blood through a chamber filled with highly oxidative gas could ever do more good than harm, as in how this wildfire of a chemical process could ever discriminate between cell membranes and protein structures of healthy blood, versus that of blood carrying pathogens or infected cells. As evidenced by the 23 year-old woman mentioned in the script, such practises can even be fatal.

      If someone like me, who simply paid attention in highschool biology class, asks this very simple question and can't find a satisfying answer, how do these people expect to persuade a majority of medical professionals to even begin to take them seriously?

      Accusing the medical establishment and its regulatory agencies of various human rights violations and corruption in an attempt to appeal to my moral sense and shift my trust over from one camp to the other just looks to me like a futile attempt to get around the basic facts, which is that the science is nonexistent and the practise is driven by financial motivation.

      Of course, one has to be an ignorant fool to think the "mainstream" medical establishment isn't driven by financial gain as well, and has seen its fair share of corruption and exploitation. But that fact doesn't grant moral or scientific superiority to toutmosis or any other practitioner of alternative medicine. They have to do better, and if the science is really on their side, they better stand up and make good of their claims.

      My mother works in the R&D department of a biotech firm, and she has first-hand experience of the hardships of being a medical scientist working within an extremely hierarchical and competative establishment. But there is light at the end of the tunnel if you strive to reach it, the uncountable medical advances over the past century are the undeniable proof of this.

    53. The answer to your first questing is simple. The pathogens, bacteria, fungi, parasites and so on in your blood flourich in low oxigen environments...They are anaerobic, they use the mitochondria only to produce energy... They can't tolerate high oxygen saturation in the blood so they die...Oxygen or Ozone attack only the anaerobic things in your blood(the bad guys) and the aerobic part survives and even thrives in oxygen environment...So you can do the thing that pharmaceuticals have never been able to to yet, fight only the bad while leave the good alone... When you use Chemo and radiation your killing everything. And what comes up first after that? the anaerobic stuff that lives in low oxygen environments...Same as on your lawn or in a lake...The less oxygen it has the more anaerobic algea grows up. Put a tube in there and push oxygen in or ozone and the balance will be restored...We are aerobic creatures and need high oxygenation environment to thrive...

    54. First of all, I'm not exactly convinced of @toutmosis:disqus claim concerning his alternative treatments.
      But then again i'm no scientist nor do I have any theoretical evidence to counteract his claim.
      Having said that, i'm defiantly intrigued.

      First of all, my faith in established medicine is extremely low. They rarely make any breakthrough in curing diseases anymore, whats more many of the drugs they advertise or sell often contain more harmful side-effects than the treatment itself.

      Second of all, Cancer is one of the most common and lethal diseases that plagues modern society, it is in fact an epidemic and contrary to popular belief this is a new phenomena that is increasing in its consistency.

      So here are the questions I have that often neglected? What exactly causes cancer? And how is is formed?

      This might seem like a simple questions, and I've heard many answers. Some surface deep (smoking, genetics, radiation, etc) but all these answers fail to delve deeper into the biological mechanism of why cancer develops at all? In fact established medicine seems less interested in this question of prevention and understanding, rather they focusing all their money and attention on treatment.
      Which is certainly commendable, but what has it gotten us?
      For example, still to this day their most common solutions thus far is chemo, radiation or surgery.
      All of these barbaric solutions are extremely expensive, usually the kind of money that would take most of your life to pay off. And if it fails, your family is still left with the bill.
      What's more, established medicine ask millions of people for donations for cancer treatment, year in and year out. Am I to believe the billions they receive from cancer victims is just not enough to proceed with new treatment?
      And what's more, where exactly does all this money go? what are some of the results?

      If you can't awnser these questions your not alone.
      Althought I may be speculating, and I don't have any deep intimate knowledge of this, but the way I see it.

      Medicine is a Buisness, or more specifically a corporation. It is no longer in government hands (at least not in the USA), its in private hands.. > Private means they are their to make money (plain and simple).

      And make money they do, Cancer is a billion dollar business, and as more people get sick, more profit for shareholders. New development and treatments are to prolong the medical experience with more expensive solutions for those desperate to survive.

      There is no money in cure, in fact if a "true" cure of cancer were ever found, it could ultimately ruin a powerful business releasing skilled specialist and experts like medical engineers, cancer specialists, pharmaceutical companies, etc..)

      In fact, such a huge business might even take steps to ensure that no cure is ever found, using the (FDA) as its tool.

      Which brings us back to full circle to what toutmosis was saying...
      alternative medicine doesn't seem to be so whack under this rubric, rather it may possibly be a more viable solution because it has separated itself from a corrupt core.

    55. Interesting comment, i agree with much of it.

    56. Cancer has genetic and mental causes of course but in what i've seen it's a collapse of the immune systems abitlity to fight correctly. As are most diseases... Dr. Gerson use to say that as long as you produce a strong local inflammatory response you're still in the green....Cancer cells appear everyday in your body and your immune system fight them off one by one. But it's all about energy. With enough energy the immune system will get you rid of everything on its own. Some people get rid of cancer with will power. Again, energy, some might say, the strongest and best of all...Its only when this system weakens for several reasons, that you start losing the battle...Parasites, fungi, isopropyl alcool used for cleaning all the giant containers in which they make all kinds of sodas and boxed juices and cans, viruses, microbes, some bacteria, devitalized food,tap water, eating foods not appropriate to your blood type, fluoride(which is the main ingredient in rat poison), Smog,etc... all put a ball and chain on your bodys energy reserves which are the same ones your immune system uses...When there's too much to handle some get Immune diseases (mostly blood group O) and some get cancer...The people who respond aggressively tend to get Auto-immune diseases. People who have low immune reaction when a pathogen gets introduces tend to get cancer...And if you pile up party drugs on top of that your body will weaken so much, you'll even make the markers for HIV and, depending on the area of the world you're in ,some Country's that use 6 markers the PCR test will show that you supposedly have Aids, believe it or not. Other countries use 9 markers others 11 or 13 before they diagnose you HIV Positive... So depending on where you are you'll either have HIV or you won't...But that's other discussion...You are right in asking where the money goes? They got tons of money from the sell of drugs, and other drugs to counter the side effects of the first one and so one, but, they want more, so they throw fundraisers, marathons, telethons and so on, to get more money for supposedly research. But in reality they put most of that money in their pockets and continue on making drugs to ease symptoms rather than cure , and your money doesn't ammount to any cures being found because it would be counterproductive do find cures...They'd lose their jobs...Lets remember that what we call now "alternative medicine" was just normal medicine before Penecilline. People thought it would be the panacea. so everything was pushed aside for a while...Now we know we created a much bigger and dangerous problem...viruses mutated to counter the antibiotics and no real knew ones that work came out, so we're now left to square one...Everything that's coming at us is now stronger and immune to our attacks... The only way out is to bring back the real simple techniques that worked before and tweak them a little and we'll get out it...But if we continue on the same path, we're screwed...Physics is the best option i see... But there are great methods that work out there...The more you combine the good ones the more fighting power you get back in your immune system and it then heals itself...

    57. What about other diseases besides cancer?
      Have you heard of Post Q-Fever Syndrome?
      I agree, the stringency of diagnostic criteria can make a big difference to the eventual diagnosis.

    58. Yes read zapping with " ions " kills tooth bacteria ...tooth regenerates, heals itself... Got real mad about my findings In my research into various alteratives for a Futuristics thesis. No need for drilling , root canals, cement containing bad poisonous elements, capping, leaky fillings bringing down the immune system...progressing onto pulled teeth , fitted bridges ..getting bacteria underneath having inflammed gumboils then bottles of antibiotics ...then expensive implants , dentures etc ...dentistry as it stands now Is indeed a whole money making procedure which pretends to alleviate suffering and pain but essentially systemically morally bankrupt and quality of life destructive exploitive - parasitic ,"head in the sands " field to be in.
      As for curing cancer with diet... My cousin did that. My mother refused conventional hospital treatments preferring to die rather than be subjected to more surgery and chemo over again. Now side by side with crude saw- bones artifical hip replacement methods I read of Chinese cures by alternative diet-rest and regenerative treatments.

    59. oh and i forgot to mention ph levels. Cancer spreads very rapidly in acidic environments. Many methods don't work simply because they forget this simpls fact...You need to make the body alcaline before you can heal it...Fortunately of one the effects of electrifying blood is that it give out a lot of oxygen, which helps make the environment more alkaline...

    60. and where did that information come from?
      I don't have words for how dangerous what your doing is, you run the risk of SERIOUSLY hurting someone with your irresponsibility.
      You realize that if someone abandons regular medicine to prescribe to your theories and they die, then you will technically have murdered them! If you want to be a doctor, go to school and get your degree, and learn REAL medicine!

    61. Real medicine is the medicine i use. And i am aware of every conventional method used today. The medicine you're refering to is only as old as the discovery of peneciline... That's when medicine turned from helping the patient to making money out of him by keeping people hooked on drugs...All researchers working on curing the body using physics instead of chemical means to heal were either shutdown,discredited or murdered...All methods using natural means pushed aside to make room for the Era of Antibiotics...Antibiotics are usefull on the short term but they destroy the intestinal flora, altering the balance between good and bad bacteria, and causing the leaky gut syndrome which weakens the body and makes it susceptible to invasion by every disease out there... Trust me, i can't do any worse than what's already being done...The techniques i use are very gentle, have no side effects and dramatically help each time. And there are thousands of doctors who share my views...I'm not worried...

      By the way, 90% of the links i posted have disappeared for some reason...Which should explain why you weren't satisfied...I'll try again...

    62. but all of your links are to utterly worthless sources...You link to incredibly biased things that have a direct profit margin tied in with people believing in this nonsence.
      In England it's against the law for people to claim that they can cure cancer, and that law is in place to stop people like you taking advantage of vulnerable and sick people to try and make yourself feel you think you're some sort of Chosen one, when infact, you're just giving people false hope for the sake of some petty thrill.

    63. Biased? Have you ever read an article on a new drug when the studies behing it were financed by the compagny selling the drug? That's biased...I posted links to Geniuses that have changed our world with their discoveries...Not bad i think...In science, the minute you say something that's not in the interest of Big Pharma you expose yourself to a lot of trouble...You don't do that unless you've got some truth to say...Telling people that all alternatives to drugs don't work, when in fact they do work, is an outright LIE...Steering people away from lifesaving techniques Is the thing that's dangerous...And i'm simply not going to let you do it just for the fun of it...You have not presented one valuable argument so far...You're here to lash out at people who don't share your views...

    64. except when those studies are published, anyone is free to replicate the study, and if the original findings are found to be false, the scientist who performet that original study basicly loses his entire career.
      The big Pharma argument is all very well and scary until you actually look into the process. The scientific method is the most reliable fact finding tool we have.

      If you can prove that alternative drugs work, the James Rhandi Educational foundation offers a $1.3million prize to anyone who can prove science wrong...thousands of peoplehave taken it to try and prove homeopathy works,

      It's quite rich to call me a liar, when you're the one who doesn't have any evidence for his claims...You're calling these quack therapies "lifesaving" when you literally don't have a single piece of reliable evidence to back that statement up.
      please...a single piece of evidence, that's all I want.

    65. Lenny, you've brought nothing to this discussion but your own presumption and ignorance. Instead of making an honest effort to investigate the claims being made you accuse complete strangers of being liars and suggest that they should be imprisoned for no other reason than that they challenged your belief system. Heh, "dangerously stupid and arrogant" indeed...

    66. Ok, so next time one of your relatives gets cancer, take them to toutmosis. No hospitals. No "western medicine". Take your dying relative to some hippie hack and we'll see what happens. (And I bet you'll take your relative straight to the hospital).

    67. Do you know for a -fact- that there is not validity to any of the claims toutmosis or whether they are fabricated? If you do please explain how you verified; if not, then I stand by my previous statement that you're as arrogant and stupid as you claim the "hippie quacks" are.

    68. i know he can't prove what he claims.
      What evidence have you seen? Why is toutmosis so special that his word alone is all that is nessescary for us to believe him?
      I don't suppose you fancy buying a used car from me do you?

    69. Heuhhh, i've just realized that 90% of my links were deleted...I don't know who's doing this, but its really shitty!!!

    70. it's because Disqus is funny with links...What a suprise you're a paranoid delusional as well...

    71. Please, try to keep together...Or get some Seroquel from your doctor if you want to follow conventional means...This is a site for exploring with documentaries, exchanging ideas. I don't know why you're here telling people natural therapies don't work, especially when its in a field you seem to know nothing about ,but it's pretty weird...?

    72. For someone whose been "in science" all his life you seem blissfully unaware of the concept of critical thinking (no real shock there).
      You paint yourself out to be a scientist, but you talk much more like a priest...especially when your beliefs are challenged!

    73. That coming from someone who can't even google the right info on a Nobel prize winner. Please...

    74. sorry if i couldn't get exactly what you were referencing from the idioticly vague information you gave me...But that's the whole point isn't it...You want to get me running around after distractions to change the subject to stop me asking you for the evidence you clearly don't have...It's not working, and it's only making you into a more sinister appearing person.

      I've mentioned the James Rhandi Educational foundation twice (three times now)and you've been oddly silent...You can hardly claim that the truth is being suppressed when you aren't even ready to consider going to the one person who would actually pay you a million dollars for proof.

    75. Good luck with that mate, practiced charlatans like the couple posting on here are masters at logical fallacies and misdirection. Seems they're sucking in quite a few too. I agree with your posts, they've not shown any evidence and consistently dodged questions they don't like. Even claimed the burden of proof over their claims lies with both sides equally. LOL.

    76. Of course the burden of proof is on both sides...You can't say that something doesn't work if you don't know now can you? That would be lying, wouldn't it? The only thing you can say is :I don't know" . Which should be your position, that is , if you were honestly analysing anything...I said previously that i use 2 electrodes over the ulnar artery branch to filter the blood...2 hours a day...I kill the rest with a strong magnetic device giving out pulses every 4 seconds over most lymphatic nodes...The magnetic waves turn into an electrical current when they hit soft tissue...I even posted the frequencies and amperage at some point. I said some researchers, ex: Basil Wainwright use Ozone directly into the blood, (Polyatomic apherisis ozone therapy) which also works...I described all this in detail. But how will that matter to you? I'm not here to prove that it works , i know it does, i tried it many, many times...I'm here to say that some alternative methods do work and quite easily too...People who want to know more will do their own research and people like you won't...So why do you care? People don't need to here that you "think" alternative methods don't work by someone who hasn't tried anything...People need to know from people who did try something and what they found out...That's the reason for exchanging information. Finding out things for yourself...

    77. I've encountered this a one few times lately. No, the burden of proof does not rest on 'both' sides. The claim being made is that your electrical magnetic blood/lymph node treatment cures cancer. Not just a certain type of cancer, but apparently any and all types at any stage of development. I reread as many of your posts as I could find, and the closest you got to a description of how your treatment works was something along the lines of (paraphrased) 'the current gives the phages an extra electron which enables them to destroy cancer cell walls' - which was ambiguous to say the least - and somewhere in there you state 'we only know half of what is going on.' coupled with something about the current being small - I've got to be honest, I am not the slightest bit convinced having heard neither sound reason nor evidence and so I disbelieve.

      The point is, If I refuse to believe for the lack of good reason to believe, that doesn't mean I have made a claim, which would indeed burden me with the proof of it. It means I remain unconvinced, no more, no less. if you want your claim to be held up next to the tried and tested, or even just in the realm of the possible, you need to back it up, you and no one else. Simply saying 'well I've seen it work.' isn't enough.

      The main reason that fills me with suspicion, is when you started out touting your therapy, (apart from watching a monologue some 5-6 years ago by a quack who had built these electromagnetic wrist bands that he claimed exactly as you do who then went on in the same breath to describe garlic as a lethal poison that soldiers in WWI died from as allegedly the bullets were coated in 'essence of garlic' for want of a better term.) is that you were not content to let your idea stand on its own, you went straight in with words like 'barbaric' and 'archaic' to describe modern treatments that are thoroughly tested and have high effective value. If your treatment works, then great. So does chemo, so does radio therapy, so does surgery.

    78. To pretend that i know every mechanism at work here would be very pretentious. I would never do that even if i have ample knowledge in the matter. And i didn't. But at some point, when you see that something works repeatedly you don't argue with it...You just try to find out as much as you can, on top of the knowledge already accumulated on the subject...I tried to explain it in laymen's terms to the best of my abilities...There are many theories on why it works, but until you've tried them out, you can't know for sure. And that's what i did. On myself...It upped my muscle mass, felt lighter, stronger, more energy in every way. Didn't get sick for 4 years straight, not even a small cold. Never could do that before... My eyes were veined and tired before, now they were clean and white. I felt so great it was crazy. Then, years later, when i was sure it worked, i proposed it to cancer patients who had tried everything that conventional medicine had to offer and were still dying...They tried it willingly without having anything to lose...They had 3-6 month to live according to their physician. All the ones i've treated are still alive and doing well, and as i said before, i've got very good relations to them to this day...None of them even register anything on a pcr test...Which is obviously great, no matter how you look at it...Everything worked like it was supposed too. And that was great since things rarely go exactly how you think there going to do...

    79. i am going to try to make the common issues crystal clear.

      1 the person making the claim owns the burden of proof. no true scientist would never avoid it.

      2 critical and scientific thought demands repeatable and testable evidence for claims

      3 personal testimonials and baseless claims are proof of nothing

      4 emotional arguments and logical fallacies have no place in a scientific discussion

      5 avoiding direct questions and red herrings just make rational skeptics more skeptical

      6 please tell me when you type "There are many theories on why it works". you know you have presented nothing that classifies your claim as a scientific theory.

      so in closing i just have one question that requires an answer. please yes or no will do for starters. can you provide evidence that would satisfy the conditions to qualify as a scientific theory?

    80. The burden of truth, in science, is on the researcher, true, of course. But i'm not talking to scientists here and not in a scientifical debate or discussion. I'm just talking to normal folk about alternative medicine. Because it's the only thing i can do, so i spread the message. It's not about prooving anything. I said it works period. I'm sure of it. All i have is empirical evidence ...If something works 15 times in a row without fail, and you did it, it's pretty obvious that it works... Of course scientifically speaking there would need to be repeatable documented proof. It is the scientific method. That's not debated here. But everybody who tried to publish his results in these matters were shut down...So what do you do then? Its a "cul de sac"...There's nowhere to go. But there is empirical evidence done by reputable researchers, and i believed some of them because their work made total sense to me. And it worked, so it's great isn't it? I did have a lot of knowledge in these matters but i hadn't had the chance to test it out. Some researchers did, and they had incredible things to say. And i listened with a lot of scrutiny...When you've seen something work many many times, you already know it works. Your just waiting for your peers to test the same things and prove the same things you already know. But when it comes to physics being used to treat people ,when the conventional model uses chemistry and is funded by multibillion dollar compagnies who would stand to lose everything if knowledge of cures using simple methods that don't generate the profits they're looking for, you're looking at a great big incentive to corrupt science...And Its what you see when you go into an hospital. Deliberate Old science. It's the same thing you see when you get in your car. Deliberate old science...We would all be driving electric cars if it were not for the people who stand to lose from technological upgrade...I just put you people on the front line and told you before most people find out...And its 30 years old knowledge. Not even cutting edge or recent. The only thing i'm claiming is that some alternative methods work. And they do. I'm not expecting that everyone will believe what i say. Some will and some won't . I can't prove any of this except to some people that are somewhat close to me. I'm just throwing it outhere because its a debate on what exists and what works...And i happen to be one of the rare ones that can speak about it. I was tired of keeping it to myself.

    81. i will take that as a no. it is frustrating that a direct question cannot get a direct answer. you go on to say "But i'm not talking to scientists here". how do you know that? scientists or not there are many intelligent people here who realize that a scientific claim requires scientific evidence.

    82. We're in a forum here. We're exchanging knowledge and ideas...I can't exchange proof...Even if i asked you to produce proof of current molecules(drugs) used today you couldn't give it to me either. Even if it's supposed scientifically accepted knowledge. I could challenge it , and you'd realize how feeble some of the science behind drugs truly is... If you keep that in mind you understand why it's so much trouble to provide proof, of anything...I did what i could...

    83. I have read all the post on this thread and I find your answers to be extremely contemptuous to say the least as you have no idea of the qualifications of the other members of this forum and as such you should answer the questions and show the evidence requested as if you were speaking to your peers as they would be asking for the same requirements from your claims as the other poster on this forum have repeatedly requested.
      From where I sit at this stage you have provided no evidence scientifically at all and the burden of proof is always upto the person making the claim not the person who disbelieves it. That applies to all aspects of life. If in doubt ask any officer of the court

    84. Just count the attacks i got and the number of times the word "quack" as been used and put yourself in my shoes for a while...

    85. Your fragile state is your own doing by being evasive and rude when asked to show the evidence to support your claims. You have state that we the other members of this forum aren't educated enough for you to explain it in which I find insulting to put it mildly.

      So you to whinge about how you have been received on this thread I think you should have used your expressed yourself in a less insulting way to start.

    86. Look at "a_no_n" 's repetitive attacks and ridiculous comments and you'll understand... I was in no way trying to insult other forum members, except a few who attacked me first or were making general assertions with absolutely no knowledge to back it up... I responded a bit harshly sometimes but you've got to understand that i'm seeing people here who obviously don't know what they're talking about mocking the science that i love and trying to monopolyse the dialogue...Attacking me in my field of science and being asked to prove everything when none of you could do the same is a bit hypocritical isn't it? Right from the start you should know that it is impossible for me to do so. Another clue that i wasn't being critized by scientists and not in an honest way either...Scientists don't react like this...
      I've seen this behaviour before on the net but never had the guts to intervene...And i'm glad i did for once. Not sure i'm gonna do it again though...

      I have made claims yes ,but mine came from first hand empirical evidence and i never lied about that or anything else for that matter...And i was in no way trying to prove it. How would i go about that anyway? Saying everything non conventional or unknown to the public doesn't work is not only incredibly naïve but statistically very, very improbable, not to say, impossible...And that's how i knew i wasn't being critized by scientists... No scientist i know would react aggressively period... There's no need too...It's only a claim...

      Saying that nothing other than what you know works, "is" making a claim too...It is a claim, it's just a very uninformed one... I mean, some have got rid of cancer accidentally by getting a bacterial infection for goodness sake! It was found out later that the bacteria fed on iron and that the cancer cells needed this iron to replicate...They were left with a treatable bacterial infection and no cancer. It is in medical litterature! There are plenty of these stories in the litterature. Sure they're all anectodal, but anectodal doesn't mean impossible at all. It means very interesting and we should take a look at it. If you know anything about science you know that most discoveries were made by accident....That is a fact. And it says a lot...Waiting for peer reviews is scientific, but it's a very, very slow process...When you see it first hand you don't need to wait...You know. That's where some of the arrogance comes from...

    87. Working in science I'm sure you of all people should understand better than most how important evidence is when claims are being made otherwise we would have quacks running around everywhere peddling all types of cures for all conditions mankind may get through out lives.

      I'm a skeptic by nature, and with out conformation or evidence to support your claims I'm finding extremely hard to take what you have said at face value. As you should be able to understand there are a lot of people out there that will make claims that are in fact untrue especially on public forums like this as it is all anonymous.

      I hear people from all walks of life blaming the top end of business and of governments for their own in actions rather than explore all options to get there voice heard.
      I don't know very much about internal running of your government however in Australia we have a government run research program in which big business may contribute to however the staff don't answer to them and quite a few facilities are on restricted access government land. I would assume that with results like you have claimed that there would be someone or department that would at least steer you in the right direction to get your said treatment correctly tested and reviewed to ensure that treatment can be administered to as many cancer sufferers s quickly as possible.

      You have mentioned that no scientist would react so aggressively however I've re read alot of your posts and one could interpret a of them aggressively so that statement seems to have flaws in it by you own mannerisms you have displayed here.

    88. Well said mate. I thought you might be interested that the two biopsies I had recently have proved negative. Yee Har!

    89. That's good news mate! One test you're happy to fail ;)

    90. G'day 6's
      That's wonderful news about your biopsies and I hope your health is on the mend.
      Thank you for pointing out my errors as I've said earlier that the reason that I enjoy this site is the opportunity to improve my knowledge and that includes my writing and spelling as I've been lacking in both areas.

      I must admit that if it was not for my boys illness this subject would not on my list of interest however how things can change instantly when something has/is effecting you personally.

      I find it hard to except toutmosis's story as one thing that this site has confirmed to me is that I'm not wrong when asking for evidence when anybody makes a statement.
      I also find it very difficult to believe that anybody that may have a cure for anything would not go to the ends of the earth to ensure that it was made availble to as many suffers as possible.
      I think that saying that the government or the "big pharmas" are preventing him from getting the scienctific community from testing his said treatment.

    91. G’day big J

      I know what you mean about illness focusing one’s mind in directions that it rarely travels and I’m sure you and your family will go on to learn a lot about your son’s condition and its treatment. I know what you’re saying about asking for evidence in claims of so called cures and treatments, as if either of us is going to risk our family’s lives on hearsay. Soldier on mate.

    92. glad things went well.

    93. Thanks Edge, I know a bit more about extracting the urine and disappearing up my own bottom from the experience. I use the word bit as in being bit by a horse ;)

    94. 15 cases cured out of how many patients have you treated?
      What type of cancers can be treated as there are many ?

    95. 15 out of 16. One didn't finish the treatments and got back to conventional treatments with an oncologist of some repute...She died a few months after getting back on chemo...For the types, i'll have to get back to you. I moved to a new house. It's in a box somewhere...But it didn't matter. The treatment is the same. The ones i don't do are head/brain cancers. Could get to them because the electromagnetic part of the treatment gives them terrible headaches if applied to the head. The blood/brain barriers poses some problems as to getting rid of the dead pathogens into microvascular pathways...Anyway, that would be a long conversation...

    96. You implying that it was the chemo she resumed played a roll in her death can be misleading as you stated that all your patients were terminally ill to begin with.

      If all the treatment is the same as you have claimed, what other side effect have been present during your trails/procedures? and if the only side effect is a headache and no long term effects and it does what you have claimed wouldn't the short term discomfort be a lesser concern than the cancer itself?

      You have stated that you have successfully treated 15 cancers suffers, have you written a thesis or had your results peer reviewed and duplicated under clinical conditions to verify your claims and if not at what step of the validation precess have you achieved so far. If you haven't why not?

    97. Got to get back to work but i'll answer you tonight if i can...

    98. As i get back from work and am tired, i see that i have 20 more of these emails to go and most of them will probably be attacks or negative, which makes no sense to me...These are my last responds then i'm out...

      Let's see, The discomforts should logically outway the results, especially in this case, since there are so few, but as we all know, people aren't always rational...The patient was my third or fourth...She came to me at the request of family members who knew me...She didn't really want to do it and she stayed only for a week and a half. After that she somehow convinced her doctor to give her another round of chemo even if she'd been told it wouldn't work, since it at spread everywhere and that she wasn't responding anymore...She did it anyway and died around 2 1/2 months later if i remember correctly...Same thing happened to my cousin...She didn't believe in what i was doing and even if i didn't understand her choice, i respected it... She died not long after...For your next question, there are some discomforts sometimes because once you start killing parasites and pathogens etc, your body goes into detox mode and tries to flush all that out. The immune systems gets tired a bit as it suddenly gets flooded with all that stuff and must respond to it...But you can alleviate that with a little ozone into distilled water...Normally Takes care of the down effect..You can also use hydrogen Peroxide into distilled water and drink it. The molecule splits into water and unstable oxygen...The oxygen helps...But cheap peroxide is often contaminated with heavy metals so it's better to use food grade if you have access to it...

      As for trials i must remind you that these treatments are not related to my work. I do that on my own time, and i don't have a lot of it...So no trials, no peer reviews...People who do what i do normally get harrassed and thrown in jail...So there will never be trials or tests of any sort regarding these therapies...If it works, gets in the way of pharmaceutical profits, it doesn't get its day in the sun...If it was accepted at some point, they would simply drive up the price so that normal people wouldn't have access to it...Treating these people took its tole on me too...It takes a lot out of you...But the results are extremely rewarding...If the system wasn't so corrupt i would drop everything and do this for the rest of my life but sadly,we don't live in that world yet...

    99. This also begs the question, if your treatment is the same for all, and it mostly involves apart from a diet fix, an electromagnetic field over an artery in the wrist to filter the blood and give the immune system a boost, allowing it to kill the cancer itself, why are you putting it on his head?
      Is it the same for all or not? It doesn't sound like it.

    100. The only thing that changes is the nutritional aspect...It's taylored to their blood group and other factors specific to the weakenesses of the patient...2 electrodes over the arteries that give out a frequency modulated bi-phasic electric current in the blood. The electromagnetic device is for organs and lymphatic nodes that you can't reach with the first method...It sends out a pulse that can reach up to 9 inches in the tissues. The magnetic current transforms back to electric current when it reaches the organ...I also use minerals or colloidal silver to make the entire body more electrically conducive...
      The head was because he had spinal and brain cancer...Maybe it would have worked with the first method alone but i was in my first year of treatment and wasn't confortable continuing on...Now, i would try it...But when the cancer spreads to the cerebro-spinal fluid, which is the purest liquid in your body, it's pretty heavy...That means that the cancer litterally got through every line of defense the immune system had to offer...It's pretty bad...

    101. So there is two types of electric treatment you use, or just the one?

    102. Yes. One electric and one electromagnetic...

    103. Well the clue is in that word, alternative, isn't it just?

      that implies that your treatment be used 'instead of' as opposed to simultaneously or consecutively (all your patients are the latter by your own word) to contemporary therapies.

      Complimentary would be appropriate If the treatment has any measurable beneficial effect at all, which according to you is so obvious and yet you can't describe the mechanism, let alone any detail on the individuals conditions, their ages etc...

      I'll ask one more time - how do you know your treatment has any effect on tumors? did you use a CT scanner? Ultrasound? how can you be sure that the conventional treatment they received did nothing, and your therapy did everything ?

      In fact forget it. It's got more holes in it than a sponge - which you refuse to address. If you don't understand how it works, but are sure it does - go and find out why first, before you promote something you (by your own word) can not know its effects harmful or otherwise.

    104. Philosophy is primarily about method; it’s about the principles that tell us how
      to discover knowledge. And even a quick look at the history of science
      shows us that these principles are not obvious. In astronomy, for
      instance, Ptolemy and Copernicus did not simply disagree in their
      scientific conclusions about the solar system; they also disagreed in
      their underlying philosophic ideas about how to develop a theory of the
      solar system. In essence, Ptolemy thought it was best to settle for a
      mathematical description of the appearances, whereas Copernicus began
      the transition to focusing on causal explanations. So what is the goal
      of science–to describe appearances, or to identify causes? The answer
      depends on the philosophy you accept.

    105. Since the natural philosophy that Ptolemy and Copernicus worked with does not exist today the question is irrelevant. If you are asking about contemporary science, it certainly attempts to do both in the sense of 'describing appearances' = making predictions of observable phenomena and 'identifying causes' = explaining how the observed phenomena works.

      I have a question for you. Why have you formatted your post with one long line then one short line all the way down? It doesn't make it any easier to read.

    106. Walter Lippmann feared the consequences of bias,
      of the limitations of ‘facts’ in revealing the world, and the distorting power of the ways in which ‘facts’ are organized to serve particular interests, the relativity of knowledge etc. But none the less, he upheld the usefulness in journalism of dividing ‘opinion’ from
      ‘fact’ (‘science’ from ‘values’) and the science of objectivity (even though he had ceased believing in science as savior). For John Dewey, on the other hand, the relativity of truth was to be celebrated because it called attention to the problem of authority in determining what will be called the truth.
      The test for truth must be in its consequences for people, and judged by the people who experience those consequences. To pretend that science was some form of independent knowledge divorced
      from the interests or concerns of the people, established the conditions for the powerful to use science for their own interests. Public opinion could be engineered by playing down the “public” in the formation of that opinion.

      How have you become informed of truths?

      a) media(popular science et al.)

      b)your experimentation( appearance/causal)

      c)authorities licensed by intellectual property(texts from corporate research et al.)


      I assert that you are intellegent and beyond the need for hard wired answers handed over as being law. Is truth what we are told it is ? How do we recognize commercial interest from benevolent science? In this age of patenting IP can there be a benevolence in the method?

    107. If someone is sent home to die, how can any other therapy be 'harmful'; unless it somehow manages to make their last days a misery? (like conventional therapy often does). He repeatedly tried to post links to his data and those posts were apparently disallowed. I don't think anyone can prove anything in a forum like this, but I'd sure like to meet this man and see his protocol; the naysayers and debunkers and skeptics, however, are always resoundingly boring and useless to discuss issues with. 'It's fish who swim against the stream who get somewhere. Only a dead fish swims with the current.'..

    108. his posts were not deleted or disallowed. either disqus lost them or he never posted them. please do not make statements against this site without something to back it up (he has already been warned). i did disallow two of your posts as one was completely off topic and the other told another poster to "shut up" don't do that . i suggest you familiar yourself with the comment policy. thanks

    109. So all fish alive swim against the current, as ONLY dead fish swim with the current, which means all live fish 'get somewhere'.
      Your analogy is as silly as your other claims. I've got fish, I've never seen a 'dead' one swim anywhere actually.

      How do 'alternative' treatments that don't work hurt terminal patients? By taking money and time from them that they can't afford. Offering hope when they don't have it to offer. By giving charlatans an opening with the desperation that being ill causes, to use these vulnerable people for their own gain.

      I don't agree with your, 'they're dying so it's open season' proposition.

    110. I don't refuse to address anything, but look at the length of these posts. Imagine if i was to describe everything in detail...I wanted to stop it here anyway...I've said enough. And i don't think you get how much trouble this could get me into...I'm the only one here who stands to loose anything...It wasn't my intention to get this discussion to go this far...Anyway, I know the effects because the patients have access to conventional means...Some of them get back to their oncologists and get scanned...The medical system here is still free in some regards...They are in a metastasic stage. Got to get their immune system to go back up first. Normally everything shrinks at the same time after that...It takes a few months at 2 hours a day of treatment in the last stages of cancer...If i got early stage i estimate it would have taken only a month or a month and a half to be sure...The polyatomic apherisis ozone treatment seems to go a lot faster than what i use. But i don't have access to that...Getting back to patients, Some of them are so fed up with the system that they get back to their life and don't want to hear about anything regarding cancer anymore...I got only terminal patients. They'd gone through years of battling this disease. It took its tole on them...They're just happy to be back on their feet and get on with their lives...Some of them have gone through terrible things...Anyway, these were just to prove to myself that it worked. If i got several in a row i knew it would prove it worked. Now i know and i'm happy with that...

    111. You said;
      "Anyway, I know the effects because the patients have access to conventional means...Some of them get back to their oncologists and get scanned...The medical system here is still free in some regards...They
      are in a metastasic stage."

      So you in fact haven't cured them as claimed. They're a stage IV cancer sufferer.

      Some of your story so far;

      You haven't tested anything, (apart from on yourself to try it apparently), you don't have follow up reports, you don't even have conversations with all your "friends" that you supposedly cured, at no cost.

      It was at first 15 people, with a 100% cure rate, now it's 16, one went back to 'regular' treatment and died.

      The more of your story you let out, the more it shows you don't know for sure what you're doing. First you use oxygen therapy, now you don't.

      Where was it you studied medicine all those years? Study is quite a loose term.

      I'd expect someone with your claimed education, ESPECIALLY someone who claims to be a medical researcher, to properly understand the burden of proof, which you proved you don't/didn't.

    112. Well they're are a lot of details of course...A lot that i don't go into...20 posts just today, and mostly insults or attacks...I shouldn't have continued on this long. I'm paying for it...Not educated in forum behaviour...Learned a lot...

      There's a 17th also but it was spinal cancer that mestastasized to the brain...A very open minded retired policeman. The only way i could get in there was with strong electromagnetic methods and electric methods applied to the scalp or earlobes... i warned him it would most definitively cause strong headaches...And it did...A 3 day one...The blood/brain barrier makes it a lot more complicated...Too many unknowns so i stopped everything right there... Didn't mention the 16th cause it didn't matter...Only got a week and a half of nutrition advice and some treatment...I go into that in a recent post if you want to look at it...Yes they were all discharged from the hospital...Late stage metastatic cancers. All of them...You can't cure them, they cured themselves through there immune system... I just take care of the viruses, parasites, fungi, heavy metals, toxins, bacteria and everything else that's floating around in there blood...After that i take care of the little buggers that hide in the lymphatic nodes...Once that's out, the immune system takes over... They were cured after a few months of treatment...

      But they have changed their lifestyles as i explained that it was often the root of the problem...You normally don't just get cancer. You create a cancerous environment in which cancer can proliferate...Bad nutrition, no exercice, repetitive negative thoughts, stress etc...Some got back to there doctors who took scans because they didn't believe what was going on...They wrote it off as miracles of nature...I told the patients never to talk about me as it could create problems for me since most would not understand but what i wanted were the scans...

      But i was very happy with the fact that they were late stage. Since i wanted to know if it would completely work on the worst cases or just help. And if it helped, how much? And people who don't have anything else to lose often listen a lot more and tend to follow the treatment... It is 2 hours a day. And they can't miss a day...Not invasive but time consuming...And they have nothing to go on but my word often enough...But they do see that i know what i'm talking about and that i ask of nothing in return except their follow through of the regimen...

      You have to remember that this is not my job...I'm intentionally discrete about this for very real reasons...I would give out every bit of info i could but it would cause problems for me in the long run as some people here would try to get me in trouble...Don't want to go through what Dr. Gaston Naessens did...Not interested...

    113. Sorry, as I have stated - your personal anecdotes are not enough for me. Jonathon Michael lays it out very clearly as well as making suggestions about what would be an appropriate course of action, and why it is inappropriate to expect anyone to trust in your anecdotes.

      I quote his entire post for clarity:

      'I have read many studies and I understand them for the most part. Others are right about Plosone giving ordinary people access to medical studies. However, in the event that I can't get a full paper, I have several friends, who are physicians, who can get me access to any study I want.

      Here's the thing about studies. Just because you can find a study (with seemingly positive results) doesn't mean it's accepted practice. An example is high dose curcumin for Cystic Fibrosis. They studied it and you can find papers on it. What is not always easy to find are subsequent studies where they did not have the same fantastic results as the original. Another example is topical papaverine to accelerate mitosis in patients with balloon expanders prior to grafting procedures. The initial study had really good results, but subsequent studies did not. On the surface of it, it looks like it should work if you only read that one study.

      You keep appealing to authority ( Dr. whoever). You should know that this is a logical fallacy. Furthermore you continue to try to shift the burden of proof.

      I have given you the solution to your problem, but you have ignored it. All you need to do is go to a site like medstartr and set up a kickstarter fund to pay for an independent trial to test your hypothesis. If it verifies and is repeatable by other scientists, then you have the proof that everyone has been asking you to provide. I am in the process of doing exactly this and plan to run a 26 week clinical trial as soon as I get funding. It works, trust me. Once you have the data, you can publish and you won't have to resort to logical fallacies
      and lengthy posts without a shred of evidence. Don't expect anyone to take you seriously until you have done this. I certainly don't expect anyone to accept my hypothesis until I can back it up with clinical

      I should also add: Do you know what they call treatments that have been shown to work? Medicine, not alternative medicine. We don't have alternative physics or alternative chemistry. It either works or it doesn't.'

    114. Good intentions. But it will not take care of the continuous harrassement and threats i will be subjected too. They will try to discredit my work and me...And this is not my work...Hell i'm on a forum and i get attacked...Nor will it take care of the goons who get sent to my lab. In reality, they would stop me right from the start with court measures at some point... Look at Gaston Naessens. I used to live not far from him...His story tells it all...Too much trouble for my taste...

    115. i wouldn't worry about it too much...Woo's like him tend to like their own comments.
      the leaps in logic are truely mindblowing :)

    116. Read all comments and you'll find it...

    117. I see a lot of decietful manouvering, plenty of spiel, some flowery rhetoric and plenty of outright mistruthes...but nowhere anywhere is there any kind of explaination as to what scientific tests you've done...hence i'm forced to conclude you haven't done any atall, and you just lied about it to make yourself sound like something your not (a running theme with you)

    118. No tests, i use it and have been using it for a number of years now...All tests have been done using what i'm using for at least 20 years...No more tests needed...I named the frequencies i use, the amperage, though 2 electrodes over the ulnar artery branch to filter the blood. 2 hours a day. I said i finish the job with pulsed magnetic fields directly aimed at the lymphatic nodes to get at what's left...You're the one using manoeuvers and mistruths. And You're turning round and round wasting time...

    119. so if you didn't use tests...why did you lie and say that you did science?
      It's good that you've finally admitted that you lied, now we can begin.

      How can you be sure that no other medication is really causing the effects that you are attributing to them?

    120. I didn't say i tested this stuff. I said i've used it many times and that it did work...No lies there...All truth. Sorry again...I can be sure that other medication doesn't interfere because the people i treat don't use any. The electricity jumps up nutrient absorption to over 700% percent. No drugs allowed ever...

    121. you did say you'd tested said you'd even explained how you tested it twice. that's three lies now.

      Ethicly speaking,how can you perform something on someone when you haven't even tested it Do you not understand how irresponsible that is?
      And if you haven't tested it, how do you know that nutrient absorption jumps 700%? There's no way you could honestly know that without testing for it.

      As a side note, nutrients are absorbed by the stomach not the blood, so 'filtering the blood' wouldn't do anything for nutrient absorption.

      you're lying to these poor sick people, you're making them suffer by giving them false hope. Conventional medication may make them feel worse, but that's what it takes to get rid of something like cancer...please, you must convince your patients to see a real doctor, because they will not survive otherwise, and you will be partly responsible for every single one of their deaths!

    122. Nutrient absorbed by the stomach? Come on? About 20% yeah. Most of it from the colon my friend, not the stomach. Not knowing that pretty much says it all doesn't it? And all cells absorb nutrients. If they didn't they'd die? They all release metabolic trash also. The electricity charges the cells and they charge the ones they come in contact with. Electrically charged cells absorb much more. Didn't test that, just trusted the published results done a long, long time ago by many smart researchers. Common knowledge in the field i'm in...

    123. so by your own admission the blood stream has nothing to do with nutrients.
      "the electricity charges the cells".
      Human body cells don't work like that. If they did then getting electrocuted would supercharge you.
      The problem is, the people who did the 'tests' you're referring to aren't genuine scientific tests. They're not real...If it was then it wouldn't be alternative medicine, it would be medicine.
      What you're basicly saying is that you bought a kit off the internet and went to work on the first poor sap that stumbled into your path.

    124. Don't even try it boy...What the hell do you think is in you're blood if not cells? I said the electricity kills pathogens and it charges cells also...Jesus! Not even knowledge in Physics either hey? I didn't need to test, i knew it worked. And i tested it on myself for years before ever doing anything to anybody. I would never risk anybody's health. THAT would be irresponsible. And i use microcurrents in specific frequencies, amplitude, so forth...You don't just zap somebody with any kind of current. You have to know what you're doing. The electricity that goes through the walls of your house or appartment is 60hz/110-120v, which some studies have shown to cause cancer. Why aren't you outraged about that? I use microcurrents. Not dangerous at all....Although lots of interesting things have happened by accident to many people regarding electricity...But that's another matter...

    125. lol, Boy...i see you're gradually dropping the whole nicey nicey act and are showing bit by bit the aggressive predator that you really are!
      Who told you any of this? because it's wrong.
      You say. "I don't need to test i knew it worked". And this arrogance is exactly the problem...You've convinced yourself that you're some kind of Jesus, and that you know better than all of recognised science...You seem to be under the impression that if it sounds right to you, it must work...Like i say, pure arrogance. And calling
      You'vegot very pronounced grand delusiond, and it's absolutly terrifying that someone like yourself is in a position of responsibility for Sick people.

    126. You're exausting. As for arrogance, you seem much better than me in that category...Hope you won't take offense if i don't answer you anymore...Good day to you sir...

    127. What's arrogant about asking you to prove that you can cure cancer with electricity?
      That's not arrogance, that's a question you should be expecting...If someone your treating asks you this question, do you offer them the same nasty condescending attitude you've been addressing me with?
      Is that how you managed to persuade an alledged 15 sick people into going along with your crazy spiel?

    128. anyway, that doesn't make sense...electricity doesn't 'filter the blood' that's what the liver does.
      How is electricity even supposed to 'filter blood' what are you filtering? Cancer is a mutation of cells not a blood disease.

    129. Like i said, your immune system kills cancer cells everyday. Cancer is an overwhelmed immune system, as are many diseases... It gets that way when too many parasites, viruses, bacteria, fungi etc...are floating around in blood. The electricity kills them leaving the immune system to take over with a clean slate. Like i said, the immune system cures you, no other thing...I simply help and the body does the rest on its own...And it makes perfect scientific sense, i can assure you. It made sense to me long before i ever tried it...

    130. cancer is not "an overwhealmed immune system" If it was, then perfectly healthy people wouldn't regularly develop cancer...But they do, regularly...If it was an immune system thing, you wouldn't get genetic cancers either.
      Your basic understanding of the disease itself is flawed at the most fundamental level, you literally have no idea what your talking about!

    131. All diseases are the result of an overwhelmed immune systems or are caused by immune dificiencies, except auto-immune diseases...And you tested the people that claimed they were in perfect health to see if they actually were? Did a blood panel did you? You don't even have basic knowledge on this matter so leave it alone, please...

    132. please address the points i've already made. Stop trying to avoid my questions.

    133. You don't listen. At the top level you are made of particles. It makes perfect sense to treat the body with physics instead of chemistry. You go straight for the source instead of going through intermediaries...What do you want me to do? You said the oppostie of what i said first, then mentioned genetic causes for cancer when we know that even people with genetic markers for cancer can get cured of it or not get it at all...Of course some people with genetic predispositions get cancer...Some babies get cancer...It could be for a multitude of reasons. Of course some cells mutate or behave irregularly but your immune system is set up to recognise these irregularities and fend them off most times anyway. All you get from science is a picture. And the more you know the clearer the picture gets...You never know everything, ever...But you can know basic things that make you a lot better and healthier...But i said it's all a matter of energy. If you get enough of it, at the right places in the right amount at a time, you've got a key to help yourself...Some people get struck by lightning and die. Some get nerve damage and blown organs. But some, i don't know exactly why, get rid of 30 years of arthritis. Some get a new row of teeth and some get all their hair back to the colour it was when they were young...Some ancient egyptians put electric eels in bathtubs and electrocuted themselves because they felt better afterwards... Nobody knows everything about these things but we know enough now to heal ourselves...We've seen patterns emerge that are clear...Everything i've said regarding biology was text book...I just have more text books then you have on the subject...I have the results of many experiments that you've never heard of...So of course this sounds a little weird. But it's still true...If you knew how many illegal and dangerous experiments have been done you wouldn't believe it. I have had access to a lot of information for a lot of time and i never even once, tried something that could even be remotely dangerous using alternative methods...Never. I use basic knowledge that's been demonstrated to work repeatedly. That's all..

    134. i'm not reading all that...Mostly because it's undoubtedly wrong. You don't properly understand the most fundamental basics of illness or it's treatments, so listening toyour extended assumptions is only going to serve more to waste my time.
      I'm still waiting for you to prove your theories work, until you can do that i don't care to study crazy 201.

    135. Randi's a magician, not a scientist, and there's been plenty of debunking on his methods (and the vaunted 1 million dollar fake challenge) also. At least spell the old crank's name right.

    136. who better than a magician to make sure someone isn't cheating? Also, how do you debunk someone like randi who specifically claims to not have any special powers? Also, Randi himself doesn't attend the tests either, he merely founded the foundation...Anyway, it's a bit rich denouncing him for not being a scientist when you're here slagging off conventional science.

      Not one word of that slander about the JREF is true! The Challenge is completely legit. The money is held by lawyers bound to a legal contract to hand over the money to anyone who wins the challenge. All of these documents have been publicly verified! and the challenge is undertaken by a completely independent team, and is even done with the challenger spearheading the way the challenge is undertaken! The challenger lays out the conditions needed to prove their theory/talent, and the independent scientists make sure the claimant can't cheat!

      The only people who have ever claimed that the JFRE was a fraud are people who have been debunked by it...funny that eh?

    137. So, because Disqus is "incompetent" with links and can't seem to maintain the links posted by this individual in support of his arguments, for whatever
      "funny" reasons, of which you fail to indicate, he is paranoid and delusional. That's a solid point of view. Thanks for that. Now, where are his posted links? Or am I inquiring to yet another apologist for mediocrity?
      As to how dangerous his methods are? Surely you jest! I find them no more or less dangerous than the experts at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital, known for its Oncology dept., who clumsily assisted in speeding up my mother's death with their incompetent execution of biopsy procedures and delays in pathological testing. Oh, but they're approved. They're officially sanctioned and excused for practicing their mistakes, aren't they?
      The bottom line is this: there are mainstream technologies and homeopathic approaches that
      are both effective and ineffective and Big Pharma has their hands in all of it. If it's not influence pedaling like the lobbyists in DC, wining and dining doctors and advertising directly to the patient through billion dollar ads, which incidentally drive the cost of these medicines sky high, a practice that would have made the medical profession roll in its grave years ago, it's bemoaning the horrors of natural alternatives as being totally unverified by any practical scientific means. And that's total BS in itself. Some of these remedies, although not specific to cancer, have been working for a thousand years.
      These one sided bitch fests get really boring. Evolution vs. Creationism, Man’s effect on Climate Change, Liberalism vs. Conservatism! Invasive Medicine vs. Alternative Preventative Medicine! How about this?
      Get the freaking money out of it; the special interests who serve no one’s interests at all but their own and let the real experts do some unbiased R and D for a change. I’m pretty sure we’re innovative enough to distill the best from each, in all forms of medicine, whether it’s eastern, western, alternative or WHATEVER!
      Each side of the argument takes themselves so seriously they start believing in all their own propaganda to the extent of fanaticism and that’s where the trouble begins. To say most industries are a fixed game is not that far of a stretch. To say Big Oil and Big Pharma wouldn’t have much to lose to alternative solutions, which in some cases are easier to manufacture and much safer, is a fallacy.
      Like we haven’t been lied to before?
      And don’t even mention the reduction in tumor growth seen in children when cannabis smoothies are introduced into their diets. Oh…excuse me, has anyone read about that? Or how about the research done in Spain years ago observing how cannabinoids positively showed tumor remission in some cases? Oh! But the unseen hand of God, the American Medical Association and the FDA, totally unbiased with where their money comes from, or whose policies they’re being bribed to promote with private foundation money, have the final word in what’s acceptable medical practice?
      It’s about time we start doing with our minds what so many of us have forgotten and that’s to keep them open.
      Thank you for your consideration.

    138. If homeopathy worked, the thousands of tests that have been done on it would prove it...but none of them ever do. You can chat nonsense about it all you want (and apparantly you have), but that doesn't change the hard facts that it doesn't work. It fails every test, every time.

    139. Amen! These nay-sayers think they live in a world where the best methods are the ones that get accepted...We have never lived in that world so far. And to not know that is to be truly ignorant...

    140. I wish i wrote that!

    141. no, the methods that are accepted are the ones that can be PROVED to work. no special pleading allowed!

    142. I wish i wrote that!

    143. Thank You. A voice in the wilderness... Too bad that the AMA, the ACS and the pharmaceutical industries OWN this country. We don't have a government anymore, we have a corporate-ly controlled fascist state.

    144. the fact that you can say that without any fear whatsoever of prosecution just goes to show how wrong you are. I actually agree with you on some fronts, i believe that corporations should be as seperate from the state as the church should be, and by that i mean very separate.

    145. there is not a single homeopathic remedy that works!
      not one. It's sugar pills dampened in clean water, nothing more nothing less!

      If water has a memory, why doesn't it remember all the dirt and poo it's had in it?

      The problem with opening your mind too much is that your brain eventually falls out!

    146. I never said that toutmosis, or anyone else for that matter, should be taken at their word. I singled out Lenny because, of the two parties, hes the only one making ad hominem arguments, direct assaults on people's character, and calls for individuals to be imprisoned based on absolutely nothing but his own presumption.

      Whether or not the therapies toutmosis advocates are more effective than mainstream treatments [an open question as far as I'm concerned thats worth discussion] is irrelevant to the point I was making. I only bothered posting because I felt Lenny's conduct was obnoxious and, as he put it, "dangerously stupid and arrogant".

    147. And your post was different to what you describe in what way? Have you read the 'honest efforts to investigate the claims being made' to the person he was talking to? It doesn't seem so.
      I'd be interested if you could get something like that out of toutmosis. No one else has so far.

    148. No I haven't read any of Lenny's honest efforts on his part to investigate because all I've seen posted here is bald assertion, counter assertion, and one presumptuous party calling for the other party's imprisonment.

    149. Yep, that about sums it up pretty good, with a few extras for fun.

    150. seriously...the guy asking for evidence is the ignorant one?
      how does that work then?

    151. I never beat anything. The body does it itself. I simply help using physics instead of Chemistry...Well i use Ozone too, so, a little bit of chemistry i guess... Oh yeah, trying to help using real medicine should land me in jail...Nice thinking there...And you wonder why you don't hear much about alternative medicine? Imagine what the guys at the AMA and the FDA do to doctors now if you think like that? My links were shutdown by the way. I don't know why but i can't see 90% of them... I'll try later...

    152. If your child had cancer in its early stages, where an actual doctor tells you that chemo and surgery are the only options to save your child's life, would you take your kid to the nearest hospital for conventional treatment or would you keep him at home and treat him with the same methods you treat others?

      Think before you answer and don't beat around the bush.

    153. First, Medicine is applied biology and biochemistry ,which is my field of expertise.( except for the emergency room doctors work) Second, if he's my child he'd never eat any blood group contraindicated lectins from his food so nutritionally speaking, i'd have that covered. No tap water, and no fluoride..And that alone makes it very hard for cancer to move in...Third, conventional medicine, especially regarding cancer, has a very bad track record...But to answer your question, if it's local i'd use a Strong pulsed electro-magnetic field device to kill it off. Then, i'd do every lymphatic node one by one, cause the some of those little buggers hide in there... But i'd also clear the blood using electricity... Normally nothing survives those 2 techniques put together...If its in the early stages, a month of treatment is enough, just to be sure...You've got to understand that Chemo and radiation are very old and sloppy techniques. Its like shooting everything around you with a shotgun and, it's highly toxic. When you do that you kill the bad stuff as well as the good. The problem is, the bad stuff, anaerobic stuff, pulls back up quicker than the good aerobic stuff...So you've just created a negative imbalance right from the start...It's illogical to put a highly toxic substance in a body that's in a weakened state, wouldn't you agree? Think about it for a minute, you normally don't cancer out of the blue for no reason? You did something that gave cancer a chance of settling in. A cancerous terrain, some doctors call it. The first place you look is nutrition and stress levels. And when i say nutrition i mean you start with elimination of all lectins detrimental to the patients particular blood group... Then, you make sure you eat good, wholesome organic food, as much as possible. Some of it raw... Then you try to get rid of stress as much as possible, identifying the sources and using stress eliminating techniques...And yes, some children live in a stressfull environment...Normally that does the job...If for some reason these didn't work, and honestly, i can't imagine why, i'd use ozone therapies... Up to now, I've only treated terminally ill patients that had tried everything conventional medicine had to offer. Doctors had told them they had a 3 to 6 months life expectency...They had nothing to loose...If it worked for them, in an incredibly weakened state, i can't imagine why it wouldn't work in the early stages...

    154. Thank you, that was the sort of answer I was hoping for from the start. I don't know if it does or doesn't work, and I'm not against there no doubt being more treatments other than the commonly accepted ones out there. That's not hard to follow and understand on a basic level your treatments, thanks.
      I'd like to see them get properly tested and verified.

      With your ozone therapies, would I be correct in assuming you're getting a free oxygen atom as the O3 decays, and this free O 'attacks and kills' the bad cells? (as I understand it that's basically what my ozone generator does in my aquariums to disinfect/ kill pathogens in the water)

      Have you heard of Post Q-Fever Syndrome, caused by an exposure to the Coxiella burnetii organism? Not the disease itself, the Fatigue Syndrome some people get after the illness.

    155. yes, the unstable oxygen atom kills a lot of pathogens and ups the oxygen content of blood. Don't know about the other 2 diseases but the electricity normally takes care of it all...

    156. You haven't treated them, at all..(edited out a statement that was addressed earlier)

      At the end of the day, these 'alternatives' are only alternatives because they cannot prove their efficacy undercontrolled conditions...In other words they areall snake oil.

      There are only three types of Alternative medicine practitioner. There's the type that knows it's all hokum but does it because it's relaxing, and sells their services in this way.

      the next type are the true believers, the type that will not have their views challenged, they are very quick to call their critics closed minded rather than try and argue their case, and will outright refute any and all evidence that shows the reality of their close held beliefs, no matter how thorough and damning it might be.

      the third kind are the flat out con artists that know this stuff doesn't work, and don't care. They seek out vulnerable people and push it on them however they can.

      You're not a conspiracy're just a really nice and well meaning guy who's been deceived and deluded, or you're a heartless con artist...But you aren't anything else. You certainly aren't a healer

    157. I'm not a healer. The immune system does that as i said many times now...And i tried to argue but you are intent on not listening at any cost, which makes me question your motives? If you could recognize the truth you'd recognize my arguments as so...You've got a real pro here and you couldn't tell the difference...I don't recognize you as a critic. No one would be that stubborn. You are here to put down any attempt at telling the truth, its obvious...I can't be effected by anything you say because i did what you think is impossible. And i did it many times now. So it works...Sorry Sleepwalker...

    158. It almost feels as if people have lost a sense for the good, a sense for what is right. They are too indoctrinated into political systems that don't care about their welfare but about their money. Go figure...

    159. You didn't try to argue told us an anecdote.
      you didn't have any arguments, you made statements, there's a difference!
      You have every right to not recognise me as a really helps my argument that you're deluded!
      You talk of telling the truth, but that's not the case is it. You're making a statement, and then insulting anyone (like me) who challenges it.

      I don't care what insults you have lined up, i want to see EVIDENCE!

    160. As i've said earlier, most of my links were deliberately deleted...I'll try some now, let's see if they get through...

    161. It is a shame that your links got deleted as I'm sure they would have been helpful.

    162. Due to the nature of alternatives in that they are more natural or easily obtained and therefore un-patentable, they are dismissed outright, without being allowed to properly tested and tried. That's the clear history of the AMA, FDA, and big pharma when it comes to alternative treatments, and that's why proper testing has not been done. The efficacy is unknown outside the small scale operations using them, and their patients of course, and all you're doing here is making sweeping generalizations and dismissing them when we should be demanding any and all potential treatments be brought forth.

    163. Thank you.... thank you... All potential treatments should be brought forth for testing. Doesn't the fact that the AMA and FDA's refusal to test "alternative medicines" ring a bell to people?

    164. but alternative therapies and treatments HAVE been tested...James Rhandi publicly broadcast the tests he did on Homeopathy. all of these therapies have been PROVEN ineffective!
      so yeah...there's that. Just because you don't like the results, that doesn't mean you get to pretend they don't exist...we call that cherry picking!

    165. Lenny, you are so right. I still remember the day 2 FDA Agents showed up at my door and "asked" me to shut down my website.
      Well, they showed up on the wrong day at the wrong door bc they didn't have a clue what oxygen therapy was and I very politely gave them cold drinks and took them to school.
      Shortly after that I got an order from someone in my immediate area and I am almost positive it was one of them, lol

      I am proof that oxygen therapy works and while I believe it will also help people who have already been diagnosed with serious diseases such as cancer, I do not take them on for consultations.
      I suggest instead that they find a doctor who performs intravenous oxygen therapy. But if you ever need one of these doctors, you won't find them in the yellow pages... they only run these Chelation Clinics for their family and friends.

    166. I cannot approve your latest post that is in moderation about your oxygen therapy business, this site is not a venue for advertising for monetary gain or offering unsubstantiated cures. Sorry.

    167. She's not describing a local oxygen therapy clinic and she's not offering unsubstantiated cures. Just cures you're not familiar with that's all.

    168. Familiar or not, people have to pay to advertise on this site :)

    169. Quite right too!

    170. Were these agents there to close you down as you say or were they being diligent in their duty any ensuring no breaches were being made under the Act.
      It would appear by you post they weren't the syorm troopers Lenny has portrayed in his little fantasy.
      The reason I know it's fantasy is because when he was speaking to docoman and stated it was happening now in his country he is wrong as docoman is an Aussie.

    171.'s much easier to scam people when you can get in an intimate setting like that...You won't find them in the yellow pages because it's much easier for them to dissappear with all your money when things go wrong
      (not you...them just for the sake of clarity)

    172. Read what? Please and please again tell us what. You've been asked and asked again and nothing ever comes but reasons why you won't tell us. You're no different than the Pharma. You know but you ain't telling. You pretend you care but won't help us who may need it because you would rather post long comments, smugly, telling us that you know how, than post the information that could (so you claim) save lives. Quite the humanitarian.

    173. This forum is very hard to figure out. I've posted many things but can't always find them...Try to find them and you'll see i answered this...I've named nobel laureates and very qualified doctors , their studies and conclusions..Listen,I would if i could but i can't provide you the studies in the medline database, It's illegal to do so and i'd have to print the documents, scan the prints and send them, and i'm pretty sure they don't allow that...Its password protected and restrited to biopersonel and physicians...Studies are really boring and complicated to read anyway...What you read are "results" of studies...And then you analyse the study for flaws. And then you make your own mind...I prefer giving empirical data...Much more reliable...Try to find my other posts and you'll see i've named a few...Hope this helps.

    174. you are so correct, toutmosis. I also have seen cancer beaten with juice fasting, and cleansing with herbs. Keep up the good fight. Ignore the trolls and keep on healing!

    175. Thanks for the support...

    176. I mistakenly tried to post my experience like you and all these trolls lurking on this site came out. Which is rather ironic considering they post videos of alternative health and then pick them apart including whoever agrees with them. None of these trolls have produced any credentials, solid proof, or any relevant information. The common mode of attack is always the same; what credentials do you have, what is your proof, you are breaking the law if you are practicing alternative health, blah blah ad nauseam. If and when proof if given then such proof is disregarded or referred to the omnipotent quackery site to be quickly disassembled.

      What these trolls fail to realize is that natural healing or even alternate forms of healing do not fit into their "peer reviewed" paradigm of so called "scientific study" for numerous reasons. Thus achieving the desired results by doing the same protocol without consideration for factors that may or may not be possible to factor in (each individual patients level of health or even the patient ! like allopathic medicine omits) will result in a large discrepancies.

      These large fluctuations in results will be interpreted by the mainstream medical peer reviewed crowd as a failure while conveniently omitting arguably the most important information...the patient. Furthermore, since the patients health is not included, consideration for increasing the intensity or decreasing the intensity of said treatment is also omitted. Increasing or decreasing said treatment is paramount to achieving the desired results. Thus, this so called "scientific peer reviewed study paradigm" as the holy grail of truth of one size fits all has several obvious serious flaws.

      Hence those naysayers of alternative therapies such as Gerson's therapy fail to realize that the protocol only works for some cases of cancer dependant upon the intensity of treatment (very mild), the health of the patient, and what stage the pathology (ie cancer) is in (yet another factor conveniently ignored by peer reviewed studies LOL). These are only a few factors not accounted for (how about hepatotoxicity, immunology, etc).

      Thus because the patient is omitted and the necessary variable intensity of treatment excluded which is based upon the seriousness of the patients pathology and the patients health this "scientific peer reviewed" model is not truly science that is applicable to alternative health.

      Therefore using a simple analogy, these trolls are forcing a round object to fit into a triangle hole. In addition, they are trying to make alternative health practitioners play their games on their game board. In the meantime ignoring thousands of years of empirical evidence in favor of their so called "scientific peer reviewed papers".

      Thus I have concluded through observation (of nature via repeated aforementioned methods easily read in numerous posts) it is entirely pointless to converse with these skeptical naysaying trolls living on this site. Especially with the notion that you might convince them. Though to state your opinion or experience and not engaging them is beneficial. Although not so much for the trolls but for those individuals truly searching for truth.

      Insanity; "doing the same thing over and over, but expecting different results" einstein

    177. Couldn't have said it better myself...2 things they don't understand. First, the burden of proof is on both sides of the argument. They should be asked to proove that the ,said, alternative method doesn't work as much as i have to proove it does work...I mean, it's in line with their logic isn't it? If you can't proove something doesn't work then all your saying is that you're the same as the people you're critizing aren't you? I Have spent long years trying out many alternative methods and separating the ones that work from the ones that don't. Did they do that? They'd never do it...Empirical evidence, to me, is much closer to the truth than any paid study...Second, why in hell would closed minded people want to operate a website that's supposed to enrich our lives with documentaries? That joke, i don't get...?

    178. The name SKEPTIC(AL) naysaying trolls is based upon empirical personal experience, you might find looking through my posts quite fascinating (especially videos, direct citations, and lectures really amazing stuff). Once you do then everything will become crystal clear.

      I agree they should prove something other than referring to and quoting from their omnipotent quacksite (lol). Though these skeptical trolls don't read journals, books, PDR's, news articles on alternative health nor mainstream health. This becomes self evident through their posts. Not to mention their replies (or lack of replies) to factual data posted in lectures, mini videos, direct citations and so on. Although I wouldn't hold my breath expecting anything relevant.

      You are quite right empirical evidence withstands the test of time. Herbs and foods used in conjunction with natural remedies have been used for thousands of years in all ancient cultures for all of human history. Even animals use these methods. The mongoose when bitten by a snake runs and finds plantain(not the bread fruit), eats it and survives.(plantain purifies the blood and thus neutralizes poison) The mongoose does not consult some "peer reviewed scientific" data base or the omnipotent oracle of quackbusters. But yet he survives.

      The laws of health cannot be changed by man just like the law of gravity, or any other similar law of nature. These unchanging laws require principles to be followed. These principles of health if followed will either give health or if not will bring disease. It is these principles and laws that skeptics despise and deny even of existing. These principles govern our lifestyle/even our very existence if we like it or not.

      Thus empirical evidence is proof that health laws do indeed exist and the mongoose graciously adheres to these laws by consuming plantain and living. I fully agree with you that empirical evidence is far more trustworthy than peer reviewed scientific manipulated studies. I will side with the mongoose and several thousand years of empirical human history.

      Another self evident fact is when one considers drugs and how they are quietly removed after several decades of causing death. It would be interesting to find out how many so called peer reviewed drugs are still on the market since their inception in the early 1900's. I wouldn't be shocked to find that over 90% of peer reviewed drugs are not only retired but were found to be dangerous or lethal. So much for "peer reviewed scientifically proven drugs". LOL

      In concluding these thoughts, the "scientific peer reviewed" paradigm attempts to omit/deny empirical evidence as hearsay/ old wives tales/old fashioned/ outdated mumbo jumbo. In addition, this so called science denies the existence of not only the patient(humanity) but the existence of health laws. Just like the catholic church of old denied the existence of gravity and the world being round instead of flat. Indeed this type science falls down flat, is a poor all around representation of alternative health and is in dire need of reformation and revolution.

    179. Wow! I feel like we were separated at birth or something...You're taking the words right out of my mouth...Pretty impressive...My first internet twin...Hope we can kick trolls around again someday...Keep spreading the word aorund...

    180. probably a sockpuppet account

    181. It seems it wouldn't be his first. :(

    182. the burden of proof lies with the person making the claims.
      It is not up to established science to disprove your theories, it's your responsibility to prove them.

      That's like literally the first rule of science.

    183. Your refering to science, this is a conversation in a forum. Quite different i must say...Scientists i know pretty much say: It's interesting and makes sense in theory, but i'd need to see it for myself...That is a neutral normal answer. And like i said, you're here to attack and discredit...Way too much time on your hands...Don't you have a video game you could play to get rid of all that excess frustration? Instead of wandering around the internet trying to find your next prey...

    184. It's not that hard to discredit you when you refuse to prove your claims.
      At the end of the day, if you put as much effort into trying to prove your claims as you did trying to insult me with snide remarks, this would've gone a hell of a lot smoother.
      It's clear that you don't care for anything except your own opinion, you may believe in what you claim, but you certainly have no faith in it, otherwise you would be eagre to put it up for criticism, not slapping away critics with valid questions.
      I started off this conversationthinking that you were a nice, generous, but deluded and misinformed person. Now i'm quite confident that you're a charlatan. That you know all of this is rubbish, but carry on doing it anyway because you like the thrill of feeling special.

    185. how is asking for evidence being a "troll"
      If you aren't prepared to even listen to criticism then your faith can't really be all that strong in your theories.

      Surely if you actually believed in this stuff you would jump at the chance to prove it rather than go around trawling the bottom of the internet for people to get into a big circlejerk with

    186. .

      Its one thing providing evidence(which has been done on many occasions) and another when said
      evidence is dismissed, deleted, and referred to the omnipotent quack buster site (lol) and so forth. Thus most of the trolls living here don't want evidence
      but rather they want to pick apart every word and sentence. Just like you have said that you know that I'm a lair and conveniently dismissed my eye witness
      account of empirical evidence of the disappearance of cancer. Thus skeptical trolls believe only in their own skepticism and nothing more. Evidence is not
      welcome, and if it is, then only in the form that the trolls prefer to see it in.

      Secondly, alternative health cannot be put into "peer reviewed scientific theory" of science for many reasons already stated. Thus "peer reviewed science" lol cannot be used for proving what alternative health can do.

      Thus to cater to trolls is a pointless endeavour as they dismiss evidence from personal experience, empirical evidence, other journals, and more. lol

    187. what evidence was deleted? Granted a LOT of evidence supporting alternative therapies has been dismissed, but it's been dismissed because either the tests have been proved to be fraudulent, or the methods have been so bad the results are worthless.

      To say that alternative therapies cannot be peer reviewed is pathetic special pleading.

      and the Ad hominem troll accusations aren't really helping either...Like i say, all i did was ask questions...the fact that you can't answer them isn't my flaw, it's yours.

    188. lots of posts were deleted...not, so lame....why don't you look up garlic and
      who said you were a troll? maybe you are, I don't know yet.
      funny how a bunch are on at the same time coincidence ?

    189. are you schitzophrenic or something? you've called me a troll in your last three or four posts!

    190. so now I said "a_no_n" is a troll"?

    191. ok, i just copy/pasted this from your previous comment. you said "account of empirical evidence of the disappearance of cancer. Thus skeptical trolls believe only in their own skepticism and nothing more. Evidence is not..." blah blah whine whine.

      You clearly say that anyone who is skeptical is a troll and nothing else...Now please stop lying, you've been caught out

    192. How must have been difficult sitting at those peoples bedsides every single moment of their sickness to make sure they did just fast and drink juice (and i thought Toutmosis's theories were insane.)

    193. actually its a piece of cake as people want to get themselves better and they have incentive to do so. The patients are willing help themselves get better which is healing in itself.
      What's really insane is thinking that toxic drugs improve health and cure poor lifestyle choices.LOL

    194. i the people that's their fault because they just didn't want it enough, right?

    195. really is that what you think?

    196. no i was asking you if that was what you thought...please don't avoid the question.

    197. since that is what you are thinking. I have to say that is not what I'm thinking at all.

    198. If you read the posts in order, that assumption doesn't make sense...i'm clearly asking you a question not making a statement...You do realise that i can go back and re-read past posts right?

    199. You 'skeptics' are the same kind of people who threatened people with being burned at the stake in the Dark Ages. Your minds are closed and you simply like to argue for the sake of arguing. What do you care if someone goes to one kind of caregiver or another? In the end, results will win out. I know plenty of people who have died even though they took full courses of chemo and radiation, and they died horribly, their last months agony. Many people who were 'cured' of cancer end up dying of liver toxicity, or kidney failure or other organ damage caused by the chemo. The death certificates don't say, Cause of death: Cancer; they say, cause of death liver failure or kidney failure. This skews the statistics and the cancer industry is thrilled to leave it that way.

      I was just diagnosed with cancer and my two consultations with the 'chemo guy' were laughable and horrifying visits into Lala land. The man was an i*iot who seemed completely unaware that other options were possible, or that even nutrition as an adjunct could be helpful. He told me outright that he knew chemo and radiation were poisons, that he told all his patients that, and the 'HOPE' was, that the bad cells would die before the good cells were too damaged.

      So, his way of treatment was based on 'HOPE'. Not terribly scientific, that.

      I walked out after realizing what an arrogant jacka** he was, and looking at his other patients; all bald, dark circles under their eyes, so bloated looking from treatment that it was hard to tell female from male. 40 year olds using canes to walk... they were obviously being poisoned, any i*iot could see it. It was appalling.

    200. if your doctor is an i*diot please see another one. there is nothing wrong with asking questions but please make sure all claims are backed by facts you can see for yourself. i do not wish to argue with you as i think that would be unfair. please find a medical professional that you trust and feel comfortable with. ask him/her what he/she thinks of specific alternatives and options. i hope all goes well

    201. actually it was the catholic church that burned people at the stake...Most of the people burned at the stake were scientists and rationalists who were burned for questioning superstition, and for asking for evidence ironicly enough.

      What do i care? What a truly awful question. I care if vulnerable people are being missold treatment by quacks because it's morally reprehensible!
      I'm sorry that you've been diagnosed with cancer, but i implore you to not rely in alternative therapies, because not one of them can be proved to work...Chemo may suck, but it works! Sometimes in life if you want something good, things have to get a littlebit worse before they can get better. The Chemo won't cure you, nobody is saying that it will, in fact if ANyone tells you they can cure cancer, i'm telling you now they are lying to you to take advantage of you in one way or another, the sad thing is that most of them don't even realise they're doing it.
      You're scared, that's perfectly natural, everything you're feeling and thinking is perfectly natural, but the thing is, if a doctor screws up, you can sue him, you can get him disqualified from practising, you can get him put in jail...If an alternativve therapist screws up, you can't do a damned thing about it, they'll tell you it's your fault it didn't work, and they'll happily go onto the next desperate person.
      I honestly wish you the best of luck, and am pleading to you with all my heart to not abandon conventional medicine!

    202. So you used electricity to filter the blood? can you explain to me in lay terms the molecular mechanism by which this treatment works? If you have all the evidence you claim and you understand the mechanism then you should be able to explain it - no excuses about my lack of background in the matter either, use analogies or whatever technique you need to avoid large math equations etc. I do not know enough about the processes to take your claims seriously, though I am open to the possibility that there may be something in it, can you convince me? The first thing you should address is how if you are filtering the blood at some artery somewhere, how does this effect the cancer cells that are part of a tumor at a different location?

      And something that needs to be said by someone with first hand experience of modern medical techniques regarding cancer, modern cancer treatments are far from archaic. relatively few types of cancer warrant full body chemo. Look up Transcatheter Arterial Chemo Embolisation, and tell me how exactly that is archaic. The archaic image comes from the '70s and '80s when it certainly seemed pretty brutal, high toxicity full body therapies with minimal results (although statistically a certainly significant effect) - times have moved on a lot since then. For some cancers the chemo can be as simple as 2 pills twice a day, with little to no side effects. The clinical trial my father was on involved taking 1 pill once a day, and while he was on it for 9 months his cancers did not grow at all, evidenced by fortnightly CT scans. Had he not been dying from cirrhosis of the liver he could have remained on that one indefinitely. Your understanding of chemotherapy seems grossly incomplete, or at best black and white. Some chemicals that are flat out toxic to cells are used in some chemo treatments, though over the last 20 years research into Angiogenesis Inhibitors amongst other more advanced approaches has yielded several tested and certified effective chemotherapy treatments, each with a different mode or mechanism of operation.

      Surgery is still evidently the best and most effective 'cure' for those cancers that it is appropriate for, which sadly is not the majority. Still, modern surgical techniques are truly impressive, just think removing a whole kidney leaves you with a barely visible 2 inch scar, let alone keyhole/open heart surgery and hypothermic methods - you seem to be implying that surgery has not progressed since the invention of anesthetics, and this is clearly not the case.

      Radiotherapy is now the most overarching treatment for solid tumors, crucially because the location of the tumor is irrelevant, and the ionising radiation is localised to at least the same degree of accuracy as surgery, or better.

      Then there's cryosurgery, amongst other more science fiction like therapies currently being developed.

      I notice you carefully worded your opening claim 'treated' as opposed to cured. If you believe you helped cure them, and you know how, why not say 'cured'? Did any of them have advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma? Did any of them have tumors as big as a ducks egg? What was the most advanced cancer you treated? how big? metastatic or not? were any receiving other therapies conventional or otherwise, simultaneously, before, or afterward? How did you gauge the effectiveness of the treatment on the cancers? CT scans?

      Sorry for the paragraph of questions but to absolutely honest, you asked for it, so if you would do me the the courtesy of answering some I will be grateful.

    203. Get 'toutmosis' to tell everyone how his electricity could possibly cure metastasis cancer.

    204. Read all the comments, you'll find it...

    205. I answered these in detail 2 times a while back...I don't get how this forum works...Can't find my own comments on there...Try clicking my name maybe you'll see them. I'll try to answer you tonight if i can find the time...

    206. But i'm not against surgery. I think hospitals are for emergencies and are not so great for the rest...

    207. I can agree with that.

    208. So, what do you think of the EPA's claim that ozone is a "toxic gas"?

    209. Ozone is used to cleanse the air in many surgery rooms in hospitals around the world just before surgery...It cleans. If you inhale it in too high concentrations it will push your lungs into fast detox and you won't like it...But its not toxic. Ozone is produced by nature from lighting. It's the fresh smell you pick up after a lighting storm...It cleanses the air...In blood it cleans also...

    210. If you inhale too much it will do damage to the lungs. It's not as benign it would seem as you're making out.

    211. Yes it would, in high concentration yes absolutely. Mostly edema though, but it wasn't meant to be in too high concentration in the air you breathe. That's why nature only creates enough to clean the air periodically but not enough to irritate your lungs...The ozone treatments i'm referring too were either put directly into the blood stream or in a glass of extremely cold water and drank. The second method being much, much milder and not in the same category...The ozone goes into the stomach and gets absorbed there...Not in the lungs. A little bit of it you smell, but after a while it doesn't even irritate you... But the strongest method is the first one...I only use the water method to alleviate the down you get after killing parasites and viruses...

    212. Fair enough, that makes sense. You use chlorine dioxide do you for the second method? If not, what do you use? What is your experience with the O3 treatments? ie. results. (not sure if you saw, I've got relatives trying chlorine dioxide at the moment)

    213. No, simple hydrogen peroxide, food grade. Wasn't aware of chlorine dioxide method? Is it in one of your posts? I have no experience with strong invasive ozone treatment since you need the machine to use it, but have read the Wainwright interview(pretty amazing story) and read a lot about it for years...I only use ozone in water...Very mild, gives a nice burst of oxygen to the brain too... Get's rid of foggyness. You feel quicker, more alert...The method i use does help clear the blood but is too mild to work alone...

    214. all this 'evidence' but yet still not a shred of proof to be had.

    215. No one can know for sure, certainly not you. Have you treated cancer patients both with chemo/radiation and natural methods? If the answer is no, all you can do is read things that may or may not be true and assume yourself.

    216. On the flip side if someone who's been terminally ill for a year suddenly shows up healthy and says weed cured me or electricity cured me I'd expect a real study done with publicised results not some piss poor attempt a creating synthetic THC.... Electricity if you don't know, some guy (German I think) claimed he cured his HIV with a steady low voltage treatment... I personally don't see how BUT he doesn't have HIV so.... Also an American guy posted a daily video of him treating his melanoma with cannabis oil. Also I'd like to add that my nan would testify, if she could, that chemo and radiation are about as hit n miss as any snake oil treatment.

      I like watching those things you listed above, I also like watching the news... Two sides of a story! That's how I prevent myself from becoming wilfully ignorant. You sound like the sort of person that would say you wouldn't listen to Alex Jones because its all BS yet you would call everyone else ignorant fools. And Julian Assange, how was you supposed to catergorise him? Conspiracy theorist or BS merchant considering he's featured heavily in the news. You really should refrain from using the word ignorant until you fully understand what it means.

    217. I did that too, spent YEARS watching this stuff, listening to lectures, reading books while at the same time trying to set some perspective by watching all the major news outlets.

      The media isn't perfect. Some people hate "the liberal media" and love Fox because it caters to their view of the world. Some people won't even watch Fox because they are gay or part of another minority group and automatically assume that Fox/Blaze/et al are from the bowels of hell.

      From an objective viewpoint, and as someone who is after the TRUTH, I can no longer take conspiracy theorists seriously nor will I support people like Assange or the folks at Wikileaks and Anonymous. It's also a mater of right and wrong and having a functioning moral compass.

      I am sick and tired of hearing people blame the woes of the world on the United States and on Israel, especially when you start to realize that the rhetoric of Anonymous and all of these groups is literally 1:1 with terrorist ideology. Everything is always America's fault :/. I'm sorry but I don't think that cheap blame game makes the world a better place. On the contrary, I think it lets terrorists and the real criminals get away with murder.

      That's why Anonymous helps terrorists and that's why Julian Assange hates the United States with every cell in his body.

      They're also snake oil salesmen. What's unfortunate is that Americans are so anti-America these days, especially Americans that lean to the left in the political spectrum.

      You have to drawn the line somewhere.

    218. You mention Israel as if anyone equates it with the old good ideologies of The United States. Please do not mention this country as it is totally outside the topic at hand, which is "alternative medicine".

    219. no i don't think that the US is running a eugenics program. i know they are part of a global eugenics program though.

    220. If a treatment for cancer was found, cancer charities, big pharma companies based around cancer drugs and cancer research would end up with no work. No work = no jobs. You have to keep people believing they're looking for a cure and that there is no full cure in order to keep the money rolling in. If you tell a lie long enough, people will begin to believe it. Do you honestly think humans aren't capable of being so conniving and sick minded as to con the public like this? If you don't think these sort of people exist, you clearly live in a bubble.

      The meat/dairy/egg industry do it all the time, paying for bulls*it studies that make meat/dairy/egg eating look healthy and needed for human survival. There's a reason these industries are worth so much. Keep the public satiated and the money will keep flowing. Why else do you think the big agri businesses tried to pass no filming/photo of farming laws in USA? It certainly wasn't because of 'trespass'.

      Where money is involved, morality often goes out the window.

    221. Western medicines working so well isn't it...obesity and diabetes have become the norm , cancers and dementia diseases in children , cardiac disorders at record levels (yes also in children ) , increasing rates of strokes....etc etc.and you think we should trust the buffoons administering this charade of " only we know best " practitioners. You said blah blah blah ...and a bit more blah..."it makes me sick " Be advised --- don't go to a western doctor as all you'll get is pills.....oh and in case he really does think there's an illness and it's of the mental variety then he may refer you to a psychiatrist....and again, you'll get some pills .
      " Doctors pills give you brand new ills and the bills bury you like an avalanche "

    222. ok, go ask monsanto dude, oh w8 its FDA head now, for a cure.
      p.s. you make me sick

    223. Regardless of your personal thinking on what works and what doesn't, after 60 years of having the flag waved in my face and being told how free I am, I would truly appreciate it if the government would stop making my health decisions for me, or other decisions, for that matter. I should be able to spend my money and risk my life as I see fit after due diligence. Think of it as an evolutionary process... survival of those most able to do real research. And BTW, the 'survival' rate after chemo and radiation, without any recurrences, is miniscule. There are many alternative methods out there for the trying, but your mainstream doctors are not trained in any of them. There is no treatment more toxic given to people than radiation and chemo. No 'snake oil salesman' could possibly come up to their standards for vile drugs with appalling side effects.

    224. are you asking for standards and regulation to be removed? would that freedom also hold true for big pharma? could they sell whatever they wish and not be subject to regulation,standards and consequences? could drug dealers on the street claim their product is "medicine" and avoid all legal claims? or are you asking for special treatment for alternative medicine because they cannot pass the standards set for other treatments?

    225. except they are dangerous to the vulnerable people who die after being convinced to abandon their medicine in favour of these things.

    226. They are dangerous to your wallet, and dangerous to people who require real treatment.

  64. great video, I gave up on western medicine after I've been told I would have 1 year to live. Depressed I traveled the world and ended up in Cambodia where I met a Cambodian healer. He gave me herbs for my HIV and breast cancer. That was 9 years ago, I'm cured from all of it. I currently moved to Cambodia and learning more about the Khmer culture which is still new to the world. God bless the people who are not greedy and just want to help people.

    1. You should give your contact info for others who may want to try the same remedy, or give more detail on where this healer can be found or what they gave you. If people are to leave western cancer medicine, they must know where they can find treatments.

    2. personal contact info is not allowed

    3. Not permitted by this site to give any way to contact me or others. No email allowed...Wow!

    4. double post

    5. TDF doesn't, but Disqus allows anyone to add a website to their name, go to your Disqus account. Click on my name to see what i mean.

    6. Proof?

    7. lol... proof anyone? proof? Be careful for what you wish for. The proof is in the people who are healed, do you want to be one of them?

    8. You had HIV and breast cancer, went to a Cambodian healer, got a few herbs and now you're HIV and cancer free?

      Why not take your story to the media? Why not make a HUGE deal about all of this? There are millions of people suffering from cancer and HIV as we speak. If you're cured, why not spread the word? Why are we not hearing about this miracle worker from Cambodia?

    9. Because they are immediately scrapped. Or they run one time and that's it...If you weren't there you don't see it...The first thing the powers at be and there friends want to control is the media...Its the best option to control public view...Cures are not interesting for Big Pharma, they want repeat business= your cure, there loss...

    10. Exactly. Make a video. Post it on Youtube. If it is any good and provides evidence of success it will go viral. There would be no stopping it. As a matter fact, if true, all of us would welcome it. Won't happen though. A video describing persecution by big Pharma and regulatory agencies is all we ever see. True scientific documentation is never published.

  65. As far as I know these "alternatives" are bogus and very dangerous thus this "doc" is pure CT bulls*it.

    1. Since when are Herbal remedies "dangerous"? Your sweeping generalizations suggest you didn't watch the doc.

    2. they are dangerous because they make claims that do not stand up to the standards. and they fail to hold up when tested according to the scientific method. they make promises to people who are scared and desperate and cannot meet the standards necessary to achieve safe and effective treatment.

    3. Sounds alot like Western medicine to me. This medicine will cure your cancer, 8 weeks later your cancer spreads and you are dead. Even in Western medicine no medicine is 100% effective. There are medicines that are 50% effective and rejected, but could cure 50% of people.

    4. could you please show me the clinical trials and peer reviewed papers that back up "There are medicines that are 50% effective and rejected, but could cure 50% of people." ?

    5. Therein lies the problem. No one can get the necessary clinical trials due to the fact that such simple solutions threaten the profits of the pharmaceutical industry. To attempt to push any alternative in the US ensures you are classified a quack and lose your medical license.

    6. no the problem lies in the fact that these "cures" are inflicted upon the public BEFORE the trials are done. that is why some lose their license. a demonstrable cure would instantly be highly profitable. and the doctor(s) involved would be famous and rich. even if we disagree on why the trials were not done it still does not change the fact that they weren't.

    7. Which also begs the question, if they're not trialed and properly tested, how is a % cure rate worked out?

    8. usually personal testimonials or claims of the practitioners backed by absolutely nothing. i realize it was most likely a rhetorical question.

    9. I'm not a practitioner. I'm in research. I just do that on the side to help for now...Your motivation to post in these subjects is what's interesting...But that's psychology...

    10. my motivation has nothing to do with if you can back up your assertions or not. just another logical fallacy to add to the pile. no matter how high you stack them they will never add up to proof.

    11. By the institutions, usually found in Mexico because they are not allowed in the US, who develop their therapies, and their own records. Until such promising therapies are allowed by the medical establishment we cannot test them in order to bring them to our markets.

    12. I agree that there is sometimes problems getting the ok to trial some things. Marijuana is a good example. It's been used as a medicine up until relatively recently, but it's current classification makes it very hard for anyone to research it anymore.

      I've also seen scammers target vulnerable people, which most cancer patients are. My mother died of cancer, and was 'targeted' by some scams attempting to sell wonder cures and treatments, which were found to be BS upon research and/or by her own trials. In the end they were nothing more then a time and money wasting distraction from concentrating on real treatments.

      I don't disagree with everything you say, by US law pharmaceutical companies are supposed to maximise their profits as a priority, which causes problems.

      But most of the 'alternative cures' from what I've seen are just doing the same thing, trying to maximise their own profits.
      At least the mainstream treatments have been tested, and have to be shown to be useful before they are approved.

      Alternative cures don't have the same safety net. That doesn't automatically mean there are none that will work, just that there are no doubt many that don't but are still sold as a treatment, it's wide open for the con still.

      I know which I'd choose if I were diagnosed with cancer. A bird in the hand.....

    13. Sorry to hear your mother died of cancer, loosing a parent no matter how, scares me to bits. My parents are coming for a visit in two weeks. My father had a triple bypass almost a year ago, the recovery was slow and constant, he claims to be in better shape than the last 4yrs. Thanks to medical research and performance, he is alive after having a mild heart attack. That makes me very happy and i can't wait to be with them. Him and i used to go to the woods a lot, where i live in Nelson BC, there is a rock in the mountain accross the lake called Pulpit rock, a nice hike i hope to do with him if he's up to it...the view there is beautiful. My mom is not much of a hiker, never was, she always says we walk too fast.


    14. Thanks mate. Your Dad sounds like a tough old bugger. :) I envy your visit coming up, I'd love a weekend talking to my Mum again. I'd love to have a walk around your area too, I've never had the pleasure of visiting Canada. Wouldn't mind trying some of your bread too, as well as other baked products you guys do over there. :) One of my nephews just got back from there last week, his brother is still over there, loves it. :) Their pic's I've seen of there are stunning. I'd struggle with the cold I think though. :)

    15. The only cure rate that's been logged and accepted is the current one. 3% efficiency using current conventional treatment protocols, which are about 60 years old...Old bad inefficient medicine...I'll take my chances with alternative treatments any day... The techniques i use have been used for 30 years now. And they've always worked, with everybody without exception. It's been tried and tested. Simply not known to the general population...And there are many more that also work...You'll never see them unless theres a big change on this planet. Big-pharma is interested in "Repeat business". For repeat business to occur, the patient buy more drugs and use treatment. You don't come back if you're cured so there's no incentive for them to bring cures to the market...And they know, they found a lot of them over the years...But they have no interest in bringing them to the public...

    16. If you could show me it worked, I'd be willing to have a go too. Right now, I'd take even 3% proven over 100% BS.

    17. Have you found the death toll by acetaminophen yet? Get back to me when you do...

    18. I will look for it when you can provide the one thing you've been repeatedly asked for, some evidence to support your claims.

      Nice try, but once again all it is was another attempt to distract from your overwhelming lack of stated evidence. “If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, baffle them with BS.” ? W.C. Fields. Right now you're accomplishing neither.

    19. what do you mean by "cure rate" exactly. and could you point me to where the figures show a ". 3% efficiency using current conventional treatment protocols," the studies and statistics i have show a much higher survival rate so i must not understand your claim.

    20. It's in the definition of "Cure" that they work their magic...

    21. i asked for your definition and a study to back that claim up. i really do not wish to argue semantics . all i ask is can you back that up with facts. that is all i have been asking all day. a request to back up claims that pertain to science with scientific evidence seems rational to me. am i wrong?

    22. If you're being honest, then I sincerely apologise. But from this perspective, you've not been convincing by providing nothing other then your word. Which given that we don't know each other, carries little to no weight online. You should know how 'touchy' this subject is, and that people will be asking for more then just someone's say so.
      So, why are you posting on here? If it's to 'spread the word', why not have evidence to hand to demonstrate what you claim?

    23. I didn't ask you about what 'Big-pharma' is interested in, I asked you for some evidence that your claims are correct.

    24. Give me the evidence that conventional treatment works.?..You won't find it. You'll only see some survive. Chemo and radiation kill the good and the bad cells...You need your lymphocytes B and T to work to have a good immune response. Chemo and radiation kills them...How is that logic? What's surprising is that some people survive this toxic mix...I'm sorry if you had a member of your family who died from this. I understand it can be frustrating to hear someone say what i'm saying, but its true. I've got a close cousin who died from breast cancer 2 years ago simply because she wouldn't look at the research...She wouldn't even talk to any of the patients that got treated succesfully...And i had to pull some strings to do it...Cause once you find a patient that's ready to talk,he or she, gets constantly harassed afterwords...At first positively (by the media) then negatively...At some point the media turns on them and says they were never actually sick in the first place. And that stops everything...They had to battle cancer and now they get told that they probably never had it...That's why you don't hear a lot about these things...That's why it's a lot of trouble to show you the evidence...It's not easy to get people to talk. Even if they were cured. They don't want the 300 phone calls from strangers...They just want to live their lives in piece. And who can blame them...

    25. In other words, you have no evidence or you will not provide the evidence to back up your claims. Then everything you say, is worthless. As Docoman posted, we don't know you and have no reason to believe you on your word.

    26. They found a lot of them. Name one. And, if you want repeat business to occur you need your patients to live. Dead patients don't come back and are notorious for not paying their bills. Big pharma does not have to worry about repeat business. Every single person on this planet is going to die someday. Unless we all die an accidental death (ridiculous), most of us will pass away from one malady or another. Invariably, when that malady is initially contracted, the sufferer does not automatically assume that this is the big one. They will fight the affliction, optimistically, and your Big Pharma will be there to offer him the medicines they need. If they can cure him, he will live to get the next affliction which may kill him and Big Pharma can be there once again to cure him, if possible. One thing is for certain, eventually, the patient will not be cured. It has never happened in the history of this planet. It is an ultimate 100 percent failure rate. You use an argument that guarantees that you will be right.

      A friend just lost his 33 year old daughter to brain cancer. When it was discovered, she was told it was inoperable and there was nothing to be done. No offer of a half cure that would keep her alive so they could fleece her. Just the sad admission that they were helpless and no treatment. They could have offered hope, provided expensive treatment, but they didn't. If the medical establishment is so corrupt, why would they do this?

      I don't know what your 3 percent efficiency rate means. Sounds like a number you pulled out of your hat.

    27. If i had been the 33 yrs old myself...i certainly would have put ALL my time and energy into every possible natural therapies there is. She apparently had nothing to lose according to the medical assistance provided in her area.

      Who knows?...may be she would still be alive.

    28. I understand what you're saying but from time of diagnosis to her demise was a little over four weeks. It happened very quickly. She had been suffering headaches for a few months and even at the time of her diagnosis she appeared to be fine except for the recurring headaches. The cancer was very aggressive and her doctors realized this and knew it would end badly. Like I said though, they never told her to undergo a treatment that would not have helped. The opportunity was there for the Pharma cash grab, but they didn't take it. It may be that it's not what they're all about. They have to make a profit to exist and some will commit objectionable acts but to paint a Pharma as totally and 100 percent corrupt is unrealistic and allowing people to believe that is bad for business.

    29. I must say...i doubt your story....perhaps a conversation between patient (and family members) and doctor is missing in action. Most anyone i have heard having cancer were offered one of the three treatment when the diagnosis was a death sentence especially if all there is recurring headaches. They will try anything to calm a dying patient except suggest a natural therapy.
      Many people actually go through with the treatment suggested and end up living a horrible death. I have seen it personally.
      Bad for business?

    30. My mother was also diagnosed with terminal cancer and her doctors told her that treatment would not be effective and did not suggest it. After a while the pain in her lower back became so severe that doctors told her that chemo would reduce the tumour that was causing the pain but as the cancer had spread through her entire body it would not change the final outcome and did not recommend going through with it. She chose not to. She died at the family farm after a long and painful illness. Even without any treatment, it was a horrible way to die. As for the young person that I told you about, I am only relating what I was told.

      Yes, it is bad for business. This comment thread demonstrates how the idea that Big Pharma is out only for your money and could care less about your well being can hurt profits. Many here have said they do not trust them and would go to alternative sources for a cure. That is bad for business. Yet, they continue to allow this idea to spread. They still use treatments knowing that people are terrified of them and that their treatments will have terrible side effects driving potential customers away. Yet, they never dress it up to keep those customers. If there was a way to make profits, and not frighten them away, they would do it. It is good for business.

    31. I have to add that doctors do not suggest a natural therapy because they know nothing about them. My mother did and she tried them with limited success and that as only pain relief. The inevitable came and sadly there was nothing that could stop it. I wish there was a way but it does not exist. Yet.

    32. I remember you writing about how your mom passed away. Again i am sorry to hear that.
      I am wondering if she ever was curious during that time about natural healing...did she try anything as such?
      Would you in the same situation?
      I was married to a director of operation for a big pharma located in Austin Texas, we then moved to Belgium where he became director of operation of western Europe. It is a business and Big Pharma is willing to lie, cheat, hide and other similar actions to sell.

    33. Thanks. I appreciate your comment about my mother.

      Initially she had been diagnosed with breast cancer and underwent a double mastectomy. She was declared cancer free. At this time she started to read everything she could about cancer. She started a very strict diet and took supplements that a homoeopath recommended in an effort to prevent the cancer from reoccurring. However, seven years later she started getting abdominal pain and had exploratory surgery. The doctors found multiple tumours all through the abdominal cavity. Biopsies on a few of them found that every one tested was malignant. Apparently, there were so many tumours that it would have been impossible to get them all. It would have killed her. They told her that she could expect no more than six months of life. She remained with us for fourteen months, most of through which she was bedridden. She was in terrible pain, eventually could hardly eat and could only stand the pain for half an hour before she would take a pain reliever which would render her unconscious. There was no chemo or radiation and I don't see how they could have made things worse that what they already were.

      I understand how drug executives can be corrupt. However, the corporate elite, bankers, politicians and the industrial military complex have not used up the quota for evil set aside for humanity. All of us have self interest, greed and corruption issues to deal with. A self appointed natural healer can be just as corrupt and uncaring as those drug executives. The one thing that the established medicine has going for it is that we have attempted to set up guidelines for them to follow and regulatory agencies to ensure they follow those guidelines. It is not a perfect system by any means but it is still better than allowing anyone with an idea or a claim to do what ever they wish for what ever agenda they might have. Some may be honest but others are only trying to fill their own pockets and are no different than corrupt drug executives. How can we distinguish the good from the bad if there are no guidelines for them to follow?

      Cancer is a complicated affliction. It disrupts the very basics of the human cell and no one really understands how a collection of cells can become a living organism. Until this is understood, I'm afraid cancer will be with us. People will continue to die and that includes every executive of every drug company. No one is immune to the ravages of cancer and no one knows whether they will be the victim of this horrible affliction.

      Thanks again, for your kind words.

    34. In response to your second paragraph, In my opinion the individuals should be able to consciously make a choice for themself. I don't advocate to stop research in standard medicine of any kind, but i also want to leave the choice to the sick person.
      I bet if you ask those who chose a personal and natural approach to treating themself while ill and feel that they have succeeded to extend their life, they would tell you that they have every rights to have chosen that way and have chose the person or groups offering support....especially if death seemed to be around the corner.
      This brings the question; should more research be encouraged in order to understand the methods employed by the people who claim success?

      "Cancer is a complicated affliction. It disrupts the very basics of the human cell and no one really understands how a collection of cells can become a living organism. Until this is understood, I'm afraid cancer will be with us."

      Absolutely and that is why extensive research should be (also)done on those who claim to have succeeded in healing themself in a natural way only...whatever that way was. The opposition concentrate on bashing the researcher actions and their methods while they forget to question those who consider themself survivors of such methods.

      It could help clearify what cancer really is...who knows?
      It may be a little bit of this and a little bit of that. The answer is not necessarily in a petri dish or perhaps it is but it has an additional dimension that can not be seen.

    35. If a person has a procedure that can cure cancer he should document every step of what he has done. There should be independent Doctor's reports to correspond with each segment of treatment. The failures as well as the successes should be studied in a meticulousness fashion to understand the procedure completely. These records should be open to public scrutiny so everyone can judge their effectiveness. If a natural healer will not or cannot do this, I think I would avoid him.

      These are all types of success and failure rates that are posted for cancer that are being treated in the accepted medical way. It is no secret that over ninety percent of patients with pancreatic cancer will die from it. We may not like this type of honesty but honesty isn't always pretty but it is truthful.

      A patient should have the right to choose how he wants to be treated but does the person have the right to treat someone when that person knows his methods don't work. Should quacks be held accountable just like a doctor must face malpractice charges. Every time a quack does face legal problems, he will cry persecution from the big drug companies.

    36. I'll give you an example---My best friend did some accounting for a small pharmaceutical comp. a long way back. Now, they don't have the money to push a new substance through the approval process so when they find something, they sell it to big Pharmaceutical comp. who push it through. But they know how a substance is to perform if its going to the public. So here's the conversation...The researcher gets in the room while my friends there with the boss. He says that they found a cure for (i can't remember what, some female disorder) . The boss asks how it works. The researcher answers that its simply 4 injections in a months time and then its cured...The boss answers: "Are you kidding, there's no money to be made with that" can't sell it. Come back to me when you got something worh my time!" And that's it. That's how much time it takes to get a new cure turned down...About 7 seconds. And when you say big pharma doesn't have to worry, thrust me, they worry. Why do you think there are less and less choice on the shelfs of natural stores. I'm talking, about the stuff that works...Why are they trying to control labeling on supplements even though ample research has been done to prove their efficacy on certain diseases and are without side effects while their drugs have plenty, including deaths? its harder and harder to get the natural products i want...There putting pressure to get bills passed that will restrict natural alternatives till they,re only be able to sell hand made soaps... If they're not worried they wouldn't attack or try to discredit anybody that's got something that works. They worry. Where i live, people have been switching from drugs to natural alternatives for years now, and they don't like it. They work through the FDA to get what they want out of the way. Here it's "Santé Canada" but it's the same thing...They've done this for years without any problems...

      The medical personel is not corrupt, mostly, there just don't have all the data. They only get the info from big Pharma. And they sell their stuff. The reason they didn't offer your friend alternatives is simply because they don't know any. And, they don't want to touch there stats...It looks bad if people die from there intervention so they stay away from it if the chances of success aren't high enough...The protocols are very strict... They studied at medical school and the curriculum doesn't include any alternative methods...You can know these things only by personal research...Don't need to be a doctor to do it but knowledge in biology helps you understand a lot faster... As for the 3% , this was the actual number 10 years ago, but i'm pretty sure they didn't change much...

    37. A great anecdote but it makes no sense. I and most people would pay double for a cure than pay for a non cure. Offer me a way out for my ailment and my wallet opens up. Allow the public to believe that they don't care about cures and they will go you may be doing already and are advocating for others to do as well. Of course there are crooks in Pharma. They're human. Every human is a potential crook but Pharma needs to show some sort of success rate. If they don't, you and I and everyone else will abandon them one by one until there is no customer base. That's business.

      Like I said earlier, you are going to die someday. That is not the failure of conventional medicine. That is the reality of life.

    38. People are slowly understanding and taken better care of themselves and that's encouraging..But Even if you paid twice as much, they make their money from returning customers...They're thinking longterm..They make much more money that way...Its business...For them, there is not enough money into cures to even consider it...They want repeat business. That's the model by which they adhere...Sadly.

    39. I certainly don't see that as the real problem, and "inflicted" is a far to hyperbolic way of looking at alternatives in my mind. We're not talking about anything toxic or even actually dangerous as far as I can tell. Perhaps some "alternatives" are in fact dangerous, but what I'm referring to are ones that involve simple nutritional and immunological approaches.

      A demonstrable cure is not instantly profitable. What's demonstrable is that unless it can reap massive profits, it will be ignored and unfunded for research and clinical trials. The most recent case of the same old song and dance I'm aware of is DCA here in Canada. It was shown to reduce certain tumours in a matter of weeks, but it only costs pennies a dose, and when I looked in to it, you guessed it, it ran in to funding problems and fell off the radar.

    40. Simply not the case. Pharma industry doesn't want a cure for cancer and neither do most hospitals. These companies make alot of money having people come in weekly for treatment, surgery, taking expensive medicine. They have a direct interest in supressing these things. There was a guy on 60 minutes who cured his "uncurable cancer" according to Western minutes using radio waves called John Kanzius

      . There was a medicine, whose name I forget, already existing and approved but used for a different purpose that cured cancer. Then you have dca and cd47 cures, you also have pancreatin cure. Then you have natural cures in things like soursap

      Now why could John Kanzius get fda approval to test , he tried out the waves with several universities and it showed early promise, but big pharma, conked him over the head and tossed him down the honky hole.

      Timothy Ray Brown was cured and is still cured of AIDS and cancer, aka patient Berlin, because they gave him a stem cell transplant with stem cells of a person who was immume to aids (1% of whites are immune to aids and the number rises to 15% in the nordic countries with another 5-10% hiv/aids resistant).

      Every time a physician, dentist, doctor etc tries to make a cure or does make one, they are stripped of their license.

      I had a teacher who had what was fatal cancer, went on 8 weeks of experimental cancer medicine in the 80s in South Texas, and was cured of his cancer and never returned.

      Finally there are cures for cancer that come from widely available products or fruits that cannot be patented, thus investors and pharma have no interest in investing in them because you cannot make money off an unpatented product(or at least that is their view)

    41. you state " Pharma industry doesn't want a cure for cancer and neither do most hospitals". so the workers at the hospitals or the CEO's don't get cancer? they wouldn't want to save themselves or their loved ones if sick? as for the money side of it look at my most recent links. within you will find out what Simoncini has been charging. there is a lot of money to be made.

      as for John Kanzius his ideas are being funded and tested. so that kind of takes away from your claims. while there are no results yet there is still professional testing going on.

      again please pick one or two specific treatments and include the results of the studies. changing the subject to the money issue or attacking big pharma does not in any way provide evidence for claims. also personal testimonials mean absolutely nothing to me. so i will ask again. do you have any demonstrable scientifically tested proof for your claims? everything else is just an attempt to distract from the core issue in my opinion and i have no interest in that type of discussion

    42. As I understand it, you air on the side that most of these alternative cancer treatments are frauds or unproven. I do not see how your links, particularly the wiki support your position. Please highlight specifically. For instance, Mazzimo Mazzucco, basically it says the italian drug regulator prevents human trials of the sodium bicarbonate. Well that is precisely the point of people who say cancer cures are suppressed. If it is a fraud, let the trials occur and if the trials are unsuccssful I'll agree with you, if they are successful then its a cure. The point that 1 patient died from not being cured of cancer is irrelvent, 90% of pancreatic cancer patients die with Western medicine, if just 1 of his patients dies its not disproving it. Even better treatments only have 50%-805 efficacy. Plenty of people, millions, die from cancer despite chemo, radiation and surgery.

      In the case of Kanzius, you said alternative treatment fails to stand the test of science. So when I find an example showing not so, you turn around and say well you disprove your own point, Not so.

      You just admitted Kanzius method was being tried, so your argument is self defeating the last paragraph. I pointed out dca and cd 47, the man cured of aids and cancer, and several examples. Scientific testing is no different, it relies on a series of ancedotal evidence for a range of participants. So lets not pretend its something it isn't. Scientific testing involves one person being cured and then trials spreading to a larger group. But you need fda approval, and without it and financial backers you cannot get to that level. And half the FDA are former employees of big pharma. and no, its not a distraction that someone discovers a cure, then is turned down by fda and murdered by big pharma. Even the cancer medicines on the market do not meet the standard you are trying to establish, people who take chemo+radiation still die by the MILLIONS.

    43. i agree that there are clinical trials going on. but that is way different then clinical trials being completed. that is when the "cure " should be available t the public. not before. the desperate and the sick are not to be used as guinea pigs for these alternative treatments. if these cures are demonstrated to be true and follow the perimeters set up to provide the best chance of clear results and reasonable safety for the public then they will be accepted as main stream medicine. until them they are still unproven. as for your other claims (dca and cd 47) testing is ongoing so no claims can be made yet. i hope that these or other treatments will be successful but as of yet there is not enough evidence to come to an informed conclusion. again attacking big pharma and bankers is a distraction to avoid the burden of proof. my point of the Kanzius treatment is that you claimed big pharma " conked him over the head and tossed him down the honky hole.". but if that is the case why is testing ongoing? then "The point that 1 patient died from not being cured of cancer is irrelvent" please read my links again. more than one person died and the money charged shows that the treatment is profitable

    44. Yeah attacking big pharma for suppressing a single medicine that would wipe out billions of dollars of profits that they make for producing hundreds of margininally effective medicine is conspiracy theory. Just like how the diamond industry doesn't supress diamond mining in Congo, Zimbabwe and other parts of Africa by paying locals to stop mining diamond and buying up warlords diamond and hiding them in mass vaults.

      The testing is going on inspite of the efforts by pharma to suppress the testing And from 2007 to 2013, that's almost a decade of testing, they seemed to have at the very least delayed its introduction into the market.

      The link only showed 1 death. and again even if its 10,000 deaths its a drop in the bucket compared to how many people die from conventional cancer medicine.

      Next you'll tell me big pharma create and didn't spread aids in africa or the un doesn't spread diseases in haiti, eugenics is a myth and that they didn't leave vaccines with cancer onthe shelves on purpose or that the merck lead scientist who came out and admitted they put cancer causing agent in the vaccines is a conspiracy theorist. I think you are somewhat rational minded, but grossly naive as to what goes on the world. There are evil and bad people who run big organizations who enjoy killing us regular scum folk.

    45. so again no actual demonstrable proof. this is getting old. as for my link showing only one death. i will hold your hand as you seem unable to navigate through a simple web page. click on the third link. click on number eight. look at the TEN deaths mentioned and the massive amounts of money charged for this failed treatment.

    46. 10 deaths? Are you serious? What about the 40000 + deaths a year simply to tylenol(acetaminophen) . Did you miss those studies too?

    47. stop with the red herrings tylonol has nothing to do with the topic at hand (cancer) and neither myself or the website claimed that there were only 10 deaths. i pointed it out because the poster i was replying to obviously will not look at anything that doesn't confirm his/her own bias and cannot or will not supply any links of his/her own. can you provide me with a link to the peer reviewed studies containing the evidence for these alternative studies.

    48. Looks like about 460 deaths a year, averaged over 11 years, worldwide, from around 8 billion pills taken per year.
      A far cry from 40,000 +, you must admit.

    49. Depending on your source. Not just the acute liver failures, the deaths for blood disorders and multiple organ failures...etc... And the point is that if this was an alternative medicine, it would have been banned a long time ago...

    50. so your claim is off by approx 8695%? congrats i never personally witnessed an error of of that magnitude before. and you just ignore that and move on. that level of willful blindness is impressive.

    51. You took the response from the other guy as truth right away didn't you...Not good science now is it? I said it depends on the source. I keep repeating myself and you never get it? Some sources triple the number i gave...It always depends on the way the studies are built. A lot of them are built wrong from the start to give the numbers that pharmaceutical companies hope to get. There is so much reading to do that it takes years to get an accurate analysis...That's what i mean when i say you've got a lot of reading to do...Now please don't waste my time boy, i've giving you enough...Your just running around in circles dumbing down the dialog...The question is : why would you think there isn't anything in alternative medicine that works? That's weird isn't it? I mean why think your right on this subject? Why think that medicine stops at what your shown? Your suppose to have an opinion after you get the information not before...

    52. no i didn't i looked into it and the numbers i found confirmed his claim. you claim that it depends on the source. okay please provide the source for your numbers and i will look at it. and again you claim that i have a lot of reading to do but provide nothing for me to read. you go on to ask "The question is : why would you think there isn't anything in alternative medicine that works?" where did i make that claim? finally you state "Your suppose to have an opinion after you get the information not before" then as i have been asking all day. give me this information. you make claims but provide nothing to back them up and then ridicule others for not accepting your baseless claims. so again i will ask. can you provide demonstrable scientific evidence that support your claims? yes or no?

    53. The cures never get available to the public...They always say that it will be available in 5 years...Then, they say 5 years more...And then you never hear about them again...How can you be so naive...?It's always the same trick and not only in medicine. Come on! The first cars were electric. Look at every invention that was made to make even gaz cars more economical...What happened to them? A lot of guys found a way. They boiled the gaz and used the vapors in the injectors...That was in the 50's-60's. They made the cars go 100-200miles a gallon, just using that...One of these guys got raided 3 times and they found him under 4 feet of sand after that...

    54. great more analogies and red herrings. is that all you have?

    55. Don't need to...Just needed to say that many techniques work and are all better than chemo and radiation. An American even used Ozone with a modified dialysis machine. Went to Indonesia to treat and cure 150 HIV patients...His lab got destroyed and they brought him back to America to be thrown in jail in Miami i think...He's been interviewed in prison, i'll try to find that interview for you, since you don't wan't to do any research on your own...Of course you won't find proof. But you got to ask yourself why? And know how the system really works. And it's obvious that you don't for now...I've got things to do now but i'll post it later in the day...But you'll call it speculations of a crazy heretic right?

    56. When did i mention hospitals or hospital staff? Again , read... I studied in Biology and pretty much all of its subfields. What did you study in? That's right...I don't need to prove anything. I proved it long ago. How else would i have a 100% cure rate? Dumb luck? Come one! All "my" patients are cancer free and incredibly happy to have found me and i am too...And why did you suddenly changed your name from Lenny to "Over the edge"...A little weird no? But the biggest question is: why even watch that documentary? Did you even watch it? I mean why post here...

    57. try looking at who i was responding to. he/she did mention hospitals. your reading skills seem as strong as your evidence

    58. I'm a francophone...I'm doing my best...Pretty sure i know a lot more than you on this subject...

    59. Also Blame Disqus, the new format's very difficult to follow a conversation or even to participate in one.

    60. Merci...

    61. and just how do you know "i know a lot more than you on this subject." ? i have never given my education background or my primary source of income to anybody on this site. i see you apply the same level of knowledge and evidence to this claim as you do to your other claims.

    62. Its really evident...I know of no one who has knowledge in these matters that talks like you. The most conservative researchers i know say that it seems very promising, when i show them any kind of findings regarding those subjects and that's pretty much it...No one attacks alternative medicine when they know just a little about it. Or about history regarding this matter. I don't no of anyone person who did know what he was talking about this who ever did, period. But your here to protect people right?

    63. lol wow. that's all you have. would you like links of actual scientists in the field(s) relevant to the topic at hand that are far less polite then i am? are there ideas that seem promising? yes. but ask those same conservative researchers if they would like a treatment to be used on the public BEFORE the tests and trials are completed, peer reviewed and duplicated by others. so i will ask the same question that i have asked over and over to no avail. do you have any demonstrable scientifically verified and duplicated evidence you can present me? the answer to that question is the only one of importance for me.

    64. I'm puzzled as to why people won't disclose their educational background.
      Do people hide this information when talking in person too?

    65. my reasons are simple. i do not wish to become the go to guy for questions on my subject of study as i think that could be dangerous. i also do not work within my field of study any longer and i am sure i am not only rusty but woefully behind. finally and most importantly. in science theories and facts need to stand on their own. if they needed to be propped up by a bunch of letters ( earned or bought ) then i get suspicious.

    66. The problem lies in the legal and ethical issues of experimenting on people. Before you can even think about administering anything, you need to demonstrate how it can help and why it will not injure.

    67. I did watch this "doc" before I commented so your assumption can be SWEPT aside. Herbal is fine (as an adjunct at best) but Herbal only? Bogus and very dangerous. This is my point. Welcome to the real world.

    68. Right on Morpheus, how did you gather I was suggesting herbal only from my comment?

  66. This is a good documentary,albeit quite old now....does make you wonder what is really going on,and who profits from the sustation of this seemingly curable disease...

    1. The key word is profit, and they will do just about anything to keep the gravy train rolling. Hell, their thug tactics are well documented as they want the visibility to create a level of open intimidation to any who may seek to usurp the standard treatments. SOP

    2. Insurance companies are making big profits too. They wouldn't exist if people didn't get sick. They love paying out because...well....because.