The Cancer Sell

The Cancer SellThis film came about because Sarah Macdonald wanted to find out more, to investigate the alternative cancer treatments and the clinics behind them.

At first it seemed easy enough. The facilities promote their services through glossy brochures and online video testimonials, such as one from a woman called Lorraine Weaver, who describes how she reacted to suggestions for conventional medical treatment for lung cancer:

"They said they were going to do chemo and radiation and I said I don't think so. I walked out and called my niece and she said you go to Oasis of Hope... and I came down and I was cured and I thank God every day, don't ever give up hope."

She found that this kind of statement was by no means unusual. The clinics often claim survival rates that far outweigh anything a conventional oncologist could offer - a complete cure when all else has failed.

When you have just been told that there is nothing else conventional medicine can do for you, it is easy to understand the attraction. So you abandon rational thought, phone the travel agent and find yourself in Los Angeles about to take a bus tour around the Tijuana clinics.

Watch the full documentary now

265
5.12
12345678910
Ratings: 5.12/10from 69 users.

More great documentaries

495 Comments / User Reviews

  1. She is so sceptical only cause she was lucky to beat the cancer. If she was really in need she would try absoluttely anything to get well.

  2. Well it seems neither regular nor alternative therapies are curing cancer so might it be a crazy idea that the different treatments ought to be combined? The 2 camps disregarding one another is not helping any patients. Scientists and MD's are better of shedding that god complex and acknowledge that they DON'T know EVERYTHING. To begin with the difference a simple thing as food can make in the body. I'd also like to call dr. Ernst into question cause HIPEC is based on the heating of chemo which makes it more deadly to cells because it's heated: not to 42c but to 40c.

    So why is it that hyperthermia doesn't work under 42c again? I'm not saying it does, I have no experience with it but to just dismiss everything cause it's hasn't been tried and tested (most often) is just ignorant and straight up foolish. An MD or scientist MUST be open to the fact that they are not the 'all-knowing' life force. ALL meds are derived from plants, lets not forget that, so to dismiss nature having potential healing effects (Turmeric is a, proven by science, example) is denying possible better treatments options and thats why cancer treatment has not gained numbers in survival rates since the last 40 years. (Not to mention to bias studies and results that are def not trustworthy anymore).

    So what is a patient to do? Why don't MD just really get into it instead of just being zombies executing what their told to do. A great example of how a oncologist should keep an open mind is with the Iscador (misletoe) extracts, check out the website believebig.org. It's set up by a woman that defeated her cancer from returning (stage4 colon) for over 5 years. Het oncologist now works with her to set up a trial to confirm the efficacy of the iscador at John Hopkins. Simply cause no pharm. company will fund a trial doesnt mean a product doesnt have beneficial effect.

  3. This is a lame documentary, one of the worst I've seen. There are so many success stories of people treating their cancer without chemo, radiation or drugs that I am surprised it's still being done at all. Like the bloodletting of the Medievel days, conventional cancer treatments of today will be a joke tomorrow.

    I am seeing much evidence that even marijuana is being used to treat and cure many serious illnesses WITHOUT the side effects (especially death) of so many pharmaceutical drugs.

    One only needs to do minimal studying to see that we have been lied to and cheated millions, if not billions, of times so a few can get rich. MONEY is the biggest disease causing, addictive drug out there.

  4. more studies done on garlic and cancer than any other food ..pub med is full of good studies as are other research sites...

  5. just dont do it, dont go to any kind of medical treatment if you have cancer or any other illness. I bet all of you critics will go to the hospital to receive any kind of treatment.

  6. Moderators:

    Today I encountered an article entitled "Merck's Anti-PD1 Melanoma Drug Shrinks Tumors in Half of Patients" in "The Street" and another entitled "Merck Anti-PD1 Update" from the Melanoma Research Foundation.
    I'm certain that both articles would interest a large number of TDF followers and that links to both articles would be welcome (the one in "The Street" even mentions Roche's PDL1 for which you created two links a while ago).
    So much Jordan Nash, Awful Truth and those of their clade.

  7. Whoooooops! "He died of the disease at 92" Poor guy, he had such a long life ahead of him. LOL. Rock on, Linus Pauling!

  8. "Do not let either the medical authorities or the politicians mislead you. Find out what the facts are, and make your own decisions about how to live a happy life and how to work for a better world."

    And:

    "Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud and that the major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them." - Linus Pauling PhD (Two-time Nobel Prize Winner)

    1. i have repeatably asked you for facts concerning alternative medicine. my inquiries have been answered by nothing other than diversionary tactics . so i agree with "Find out what the facts are" as nobody who supports pseudo science has provided any facts at all to support their claims of effectiveness of alternative medicine

    2. While Dr. Pauling was a brilliant chemist and a major figure in his field, when it came to medicine, he was a quack who believed that Vitamin C either cured or palliated cancer and spent a large part of his life consuming huge quantities of it. As evidence of the success of his treatment, he died of the disease at 92. For further information, see "The Dark Side of Linus Pauling's Legacy" by Stephen Barrett, M.D. and "High Dose Vitamin C and Cancer: Has Linus Pauling Been Vindicated," both on the internet.
      By failing to provide this information and from the other quotes you have furnished (most of them from 20-50 years back and not one from an oncologist or someone in a related field) you have shown yourself to be one of the most dishonest people ever to post on this thread.

    3. @Jordan Nash: I am in complete agreement with you. Chemo therapy (mustard gas) and radiation treatment is all the medical community has done for cancer patients in the last 50 years after billions of dollars of donations. Here is my blog from last week. you might find it interesting: needless to say, it didn't go over any better than your blogs. To answer your question, you are only being singled out by the same people who are most threatened by what you are offering. (thinking for yourself, questioning the so called experts, and awareness of corporate intent)

      Man, where to start:
      1) DCA - or Dichloracetic acid has been found in scientific studies to be very successful at reducing malignent tumors in size, sometimes getting rid of them altogether. Since this compound is relatively inexpensive, don't expect it to be embraced by the medical, in particular the pharmaceutical community any time soon.
      2) Marijuana has been recognized in multiple scientfic studies in the prevention/inhibition of lung cancer. Since the U.S has a war on everything (especially drugs) don't expect this to be a viable alternative in the medical community.
      3) Chemotherapy (basically mustard gas) along with radiation therapy is the standard treatment for most cancers in the medical community. While there has been some success with this treatment, it is soley dependent on the individual who is treated with it. (assuming it hasn't been watered down - greed again) Since no one really knows whether they will have success with it, it is potluck at best. For those that are unsuccessful with it, would have been far better off doing nothing, and will likely live far longer with no treatment at all.
      4) In the 1930's, a man by the name Royal Ray Rife created an electron microscope that could take motion pictures of the highest degree. Furthermore, he had apparently discovered that many pathogens oscilate at different frequenciies (including cancer) which could be obliterated by resonance frequencies that matched the specific mutation. Unlike standard treatment, it left the healthy tissue alone. Supposedly, his machines were confiscated by the FDA or AMA (American medical Association) when doctors who were using it made the mistake of stating that they were consistently 'curing cancer'.
      5) The medical community constantly denegrades other non life threatening options. (chiropractic, reflexology, homeopathy, etc) If any of the viewers have had similar experiences like myself, you soon realize that there really is alternatives that work far better than standard treatments, and if the medical community refuses to acknowledge their benefits, it only reduces their credibility, which in turn motivates people to search out alternative treatments. (some good, some rediculously bad)
      It is my opinion people should research things for themselves, and follow the axiom; believe nothing you hear, and only half of what you see. Since all cancer is a mutation, (oncogenes) and everyone has different triggers, a one shot treatment fits all (chemo/radiation) attitude is a poor approach if I ever seen one. (especially one that attacks your only defense with poison)
      On a final note: Contrary to what you may have been told, obesity is the number one cause of cancer in the world. Thus, the best treatment for life in general is exercise. (obesity actually re-writes your DNA promoting mutation) With that said, genetic predisposition, and most environmental factors are not within of our control. Ergo, nothing in life is fair! What you can control is the power of thought, so never dismiss it's potential either.
      This is only one mans opinion, and take it as such. Research for yourself!

    4. Repeating your post of last week does not render it any less ignorant. As you have no medical background, you are not qualified to pronounce judgment on current cancer treatments.

  9. @Jordan Nash
    do you have any demonstrable proof that alternative medicine works or not? a yes or no answer will suffice. as of yet absolutely nobody who supports the pseudo science has been able to provide anything other than outdated claims and personal testimonials

  10. No medical man during his student days is taught to think. He is expected to assimilate the thoughts of others and to bow to authority. Throughout the whole of his medical career he must accept the current medical fashions of the day or suffer the loss of prestige and place. No public appointments, no coveted preferments are open to the medical man who declines to parrot the popular shibboleths of his profession.
    Dr. Hadwen in his book 'The Difficulties of Dr. Deguerre' on why most doctors will accept and perpetuate the status quo in medical treatment, no matter how unsatisfying or unsuccessful.

    1. First of all, this says nothing. Secondly, Walter R. Hadwen (1854-1932). Once again, you're a cheat.

    2. I'm a medical student, and I disagree.

    3. Thanks for the book recommendation. Sounds interesting. I have heard several surgeons (on youtube) state that their medical training was more indoctrination than education.

  11. ...the immune system can hold many problems in check, as long as it is not compromised by powerful procedures. Guess which system is the most important to you at this time, more than it's ever been before in your whole life. Right - the immune system. Guess which system suffers most from chemotherapy and radiation. Right again. A 1992 study in Journal of the American Medical Association of 223 patients concluded that no treatment at all for prostate cancer actually was better than any standard chemotherapy, radiation or surgical procedure. (Johansson)
    Dr. Tim O'Shea in TO THE CANCER PATIENT

    1. Dr. Tim O'Shea is a D.C., i.e., a CHIROPRACTOR. Note, the reference to the study in the Journal of the American Medical Association is 21 years old. Medicine has made great strides since then. Once again, you are a cheat.

    2. Right, you and 'toutmosis' on the other posts in progress on the doc "Cancer: The Forbidden cures" on TDF should compare notes, since he says he has already cured 15 people that have/had cancer with electricity, that supposedly enhances the immune system. Let us know your prognosis.

    3. You are misstating what the study on prostate cancer showed. It showed that there are two types of prostate cancer. One type is very aggressive and the second type is slow growing and very indolent. These two types can be differentiated. The more aggressive type requires treatment. While the slow growing type depending on the patients age, if they are older requires no treatment. In an older person it would be more likely they would die from some other cause than the prostate cancer.

      Therefore you are incorrect when you say the study showed NO treatment was required for prostate cancer.

    4. I see you have taken my suggestion. You will find a lot of Jordan Nash's posts. It's hard to tell which is the most ignorant.

    5. It is hard to tell which is the most ignorant. They are so redundant too. I think I've had about as much as I can stomach for one day. I just received 'Reality Check how science deniers threaten our future' by Donald R. Prothero. I think I'll go and read it. :-)

      P.S By the way your comments are brilliant. Two hours just flew by while reading them.

    6. Do everyone a favor and keep posting. Once again, I would appreciate your comments on the Merck article I suggested as well as the video on Dr. Venter.

    7. I don't know if my posting is doing anyone a favor. Certainly not the cranks who have made up their minds. I learned a long time ago that it does little good as far as they are concerned. I've watched cancer patients who rejected traditional medicine for quackery and snake oil and were clearly dying from their disease, and they still refused to believe that they wouldn't be cured. Still it's so hard to let some of these comments go unchallenged. The dishonesty is appalling.

      Cancer Immunotherapy is promising area of treatment. MPDL3280 certainly looks exciting. There are patients who were stage 4 melonoma with advanced metastasis who are alive 4 years post treatment. But hey, isn't chemotherapy mustard gas?

      I'll certainly watch the doc on Dr. Venter. He is an amazing man. I am leaving the country in a day and Internet might be intermittent, but I will watch it as soon as I get a chance. If you can recommend any other videos it would be appreciated.

    8. Never mind. Just keep posting. All the moderators are enlightened.
      It's amazing how much genetic research has contributed to combatting various forms of cancer--a lot more than cannabis or coffee enemas!
      You haven't provided your opinion of Dark Matter's videos. One of my favorites is Job (I much prefer the second ending). I also recommend the Preaching Atheist. But before you do anything, there's a new video by Baud2Bits entitled the Presuppositional Helpline which you absolutely much watch.

    9. Will do. :-)
      Thanks

    10. Oh, please...we have been hearing about "promising areas" of cancer treatment and "promising" new drugs and "exciting" cancer "breakthroughs" for the past twenty-five years. It is a lot of big pharma BUNK.

  12. The New England Journal of Medicine Reports— War on Cancer Is a Failure: Despite $30 billion spent on research and treatments since 1970, cancer remains "undefeated," with a death rate not lower but 6% higher in 1997 than 1970.
    John C. Bailar III, M.D., Ph.D., and Heather L. Gornik, M.H.S., both of the Department of Health Studies at the University of Chicago in Illinois

    1. Why no source? Is this another instance of your cheating? And by the way, Heather Gornik is a cardiovascular specialist, not an oncologist or anything like one.

    2. could you please link me to the " New England Journal of Medicine Report" that states that?

    3. As pointed out in several of my posts, two of his quotes are long outdated, one is from a chiropractor and Heather L. Gornik is a cardiovascular specialist. He must be getting desperate.

    4. i think he started out desperate.

    5. And speaking of cancer, once again thanks for posting those articles. Have you had a chance yet to read about MPDL3280?

    6. not yet. no acceptable excuses other than laziness. but i will

    7. O.K. I've now watched all the available episodes of "Coffee with Claire" plus a few of her documentaries and ended up knowing more about geology than I thought I would. I'm thinking of writing to her about TDF. What do you think?

    8. I don't agree with the claim that the War on Cancer is a failure.

      "Overall rates began to decline soon after the introduction of better early diagnosis and preventive measures and effective adjuvant treatment of common cancers, such as cancer of the breast and colon. The 5-year relative survival rate for all cancers, which was 38% in the late 1960s, just before the passage of the National Cancer Act, is now 68%. Straight-line projections indicate that the survival rate will rise to 80% by 2015.53,54 Overall rates of death from cancer, which began to decline in 1990 in the United States, have decreased by 24% overall since then.53,54 Straight-line projections to the year 2015 indicate that the overall absolute reduction in cancer mortality will be about 38 percentage points."
      "Two Hundred Years of Cancer Research NEJM June 7, 2012"

      Here's a little factoid for you. How many children diagnosed with leukemia 60 years ago survived? Zero, zilch, nada. Today with chemotherapy the survival rate is 85-90% I'd call that a success. Some types of lymphomas have as high as 90% successful treatment rate. Breast cancer survival rates are improving every year.

      You should read the article from the NEJM that I quoted above. It gives an excellent overview of how far cancer treatment has come. Sure it's got a ways to go. But to say it's been a failure is untrue.

    9. I see you have located another of Mr. Nash's infamous posts.
      You might be interested in "Merck Announces Breakthrough Therapy Designation for Lambroliguamb . . . " on the internet as well as a number of other articles from the industry giant.
      It's particularly despicable when those like Mr. Nash claim without any evidence, much less knowledge, education or training, that the medical industry is not out to find a "cure" for "cancer" (which is impossible as there are so many carcinogens, each one different) because the REAL money is in treatment.

    10. I hear that odious claim over and over by JN and his ilk. Right. That's why research institutions spend BILLIONS of dollars on cancer research in the hope of finding the next big breakthrough. There is no logic to their claim.

    11. You're right. Contrary to the assertions of these willful ignoramuses, too many of whom find their way to sites like this one, there's more money in a cure than there is in a treatment.
      You still haven't commented on Andrew Wakefield, not that you can without becoming violent ill.
      I'm curious, which part of the globe do you inhabit? I reside in Los Angeles.

    12. I'm in Calif too Los Angeles to be exact! Hi neighbor!

      Willful ignoramuses. I like that description! It fits them to a tee.

      Wakefield is a criminal. A despicable creature. Now we have him as a resident of the US. Someone posted a picture and address of his multi-million dollar estate in Houston, Tx. Being a weasely, lying scumbag pays off I guess. He whores himself out as a speaker at anti-vax gatherings. If I believed in a hell he would definitely be someone who should end up there along with Jenny McCarthy and Suzane Somers.

      Stanislaw Burzynski is another one who has profited handsomely from his 30 year scam. He resides in Houston in a 7 million dollar estate with 15 bedrooms and 15 baths. Cancer quackery can be very lucrative. It's especially galling that his poor desperate patients give up their last dollar in order to come up with the hundreds of thousands of dollars he charges them. Only to die anyway, leaving the family penniless. I suggest reading the stories on "The Other Burzynnski Patients". Be prepared to sickened and appalled.

    13. I doff my hat. You know your stuff. I have read and I'm already sickened and appalled as I'm sure you've already noticed. I have no patience with what Carl Sandburg described as bunkshooters.
      West Los Angeles perhaps?

    14. I've never heard the expression bunkshooters before.

      Not too far away, Hollywood Hills, Nichols Canyon.

    15. Not too far away at all. Enjoy your trip.

  13. Medical study shows: untreated patients live up to 4 times longer than those who received conventional cancer therapy
    "My studies have proved conclusively that cancer patients who refuse chemotherapy and radiation actually live up to FOUR TIMES LONGER THAN TREATED CASES...Beyond a shadow of a doubt, radical surgery on cancer does more harm than good...As for radiation treatment -- most of the time it makes not the slightest difference whether the machine is turned on or not. ...unfortunately, it seems to be only a question of time, usually, before the disease pops up again all over the body... Every cancer patient who keeps in excellent physical shape may have many good years left. The alternative is to squander those years as an invalid through radical medical intervention, which has zero chance of extending life. ...It's utter nonsense to claim that catching cancer symptoms early enough will increase the patient's chances of survival... Furthermore, untreated breast cancer cases show a life expectancy four times longer than treated ones. ~ My wife and I have discussed what she would do if breast cancer was diagnosed in her. And we both agreed that she would do nothing as regards to treatment, except to keep as healthy as possible. I guarantee she would live longer!"
    Dr. Hardin Jones, prominent cancer researcher & former physiology professor at the University of California Department of Medical Physics, who has been studying cancer for more than 23 years, travelling the world to collect data on the dreaded disease. Published in Transactions, New York Academy of Science, series 2, v.18, n.3, p. 322.

    1. Dr. Jones made this statement back in 1956!!! For further information on its correctness see "Hardin Jones and Cancer" on the internet. You are a distorter and a cheat.

    2. I missed this comment before I responded to Jordan Nash's comment above. So this guy Hardin Jones made this comment 53 years ago! Wow, and Jordan Nash is basing what he would do if his wife were diagnosed with breast cancer today on what some guy, not even a doctor had to say 53 years ago. He says he discussed this with his wife and they agreed she would seek no traditional medical treatment. It boggles the mind.

    3. Whatever you do, don't marry Jordan Nash.

    4. This person Hardin Jones Phd. you are quoting is not an oncologist. He's not even a medical doctor. This means he is not a clinician. Which means he doesn't take care of patients. His claim that untreated patients live 4 times longer is ridiculous. I certainaly hope your wife never finds herself facing breast cancer. Perhaps you should take a look at the results of an untreated breast cancer. Google: "We Mourn for Michaela".

      Surgical removal of solid tumors when possible is still the most effective form of treatment for malignancies. If a tumor is left to grow and metastasize it will eventually kill the person.

      "Surgery is the primary method of treatment of most isolated solid cancers and may play a role in palliation and prolongation of survival. It is typically an important part of making the definitive diagnosis and staging the tumor as biopsies are usually required. In localized cancer surgery typically attempts to remove the entire mass along with, in certain cases, the lymph nodes in the area. For some types of cancer this is all that is needed to eliminate the cancer. Cancer Wiki"

      You commented in another post that chemotherapy is mustard gas. This is patently false. Chemotherapy used today is many different types that work in different ways. There are several classes from alkylating agents to anti-metabolites. To refer chemotherapy as mustard gas is ignorant and fear mongering.

      I have to wonder how long ago Hardin Jones PhD made those comments. They certainly don't reflect the current reality of cancer research and treatment today.

    5. There's a common thread which runs through these people. They get angry when asked to provide the sources behind their allegations and whatever they provide turns out to be bogus a la Hardin Jones.
      Please correct me if I'm wrong, but as I understand it, the early forms of chemotherapy employed mustard gas which was eventually replaced by more efficacious and less harmful alkylating agents. But yes, the post you're referring to is as ignorant and fear-mongering as claims that aborted fetuses are used to make vaccines.

  14. Has anyone considered watching the other documentaries on cancer located on this website?

    1. There is ongoing discussion on "Cancer: The Forbidden Cures" on TDF

  15. In 1956 Fritz ter Meer became chairman of Bayer's supervisory board. He was convicted at the Nuremberg trials for his part in carrying out experiments on human subjects at Auschwitz. He was found "guilty of count two, plunder and spoliation, and count three, slavery and mass murder" and sentenced to seven years imprisonment and served five years.

    "After 1978, there were four major companies in the United States engaged in the manufacture, production and sale of Factor VIII and IX: Armour Pharmaceutical Company, Bayer Corporation and its Cutter Biological division, Baxter Healthcare and its Hyland Pharmaceutical division and Alpha Therapeutic Corporation, which have been or are defendants in certain lawsuits.

    The plaintiffs allege that the companies manufactured and sold blood factor products as beneficial "medicines" that were, in fact of likely to be contaminated with HIV and/or HCV. This resulted in the mass infection and/or deaths of thousands of haemophiliacs worldwide.

    It is believed that three of these companies, Alpha, Baxter, and Cutter, recruited and paid donors from high risk populations, including prisoners (i.e. prison-based collections), intravenous drug users, and plasma centers with predominantly homosexual donors, esp. in cities with large populations thereof, to obtain blood plasma used for the production of Factor VIII and IX. Plaintiffs allege that these companies failed to exclude donors, as mandated by federal law, with a history of viral hepatitis. Such testing could have substantially reduced the likelihood of plasma containing HIV and/ or HCV entering plasma pools."

    1. i had to remove your link as it went nowhere. feel free t try again

    2. You've obviously not learned that allegations don't count as facts. This post says nothing. Even if all your allegations were correct, they would not validate "natural (alternative) treatment" by default. As Over the Edge has tried to explain to ignorant little you, "Natural (alternative) treatment" must be held to the same standard as mainstream treatment and if it passes, then it is no longer "alternative treatment."

    3. Multi-billion dollar, settled lawsuits and the Nuremburg trials are somewhat more than an allegation. You seem to spin the same lame web of deceit in all of your 9,000+ comments you've made during your work as an online weblog troll. You provide no information, just child-like insults and tripe.

      Natural treatment will never have to be held to the same standard as manufactured chemicals because they are just that - natural. Combine that with the extreme low risk of harm (not to mention public demand) and they will always stay as they are - cheap and easily accessible. And, best of all, they work great without the often deadly & disfiguring side effects of chemicals.

    4. just so both of us can save some time. do you plan on providing proof for your claims? or am i wasting my time?

    5. I thought this was an opinion blog?

    6. opinions are great. but you have been asserting your claims as fact not opinion. if you state everything you have posted about alternative medicine is an opinion and not fact i will move on.

    7. Actually they're not if they're based on wilful ignorance, misinformation or dysinformation.

    8. while i agree if something is stated as an opinion i tend to move on.i have very little to no confidence in my ability to change this posters mind. but i feel that there might be some fence sitters reading who might benefit from the distinction between opinion and fact. i do not think that pouncing on an anonymous opinion will help in any way towards reaching my desired goal

    9. However, if someone like Laurence Krauss states an opinion on quantum mechanics or nuclear fission, I'm inclined to take it seriously.
      Jordan Nash is no different from creationists and anti-evolutionists who through ignorance or downright lying distort good science or drag excellent scientists and scientific papers through the mud.
      But you're right, Jordan Nash is too far gone and enamored of his proud and wilful ignorance to allow for anything such as facts/evidence or the absence of them, much less proof. My concern is not only for the fence sitters, but for those who might take him or others like him seriously, resulting in potentially disastrous consequences.

    10. Right, like the "good science" that is curing everyone of cancer.

    11. EVERY comment on this website is based on personal opinions. Why are mine being singled out? Freedom of speech, what happened to that?Seemingly it's okay for someone to use slanderous remarks but opinions are a no-no here. For every so-called "fact" that robertallen1 spews there are others that can refute it, and same for me. It's an opinion based argument on both sides, period.

      As far as fence sitters and those trying to make up their mind on whether to go natural or conventional it's critically important for them to make up their own mind, based on their own research and their own opinion. That is exactly what I did when I was diagnosed with cancer and I have absolutely no regrets in doing so.

    12. again all you have to do is admit your claims are opinion only and you are unable to back them up with demonstrable repeatable evidence and i will move on. you have your freedom of speech to make your claims just as i have mine to call you on those claims. this is a red herring and argument from emotion to derail the topic at hand (in my opinion). as for the fence sitters ability to make up their own mind. i agree all i am doing is attempting to show your claims have no facts to back them up. and i implore them to do their own research. the number of robertallen1 comments proves that he posts a lot nothing more. and i will delete your baseless claims against his motivations for posting (again) but this time will carry a warning to not repeat this claim again.

    13. Bringing in freedom of speech is not only irrelevant but evasive and constitutes an attempt to cover up your failure to provide any support your claims either than more claims. And by the way, it's not a matter of opinion, but of fact--another evasion on your part.

      Quite frankly I hope you come down with some fearful scourge so all of us can see just how far you get having it cured through "natural (alternative) medicine." And please don't cite your allegedly being diagnosed with cancer, for so far you have provided no evidence to support it. So how about placing your medical records somewhere on the web? I'm sure one of the moderators will happy to provide a link to it.

      You obviously do not know the difference between slander and libel and I suggest that you find out. On this subject, your accusation of my being a shill for the medical industry constitutes libel for which you will be reported to the moderators for further action.

    14. You've cited three lawsuits and one off-topic post on a patent dispute (the Nuremburg trials are irrelevant to cancer treatment). This doesn't even constitute a miniscule portion of the beneficial drugs on the market.

      Why haven't you been able to provide any peer-reviewed articles attesting to the efficacy of "natural treatment over mainstream medicine?" I'll answer for you: because you can't.

      "Natural treatment will never have to be held to the same standard as manufactured chemicals because they are just that - natural." Not only is this illogical, but it is despicable and disgusting as well and says everything about you.

    15. Yes I provided a few for you but if want more, just Google: pharmaceuticals lawsuits and see the 4.75 million hits

    16. Where are you getting this figure? One way or the other, it does not reflect anything near the number of lawsuits--and you know it. Another fraud exposed.

  16. Cerivastatin (Baycol)

    Maker: Bayer

    Recalled: 2001 (after four years on the market)

    Financial damage: Litigation-related damages totaled $1.2 billion

    Baycol, prescribed to patients as a treatment for high cholesterol, is reportedly responsible for more than 100,000 deaths and about as many lawsuits. It was connected to a severe muscle disorder known as rhabdomyolysis, which clogs the kidneys with protein from dying muscle tissue.

  17. Fenfluramine/phentermine (Fen-Phen)

    Wyeth-Ayerst Laboratories

    Recalled: 1997 (after 24 years on the market)

    Financial damage: Awards to victims close to $14 billion, making it one of the most costly products liability cases in history.

    Fen-Phen’s was a hugely popular weight loss drug, its popularity peaking in the 90’s. It is estimated that as many as 6.5 million people took it to help fight obesity. After consumers began experiencing heart disease and other pulmonary problems, the FDA set the recall in motion. American Lawyer reported that more than 50,000 Fen-Phen victims have filed suits against Fen-Phen’s maker Wyeth, and legal expenses combined with awards may have exceeded $21 billion. Lengthy time in the marketplace combined with the severity of both the public reaction and the significant awards granted to its victims make its impact unprecedented.

    1. Trying to make an argument against mainstream medicine based on three cases, two of which did not even involve cancer, is the tactic of a basically dishonest person, but what can be expected of someone as wilfully and proudly ignorant as you?

      Medicine like science in general corrects itself with the influx of data and is far better than anything you have to offer.

      .

    2. Three cases? You're off your meds again aren't you? How about thalidomide? Now THAT was once a "promising" drug too.

      Now, go take your pills before you have another psychotic episode LOL

    3. That was over fifty years ago when medications taken during pregnancy were not strictly monitored. We have learned a lot since. You've obviously learned nothing.

  18. Over the Edge and, of course, others:
    There's an article entitled "3 Cancer Scientists Awarded $500K NY Medical Prize" which might be of general interest. Among other things, It gives the lie to Awful_Truth's statement that obesity causes cancer.

  19. If it's quacks they're looking for then one only needs to open their local newspaper on any given week in any given city to find yet another quack medical doctor being found guilty of one form of unethical behaviour or another (sometimes deadly). It makes me wonder how many more of are out there still "practicing" on other victims.

    1. Makes me wonder too.

  20. It wasn't that long ago that those in the field of conventional medicine thought it was crazy to wash their hands and instruments before medical procedures, the very thought of it being dismissed in spite of the rates of death caused by not doing so. No one from their schools taught it so it could no be true. Same holds true today, it seems.

    Google: Ignaz Semmelweis and read the sad story of this poor fellow who attempted to bring this simple theory to practice.

    1. You are attempting to use Dr. Semmelweis who lived prior to the age of clinical testing to justify the ignorance and quackery, a lot of which has been tested and found wanting, which you espouse. It won't wash.

  21. Man, where to start:
    1) DCA - or Dichloracetic acid has been found in scientific studies to be very successful at reducing malignent tumors in size, sometimes getting rid of them altogether. Since this compound is relatively inexpensive, don't expect it to be embraced by the medical, in particulalr the pharmaceutical community any time soon.
    2) Marijuana has been recognized in multiple scientfic studies in the prevention of lung cancer. Since the U.S has a war on everything (especially drugs) don't expect this to be a viable alternative in the medical community.
    3) Chemotherapy (basically mustard gas) along with radiation therapy is the standard treatment for most cancers in the medical community. While there has been some success with this treatment, it is soley dependent on the individual who is treated with it. (assuming it hasn't been watered down) Since no one really knows whether they will have success with it, it is potluck at best. for those that are unsuccessful with it, would have been far better off doing nothing, and will likely live longer with no treatment at all.
    4) In the 1930's, a man by the name Royal Ray Rife created an electron microscope that could take motion pictures of the highest degree. Furthermore, he had apparently discovered that many pathogens oscilate at different frequenciies (including cancer) which could be obliterated by resonance frequencies that matched the specific mutation. Unlike standard treatment, it left the healthy tissue alone. Supposedly, his machines were confiscated by the FDA or AMA (American medical Association) when doctors who were using it made the mistake of stating that they were consistently 'curing cancer'.
    5) The medical community constantly denegrades other non life threatening options. (chiropractic, reflexology, homeopathy, etc) If any of the viewers have had similar experiences like myself, you soon realize that there really is alternatives that work far better than standard treatments, and if the medical community refuses to acknolwedge their benefits, it only reduces their credability, which in turn motivates people to search out alternative treatments. (some good, some rediculously bad)
    It is my opinion people research things for themselves, and follow the axiom; believe nothing you hear, and only half of what you see. Since all cancer is a mutation, (oncogenes) and everyone has different triggers, a one shot treatment fits all (chemo/radiation) attitude is a poor approach if I ever seen one.
    On a final note: Contrary to what you may have been told, obesity is the number one cause of cancer in the world. Thus, the best treatment for life in general is exercise. With that said, genetic predisposition, and environmental factors are not within of our control. Ergo, nothing in life is fair! What you can control is the power of thought, so never dismess it's potential.
    This is only one mans opinion, and take it as such. Research for yourself!

    1. "Since this compound [DCA] is relatively inexpensive, don't expect it to be embraced by the medical, in particulalr the pharmaceutical community any time soon." In truth, DCA is still being tested BY THE MEDICAL INDUSTRY with varying results. Doctors are cautioning against self-application because of potentially dangerous side effects. So your statement is not only idiotic but misleading. .

      "it [chemotherapy] is potluck at best. for those that are unsuccessful with it, would have been far better off doing nothing, and will likely live longer with no treatment at all." What are your medical qualifications?--and by the way mustine which is what you're referring to was supplanted years ago.

      Royal Rife was a dangerous quack and the least said about him the better.

      "Since all cancer is a mutation, (oncogenes) and everyone has different triggers, a one shot treatment fits all (chemo/radiation) attitude is a poor approach if I ever seen one." This is a decision which should be left to a trained oncologist. So again, what are your medical qualifications?

      "If any of the viewers have had similar experiences like myself, you soon realize that there really is [sic] alternatives that work far better than standard treatments." Which treatments are these and where is your peer-reviewed reports?

      "Contrary to what you may have been told, obesity is the number one cause of cancer in the world." Where are your peer-reviewed reports. And once again, what are you medical credentials.

      In short, another of your ignorant posts and a dangerous one at that.

    2. Another one who thinks chemotherapy is mustard gas. Go and Google chemotherapy. Wiki gives a great overview of the history and all the different types of chemo used today. And guess what? None of them are mustard gas. So you can stop repeating that fear-mongering lie.

      DCA is in the very early stages of research. Most studies are in vitro, in labs on rats and in Petri dishes. Just because a certain chemical works in rats and directly on cells in a Petri dish doesn't mean it will work the same way in humans. By the way in some cases it increased the rate of tumor growth in mice.

      "In 2010, it was found that for human colorectal tumours grown in mice, under hypoxic conditions, DCA decreased rather than increased apoptosis, resulting in enhanced growth of the tumours Wiki"

    3. I see you have happened upon another chronic fear-mongerer and ignorant know-it-all.

  22. to anyone reading this blog, I apologize for the comments of robertallen1 and some of my own. If you or anyone you know has been diagnosed with cancer please explore and make up your own mind, please trust your innate wisdom

    healingcancernaturally dot com

    cancertutor dot com

    youtube: Biology of Belief - by Bruce Lipton (full documentary)

    youtube when the body says no dr gabor matte

    1. If I have any apologizing I'll do it myself and when it comes to you and those of your ilk, I have nothing to apologize for and I resent your temerity in attempting to apologize for me.
      Innate wisdom is worthless without knowledge and anyone who takes you seriously deserves the misfortune which will in all probability be visited upon him.

    2. And those that follow the idiocy of your mantra deserve an apology from your poisonous world. In the future societies will laugh, as they already do, at the methods in which conventional "medicine" conducts their big business. It saddens me to be a witness to its foolery in the likes of you.

    3. And it saddens me that you've infected this thread with your ignorance.
      Now let's compare the documented accomplishments of conventional medicine those of whatever you're espousing in its stead.

    4. you must mean the "documentation" created, manipulated and edited by the pharmaceutical industry in its own favour over the past 40 years. you cannot mean the accomplishments of the past three thousand years because then you'd lose.

      You have no medical qualifications,and your only response to anything is "where's your evidence" yet you provide none yourself.

    5. You as the accuser must provide the evidence and so far your only evidence has been more allegations.
      Now, do you want to compare the accomplishments of mainstream medicine say within the last 150 years to those of the quackery you espouse? I know you don't because you'd lose.

    6. I have a better idea. How about listening to your trained oncologist. Then get a second opinion from another trained oncologist. Make sure everything is explained well to you. Then make a decision.

      None of this "trusting your innate wisdom" that's b.s. I'm assuming you are not a oncologist and cancer treatment is complicated. Trust the wisdom of your cancer doctor. They have spent years acquiring the knowledge needed to take care of you.

    7. How can anyone have innate wisdom on something he knows nothing about or even wants to. And speaking of knowing nothing, check out the four sources cited by JN.
      I'm sure you've noticed disquieting similarities between the alties, as you call them (thanks for the new word) and the antivacs.

  23. "Robertallen1'...'Jordan Nash'

    Will try to keep pertinent info on between you two. But all personal jabs will be removed.

  24. "Holistic methods focus on working with the body and boosting whatever immune system the patient still has. Chemotherapy and radiation by contrast, usually devastate the immune system at the one time in you life that you need it the most. Lorraine Day tells us: "Cancer is a disease of the immune system. It's caused by a depressed immune system. How can it possibly be cured by a therapy that further damages the immune system?" Cancer Doesn't Scare Me Any More"
    quote by Dr Tim O'Shea in TO THE CANCER PATIENT

    1. There is a lengthy article about Dr. Day on Quackwatch, including a discussion of the "evidence" she has provided--i.e., virtually none. There is absolutely no mainstream support for her holistic methods just as there is no mainstream support for holistic methods in general and for good reason, they don't work.
      Promoting this type of quackery makes you a quack yourself and, as stated before, a dangerous one.

    2. QuackWatch is like any other skeptic website I've come across. They are all extremely ego-centric and already have their minds made up. They pretend that they're there to protect the ignorant and gullible consumer, but they're really only interested in promoting their own viewpoints and in being right. They collect evidence to back up their beliefs, and refute anything that doesn't. They've decided that if you don't have scientific "proof" for something, it must be a scam. They are not true scientists in the strict sense of the word. In reality, they represent the "blinded by science" crowd. The world just isn't as black-and-white as they think it is.

      If you believe Quackwatch, ALL alternative health treatment is quackery, even if people have gotten results with it for thousands of years. ALL alternative health practitioners are trying to scam you. Only drugs can cure disease. That alone should make one suspicious.

    3. Just what is the matter with demanding scientific proof for something scientific such as medicine and who are you with no scientific, much less medical background to state that the people on QuackWatch are not true scientsts--and isn't a scientist supposed to be "blinded by science." And by the way, what's wrong with being right?
      Just what are these results produced by "alternative medicine" that you're referring to and where are the clinical double-blind tests to back them up?
      ALL alternative health treatment is scam for if it were effective, it would be part of mainstream medicine, the only type of medicine that counts.
      This post especially bears you out for the vile, ignorant, pernicious scumbag that you are.

    4. Mr Angry (aka: robertallen1) is having another episode, please delete his libellous remarks. Could be the conventional meds aren't working tonight.

    5. You are in no position to ask a moderator to delete anyone's remarks.
      But you're right, I am angry, especially when those of your clade attempt to drag good science through the mud of your ignorance. As a matter of fact, you're so ignorant that you are totally unaware of your own ignorance and when it comes to medicine this is especially dangerous for there are all too many of your mental capacitywho will afford you the credibility which you don't deserve and act to their own detriment, resulting in unnecessary demise.

    6. You mean, actually think for themselves? What a crime that would have been in Nazi Germany or Communist Russia. Fortunately we live a country that is, for the most part, far removed from such stupidity as in your pea brain.

    7. Without knowledge you cannot think for yourself. What you really mean is thinking the way you do. Bringing in irrelevancies such as Nazi Germany and Communist Russia renders you not only a dangerous ignoramus but a vile hypocrite as well.

    8. I see this kind of anger in many mainstream medicine people, only believing what their pharmaceutical company funded schools allow them to hear. The minute you begin to think for yourself or use common sense you will be shunned. Scary!

    9. "Dangerous" is attempting to treat cancer with well know carcinogens like chemotherapy (a derivative of mustard gas) and radiation (like Hiroshima or Chernobyl)

    10. Care to back up your assertion that chemotherapy is a derivative of mustard gas?

    11. Actually, musine which was the first form, is a derivative of mustard gas; however, what Jordan Nash failed to point out, probably due to his ignorance, was that the drug was supplanted years ago.
      Have you had a chance to read up on the promising results of Roche's MPDL3280A for which Over the Edge was kind enough to post a link. If you have a problem locating it due to this new "system," you might want to first google "Roche Immune Therapy Cancer Drug Shows Promise in Early Study." I would very much appreciate your feedback.

    12. I will check it out i scanned OtEs link briefly.

      Of course you are correct I just wanted to point out that a general statement like Jordans above could only be true in a very limited sense, and as such should have been noted as such, rather than implying all chemotherapy is derived from mustard gas, or even that such a chemical is used today.

      Besides, I don't particularly care if it is as long as it is shown to have the desired effects.

    13. Awful_Truth posited a similar distortion.
      As I explained to Over the Edge, what ticks me off is these medical ignoramuses attempting to drag good science such as the clinical testing being conducted on Roche's MPDL3280 through the mud of their ignorance. This is no different than creationists and the like taking fine science and well done scientific reports and twisting them beyond recognition to their own ends.
      For some reason, asking for evidence, e.g., peer-reviewed reports, to back up their assertions and accusations never fails to elicit a negative reaction or downright evasion.

    14. P.S.
      I've been meaning to ask you if you ever watch "Coffee with Claire?" If not, I suggest you do. It's on You Tube.

    15. I love Claire! Concordance, Potholer54, AronRA to name a few. :-)

    16. I'll bet you also love Dark Matter.

    17. Mustine has long since been supplanted.
      One way or the other, as you have no medical background, you cannot make a valid judgment on what is dangerous when it comes to treating cancer.

    18. .

    19. When you start dragging the promising research of Roche's MPDL3208 through the mud of your ignorance, you're not only an imbecile for making a judgment on something which you are not qualified to judge, but you are a vile piece of ignorant trash as well and a poor excuse for anything worthwhile.

    20. "Promising" means nothing, it's an adjective placed on drugs in the development stage, just like the thousands before it. Interesting though that drug companies are finally showing interest in the immune system instead of killing cancer cells and everything in its path. Ironically, that's been the premise of natural healing all along.

    21. Ironically, "natural healing" has been unable to accomplish this.

      It's more than "promising." The small sample tested so far has produced positive results. Denigrating this positive step based only on your proud and wilful ignorance places you among the lowest of the low.

    22. Most of your replies contain "where's your evidence" or something similar, yet you provide none yourself other than "quack watch". You pound the conventional medicine drum like an automaton and it pains you to see the truth. Any evidence that could be found, even though you yourself supply none, is supported solely by the pharmaceutical industry whose total interests rely on natural medicine being ignored.

      Funny how, if the patients survive your methods they'll turn to natural medicine for a cure yet you never see a case where cancer patients try natural medicine first then turn to conventional treatment. Similarly funny, how so many medical doctors will eventually turn to natural medicine to, at minimum, enhance their therapies but you'll never see a naturopathic physician turn to radiation and chemo for help.

      Anyone of even moderate intelligence can see what the real motivation behind quack watch is.... the promotion of conventional "medicine" and the suppression of natural healing.

    23. You are the one making claims, so the burden of proof rests with you. As I am not a claimant, I do not have to provide any evidence. So far, your only "evidence" has consisted of a quote from a doctor who is held in ill repute by the mainstream medical profession--and rightly so and unsupported allegations against Quackwatch.

      "Funny how, if the patients survive your methods they'll turn to natural medicine for a cure yet you never see a case where cancer patients try natural medicine first then turn to conventional treatment. Similarly funny, how so many medical doctors will eventually turn to natural medicine to, at minimum, enhance their therapies but you'll never see a naturopathic physician turn to radiation and chemo for help." WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE? WHERE IS YOUR PROOF?
      Once again, if there were anything to "natural healing," it would have become part of mainstream medicine a long time ago.
      Once again, you're commenting on something you know absolutely nothing about and don't care to learn anything about which renders you a wilful ignoramus.

    24. "Funny how, if the patients survive your methods they'll turn to natural medicine for a cure yet you never see a case where cancer patients try natural medicine first then turn to conventional treatment"

      Actually that's not true at all and it's definitely not funny. I have a personal experience where the person was absolutely certain they would beat their leukemia with natural treatments. This person tried just about everything from juicing to alkalizing to H2O2 to MMS, to flying his own private guru in from India. Guess what? Nothing worked. He got sicker and sicker. Finally after almost a year he turned to his oncologists but it was too late.

      And then there is Steve Jobs. With all his monetary resources he had access to any kind of alternative TO medicine i.e natural treatments there are. You know how that story ended. The sad thing is if he'd listened to his doctors and had the tumor removed when first diagnosed he had an excellent chance of surviving. He had pancreatic cancer but it wasn't the deadly kind most get. It was a neuroendocrine tumor that if caught early and removed was very treatable. He decided to juice etc. and after almost a year the tumor had metastisized to his liver.

      So there are two examples of someone who tried the natural approach first.

  25. The War Against Quackery is a carefully orchestrated, heavily endowed campaign sponsored by extremists holding positions of power in the orthodox hierarchy.....The mutimillion-dollar campaign against quackery was never meant to root out incompetent doctors; it was, and is, designed specifically to destroy alternative medicine...The millions were raised and spent because orthodox medicine sees alternative, drugless medicine as a real threat to its economic power. And right they are...the majority of the drug houses will not survive.

    1. Where is your evidence?.
      P.S. "Alternative medicine" is not medicine at all and if what you say is correct, it deserves to be destroyed.

  26. Over_the_Edge and, of course, others:
    I found more information on MPDL3280A, the drug currently being tested by Roche. Two options:
    1. go to gene dot com, select medical professionals, then our pipline, then go down the list to anti-PD-L1 module
    2. go to clinicaltrials dot gov and search for MPDL3280.
    These clearly give the lie to Jordan Nash and others like him and may prove enlightening .
    I would appreciate your comments.

    1. Yes, please do go the website robertallen1 recommends and read the "Boxed Warnings". Is that medicine or military grade chemicals for war?

    2. Which "boxed warnings?" The medicine is not even on the market yet as it is in its initial testing phase. You really are an ignoramus.

    3. Now now, you were very concerned about libellous statements earlier. Go to the website you recommend, click the links you recommend. read if you can. See the two drugs it's being tested in combination with? Boxed Warnings is in bold letters, you can't miss it. Just another chemical drug to add to the thousands before it.

    4. In 1999, Genentech agreed to pay the University of California in San Francisco $200 million to settle a nine-year-old patent dispute. In 1990, UCSF sued Genentech for $400 million in compensation for alleged theft of technology developed at the university and covered by a 1982 patent. Genentech claimed that they developed Protropin, a growth hormone, independently of UCSF. A jury ruled that the university's patent was valid last July, but wasn't able to decide whether Protropin was based upon UCSF research or not. Protropin, a drug used to treat dwarfism, was Genentech's first marketed drug and its $2 billion in sales has contributed greatly to Genentech's position as an industry leader. The settlement was to be divided as follows: $30 million to the University of California General Fund, $85 million to the three inventors and two collaborating scientists, $50 million towards a new teaching and research campus for UCSF, and $35 million to support university-wide research

    5. What does this have to do with anything? I guess you must be getting desperate.

  27. Over_the_Edge and, of course, everyone.
    An article just appeared entitled "Roche Immune Therapy Cancer Drug Shows Promise in Early Study." This seems to give the lie to those who claim that "big pharma" is interested only in treatments, not cures. While the study is admittedly small, it appears to be a step in the right direction.
    Could you post a link to it and, of course, provide your comments.

  28. I totally agree with the idea that the fear of cancer is abused to make money. Bad people with no mercy take advantage of those who are afraid to die. In line with this thought you may assume that the people who make the biggest profits are probably the biggest crooks, no? How ironic that these people are in fact your doctor, your so called specialists, the pharmaceutical industry who cooks your chemo and arranges your operations... Check the facts and then look again. Read for example 'What doctors don't tell you' by Lynn McTaggert - one of the many scientifically proven books that just state the facts.

    1. Sounds like another quack without medical qualifications, just like you.

  29. i don't think imma waste time watching this......i'll just read the comments.....

  30. @robertallen1

    i noticed the response to the deleted post was to a name i haven't used in many years (name withheld) and never used it here. was that displayed on the thread as that? it is worrying that disqus would err and give an old name.

    1. Sure beats me. Shame there is no convenient way to ask the geniuses at Disqus. One way or the other, I appreciate your removal of the post with the clearly libellous comment. This is now the third time he has falsely accused me of being a shill for the mainstream medical industry. I note that he has not responded to your post from a day ago asking for the same thing I've been demanding, evidence. The only conclusion that can be drawn is that like the other ignoramuses who have posted on this thread, he is trying to substitute tirade and accusation for lack of anything to back up his allegations against the mainstream medical profession.

  31. Pescado

    okay lets look at alternative medicine shall we.? please give me your best one example of either a doctor/clinic or specific treatment that best represents your case. please do not bury me under a flood of accusations about the medical profession. i will need something that has been replicated under controlled conditions and subjected to double blind trials. personal testimonials or claims from the supporters without sufficient documentation subjected to the scientific method and basic guidelines of trials will be dismissed as unreliable, what do you say?

  32. Dear lady

    I assume you profession is journalism.
    Journalists should bring in information without judging. This despite the fact journalist have the right to have an own opinion.

    This whats wrong here.
    You stated yourself that you don't have a scientific background.
    How can you judge?

    Believing the statements of the classical medicine which is backed up by the most criminal infiltrated organization called FDA is your right because every one has the right to be a believer but...

    I enjoy the presence of people who think and believe but I prefer people who know and I disgust people who think they know.

    My advise to you start studying human bio-chemistry on cellular level and when you are intelligent enough and understand things on cellular level to do the next step going to interactions on genetic level than you can do this whole thing over.

    I look forward to hear from you in a few years.

    Prof. Guy Van Elsacker Dr.Sc.
    Retired research fellow

    Disclaimer: I do not have any commercial* interest that influences my opinion.

    * commercial = probably one of the worst evils of this times replacing the religious nonsense. - This is the only point where I agree with you

    1. Assertion is worthless. Now, where is your proof that the FDA is a criminally-infiltrated organization--and by the way, if you support Burzynski who has been discredited by his peers (i.e., the classical medicine which you so despise but which is the only type the counts), you are no more than a quack yourself.

  33. This is one of the most baseless, unsupported, documentaries I have ever seen. The narrator ruthlessly and unintelligently distorts everything that is said to her to make her point. This is the type of journalism that suits Al Jazira.

  34. Where is your data to support the term "quack"? If you do not understand that that is a fraudulent unsupported claim then your comprehension is very lacking.

    "Medicine has made considerable progress over 6000 years" your type of medicine that you refer to has not been around for 6000 years. This is your fraudulent statement. Your type of Medicine cant even cure the common cold, no advances here. Now herbology HAS been around for 6000 years and can rid one of the common cold. Thus if Neanderthals were smart enough to figure this out, then its apparent that they were far more intelligent than many so called modern homo sapiens. Thus Im happy to follow over 6000 years of knowledge with complete confidence. On the other hand, modern medicine has a very questionable track record of mostly around 100 years or less. Even with the most basic of illnesses like the common cold.

    There are thousands of falsified studies that can be easily found by actually studying. I know you will never do this as this is your pat answer. The drug Prozac is one of hundreds of drugs as an example. Once again only asking questions but adding nothing of substance but baseless skepticism.

    Did someone just fart? Cause it really stinks of manure around here. As usual no real factual data of conclusive evidence at all to support any statements or claims. Just some uneducated opinion masquerading as some sort of expert witness about a field that one has never even studied. Its a good idea not to call anyone a "quack" in any field when its obvious one has no rudimentary knowledge about. At least someone with rudimentary knowledge could give some substantiating argumentative evidence as to their OPINION on the subject...Now its very ironic that someone without rudimentary knowledge in the field they are questioning calls someone who has ACTUALLY studied in that field a "quack" . Now I wonder who the real QUACK is?

    KIDS... JUST SAY TO NO TO DRUGS, THEIR DRUG PUSHERS, SUPPORTERS AND THEIR BANKER BUDDIES..CRACK/PROZAC KILLS...THOSE CUTE SHAPED AND PRETTY COLORED PILLS ARE NOT CANDY! DONT BE FOOLED BY LIES TOLD OVER A LONG TIME....

    1. Once again, which claims of mine are fraudulent and unsupported?

      As for you:

      Claiming that there is a cure for the "common cold" is fraudulent, as there is no such malady, but rather a whole family of them, and thus no one treatment.

      Claiming that there is a cure for cancer is fraudulent, for like the "common cold" there are many forms and one treatment does not fit all, i.e., leukemia is not treated in the same way as breast cancer.

      Claiming that there are falsified studies, especially regarding Prozac, without listing any or providing sources is fraudulent.

      Claiming that the mainstream medical profession and especially the big pharmaceutical companies are in on a vast conspiracy without providing evidence is fraudulent.

      "My type of medicine?" Real (i.e., mainstream) medicine is real medicine and claiming that there is any other type is fraudulent.

      Claiming that you know more than mainstream medical practitioners is fraudulent, this highlighted by your suggested "treatment" for cataracts two months ago which involved placing a dangerous mixture containing cayenne pepper in the eye--as a matter of fact, it was so dangerous that a moderator had to step in and pull the post containing it, lest some misguided mo*on take it seriously.

      If I knew where you were and discovered that you were practicing medicine (by you're own admission, you are not an M.D.), i.e., were providing treatments, I would report you immediately to the proper authorities for criminal prosecution.

    2. All your claims are fraudulent as you reject all evidence presented without providing any evidence.

      There are entire books written on Prozac and if you are too lazy to look them up then that's your own fault. I have read a few, since you don't even know they exist you know nothing about this topic. This is evidence once again that this is your uneducated OPINION.

      There are cures for cancers as I have personally witnessed them despite your uneducated claims.

      Since you have never tried eyebright and cayenne in a tincture and state that its dangerous without any double blind conclusive evidence your uneducated opinionated statement is more than obviously an outright lie. I have washed my eyes many times without anything but beneficial results and many people I know have done the same.

      Fortunately, I don't treat anyone I just teach and freedom of speech is in the constitution. Thus any of your threats are only a joke.

      I know you and your drug pushing Mexican cartel buddies are angry that I tell kids "JUST SAY NO TO DRUGS". I know you would tear up the constitution in favor of giving little children Ritalin pushed on them by the drug pimping teachers and nurses. I know you love pimp and hoe party's and support your local drug dealing chapter. I know that you think pimping drugs is advanced medicine. Though no matter how many times you tell lies I know they are not true. Hitler is wrong this time.

    3. You haven't presented any evidence, only assertions, allegations and anecdotes which, in addition to your lack of medical training, renders everything you posit sheer quackery, including your "cure" for cataracts which, as one of the moderators informed you, is dangerous and constitutes practicing medicine without a license

      The following paragraph is so indicative of the level of your intelligence that I feel I must quote it for everyone to read: "I know you and your drug pushing Mexican cartel buddies are angry that I tell kids 'JUST SAY NO TO DRUGS'. I know you would tear up the constitution in favor of giving little children Ritalin pushed on them by the drug pimping teachers and nurses. I know you love pimp and hoe party's and support your local drug dealing chapter. I know that you think pimping drugs is advanced medicine. Though no matter how many times you tell lies I know they are not true. Hitler is wrong this time." Again, allegations and assertions without an iota of proof or evidence.

      Although you claim not to treat anyone, I repeat the warning contained in my previous post to you, "If I knew where you were and discovered that you were practicing medicine (by you're own admission, you are not an M.D.), i.e., were providing treatments, I would report you immediately to the proper authorities for criminal prosecution."

      Act accordingly.

    4. No cure for cancer? Really? I must be living a fraudulent lie then because my cancer has been successfully treated naturally without chemo or radiation. As a matter of fact, I sat with quite a number of people in worse condition than me who were doing the same thing. I recently met an elderly fellow whose wife who was placed into palliative care, after failed attempts to treat her with chemo and radiation, was given medical marijuana oil and walked out of the palliative care facility weeks later.

      There are numerous ways to cure cancer naturally, it's been done for thousands of years, long before western medicine intervened. It has been extremely damaging on society to be telling people there is no cure, giving people a death sentence when it is not true.

      "Anyone who rejects evidence simply on the grounds that it is anecdotal would stand on the end of a jetty with a lifebelt in his hand and watch a man drown, not throwing the lifebelt because there was no scientific evidence that it would save the man's life." a quote by Dr Denis Burkitt, a surgeon who first described the rare form of cancer known as 'Burkitt's lymphoma, speaking at the Pritikin Center's annual conference in Santa Barbara, California

    5. I don't believe either your personal anecdote or your anecdotes about others, for were they true, they would have made headlines worldwide, despite your unsubstantiated claims about suppression by the medical industry. And speaking of medicine, what are your credentials?

      Where are the peer-reviewed articles supporting your claim that there are numerous ways to cure cancer naturally? Again, what are your credentials?
      So far you've revealed yourself to be a dangerous fraud.

      P.S. Quotes from authority are just as invalid as anecdotal evidence.

  35. Your right; drug dealers masquerading as quack doctors are everywhere. Just say NO to drugs, and the drug cartels ! Including their money laundering banks Wells Fargo and HSBC! Besides at a ratio of 10000-1 or more deaths per patient I like my chances with herbs that have been around for over 6000 yrs not some quack medicine for about 60 years or so.

    1. When you make allegations or proffer statistics, you must support them; otherwise, they are as fradulent as you are.

      Whether you wish to acknowledge it or not, medicine has made considerable progress within the last 6,000 years. So taking your chances with solely with herbal treatment employed by people around 4,000 B.C. is the mark of a troglodyte, an i*iot and a wilful ignoramus. I hope you don't have children.

    2. Your usual pat answer. You make fraudulent claims that are completely unsupported. I have asked you many times to support the term "quack" by those beloved double blind peer reviewed conclusive evidence but all you offer is your uneducated opinion. Thus the fraudulent claims that you continually throw out are just that completely fraudulent.

      Your history that you learned in grade school is sadly lacking modern medicine has not been around for 6000 years. Though herbalism has been around for 6000yrs. I love those lies keep them coming.....

      Im quite happy with empirical evidence gathered over 6000 yrs+ compared to some falsified double blind studies bankrolled by corrupt drug companies and sold by their drug pushing stooges.

    3. Which fraudulent claims are you referring to?

      Where did I say that modern medicine has been around for 6,000 years?

      Which corrupt drug companies are you referring to and where is the data to support your allegations?

      Which falsified double-blind studies bankrolled by corrupt drug dompanies are you referring to?

      Just a lot of hot air--and once again, you and those like you are not only wilfully ignorant, but dangerous. I fear for your children, if you have any.

  36. You can't be close-minded about this issue. Alternative therapies that work are out there. Not every doctor will tell you there is no alternative cure, only the ones who have been trained to think that way. This documentary fails to explain the exorbitant cost of conventional cancer treatment in the U.S. (Last I checked it's $10,000 PER PILL!!!)... for treatment that makes you SICK and DOESN'T WORK!!! Talk about insult to injury! Don't you get it? Chemotherapy DOESN'T WORK. Al Jazeera is happy to keep us misinformed. Why don't you move to Europe and talk to the doctors there, maybe some of the patients who have been cured via alternative methods. This blind faith we have in these pill-pushers we call "doctors" in the U.S. is the most dangerous thing of all.

    1. Just which "alternate cures" work better than mainstream medicine? And just how do you know that chemotherapy doesn't work? Why do you assert and accuse without any evidence or backup? And while we're at it, what are your medical qualifications?

      But you're right. When it comes to quackery, I'm closed-minded and proud of it.

    2. Right, because the inordinate number of cancer cases that have gone into remission are attributable to random magic instead of the carefully honed chemotherapy regimens they just happened to have had.

      Stroll through the halls of St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, and then try to claim that chemotherapy doesn't work. At least 'conventional' (ie: REAL) medicine doesn't have the gall to claim infallibility, unlike the alternative therapy hucksters. Conventional medicine is even nice enough to provide stacks upon stacks of peer reviewed research supporting their treatments. Again, this is something alternative practitioners are tellingly reticent to do the same.

    3. I appreciate that you sound intelligent, but it reminds me that even intelligent people can be incredibly uniformed and biased! I encourage you to do a lot more research when you speak of alternative therapies.
      Yes, of course chemotherapy works, it is an incredibly strong and toxic medicine designed to target rapidly growing cells, ie cancer cells. Perhaps this aggression is what is necessary for such an aggressive illness, however there is no doubt that this therapy also attacks immune cells as they too reproduce very quickly. Cancer occurs because our immune system is unable to rid the body of abnormal cells which we produce everyday. This is where alternative medicine is extremely helpful.
      Integrating the two medicines will help the body get back into a natural harmony and re-build itself. And yes, there most certainly are peer reviewed articles supporting the use of alternative therapies such as herbal medicine and acupuncture. Look up Astragalus membranaceous and maintaining white blood cell levels while doing chemotherapy. Herbal medicine is not just a couple of drops of echinacea in your orange juice, naturopaths and professionally trained herbalists are probably a lot more informed on the human body than your GP. Of course there are far less peer reviewed articles for herbal medicine and acupuncture, no one can patent a plant or an ancient set of energy meridians in the body, and these practices prescribe treatments entirely on an individual basis so proper clinical trials are virutally impossible (think of trying to do a double blind with acupuncture...)
      Opening our minds to both/and and not either/or will save millions. Whether you choose to be in on it or not, its going to happen!

    4. There is no such thing as alternative medicine--ONLY MEDICINE--AND ONLY MAINSTREAM MEDICINE. And just where are these peer-reviewed articles supporting the use of alternative therapies for the curing of cancer, especially by herbs? Let's see direct references from mainstream medical journals.

      I have too much respect for my intelligence to open my mind to the quackery which you are promoting. People like you with neither medical training nor experience are dangerous.

  37. "And for your information, there's only one type of medicine and that's mainstream.. Anything else is quackery."

    There is lots of information that I take time to study, think through and make conclusions of my own, thank you very much. And it does not end on medical education - alone it is absolutely meaningless considering the level of progress that we reached.

    The statement above puts you in a position of a very ignorant and narrow minded person, I don't like to say this, but you just said it yourself: if your child, God forbid, would end up in a situation where a doctor send him home to die because there is no MAINSTREAM cure for him, you would let him die, since there is nothing else in the world that would help, according to you, no other treatments, no more bright minds that are working on a greater solution. It seams you are going against your own words. And there is no reason to involve religion, it is a completely different world that deserves a separate discussion.
    Just for the record - as I mentioned before, I do not reject any medical treatments provided, because the only way you could reject something is by trying it out yourself and proving it worthless, a scientific conclusion is not enough as long as we don't know and trust the people involved.
    I feel that any discussion with you will end up right where it started, as I read you previous attempt to prove something to a person who was giving you rather smart arguments (that you could at least take to mind, before insulting him). If your goal is to deny everyone who DARES to question something that you don't believe in for one reason or another, good luck with that.
    Just remember the saying:
    “The greatest ignorance is to REJECT something you know nothing about”
    -Anonymous-

    1. Unless you have medical training ,which I seriously doubt, you do not have the qualifications to make medical judgments.

      If a mainstream medical doctor (the only type of medical doctor there is), someone with years of training, education (and yes education is paramount), experience and peer respect, tells me that there is presently no cure, then there is presently no cure and that's it. So it's not a matter of letting my hypothetical offspring die; there is simply nothing else that can at present be done. The offspring will die anyway, so there is no reason to seek the false hope which quackery offers.

      "The only way you could reject something is by trying it out yourself and proving it worthless, a scientific conclusion is not enough as long as we don't know and trust the people involved." A manifesto of ignorance if every there was one.

      Those with philosophies such as yours are fodder for quacks and by promoting the ignorance of quackery over evidence-based medicine are despicable and dangerous.

      And once again, spare us the maxims.

    2. If a tragedy hits someone's family it does not improve his epistemology - more often than not it does the opposite. So the mantra of "I study and make my own conclusions/ I think with my own head" doesn't have anything to do with the quality of the conclusions, it is just proclaiming a right. One needs to have mastered some instruments of reasoning before bulking up on affirmations because there is too much info out there and you gamble without a systematic way of discerning it. Actually it's worse than gambling, due to cognitive biases we'll favor, how should I put it, the kitsch.

    3. I hope I'm never in that situation, and greatly empathize with those who are or have been. The horrible nature of that situation doesn't change reality: there has yet to be an alternative therapy that has been shown to be effective at fighting cancer.

    4. If I found myself in that situation I can say with certainty I would not turn to alternative TO medicine. I would perhaps seek out an experimental treatment at a respected major medical institution. If the treatment failed I would at least know I had contributed to the advancement of cancer treatment in some way.

  38. There is a good saying "Never argue with fools, they will take you down to their level and beat you with experience". You can only feel sorry for people who see only negativity in life and every other opinion except their own is considered wrong by them. (As I had the luck to meet a lot of those). I am not in this discussion to support or reject any opinion so there is no reason to attack me. Sorry also if in some way I offended you with my previous comment. But I will most definitively not going to join this pointless argument, there for have to ignore your meaningless questions. My point was only that everyone has a right to make their own mind about anything that they want to do with their lives and health and there is no reason to go around fighting over this, spreading confusion, there is enough of that as it is. Although, I would really liked to understand the reasons for such an aggressive response from you... if it would be possible to have a decent civilised discussion with you that is.

    1. So a parent has the right to deny his offspring needed medical attention if his religion militates against it.

      And for your information, there's only one type of medicine and that's mainstream.. Anything else is quackery.

      So we can do without your sermonizing.

  39. People, would you just stop for a second and listen to yourselves... What are you fighting about? You are all right in your own way. But it's not like you even have a reason to reject or support any of the given treatments, no matter who promotes them. It is only for the sick person to decide what to believe and as long as there are many choices, at least there is hope for those who need it. Most of the natural remedies will have side effect one way or another, each and every chemical that is anyway foreign to our body will cause damage no matter if it can combat cancer cells (we can not be sure which of them have more reasons to be banned). The best thing about alternative medicine is that it gives a chance to survive when your all knowing DOCTOR tells you to go home and enjoy your last three months because there is nothing he can do to cure you... In such cases all you can do is to turn to alternative and hope at least for a placebo effect if not a real treatment. Now think about that before starting a fight that won't bring any results. It is absolutely ignorant to believe that mainstream healthcare has all the answers and working only for the benefit of people. But it is also insane to state that chemical drugs would have better healing effect on you than nature would. Thank you, to those who don't give up and try to brake through with any kind of cure that they sincerely believe could help someone in need... As there are many of us (sick or about to loose someone close) looking for that help anywhere we can.

    1. How dare you place the quackery of "alternative therapy" on the same level as mainstream medicine. Let's see you provide one instance of a cancer case cured by "alternative medicine," bearing in mind that anecdotal evidence is not acceptable and that the evidence must include peer-reviewed studies and clinical trials. Also, in light of your contrast between chemicals and so-called "natural cures," what are your medical qualifications?

      Mainstream medicine does not have all the answers, but "alternative medicine" has none.

    2. "But it is also insane to state that chemical drugs would have better healing effect on you than nature would."
      Nature isn't "made" to be caressed or eaten; if anything, it's there to poison you, to murder you. It competes with you.

      Unless, of course, you'll say that evolution isn't real...

  40. Just because some people con desperate cancer victims into a false cure for financial gain, it does not prove or even suggest that a natural cure cannot exist within the plant kingdom. For example curcumin (found in tumeric) and indol-3-carbinol (found in cruciferous vegetables such as broccoli, cabbage and brussel sprouts) are accepted by the medical establishment as being able to cause apoptosis (organised cell death) to certain types of cancerous cells without causing death to healthy cells. The problem with cancer is that it can arise by literally thousands of different mechanisms. Put simply, a particular genetic mutation alters a particular biochemical pathway, of which there are thousands, in a particular way. The end result may ultimately cause cancer by, for example, switching on or accelerating cell division permanently, or by switching off the ability of the body to recognise and destroy the abnormal cell. This is why some treatments work for some cancers, and not for others. It depends if the biochemical pathway targeted by the treatment (e.g. tumeric) is the same one causing the cancer.
    However, if enough of these cancer specific compounds can be found in plants and administered all together in their raw state (i.e. not synthesised or extracted/chemically altered), the result would eventually be a mixture targeting so many biochemical pathways specific only to cancer (most natural compounds that do this actually target multiple pathways),a large proportion of cancer types (say 90%) could be treated with one product.

    Various herbal cures have been claimed for a long time now, most notably by Hoxley and also a woman named Caise (herbal cure was named "Esiac"), and also another named "Black Salve". All of these were a mixture of many many different types of herbs, AND THEY REALLY WORKED, do the research. The problem is that if these treatments are released, Big Brother/Pharma will lose billions or even trillions as people stop buying their treatments.
    The reason there is no peer reviewed literature confirming Hoxley and others' cures is because no-one will provide the funding for something that is not profitable (natural plants cannot be patented), and because anyone who has ever figured it out has been discredited by Big Brother and labelled as quackery.
    Viva la Resistance!

    1. Check out gerson's theory.

    2. Once again, you don't know what you're talking about which renders you an omnipresent danger.

    3. You seem to call many people "dangerous" for questioning the mainstream. We are only "dangerous" to big pharma, not to anyone else, especially not to cancer victims with nothing else to lose. The Hoxey treatment is not "dangerous" to anyone's health. Only those with financial interests in this matter are likely to find it "dangerous".

    4. J_F_K
      do you have any peer reviewed studies? if not you are an anonymous poster on the internet making baseless and dangerous claims.

    5. I thought it took an M.D. rather than a Ph.D. to obtain mainstream qualification in cancer research. One way or the other, anyone who supports Hoxsey Therapy and consistently misspells the name of its founder cannot possibly be a bona fide cancer researcher.

      Have you read "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre?

    6. robertallen1
      "I thought it took an M.D. rather than a PhD. to obtain mainstream qualification in cancer research." i am not sure about the qualifications in the U.S. here in Canada depending on the type of research there are many degrees (mine included neither Ph.d or M.D). in the UK they actually offer PhD prograammes in cancer research. i am unsure of prerequisites. i also have a good friend who has her PhD in microbiology and immunology who is doing cancer research

      "Have you read "Bad Science" by Ben Goldacre?" no i have not. i will have to put that one on the back burner til at least the new year.

    7. Perhaps things are different here. What nationality is your friend?

    8. robertallen1
      she is Canadian.

      "Why don't you ask your friend what she thinks of Hoxsey and Gerson Therapies?" her and i have had similar discussions and i can with almost certainty say that her views are the same as mine. " if you can't show it you don't know it" (Aronra). she puts little weight into something that has no data and testing to back it up. i have tried to get her to post here but she thinks we are too argumentative lol. i will mention it to her again when we speak next,

    9. Will you share her answer with us?

    10. robertallen1
      most certainly

    11. P.S.

      Why don't you ask your friend what she thinks of Hoxsey and Gerson Therapies?

    12. If Hoxsey (please note spelling) treatment is not dangerous to anyone's health, why has it been banned in the United States since 1960? And until you can provide evidence, not conjecture, don't give me the crap about "big pharma." Other herbal treatments (however ineffective) are not banned in the United States.

      And yes, you and those like you are dangerous and fraudulent.

      Now, let's see the results of your clinical testing.

    13. From Wikipedia:

      "The American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute do not advise the use of the Hoxsey Therapy, as neither has found any objective evidence that the treatment provides tangible benefit to people with cancer. Reviews by the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center and M. D. Anderson Cancer Center found no evidence that the Hoxsey Therapy is effective as a treatment for cancer. A controlled experiment in lab mice did not find any difference in tumor growth between untreated mice and those given the Hoxsey tonic. An FDA review of 400 people claiming to have been cured by the Hoxsey method found that many of the patients never in fact had cancer, or had received successful medical treatment elsewhere before being treated with the Hoxsey Therapy. Those who had cancer at the time of the Hoxsey Therapy were uniformly either deceased or alive with active cancer. There were no cases of actual cures among those promoted as such by the Hoxsey clinic." Do you want any more?

      And spare us the groaning over lack of funding for clinical testing of these forms of "alternative medicine" and the moaning over the machinations of "big brother pharma," to keep these "treatments" off the market in the name of profit. Did it ever occur to you that those knowledgeable in medicine (and by that I mean mainstream medicine, the only type the counts) understand these "treatments" for what they are, sheer quackery not worth the money to spend on clinical tests? Did it ever occur to you that if these "treatments" worked, "big pharma" would have more to gain by putting them on the market than by attempting to keep them off?

      In light of the myriad assertions you have made, what are your medical qualifications supporting them? Where is your scientific evidence that these herbal treatments you've described worked? You certainly can't expect anyone with any intelligence to take the word of a dangerous liar such as you.

    14. @robertallen1

      I have a PhD in cancer research actually mate, and worked for many years developing synthetic inhibitors for mutant proteins found in various cancers, however i left the profession after i stumbled across treatments similar to the Hoxey treatment which i personally witnessed as effective in many, but not all cases, for the reasons stated in my post, which you clearly did not read or understand. These treatments were constantly blocked by big pharma. If you did read my post and have the intellect to understand it you would know that big pharma cannot make money on natural remedies as they cannot be patented, and would lose trillions on synthetic inhibitors that no-one would be buying anymore (e.g. Herceptin costs around £40000 per person per year and treats only Her2 defective breast cancer). Calling me a "dangerous liar" illustrates your unwillingness to accept possibilities other than those written on wikipedia, which is not peer reviewed and can be submitted by anyone. It is you, therefore, who lacks the knowledge of medicine required to make a valid summation of these matters. In fact i wouldn't be surprised to discover that you are accepting payment for this disinformation aimed at keeping the public controlled by the ruling elite. As you learn more, all you realise you know for sure is that you know virtually nothing.

    15. Wikipedia is simply an encapsulation, complete with references, of peer-reviewed mainstream science which beats anything you have to offer. And if you don't like it, you can go to Quackwatch.

      Hoxsey treatment has been banned in the United States since 1960--and for good reason--it has been determined by mainsteam medicine (the only type of medicine that counts) to be dangerous and ineffective. Your support of this quackery which seems to consist of your personal observations, as opposed to clinical data, causes me wonder if you are what you claim to be and whether you left the profession, under a cloud or were kicked out of it--and no, I do this for free--and gladly so to rid the world of dangerous liars such as you.

    16. You are the con artists who continue to call new treatments quakery, the treatment is harmless and does not cause any cell destruction and deserves at least investigating before any claims are made that they are quakery. You people kill any natural remedies before you have even tried them are biiased in favour of the very destructive present system which has been known to kill people. this is very narrow minded and you continue to thwart any new thinking on cancer treatment, because it is geared to making profits not saving people. As this treatment is harmless it deserves more publicity and investigation if it dosnt work no damage has been done and the patient benefits from better eating practices. Presumably you people continue to endorse all the very food additives such as aspartame etc which actually contribute to the causes of cancer, instead of looking at natural foods. You are evil, NO remedies for this terrible disease should be ignored, critisised Demonised or Discredited, especially the ones which have no nasty side effects, like the mainstream treatments at present do have. GET A LIFE Stop demonising natural remedies. What are you afraid of ? You may loose revenue and your evil blood money!! Leave natural remedies alone!!!!!!!

      Subject: [topdocumentaryfilms] Re: The Cancer Sell

    17. "Most of the herbs in the tonic [Hoxsey's] have been tested for antitumor activity in cancer, with negligible results for a few and no results for the others. SOME OF THESE HERBS, MOST NOTABLY POKEROOT, HAVE TOXIC SIDE EFFECTS. The NCI evaluated case reports submitted by Hoxsey and concluded that no assessment was possible because the records did not contain adequate information." [emphasis added] Gelband H and others. "Hoxsey Treatment. In Gelband H and others. Unconventional Cancer Treatments." Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1990, pp 80-81.

      Once again, the jury is already in on Hoxsey treatment which has been banned in the United States since 1960.

      From your statements, I wish I could find out the real reason that you are no longer in the medical profession--as a matter of fact, I wonder if you were ever in it in the first place. After all that's been said and done, chacterizing Hoxsey treatment as harmless puts you on the same nefarious level as those who practice it and other such similar frauds.

      Once again, I do this for free to expose evil liars such as yourself, but now that you've brought up the issue venality at least twice so far, I really wonder about you.

      .

    18. People not familiar to scientific method are not evil liars. They may misinform, but not out of 'pure evil'. Public information is a long process and if you attack the people who do not have the tools to discern the anecdotes from facts, you'll only create what is called 'reactance' ("occurs when someone is heavily pressured to accept a certain view or attitude. Reactance can cause the person to adopt or strengthen a view or attitude that is contrary to what was intended, and also increases resistance to persuasion").

    19. If they are not familiar with the scientific method, then they shouldn't be making statements unless and until they are; they should be asking questions. So as far as I'm concerned, they are evil liars.

    20. Interesting fact ; vincristine/bencristine are toxic and can kill you!
      Ever watch people die from the treatment? Very shocking teeth fall out, hair falls out, secondary infections kill the patient from the immunosuppressive drugs its beautiful.

    21. So what? If you're allergic to it, penicillin can kill you too, but that does not mean that it's not in general effective. So don't try that crap.

    22. rather hypocritical statement; face the fact drugs kill.

    23. Face the facts, quacks kill too.

    24. So they really worked but there's no peer review literature to confirm it? Then we're in the land of anecdotes.
      Many 'natural' remedies were actually tested and, lo and behold, none worked for serious illnesses like cancer (more, you know, than doing nothing).
      You're reversing cause and effect in reasoning about big pharma conspiracy. Of course pharmaceutical companies would love to sell you flowers, but they won't get approval to call them medicine.There is control over what they do. They have to submit to draconian Cochrane review research methodology which is hugely expensive.

  41. very one sided ,the reporters mind was made up before they even started,and when they did they went straight to the quacks they should of looked at at the people who are being attacked she would of found real results but it would of never seen the light of day, if you want to know about proven cures for cancer look up hoxsey clinic!

    1. The National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, Anderson Cancer Center and Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, all respected mainstream medical institutions, have found no evidence of Hoxsey Therapy being an effective treatment for cancer. The sale and marketing of the Hoxsey Method were banned in the United States by the FDA on September 21, 1960 as a worthless and discredited remedy and a form of quackery. In case you didn't know it, in 1967, Hoxsey himself developed prostate cancer and his own treatment failed to cure it. As a result, he underwent mainstream therapy and treatment, dying seven years later.

      And this is what you call a proven cure for cancer. You should be ashamed of yourself for promoting this fraud.

  42. Robert not only do you sound like you really dont have any clue what your talking about. But I'm not to sure you dont work for the FDA or NCI. You wrote;
    In 1998, three oncologists enlisted by The Cancer Letter to conduct independent reviews of Burzynski's clinical trial research on antineoplastons concluded that the studies were poorly designed, not interpretable and "so flawed that it cannot be determined whether it really works". One of them characterized the research as "scientific nonsense".
    which later surfaced to the faults of NCI for not following proper protocol and diluting the medicine so that it would fail in the trials. now for your scientific non sense guy wouldn't have been the doctor who first said we should look into Burzynski's medicine, who later left NCI to go to work for the FDA to approve copycat patents of Burzynski's medicine. PEOPLE OF AMERICA NEED TO KNOW THAT CANCER IS THE #1 WAY THE GOVERNMENT CONTROLS POPULATION IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. WE ARE CONTROLLED IN EVERY ASPECT OF OUR LIVES. So no you will never hear of these alternative options because then to many people would live longer lives. UNLESS WE THE PEOPLE TAKE BACK OUR COUNTRY ALONG WITH OUR RIGHTS AND OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS. UNTIL THEN WE CAN DO NOTHING.

    1. Assertions, accusations and allegations are not proof. It's obvious that you have no evidence for your conspiracy theory and for your defense of quackery. Hence, what you write is worthless.

    2. P.S. Before posting further, I suggest you read the comment policy pertaining to the abuse of all caps.

  43. This is disappointing. She didn't explore the Japanese medical establishment's measured success rates with the Gherson Therapy, nor did she explore the very real context that many cancers are caused or exaserbated by nutritional deficiencies. She should have read the Journal of Orthomolecular Medecine if she wanted to do "investigative" journalism, rather than a quack assassination piece. This woman has done many people a great disservice by labelling all alternative approaches under one umbrella. This is a disgusting piece.

  44. Unfortunatly this video doesnt include VERY credible alternative therapies with honest and intelligent representatives. It just makes the blanket statement that"all alternative therapies are quackery". yet it fails to mention that the majority people "cured" of cancer by conventional medicine...are dead within 5 yrs. This conventional medicine stranglehold on us re Cancer is very self serving...financially. As I write this ..I see above me(by sheer coincidence) 4 suggested Documentaries to watch. One is called "Hoxsey: How Healing Becomes a Crime". Howard Hoxsey ,a wealthy oil biz success ,was curing people of cancer with a natural concoction his father created. He was stopped by the courts. See his story and 5 others who had cures and were stopped, on YouTube... "Cancer: The Forbidden Cures". Or See "Burzynski-The Movie" re Dr Burzyski of Housten fighting the FDA for 30 yrs to allow his patented "Antineoplastons" to be marketed. He has full documentation of all he has cured. He has even cured an inoperable type of cancer young children get. Why doesnt the FDA and the AMA embrace him? Because a simple cure wil;l put a lot of cancer Ind people out of business. This documentarian Sarah Macdonald did an excellent job of being one sided...but not an excellent job on her research. There is a "Gersin Hospital" in Budapest that has been curing 10's of thousands of people of Cancer for 75 years using only the diet of Dr Max Gersin. Charlotte Gersin has a Gersin Hospital in Mexico too...why was she not included here and allowed to show her documented cases as she does in "Dying to Have Known". True Journalism is not one sided.

    1. Credible alternative therapies with honest and intelligent representatives, eh? Well, let’s examine the three treatments you so heartily recommend.

      Hoxsey Treatment
      In 1957, the Hoxey clinic in Mexico was visited by a group of doctors from the University of British Columbia who reported on the medical records for 71 of the clinic’s Canadian patients as follows: “For over one-half of the [cancer] patients from British Columbia, the result [of treatment by the Hoxey method] has been either death or progression of the disease. In nearly one-quarter there was no proof that the patient ever had cancer. Nearly one in ten patients had curative treatment before going to the Hoxey Clinic. In only one case, an external cancer, was there any evidence at all that the Hoxsey Treatment had an effect on the disease; in that case, better results could have been obtained by orthodox means.” The acme of credibility.

      Burzyski Clinic
      In 1998, three oncologists enlisted by The Cancer Letter to conduct independent reviews of Burzynski's clinical trial research on antineoplastons concluded that the studies were poorly designed, not interpretable and "so flawed that it cannot be determined whether it really works". One of them characterized the research as "scientific nonsense". In addition to questioning Burzynski's research methods, the oncologists found significant and possibly life-threatening toxicity in some patients treated with antineoplastons. The National Cancer Institute observed that researchers other than Burzynski and his associates have not been successful in duplicating his results. Burzynski’s use and advertising of antineoplastons as an unapproved cancer therapy were deemed to be unlawful by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Texas Attorney General. In 2009, the FDA issued a warning letter to the Burzynski Research Institute, stating that an investigation had determined the Burzynski Institutional Review Board "did not adhere to the applicable statutory requirements and FDA regulations governing the protection of human subjects." In particular, the board had approved research without ensuring risk to patients was minimized, had failed to prepare required written procedures or retain required documentation and had failed to conduct required continuing reviews for studies, among others. In 1994, Burzynski was found guilty of insurance fraud for filing a claim for reimbursement by a health insurer for an illegally administered cancer treatment. In 2010, the Texas State Board of Medical Examiners filed a multi-count complaint against Burzynski for failure to meet state medical standards. Talk about honest and reliable representatives backed by a supporting documentary which plays like a wind-up used car salesman.

      Gerson Therapy
      Gerson therapy has not been independently tested or subjected to randomized controlled trials and is thus illegal to market in the United States. Gerson published a book discussing the alleged success of the therapy in 50 patients, but a review by the U.S. National Cancer Institute uncovered no evidence substantiating the accuracy of Gerson's claims. Several case series by Gerson Institute staff published in non-peer-reviewed alternative medical literature suffered from significant methodological flaws and no independent entity has been able to reproduce the claims. In the early 1980’s, 13 patients sickened by Gerson Therapy were evaluated in hospitals in San Diego and all 13 were found to still have active cancer. An investigation by Quackwatch found that the institute's claims of cure were based not on actual documentation of survival, but on "a combination of the doctor's estimate that the departing patient has a 'reasonable chance of surviving', plus feelings that the Institute staff have about the status of people who call in." The American Cancer Society reported that "[t]here is no reliable scientific evidence that Gerson therapy is effective in treating cancer, and the principles behind it are not widely accepted by the medical community. It is not approved for use in the United States." According to sources cited in the wikipedia article on Gerson Therapy, serious illness such as electrolyte imbalances and death have occurred as a direct result of it. Continued use of enemas may weaken the colon's normal function, causing or worsening constipation and colitis. Other complications have included dehydration, serious infections and severe bleeding. Coffee enemas which can cause colitis (inflammation of the bowel), fluid and electrolyte imbalances, and in some cases septicemia have contributed to the deaths of at least three people in the United States. The recommended diet may not be nutritionally adequate and has been blamed for the deaths of patients who substituted it for standard medical care. The very paradigm of safe and salubrious treatment.

      So the majority of people “cured” of cancer by conventional medicine are dead within five years. And just what is the source of this astounding asseveration? And while you’re at it, what are the concomitant figures for those “cured” by the quacks you espouse who are above the base cupidity of the medical profession?

      The documentary is right; all alternative therapies are quackery and you should be ashamed of yourself for promoting any of them. The real tragedy is that there are all too many who are likely to find you credible to their detriment which makes you not only ignorant (from your statements, you know nothing about cancer) but dangerous and despicable.

    2. Hi robertallen 1. Seeing that you are the expert on this and every other subject so it seems, why don't you post some of your statistics for conventional treatments. Then us 'quacks' may change our views and believe that maintstream medicine is FAR better for us. NOT. HA HA. But really I'd like you to passionately give us all some statistics of the poisons that you support. That is all.

    3. Is this the best you can do? It's not even responsive to my post.

    4. No Robert it's not the best I can do. Yes Robert this is responsive to your dangerously opinionated post. Please Robert - divulge some of your precious stats regarding mainstream cancer "therapies" (laughable) - Robert, why can't you highlight the "benefits" and "positives" of the treatments you so whole-heartedly support??? You waste so much energy telling people they are wrong - prove it then - otherwise, quote of the day by King Robert himself: "you're argument is worthless, all alternative therapies are quackery" as you are so quick to say every single time as a "defense" to your arguments. Robert this is very responsive to your opinion. Not my problem if you can't take what you give out. Robert, by the way, massage is an excellent stress and pain reliever, I am referring to an earlier comment where you are comparing massage to chiropractic treatments and placing those modalities in your quack basket - but judging from your narrow mindedness in your approach to the human body, you would take the easy approach and pop a couple of aspirin to relieve pain instead of looking for the solution to the problem. This example is representative of the majority of the population who are sadly uneducated and very gullible when it comes to their health - who think that if something is wrong - go to mr.fix-it doctor - because "they know everything - they can fix me" - yes for certain minor ailments with toxic antibiotics and other poisons, but the real problem is that much of what gets dished out they don't know for sure, 100% what the outcome will be - what does that say to you? Do your own research people - take your health into your own hands. Don't put your own health in doctor and specialists' hands - they get away with murder. Society has become the guinea pigs for the pharmaceutical companies to make profits. So who is the most dangerous in our opinions? You or me??? Robert - you can't tell me that you have never sought some form of alternative treatment or medicine during your life - that in itself is double standards and therefore "renders your opinion worthless". :)

    5. How dare you accuse me without any evidence of seeking alternative treatment or medicine. I have too much respect for both my body and intelligence to lower myself to doing this. This allegation goes to the credibility of everything you have written and says a lot about the type of low life that you are, but again considering the ignorance that you're promoting I'm not a bit surprised.

    6. Settle down old scrote!!! I did not accuse you of anything - I was merely stating that at some point in your life, you have probably used a multi vitamin, vitamin C perhaps? You get what I am saying? Low life? Yep - that's me - definitely a low life - in a profession where I help people on a daily basis. Oh yes and of course my credibility is nil compared to yours. :)

    7. Your statement was, " . . . you can't tell me that you have never sought some form of alternate treatment or medicine during your life . . . " That is far from merely using a multi-vitamin which I have done only when recommended by a doctor--and by this I mean a REAL doctor. By being based on nothing, your statement was a lie and says a lot about your credibility..

      I notice that you don't state what your profession is which adds further to your lack of credibility.

    8. I stated in an earlier post that I am a remedial massage therapist - to which you compared me to that of a chiropractor and labeled quackery.
      Seeing that I am so incredible, I am going to cease in making any more comments. Thank-you for a recent source of amusement.

    9. And just what is a remedial massage therapist and what type of a background and licensure is required to practice your "trade."

  45. Search: Oncolyn, Graviola (soup sop), hydrogen peroxide, sodium bicarbonate, Hulda Clarks 'Cure for all Cancers' (human intestinal fluke), Rick Simpson at Phoenix Tears or 'Run from the Cure', Huffington Post's article on the use of medicinal marijuana, or just the use of fresh/non-psychoactive marijuana juice, Essiac Herbal Tea, Kelp, Carnivora (venus fly trap), etc.... I work for a Natural Health centre and have met many self cured cancer survivors who were told to go home and die by modern or 'western' medical doctors.
    Also check out Simply Seven a sea vegetable liquid combo, paud'arco, and a good mushroom combo like Immune & by Purica...just do your research about Natural Health and it will all make sense eventually. Some people are so closed minded it's as if they don't want to see the truth. They haven't met enough people...and those who are open-minded, have suffered the hardships of being a good, open-hearted person that they have learned to keep quiet. Not many people know these things in comparison to Every human being, but Many still do, from what I have seen for only working in the field of natural health for 7 months, (although I have researched the topic for many years.)
    (Many other diseases have been known to be reversed with many natural sources, I have met Way too many people who averted joint surgery, diabetes, gluacoma, learning disabilities, skin disorders, thyroid problems, hormonal imbalances, immune system issues, chronic pain, fibromyalgia, addictions, depression, you name it, there is hope out there in the world of Nature. Why else would we all be alive today?

    1. nice post..i too have met cancer survivors and its great to talk with them .They are so vibrant and ecstatic that they beat the disease. Its a real pleasure.

    2. So you've met many who have self-cured themselves of cancer. Well, let's see the evidence. I'm certainly not going to take the word of someone who's medical qualifications seem to be that he works at a "natural health center."

  46. Allopathic medicine is never going to 'cure' cancer because cancer is not a disease, it is a symptom. You can't 'cure' a symptom, you can only find and remove the cause and this is where alternative or true medicine puts its focus. It's too profitable for big pharma to keep people sick and coming back for more drugs that are never going to cure them. What would motivate them to find a cure for their biggest cash cow?

    I would not give a single cent to anyone raising funds for cancer, it's big business, nothing more. They've had billions of our dollars and have come up with nothing more than toxic treatments that kill in the most painful and horrible way. If someone lives it's despite these toxic treatments, if they die, it can all be blamed on the cancer. Time for us to wake up.

    1. Mainstream medicine has come up with a lot more to treat cancer than the quackery which you support which has come up with nothing and never will. By giving people false hope and gouging them for it, its practitioners are the scum of the earth and by promoting this fraud, you're no better.

      Until you present hard evidence of collusion on the part of the pharmaceutical industry, spare us your crap about big business.

    2. Mainstream "medicine" has come up with no cure despite billions invested, the very definition of fraud and quackery.

      As for Big Business, tell me again how many died from Asbestos, Tobacco and Thalidomide? I'm sorry but you're extremely gullible, as another poster here stated (I suspect a troll).

      People are "gouged every cent they have" for mainstream treatments that have no evidence whatsoever of curing them. You're only throwing up that argument about Gerson to deflect from the very thing mainstream chemo does. Nice try, but I've seen it all before and you won't get far with old, worn out debating tactics instead of research on the actual subject.

      Chemo is massively profitable for Big Business, it sure isn't given away.

      I posted my comments, not as a reply to you so I don't care if you agree or not. I'm not here to debate with a troll about them! You're outed.

    3. @Abamovich,

      I suppose physicians and their families can get cancer. The question is, when the time comes what will they use: the Gerson therapy (and alike) or mainstream medicine.

      By your reasoning the physicians are the part of the conspiracy, or at least the majority of them. Since they would be (or already are) aware of the ineffectiveness of the mainstream medicine against cancer, it is logically to think that they will massively visit Gerson clinics (and alike) to cure themselves and their families.

      Fortunately that isn't the case. Most of them are subjecting themselves and their families to mainstream medicine. You have to ask yourself why would someone who is part of the conspiracy would subject himself and his dearest to the same conspiracy, knowing it is ineffective.

      Won't you agree that if you're right an average physician should reason like this:

      Mainstream medicine, chemotherapy... that's for the masses, it is not that effective, in fact it's lethal. We have to somehow make money you know. Me and my family will go to Gerson and Burzynski. Suckers.

    4. Doctor's aren't the ones running the drug companies, they are the vehicle that our mainstream medicine channels these drugs through. Given the vast amounts of money drug companies put into the training and promoting of their drugs to the mainstream medical profession (and nothing else), doctors have little choice.

      Do you remember Camel cigarettes in the 40s & 50s? Doctors were promoting these to the public back in those days with the tagline 'more doctors smoke Camel than any other brand'. What doctors choose to take and prescribe has no relationship with whether they are harmful or not, it needs to be proven with epidemiology research and evidence.

      I have seen very little evidence in the effectiveness of chemo for most cancers, mainstream medicine has not come up with a 'cure'.

      I believe we should start looking at the human body in a more wholistic way, as the self healing mechanism it truly is (not the sum of its parts as allopathic medicine treats it). We need to support this natural healing process and allow the body to do what it's designed to do instead of trying to force it with drugs.

      The human body has far more intelligence that we give it credit for, its evolved over millions of years, but we keep getting in the way of healing with our unhealthy, unnatural lifestyles, including drugs. Why eg. force blood pressure down with drugs, while you continue to abuse your body with an overdose of salt? Relying on drugs for health is pseudo science - drug after drug is proving to have life threatening side effects. Madness is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

    5. @Abamovich,

      Suppose doctors do have a "little choice" (FDA approved drugs and practices) when it comes to their regular patients. But when it comes to themselves and their families, would you think they'll submit to the mainstream medicine despite their "knowledge" about the "ineffectiveness" and "harmfulness" of their trade. The question is simple: Why don't we see doctors running to Gerson and Burzynski to save themselves and their kids?

      Or do you say that doctors have no idea that their trade is ineffective and false?

      Camel cigarettes are fine example of what I'm asking you about? Do you think all doctors were smoking cigarettes and were forcing their families and patients to smoke them as a healthy practice. Of course not. If your reasoning was true, in 40s and 50s, every doctor would have welcomed their patients with a cigarette smoke: "Good morning, I'm here for my heart operation. Great, before we anesthetize you lets' have a smoke."

      I hope you do understand that there will be no cure for cancer. Not traditional cure at least. Every type of cancer is different. As I previously said, the solution will probably be unique genetic manipulation for every patient.

      The rest of your comment is about healthy life style and diet. Including that is meaningless in this conversation, because the mainstream medicine supports healthy life style and diet 100%.

    6. Nailed it. Nice Einstein quote too.

    7. average physician - yeah average all right.

    8. Anyone who writes " . . . cancer is not a disease, it's a symptom," makes me wonder about that person's medical background. So I'm certain you won't mind providing me with yours and, of course, the source of your assertions about the nature of cancer and the cancer research being currently conducted?

      Tell me what "alternative medicine" (which is really a sham dressed up to look like medicine) has come up with despite the billions thrown away on it. Show me one "alternative treatment" for cancer supported by clinical testing conducted by qualified professionals under double-blind conditions which has achieved better results than mainstream medicine--and don't insult the intelligence by using Dr. Gerson or those like him as examples.

      So deliberately not finding cures for cancer is all a conspiracy driven by the greed of the big, bad medical industry. Did it ever occur to you that more is to be gained with a proven cure than with a torturous prolongation? So people are being gouged to their last penny by mainstream medicine? What about those on HMO's or similar plans? Why aren't there any HMO's for "alternative medicine?"

      Of course you don't want to debate the matter because you have nothing to debate with. You have not provided one iota of proof to support any of your accusations against mainstream medicine and the reason is you can't.

      "Alternative medicine" is a cash cow whose very life's blood is the gouge which renders those in it the very embodiment of quacks, fraudsters and conmen--could you possibly be in the business?

      It's really a shame that there are people like you in the world.

    9. That was an awesome smackdown.

  47. Yeah Robert you think your so smart your really just stubborn and defensive to the extreme and your own detriment. I was like you but after 21 years said **** it i'll look elsewhere, and now im in a better space. If it didnt work would I still be investing, not wasting, my money on people like natropaths, would they even be in bussiness? No way i've got a brain and im very sceptical aswel but your just a paranoid fool. Are you enjoying your modern diet? What kind of food do you eat im curious. Feeling good buddy? Most people cant even tell their on the slippery slope to some kind of illness and then the realisation gets delayed even futher by all the symptom stoppers our artfully trained medicine salesmen who charade as health professionals prescribe us. Your not meant to feel like ****, its not normal, and taking that pill wont help the root cause.

  48. Robertallen, you're dangerous with your ridiculous one sided view. There is a place for all types of medicine. I for one can say that if it wasn't for good chiropractors I would have been subject to a lifetime of pain and consumption of dangerous painkillers and possible operations. No amouint of BS from you or anyone would convince me that chiro's don't save 100,000's of operations and all the other assoiated benefits that come with that e.g. massive reduction in lost production.

  49. Clear and simply answer -

    If conventional medicine fails, people have to try alternative method.

    Herbal supplements cannot affect anyone if they're used in the recommended doses, come on lets not be paranoid.

  50. I think that the answers to robertallen's questions are easily found by a Google search so it would be a waste of time to reply point by point. But it appears that his mind is totally closed to the possibility that anything outside of modern medicine can be an effective cure. That is a shame. But that is the world that we live in - while increasing numbers of people continue to lose faith in modern medicine and find real and lasting cures among the alternatives on offer, the defenders of allopathic medicine continue to refuse to do the necessary research to validate or disprove the alternatives. Personally I would be happy to see many of the alternative therapies disproven if it were done ethically and scientifically. Then we could winnow them down to the truly effective ones.
    I respectfully suggest that a great part of the problem of modern health care lies exactly in the kind of uninformed attitude and blanket condemnation that he shows in his posts. It is hard for all of us to come to terms with the realization that prejudice and self-interest can come before the welfare of other human beings. But sadly it is so.

    1. Where are your statistics on these increasing numbers of people "who continue to lose faith in modern medicine and find real and lasting cures among the alternatives on offer." How does this compare with statistics going the other way, i.e., people disillusioned with the quackery of alternative medicine, seeking help from the mainstream and being cured?

      Let's see how well some representative alternative therapies have done in clinical testing:

      1. Acupuncture - placebo only.
      2. Homeopathy - placebo only.
      3. Chiropractic - good only for certain lower back pain (which physiotherapy can provide at less cost and greater safety) otherwise ineffective and sometimes dangerous.
      4. Herbal medicine - some such as St. John's wort do some good in small doses, but are potentially dangerous in large ones. Herbal medicines taken alone can perniciously interact with or counteract conventional medications and pose a risk due to contaminants and adulterants. See "Trick or Treatment,"Simon Singh and Edzart Ernest pp.202-203 for a list of common herbal medicines and their clinically tested effectiveness and pp.214-215 for a list of common herbal medicines and the risks involved in taking them.
      5. Anthroscopic medicine - Biologically implausible, ineffective and carries considerable risks.
      6. Aromatheray. No evidence gthat it can cure specific disease.
      7. Ayurvedic Tradition. Cannot be easily evaluated. However, while some of its elements are effective, may others are untested and overtly dangerous.
      8. Cellular Therapy - Claims not supported by scientific evidence, treatments dangerous and a waste of money.
      9. Chelation Therapy - Disproven, expensive and dangerous.
      10. Colonic Irrigation - Ineffective and dangerous.
      11. Craniosacral Therapy - No evidence demonstrating its effectiveness.
      12. Feldenkrais Method - No compelling evidence for its effectiveness.
      13. Magnet Therapy - No evidence that it offers any medical benefit.
      14. Neurotherapy - biologically implausible.
      15. Orthomolecular medicine - biologically implausible and potentially dangerous.
      Source: "Trick or Treatment," Simon Singh and Edzart Ernest, true scientists whose credentials are far more impressive than yours and whose reliability is far greater than yours. So much for your accusation of being uninformed.

      Alternative medicine deserves the contempt it has encountered from the mainstream for the best of possible reasons: it is ineffective, not to mention fraudulent.

  51. @robertallen1

    Paranoid much?

  52. In reply to robertallen I would ask him to do a couple of simple Google searches -"iatrogenic deaths in the US" for example will turn up all the information and sources on how many hundreds of thousands of people are killed by mainstream medicine each year.
    Another search "AMA conspiracy against chiropractic" will reveal the tactics and ethics of the senior members of the AMA when it comes to defending their monopoly.
    It is time to get beyond blind defence of the medical paradigm by calling any other option "quackery." The placebo affect is said to account for around 30% of all cures, including those in mainstream medicine it is important to note!
    The existence of an innate ability to cure oneself if the right psychological stimuli are presented must be one of the most marvelous and miraculous phenomena. But it is one that is systematically excluded from mainstream medicine in the search for specific compounds and treatments that are patentable and profitable.

    1. Were these people actually killed by mainstream medicine, i.e., their pathology was exacerbated because of it, or were they simply terminal anyway? How do these figures compare with those for patients killed by the incompetence and greed of alternate practitioners when mainstream treatment would have cured them?

      AMA or no AMA, the results of myriad clinical tests on chiropractic have shown it to be effective only for lower back pain (physiotherapy accomplishes the same results at a lower cost and greater margin of safety) and nothing more and that its extravagant claims are not only unfounded, but at times the treatment is dangerous.

      Modern medicine not only has a built-in placebo effect but clinically tested efficacy as well. Alternative "medicine" has only the former.

      And spare me your unsubstantiated claims about profit motives on the part of the medical industry--as if alternative treaters had none. It's patently obscene how much is spent yearly on sheer quackery and how much the phonies who practice it rake in. If any of these alternative treatments actually worked, don't you think the medical profession would jump to have them tested and placed on the market so that even greater profits could be realized? So there's a good reason why these "treatments" are systemically excluded from mainstream medicine--they don't work.

      Now cure yourself of any cancer of your choice.

  53. Yep, Mr allen certainly has some issues. No doubt there are some greedy quacks that deserve his contempt, but to simply wrap himself in a blanket of science and lambast anything that doesnt fall under the mainstream is such an unhelpful human trait. Its why I usually dont get sucked into these kind of arguments, I dont fight fire with fire, I cant cite professor whats his name in a white suite with rich friends saying so and so. I've done enough trial and error to know what works and what doesnt, backed up by people who can shed more light on these issues. If only he could do the same.

    1. So your trial and error is tantamount to clinical testing.

      And you're right, I have some issues: with quacks and people like you who support them.

  54. Why is it so hard to have a rational discussion about anything that lies outside conventional medicine? When you throw out terms like "quack" or "conspiracy theory" the discussion is already over. I know that if I get run over I am not going to call out for an aromatherapist, I will be happy to get the best emergency treatment that modern medicine can offer. But it is a fact, born out by the medical industry's own figures, that medicine in the US is the number one killer through iatrogenic complications and adverse drug effects. Alternative therapies in reality do not have even a fraction of a percent of the same negative effects. In general the worst that one can say about them is that people might waste time by not getting the correct treatment from a "real" doctor. And them may spend money on a worthless treatment, although again, the facts show that the modern medical-industrial complex bankrupts hundreds of thousands of families each year through exorbitant expenses for treatments that may or may not actually work.
    I have come to suspect that cancer is a huge cash cow for this medical-industrial complex and that if a cure was found then a lot of people would lose their careers and profits. There is an old saying in journalism about following the money trail to find out who is really responsible for something. In this case it is not too far-fetched to claim that there are vested interests in destroying any type of alternative therapy that might show better results than radio- and chemo-therapy.
    So once the suffering individual strays outside the narrow realm of what the "experts" say is acceptable treatment, they are exposed to both the potentially good and the bad in an an uncontrolled realm of alternative therapeutical claims where there exists no oversight. I just watched another documentary, "Hannah's Anecdote," which gives the human side of the whole situation of being confronted by the diagnosis of cancer. She is cured by an alternative therapy after conventional approaches don't work. But in the end, hers becomes just one more piece of "anecdotal evidence," the term which conventional doctors use to dismiss such cures and so avoid challenging their belief in the paradigm they defend.
    To me, Cancer Sell sets out to discredit alternatives, so it is not a real investigation, which is sad. It is not that long ago that the medical establishment was bleeding patients and using leeches to cure them and taking out women's ovaries to cure them of hysteria. It is only through independent and impartial research that science can advance, not through dogma and blind faith in one paradigm.

    1. And just where are you getting your information about the deaths from mainstream medicine as opposed to those from alternate medicine and considering the shadiness of most alternative providers, how were these statistics obtained? Do they include those who died because the alternate providers didn't know what they were doing? Bald assertions are an insult to the intelligence.

      Your relegation of "alternative treatment" to the area of innocuousness and simple unnecessary expenditure is disgusting, especially when someone with a serious condition is "treated" by one of these fraudsters, ignoramuses and incompetents and succumbs when he could have been cured.

      If you assert that the medical industry is gauging the public, you'd better be able to prove it for your suspicions are as worthless as the bald assertions which began your post.

      As in science in general, there is only one paradigm in medicine, hard facts verified through clinical test after clinical test after clinical test. Anything else is potentially fraudulent and dangerous. Anecdotal evidence is not even evidence.

      And please don't lie. There is no verified mainstream medical record of anyone ever having been cured of cancer through alternative treatments. For if any of these had proved successful, they would have been tested and if found viable, would no longer be alternative, but part of the mainstream--and don't give me the crap about some conspiracy on the part of the medical establishment to keep known cures off the market. The industry is as competitive as any other and cures afford much better PR than prolongation.

      Show me one alternative therapy which has been verified--and I don't mean through the practitioners but through accepted scientific methods--to produce better results than mainstream medicine.

      People like you are so dangerous because there is always a ready suppy of suckers who will take you seriously with dire consequences.

  55. My qualifications: someone who has suffered with gut issues for 21 years of life, and who has struggled to find answers and been screwed over by many doctors and so called specialists. The best results, perhaps even miracles, have occured when I started to follow my natropaths advise. I really wish I had some before and after pics of my excma but thats the best I can offer. Seriously you need to open your mind up bro, before its too late just do a bit of research and you might find the people who have healed themselves and swear by their methods. And there is no cure all or magic bullet by the way everyones problems are unique and their also hard to study decisively you've got to find what works for you personally to overcome your unique problems. It takes a lot more work then just popping a perscription pill.

    1. In other words, you have no medical qualifications or reports of clinical testing. You have nothing other than your personal anecdote and the testimony equally ignorant people who swear by aomething, all of which is worthless.

      P.S. I am not your bro.

    2. No one cares what you think. Get a hobby.

    3. It's not what I think. It's what the facts (i.e., mainstream medicine) reveal. Is this reply the extent of your intellection?

    4. Each time you reference "mainstream medicine" you lose more credibility...

    5. If it's with you and those of your mephitic ilk, it's no loss.

    6. Right back at ya, hotshot. ;-)

    7. NaFaMod I think, as kind as your offerings are to robertallen, we are spitting in the wind with him. As I am a teacher in the health/food sciences, I find that skepticsm is mostly a healthy practice in this fast changing world. However, there are some people who fail to exercise the critical thinking challenge or are just not willing to go beyond the status quo. We could give examples until we are blue in the face: 1) that the AMA bashed chiropractor "quacks" for some 75 years and now the US military uses this modality as standard practice. Hmmm, they don't do "double blind studies" nor graduate from the Harvard School of Medicine archetype. 2) that PHd's like Andrew Weil and Deepak Chopra spent some 30 years in America trying to convince the medical establishment of the Mind/Body connection...and now science verifies everything they tried to tell us (which was ancient knowledge). The bottom line is, that, for the most part, we Americans are largely arrogant in our mere 236 year history, and some folks will never open their minds and hearts to all the possibilities that are available to resolve the needs of each individual. I know in my life, that there are 10 humans (5 of whom already have their own children) who are healthy and self-sufficient, discriminating and critical thinkers, who own their own small businesses (construction with military contracts, trucking, etc) give back to their communities, and teach their children same. Mr. Allen falls into another category, and appears more interested in internet antagonism than considering information outside the scope of his narrow beliefs. I thank you for your reasonable approach and contribution to a discussion from which I will now excuse myself.

    8. AKJayme
      when you state "As I am a teacher in the health/food sciences" do you teach and/or sell the products you are promoting here? because if you are that is a clear bias that i would have thought someone would point that out right off the top of a discussion. if that is the case and you are trying to sell something i will strongly advise you not to . is that why you provided a personal e-mail in a previous comment?

    9. Considerable clinical testing has shown that while chiropractic might prove helpful for certain types of back pain, physical therapy does the same if not a better job--and it's also cheaper. In addition, other than the placebo effect, chiropractic has been proved ineffective and at times dangerous for the remainder of the conditions it claims to cure. You also fail to mention that while the military offers chiropractic services, there are no commissioned chiropractors.

      Please point me to clinical testing verifying the claims made by Deepak Chopra and Andrew Weil and provide me with a list of their their contributions to mainstream science, the only science that counts and the only science there is. These charlatans, hucksters and conmen who have grown unjustly rich off the ignorant and the gullible are held in contempt by the preponderance of their peers and rightly so .

      So spare me the crap about an open mind, critical thinking and narrow beliefs. You are no better than the frauds you promote and by trying to sell your products on this thread (you did provide your website in violation of comment policy), you are clearly following in their footsteps.

  56. All these tests are failing to prevent the general population from poisoning itself. If there was such genuine honest scrutiny and dedication to human beings leading healthy lifestyles then why are we given such bad food? Why do we sell hydrogenated vegetable oils, why is salt processed, stripped of nutrients and then flooded into many food products, why is the same done to flour, why do we sell fizzy drinks by the gallon? Why are smokes legal and why is alcohol cheap and given to tribes of native American Indians? BECAUSE $ > YOU. There is so much bull **** out there right under your nose and you cant even smell it, its incredible.

    I don't know why you think your safe living under big brothers care, he doesn't give a **** whether you live or die your just a number. He just gives a **** about making as much money out of you while your alive, which if you continue to be a stubborn degenerate monkey, will probably not be much longer. Oh well better get a funeral plan mate. Although I'd prefer you just woke up, I'd much rather a world where my healthy lifestyle wasn't seen as quackery and the human race actually prospered.

    We're treating this whole world like ****, in a sense were a cancer and thats why were all getting cancer.

    1. And what are your qualifications?

  57. I think the doctor got it right. The attitude of oncologists is a large part of the problem. Some trade the time they ned to deal woth the patient of economic pressures which makes any discourse with the alternative therapy scams seem hipocritical.

  58. My mother died of cancer. She went through the usual medical treatments which were obviously unsuccessful. She also researched into alternative treatments. She decided that her money was better spent on helping her children then what she concluded was most likely conmen preying on the desperate, offering cures, possibly putting off the inevitable for awhile.
    The fact is, we're all going to die. I think dying is the easy part, it's the fear of it that's hard. I just hope when my time comes I can do it with half the strength and dignity she displayed. A week before she died she checked herself out of hospital and went to Uni lectures. She liked a line out of the movie Shawshank Redemption, "get busy living, or get busy dying". So do I. She outlived all time predictions by a fair way, (after the usual treatments were exhausted) by doing what she's always done. A healthy diet, no alcohol or smoking. Meanwhile, her alcoholic, chain-smoking azzhole of a brother lives on. Life's weird like that sometimes.

    1. I take that you understood my comment.
      1i

    2. I'd rather check out with loved ones around and as little suffering as possible. I get what you mean I think. :)

    3. This is the brother who stabbed you, right? Just goes to show that if we didn't believe in a supreme being, we would have no morality.

      P.S. My dad died of cancer--only he didn't have it as good as your mother.

    4. No, I was talking about my uncle. (I call him Uncle Poontang.. he currently lives/owns a girly bar in the Philippines) My brother kicked my fresh ileostomy. He didn't bring an axe and a death wish ;)
      Sorry about your Dad mate, it's never nice to watch someone you love in pain.

      P.S. There's quite a few azzholes in my extended family.. many would say I'm one of them :)

    5. And my dad went through six months of it.

      P.S. Everybody thinks I'm an azzhole, but I've just accepted it and moved on.

    6. We're all azzholes to some, i've just accepted it and am moving on.
      By the way,
      The way one lives the death or the departure of others
      is always the right way.
      1i

    7. My mother had a brother like that although he died eight years after she did from liver damage. He would still be alive if not for his destructive lifestyle.

  59. A cousin of mine was feeling ill, she took days off from work (she worked in a hospital) went for tests which confirmed that she had lung cancer which was spreading.
    She was instantly hospitalized and treated with chemotherapy and radiation. She died (two weeks ago) on that bed after pucking and feeling horrible for one full month.
    Had she gone to natural therapy both physical and psychological, she would more than likely be alive still surrounded by her son, brothers and sisters, parents and friends.
    She would be getting ready for a imminent peacefull death.
    It is hard to tell when we become guinea pigs for research when life starts smelling like death.
    1i

    1. And just what do you have to support this conjecture?

    2. What do you have to call it a conjecture?
      1i

    3. "Had she gone to natural therapy [whatever that means], she would more than likely be alive . . . " A conjecture with absolutely nothing to support it.

    4. My condolences on the loss of your cousin but her death using naturopathy may not have been as peaceful as you are imagining.

      My mother was told that chemo and radiation would be ineffective and was not recommended so she received no such treatment. She spent the last six months of her life, bedridden, by the window at the family farm. She would be awake for a half an hour to an hour before the pain would become so intense she would begin to groan uncontrollably. My father would then inject her with a pain killer which would render her unconscious for about six hours. There was nothing peaceful about it. It was horrible and gut wrenching for us all and incredibly painful for her. So much so that she prayed for death to come. As much as we mourned her loss, we were all thankful it was over for her.

      Cancer is the most terrible disease on the planet. Don't ever fool yourself into believing that there are those out there who can cure or make it a pleasant experience. If this were true, the world would be beating a path to their door and that includes the medical establishment. Even the top doctors and the pharma executives are susceptible to this disease. The cure just isn't out there. That is why our family members succumbed to it. The medical establishment is just as baffled by this terrible scourge as the rest of us.

      This was not easy for me to relate but I wanted you to understand the reality of what we are dealing with. The blame game helps no one. Sorry for you loss.

  60. Nice doc because it's short and to the point, and easy to follow using layman's terms.

    Does seem biased against "alternative" treatments.

    1. Why shouldn't it be?

    2. Don't get your knickers in an uproar. I was just stating a fact.
      Relax!

  61. Anecdotal evidence... the best kind. Easier to understand than all that scientific testing that follow guidelines. Who could figure all that stuff out. Give me a good story with a happy ending, any day.

    1. You're right. Those guidelines are such a nuisance.

  62. You so readily call everyone a quack. No doubt there are quacks out there, but there are also many other people with alternative knowledge which is not accepted by the mainstream that genuinely want to help people. All GP's do is prescribe pharmaceuticals that match you to something in most cases vaguely associated with treating a symptom in my personal experience. I call them the quacks and I just have to walk down the street and look at sneering overweight people or see some acne covered teenage kid sculling a bottle of coke, to see the general population is being misled by the health industry. I am proud to follow an alternative path to that lot.

    What rank fats do I speak of? Have you heard of trans fats my friend? Apparently their good for us, many bottles of this **** has a heart society tick on the labeling. Funny that when I stopped eating them I went from being covered in excma to it clearing away in the space of about a week. Funny that I see so many other poor souls with excma who go to GPs and apply steroid creams and believe that these fats are good for them. Of course this isn't the only thing that causes excma but the damage it does to your immune system is immense and it seriously inflames it.

    As for cancer, I believe in prevention, eat healthy whole foods and look after your general wellbeing and your body wont start to eat itself inside out. Pretty simple really, but you guys continue to be stubborn and call me a quack, you wont learn until you've been screwed over like I was by our wonderful modern medicine system I just hope it wont be too late for you when you do.

    1. How can you tell the quacks from those with real alternative knowledge? That is why the FDA and the AMA impose guidelines for research that must be strictly adhered to. If one has alternative knowledge, do the research in a professional manner following guidelines established, then one can rise above the ranks of quacks and get the recognition deserved. Complaining about big Pharma is a smokescreen and leaves the implication that hard copy research is not available for all to examine.

  63. If anyone wants an understanding of how cancer works then read The Emperor Of Maladies by Siddharta Mukherjee. If you don't understand how cancer cells operate, then you can't criticise the methods used by the medical establishment to treat it and to do so only illustrates your hubris.

    Any alternative therapies that are shown in clinical trials to have ANY positive effect cease being alternative and become mainstream medicine. If a treatment (that is not brand new- which most alternative therapies are not) remains in the realm of the alternative practitioner it quite simply means that it has been tested and has not shown to have an above chance therapeutic effect.

    I have an anecdotal story that, to me, sums up the majority of the alternative therapy industry. Oral Vitamin C has been touted for years as a cure for cancer by alternative therapies proponents, based on a few trials done from the 70's onwards which were later discredited.

    More recently, one trial was done involving intravenous Vitamin C which showed some positive effects. The NIH released a statement saying that the results of this single trial warranted further experimentation.

    Immediately, a very prominent alternative therapies website released, in it's news section, an article regarding this with the headline "NIH finally eats it's words over Vitamin C as cancer treatment" and then prattled on about how correct they have been all along. The article was, in it's entirety, factually wrong.

    If the alternative therapy field wants to be taken seriously they should give people a reason to think that they ARE serious, as opposed to the common way they present which is either hopeful, naive or blatantly disingenuous.

    1. There's a talk by Siddharta Mukherjee over at Keen Talks called The Cancer Puzzle. Watched it a while ago, very lovely. Nice bloke :)

  64. Robertallen... I turned to "natropathic" means for answers to my medical problems after years of going to GPs and being let down. I trusted the food in the supermarket and believed I was just unlucky and tried to live with debilitating medical conditions which were never properly diagnosed or dealt with. All GPs do is throw various steriods, antibiotics, and other quick symptom fixers at the problem.

    After going to a natropath and no longer eating processed foods and trans fatty oils my excma substantially subsided. About a year later I went back and they taught me about how all the problems begin in the gut and my eyes were opened to how we are lied to because the profits they make outweigh any empathy they might have for fellow human beings. This natropath is associated with Sally Fallon and I could'nt give a **** what dirt you can dig up on someone, im sure your closet isnt clean either, no ones is least of all the "scientists" who tell us to eat their rank fats and processed crap. My life is changed now and I have hope for the first time in my life, its traditionally proven nurouishment combined with contemporary studies not for the purpose of profits. WAKE UP.

    1. the guy is brainwashed, oh has not dealt with serious illness before where the GP's f him up, then he would know, i was having more or less the same problem, GP threw antibiotics at me and whiped my hole intestinal flora till the only thing that i could eat was water and yoghourt. When i confronted him he said oh, sorry, i didn't expect that it would do such a thing, it happens but not always, what a f *****, when you prescribe antibiotics you should ALWAYS prescribe probiotics, that is what the my new MD & NMD does who was able to heal me with various medicinal herbs specific to my condition, probiotics and diet change.

      but then again any one who is not ******** and has an IQ of over 70-80 can google and copy paste the first controversial story into a discussion. Actually spending 7 years in research and taking various medicinal herbs and observing what they are doing in the body, and how they heal it's a different story. The same way as to build a house, or a building takes months but to destroy it you need just seconds.

      but then again each his own

    2. Mike, You doctor does not need to prescribe probiotics as they are not a controlled substance. As a patient the onus is on YOU to research the specific untoward effects of the medications you take and be prepared in case one of them occurs. In the end we are all responsible for our own health, quit trying to pass your responsibility as a patient onto your physician

    3. come on man, if you go with the car in service do they do half the job and then pass you a screwdriver and the rest of the spare parts in the hand and then tell you from now it's your responsibility to fix the rest, wake up man, if i do this kind of approach in my job i would be fired the next day, get real man, if you are a doctor and call yourself one then you should take care of your patients FULLY not do half the job. If i want to research medicine on my own then i don't need a f doctor anymore, then I'm in charge of my own health and treat myself. that i didn't do/want/have time and when i go to a professional i expect him to behave as such. you wait your turn, eventually you'll be screwed to by one, that's the beauty of it

    4. I challenge you to find me one scientist in the field of nutrition, or indeed any field, who tells you to eat "rank fats and processed crap"

      People from big food corporations, wearing white coats in adverts, may tell you that their food is good. But a white coat does not make a scientist. Just a person in a white coat.

      That you would dismiss actual crimes, which are direct frauds about the claims of the quack's "cures" is baffling and disturbing. That you would believe such people and abandon actual medicine without any clear understanding is worrying.

      Sure, you may have had some bad GPs there could be any number of reasons why, I'd wager you haven't explored any of them, but to abandon reason, logic, tested and reproduced medicine in favor of airy-fairy magic is lunacy.

      Nutrional science demonstrates that a good diet of non-processed food, made mostly of fruit and vegetables with a good balance of proteins, will improve overall health and prevent many illnesses. Especially when combined with regular excercise. It is science which as shown this to be true. They've been saying this since I was a kid, and all these decades later it's still true.

      These "Naturopaths" are simply grabbing onto these ideas, without sufficient information, then making it sell by adding magical explanations, and "ancient-wisdom". All the usual garbage that scream 'con-job' to any critical thinker. The problem is that they overblow the effects of such a diet and then claim it can cure things it absolutely cannot. That's where it becomes dangerous. The naturpaths are just as guilty of tricking you for profit as the people who'd sell pop-tarts as a "healthy" breakfast.

    5. To add to this, my mother went to a naturopath because of allergies to ragweed. He recommended an elixir that, incredibly, did relieve her symptoms, although she admitted, no more than the medicine that her doctor had recommended. She later found out that one of the active ingredients of this elixir was a natural form of the chemical in the medicine she had bought at the drug store. It is a chicken and egg scenario. Did the drug manufacturer use this active ingredient because they knew of its effectiveness when used as folk medicine or did some naturopath use his knowledge of chemistry and biology to realize how to find this substance in a natural state to make his own remedy.

      My mother had just gone through breast cancer treatments and the naturopath told her that cancer was caused by our unhealthy diets. He recommended a diet that he said should prevent the cancer from returning. At Christmas, when the rest of us ate turkey, dressing, mashed potatoes and vegetables, she would eat this seemingly unpalatable gruel. Sadly, six years later, the cancer returned, in spite of this strict regimen that she followed. The prognosis was that it was terminal and treatments were NOT recommended. Two years later, she passed away. I do not blame the doctors or the medical establishment for her demise.

      Cancer is a complex disease, attacking the very basic structures of our bodies. We just don't know enough about how our basic cellular structure to cure it. The failure to find a cure does not negate the medical procedures that conventional medicine has put in place. It demonstrates how little we know and how much research is still ahead of us.

      I would also question whether naturalistic practitioners have guidelines when they do their research. If they do, I would like to see them.

    6. So much for naturopaths.

      Could different types of cancer act in different ways, cf. leukemia to breast cancer? Or perhaps different types of malfunctions can result in the same disease--again breast cancer? Therefore one treatment may not fit all. I would appreciate your thoughts.

      I can't recall if I asked you this before, but have you read "Trick or Treatment?"

    7. It would seem that the different types of cancers is at the heart of the reason why cancer can be so baffling. Some cancers have a high success rate at cures while others are basically a death sentence. That is why I would think, and history backs this up, that a treatment for prostate cancer (highly successful) is ineffective against brain cancer. Even after all the research, professionals can only scratch their heads in puzzlement. Sometimes it would appear to be many different diseases instead on one in various forms.

      I have never heard of this book until now. Sounds like an interesting read. Thanks.

    8. I got the idea from an M.D. who informed me that there is no such thing as the common cold, that two individuals can break out with the same symptoms in the same bodily areas and actually have two different maladies. Your statement seems to indicate that there is considerable validity to this approach. In other words, the best way to conduct cancer research and treatment might be through examining individual forms of the disease rather than employing a blanket approach. I don't profess to know.

      Simon Singh is one of the authors--and it's a worthwhile read.

    9. My daughter was just telling me about the father of a friend of hers. When diagnosed with terminal cancer, he started to drink rubbing alcohol everyday. Apparently, at the time, there was talk about how it was the cure for cancer that the medical establishment didn't want the public to know about. Sadly, the man died shortly after.

      I, sincerely, wish there was a magic potion that would cure all cancers, but that is like wishing for the winning lottery ticket. It could happen but I'm not going to depend on it.

    10. That's isopropyl alcohol which I understand is highly dangerous to ingest. I wonder who gave him this advice, certainly not an M.D.

      I just hate it when people such as several of the posters here justify and promote quack "cures" by resorting to an alleged conspiracy to suppress them on the part of the medical establishment. That's one of the ploys of the fraudster, "The reason my product is not on the mainstream market is because the medical profession doesn't want anyone to know about it. It's too effective." Well, if it were so effective, the pharmaceutical companies would vie with each other for the right to manufacture it and would want everyone to know about it.

    11. No one has tried to sell me a potion. I dont know what gruel your mother ate, nor do I know anything about the "natropath" she visited. Could have been a quack, im sorry about what happened. Natropath is a very broad term and they all say different things to be honest. Their not regulated, they arnt consistent and their easy to fling dirt at.
      My own personal experiences led me to try alternative methods of healing. Their philosophy is pretty much to get the body all the nutrients it needs while cutting out all the things that impair its functions and can cause problems such as cancer. I was given tonnes of information and it all made sense to me and thats why I have placed my faith in this form of medicine over a doctor who just groups me with everyone else with a tummy bug and perscribes me medicine which doesnt do anything.
      I lost my faith in the mainstream over a long period of time, I find conspiracy theories harder to deny then ever. Pop culture, reality tv, drugs, junk food etc. all seems to be aimed at lulling us into stupidity and bad health if you ask me. If you want to prosper you must be proactive and seek the truth where ever it lies. It might not be where you think it is.

    12. So in other words, if for some reason you started spitting up blood, you'd go to some "alternative" practitioner rather than an M.D. Well, it's your body. I certainly hope you don't have children.

    13. Are you sure your daughter didn't mean 35% Food Grade hydrogen peroxyde?
      1i

    14. I'm sure she said rubbing alcohol but even if she meant hydrogen peroxide, I still think its crazy.

    15. crazy or not, still, of the two, only 35% hydrogen peroxide is thought to be therapeutic to some, not rubbing alcohol.
      1i

    16. That's what happens when we start listening to alternative medical sources. You never know what they will push and quite often it puts a buck in their pocket.

    17. It is not what is thought to be therapeutic; it's what is proved to be therapeutic.

    18. You're taking the words out of my mouth, although i would have said proven.
      1i

    19. Either past participle is correct.

    20. I agree and i know but my french brain goes straight to proven.
      1i

    21. Well, in French you have just one past particle of the verb to prove.

    22. "Available scientific evidence does not support claims that naturopathic medicine can cure cancer or any other disease, since virtually no studies on naturopathy as a whole have been published." American Cancer Society.

      "Non-scientific health care practitioners, including naturopaths, use unscientific methods and deception on a public who, lacking in-depth knowledge, must rely upon the assurance of providers." William T. Jarvis, Ph.d., Professor of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Loma Linda School of Medicine.

      "[Naturopathy] is simplistic and . . . its practices are riddled with quackery." Stephen Barrett, M.D., National Council Against Health Fraud.

      " . . . the risks to many sick patients seeking care from the average nathropathic practitioner far outweigh any possible benefits." Textbook of Natural Medicine, Arnold S. Relman, M.D., Professions of Medicine, Harvard Medical School.

      I'll believe these people before I'll believe you.

    23. In the tier of health care, a doctor should come last. When all else fails, consult a doctor; they should not be the first call. Sickness is when people give up care of their own health to a foreigner, instead of knowing and doing something about it on their own. And just because people have an organized institution regarding their philosophy of health, it doe not mean that their model is the only practical one. What the medical and pharmacological community has done is create a society of illness, by saying that a doctor know better than the person. It is a trillion dollar business, and one needs to stand up to such corruption of reliance.

    24. Your first sentence is a harbinger of the idiocy and ignorance that follows. In other words, a medical doctor with who knows how many years of education and experience has just as much knowledge about medicine and anatomy as his patient and by extension, all the quacks I have listed in previous posts. In other words, someone who has trouble breathing should first try to cure himself and then consult a doctor (ostensibly when the situation becomes dire). Your entire post is ludicrous.

    25. "When all else fails, consult a doctor; they should not be the first call."

      I'd recommend you read "Trick or Treatment" by Singh and Ernst. You might find that once you know all the facts you feel differently.

    26. I've read it and you're right.

    27. Taking care of your own health is comprised of a good diet and adequate exercise and a reasonable lifestyle. In the end, however, in spite of all precautions, everyone will develop health problems. You then see a doctor, who can help if the problem is not too complex, or direct you to a specialist whose goal in their professional life is the study of specific health problems. Once a diagnosis is given, find out all you can about the condition, to keep you informed so you can determine if the specialist is competent of incorrect in the way he deals with it. If uncertain, see another specialist. Do NOT, please, try to cure yourself. The doctor who tries to cure himself has a fool for a patient.

    28. Suggest changing "fool" to "corpse."

    29. 'sickness is when people, give up care of their own health to a foreigner....' What if you broke your leg, would you attempt to set and splint it yourself, chew willow bark for the pain and then drag your skew-wiff self to a doctor when it all went wrong?
      Sorry, no nutter with a mustard poultice and a stick is coming within a mile of my leggy long and, you can stand up to corruption much better with a plaster cast and a good painkiller :)

    30. "This natropath is associated with Sally Fallon and I could'nt give a **** what dirt you can dig up on someone, im sure your closet isnt clean either, no ones is least of all the "scientists" who tell us to eat their rank fats and processed crap"
      What Doctor has ever said to eat fats and crap, eh? Tell me, give me some examples. Think about what you are saying first, okay?

  65. Red Herring anyone?

  66. I have yet to see robertallen say anything, ever, that was not informed or educated, or logical. You dreamers can dream what you like.

    1. My fan club--and a respectable one at that, one who understands the beauty and intricacies of Stokes' and Green's theorems and goes ga-ga over surface and line integrals. Did you read the latest news that some mathematician in Japan has apparently found a pattern to the distribution of prime numbers--and has submitted a 500-page proof which has yet to be peer-approved?

    2. See his comments regarding immigration. Pure unempathetic a--hole-ery bordering on bigotry. It's a damn shame too because he is very logical on many things and clearly a scientific mind. So sad that he lacks empathy and doesn't understand what is kind or cruel to say to suffering people.

    3. This post from someone who says she "teaches" illegal aliens. In other words, a lawbreaker and proud of it. Once again, if I knew where you were, I would report you to the proper authorities.

  67. research on your own and make your own informed opinions/decisions, for me these people make a much more sense than what mainstream medicine tries to push down our throat, whatever you chose it will be right for you weather conventional or alternative medicine just look at both sides of the coin not just one, study both approaches and see what feels right for you, for many it's mainstream medicine, and they get better, and that is good, for many more it's not, my approach is always based on nature so is the more than 3000 years approach of the Traditional Chinese Medicine in comparison to our western synthetic chemical cut slit open hide the symptoms not look and address the root cause approach based on not even 200 years of experience. You choose :)

    Dr. Max Gerson - Gerson Therapy

    DDS Weston A Price / weston Price foundation
    Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride
    Sally Fallon : Book Nourishing Traditions
    PhD Gary Null
    Dr.Russell Blaylock
    Dr. Mercola
    Dr. Nicholas Gonzales
    Dr. Leonard Coldwell
    Dr. Thomas Rau (Paracelsus Clinic in Switzerland)
    Dr. Robert Dowling
    Dr. Lloyd Jenkins
    Elaine Hollingsworth - One Answer to Cancer
    Ty Bollinger – Researcher and Author of “Cancer: Step Outside the Box”

    Dr. Omar, M. Amin, Ph.D
    Dr. Hulda Clark
    Dr. Garry Gordon

    David Wolfe

    1. Let’s examine the credentials, quality of treatment and honesty of some of the individuals mentioned:

      Nicholas Gonzalez. In 1994, he was reprimanded and placed on two-years’ probation by the New York State Medical Board for departing from accepted practice. He has lost two malpractice suits, one in 1997 for $2.5 million to a patient he wrongly claimed to have cured of cancer and one in 2000 (partial liability) for $282,000 stemming from his use of an unproven cancer screening method. “A test of his protocol published in 2009 found that Gonzalez’s patients died faster than those treated with conventional chemotherapy and had significantly worse quality of life.” [Wikipedia].

      Hulda Clark. Although she claimed a doctorate in physiology, her actual doctorate was in zoology with a minor in botany. In 1993 in Indiana, she represented to an undercover investigator that she could cure his HIV in three minutes, but that it would return unless he came back for six more appointments. Two days after being informed of the results of the investigation, she claimed it was all a misunderstanding and then disappeared, only to emerge in 1999 in San Diego where she was arrested on a fugitive warrant and sent back to Indiana to be tried. The case was dismissed, not on its merits, but rather on apparently abridgement of Ms. Clark’s right to a speedy trial. In 2001, her Century Nutritional clinic was shut down by the Mexican authorities for operating without a license. She was barred from working in Mexico even as a consultant.

      Sally Fallon. A nutritionist, not a medical doctor, and one of the founders of the Weston A. Price Foundation. In “The Truth about the Weston Price Foundation,” Joel Furman, M.D. (a real doctor), accuses the institution of purveying misleading information and failing to update its recommendations in light of contradictory evidence.
      Gary Noll. A radio commentator who nearly died from ingesting one of his “supplements.”

      If the above individuals (and I didn’t forget Dr. Gershon whom I have commented on earlier)are representative, these names read like a roll call of infamous quacks and sharpers. In short, people like you are not only wilfully ignorant, but as dangerous as those whom you tout.

  68. robertallen , i bet you have a medical degree , you sound suspiciously invested . lets not all forget if a cure or cures ever get into the main stream all the drug dealers with degrees will all be sweeping up

    1. i'm not even wasting my time with this guy, he's either studying medicine, or has a degree or his parents have one or the first and last one, god help him if he ever gets cancer :)

    2. If I ever did, I wouldn't waste my time and money on these quacks.

  69. I haven't watched this yet but certainly intend to.

    What about Green Tea? I've been researching on the internet and it seems there may be something to its effect as both a preventative and a destroyer of cancer cells.

    It was mentioned elsewhere that Steve Jobs had wasted precious time going to Mexico...it's such a hard call. That six letter word is simply devastating, as I can attest to.

    To me, after all these years and multi-billions of dollars later, it seems we still have the same old slice, burn and poison approach. My own thoughts are that the answer is going to lie with advanced nanobots, which will patrol the body and seek and destroy a cell or cells as soon as they show signs of being different. Saw this as part of a documentary last year; wish I could remember what it was called.

    1. google white tea

  70. this programme is nothing more than a smear campaign against the allternative treatments that do work ie . brezinsky , gerson , tullio simoncini , hoxley , willem reich . funny not one of the real allternatives were mentioned , i would say shame on you alljazeera but theres no point , we know your biasedand the to the stystem . and to sarah go back and ask your oncologist to explain the five year premiss to you , i dont think once you understand what that means you will be so confident in your prognosis . we all know there are snake oil salesmen , but to write off all allternatives like this , shame on you .

    1. No, these treatments don't work. It's bad enough that you don't know what you're talking about, but when you start to draw others into your web of ignorance, you come dangerously close to practicing medicine without a license.

  71. You eediots... stop wasting your time and money on this chemo and other ridiculous ancient ideas. Just get medical marijuana and self medicate to kill those cancer cells.. will you guys ever learn!?

  72. it seems like this documentary's aim is to sway people from alternative treatments, it only show the other face of conventional treatments.. but not the truth about cure.. why MMS and Hemp oil was not part of her investigation.. nature gives the cure for pennies a day.. maybe you should focus on cures that work,becouse showing this does not mean conventional cancer treatment is the answer.. evidantly it is not.. it is just a money making machine that big pharma does not want to share with those other crooks south of the border.

    1. And just how do you know this?

  73. so when your doctor tell you you got a terminal cancer,which means you will die; dont spend your money to save yourself but do what with it exactly?

    1. Anything but spend it on quackery.

    2. Give it to a charity. Helping someone instead of lining the pockets of a snake oil merchant.

    3. What does the money matter? It's how you spend your time that matters most :)

    4. The absolute wisdom in your statement is characteristic yet refreshing none the less.

      We all gotta live until we die, right?

      In my experience, too many folks expend their last energies exclusively trying to postpone the inevitable, whether through conventional or alternative therapies or both, as soon as they are given the word. Reminds me of an old story -

      A guy leaps off a huge tower block and on the way down as he passes each floor he says to himself, 'So far, so good.' Of course it isn't the falling that kills you, but the anticipation of the end can make it worse than death if you let it. So don't count the floors and keep looking up.

      Especially when a doctor tells you you only have a couple of floors to go.

      Regards,
      Sam.

    5. I love that, not falling, just flying until you're not :)
      My mum had leukaemia, spent her time in hospital scared stiff and wondering how you die, a question that had never crossed my mind until she asked it. How do you answer? Anyway, when they finally told her that she wasn't winning, when she knew she was going to die, she became quite calm about it. I made friends with a few others at the hospital and they said almost the same of their poorly relatives. The not knowing seemed harder to live with, fear of the unknown.
      Have you ever watched/read Dune? 'I must not fear, fear is the mind killer'
      So easy to say, I hope when it's my turn I remember these words and keep looking up! :)

    6. Yes I've read Dune (the first 4-5 novels anyway), epic story. I gave up after about 20K years of history that it had covered. The film adaptation from '83 or '84 with Patrick Stewart is fantastic, a merger of the first 2 books in the saga, one of my all time favourites.

      I must not fear.
      Fear is the mind-killer.
      Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration.
      I will face my fear.
      I will permit it to pass over me and through me.
      And when it has gone past I will turn the inner eye to see its path.
      Where the fear has gone there will be nothing.
      Only I will remain.

      :)

    7. Well, I think you read further than I did! I do love the film, one of my favourites :) I'm back out to work, enjoy your day Sam ;)

  74. Apparently you have a problem with evidence and English.

  75. Every illness has a cure in nature, so why not alternative medicine? Its illegal because it doesnt bring any profits to countries and their insitutions, stupid right?

    1. "Every illness has a cure in nature." How do you know this? There's a good reason why it is illegal for medical doctors to recommend "alternative medicine"--because there is no such thing.

  76. Mainstream or allopathic medicine does not cure cancer. It merely, in a very primitive way, either cuts it out of the body or kills it an every other fast-growing living cell via radiation. In both instances, it only works to address the symptom, not the cause. Dr. Gerson, who developed a method for actually curing many cancers and other diseases, was basically prohibited from publishing his findings in the USA. The industry is so profitable and the climate is such that it is actually illegal for doctors to recommend alternative therapy. And doctors and multinational drug companies do not get rich if they tell their patients to eat organic living foods, and not a ton of toxic, liver-damaging drugs.

    1. Dr. Gerson was a quack as all clinical tests have shown and his treatments are regarded as dangerous and ineffective by mainstream medicine, which is all that counts--and blaming the pharmaceutical companies is a smokescreen of dishonesty.

  77. This is rather depressing and unhelpful. I hope she has learned about Macrobiotics (via the Kushi Institute) and the Gerson Therapy. There may be a lot of quacks out there, but these two therapies have actually cured many people. I think this director is unaware of how against an actual cure the AMA is. The traditional route in the US has become so incredibly lucrative for the cancer industry.

    1. Clinical testing has not shown that macrobiotics cures or prevents cancer. Get your facts right.

    2. Show us the clinical tests you refer to, and I'll show you the corporation that funded the research. Follow the money.

    3. this documentary was probably made for/in the order of AMA

    4. And just what's the matter with the AMA that you can document, not allege.

    5. Plenty of documentation for anyone who wants to take the time to Google, "AMA curruption".

    6. No, it's up to the person who alleges to provide the documentation, an area in which you have sorely failed and for good reason.

    7. Following your own logic and criteria, you sorely failed this entire argument from start to finish, with every post.

      The onus is on you. Prove it to us with all of your "medical qualifications". We'll be waiting.

    8. You're the one making the accusations, therefore the onus is on you to provide the proof and as your only retorts have consisted of more rants, you're the one who has sorely, patently and completely failed.

    9. Wrong again. You clearly initiated accusations prior to any of my posts, putting the onus directly on you to provide supporting information for your assertions.

      Regarding rants, one can clearly see your emotional and resentful tone through the use of name calling and vitriolic rambling. With this in mind I would argue that you Sir, are the one ranting, and would wager any reader here would agree with me.

      Once again you have failed to bring forth any substantial argument or claim, instead clinging to a false bravado masking your owned failed beliefs.

      I sincerely respect passionate views and appreciate any real debate. Unfortunately in my opinion you are not open to true debate of facts - and instead are simply a cynic and not a skeptic. Skeptics are of course valuable in the quest for truth -- cynics are simply naysayers with no interest in furthering true knowledge.

      Lastly, your tendency to attack when confronted with opposing views is indicative of the highest form of ignorance.

      Good day to you, Sir.

    10. It's obvious that you don't like it being pointed out to you that you have provided no evidence supporting any of your allegations against the medical industry and medical education in general. Not only are you proud of your ignorance of medicine in general and cancer specifically, but you are a libeller as well--in short, a piece of ignorant garbage. .

    11. The same could be said of you and your assertions against any type of alternative (yes, alternative) medicine or other clinically proven and time tested treatments.
      While I have cited numerous sources documenting AMA corruption and have provided documentation and references to Gerson's Wikipedia page being gutted of his biographer's input -- it is you who have patently failed to bring forth ANY supporting documentation for your beloved and corrupt AMA, so called "mainstream treatments" or even against any alternative method such as Dr Gerson's Method, or alternative dietary/nutritional approaches.
      Your ignorance is readily apparent with empty, false claims of libel (which would either never make it to court or be struck down as frivolous), and your obvious anger and frustration that the majority of people in America no longer buy the propaganda you espouse.
      Rest assured, we will never stop exposing the true charlatans of the world - the corrupt and insidious AMA and their wholly owned and tainted Medical University system. Any body or organization that is against exploring nutritional healing is simply a lapdog to big pharma and it's parent corporations.
      Many of us have seen first hand, the horrors of watching loved ones killed by chemo and radiation and will never again succumb to the pressure or law to force our family members to undergo torture forced on the suffering populace by this corporate racket. Nutrients heal holistically. Man-made chemicals and radiation kill. Period.
      Next troll, please.

    12. You're simply a liar. You haven't provided one bit of evidence, only a gaggle of assertions and accusations and once again as the claimant and accuser, the onus of proof rests on you and it takes much more than:

      1, "Rest assured, we will never stop exposing the true charlatans of the world - the corrupt and insidious AMA and their wholly owned and tainted Medical University system." Just who is "we," the wilful ignoramuses of the world?

      2. "Any body or organization that is against exploring nutritional healing is simply a lapdog to big pharma and it's [sic] parent corporations." Wrong. Anyone who supports quackery such as Gerson therapy which has been unarguably demonstrated by mainstream medicine (the only type of medicine there is) to be ineffective and dangerous is not only a wilful ignoramus, but a serious menace.

      3. "Many of us have seen first hand, the horrors of watching loved ones killed by chemo and radiation and will never again succumb to the pressure or law to force our family members to undergo torture forced on the suffering populace by this corporate racket. Nutrients heal holistically. Man-made chemicals and radiation kill. Period." Now where is the data behind this melodramatic screed? Again, such a claim requires a medical background. What's yours?

      4. " . . . the majority of people in America no longer buy the propaganda you espouse." How do you know what the majority of people in America no longer buy? Have you conducted a survey or is this another example of empty bluster?

      Now just what are these clinically-proven and "time-tested" (whatever that means) treatments of "alternative" medicine to which you've alluded at the beginning of your post? Did it ever occur to you that if these treatments were proven effective through clinical testing, they would have found their way into mainstream medicine? And before you get started, don't give me your suppressionist conspiracy crap. There's more money to be made out of something that works than something that doesn't.

      You are as ignorant of the law as you are of medicine. In two of your posts, you have falsely accused me of being a paid shill for the AMA or similar organizations, thus your statements are clearly libellous and once again, if I knew who you were and where you are, I would not hesitate to bring legal action against you.

      Your diarrhea of the keyboard is an insult not only to modern medicine, but to the concept of science and knowledge in general and it doesn't say much for the human race that a dangerous, ignorant, libelling piece of trash like you exists.

    13. Being angry, obtuse and self-righteous does not automatically mean you are correct in any way.
      Again, distortions, accusations and vitriolic rhetoric with no facts or documentation to substantiate any claims. The information you rely on is from untenable sources -- the very labs and universities owned by big pharma and the medical estblishment. Your twisted views represent the worst aspects of the Capitalist Economy - namely, promoting sickness and suffering over any true medicine or cures. An industry and it's institutions so perverted by corporate greed and corruption that any attempt to even discuss true natural nutritional medicine is met by insane attacks by brainwashed fanatics like yourself.
      No matter how much hate and anger you spew forth onto the screen, by any measure - the majority of people on this page alone reject your one sided ignorant claims that somehow the corporate "medical establishment" - whose only goal is profit, NOT prevention or cure -- is by default suspect at best or guilty at worst.
      This is the disease of privatization -- the cancer in American society and culture. Privatized institutions whose very goals of profit go directly counter to any medicinal or curative motivations -- a paradox of greed by the very souls whose job it is to heal, care for and protect it's patients. Entire staffs of Doctors, Nurses and supporting personnel indoctrinated with the same false beliefs -- like brainwashed children, released from corrupt institutions of learning armed with firm beliefs in falsehoods against a misinformed public.
      Any and all research by your beloved AMA and it's ilk are obtained through wholly corporate owned falsification factories, where if the desired result is not obtained, tumors are simply removed and documentation manipulated and falsified to meet corporate expectations. Charlatan shenanigans by corrupt yes men, endangering the lives of millions across the globe.
      How many new pharmaceuticals are released each year on average? How many of these have been tested in long term (10 year or more) studies? How many of these so readily approved "wonder drugs" have incredibly horrendous side effects ranging from rectal bleeding to coma to death? There are now allergy medicines on the market that threaten death and coma, suicidal thoughts and psychiatric disorders. Addiction is a huge problem. Over prescribed drugs by pill pushing quacks with AMA accreditation poisoning our citizens and the environment -- all for profit.
      Again, interesting to note that every single drug recalled by the FDA had to first be deemed "safe and effective" by the same body -- and then be pushed by the AMA. Drug recalls surged to a record 1,700 in 2009 alone...
      Keep defending the indefensible, while Americans awaken to the facts that other nations have known all along -- that preventative medicine and nutritional holistic approaches have worked for thousands of years, and continue to expand and evolve. That profit driven approaches - whose only goal must be profit in order to sustain it's bloated, monolithic stature - will always be corrupt and suspect -- will never strive for true health through better living or prevention.
      Big Pharma can't patent juices and nutrition. Too bad. We don't all have to subscribe to your twisted views, and refuse to be bullied or intimidated by ignorant fools of your ilk.
      It is solely the patients right to refuse any AMA quackery. This is the law in America. Deal with it.

    14. "The information you rely on is from untenable sources -- the very labs and universities owned by big pharma and the medical estblishment." Thus, on your say-so, colleges and medical institutions of higher learning are "untenable" sources. Why would anyone with any knowledge and intelligence believe you as opposed to those who have devoted their lives to the scientific study of medicine and have something positive to show for it? In short, WHERE'S YOUR EVIDENCE?
      "Your twisted views represent the worst aspects of the Capitalist Economy - namely, promoting sickness and suffering over any true medicine or cures. An industry and it's [sic] institutions so perverted by corporate greed and corruption that any attempt to even discuss true natural nutritional medicine is met by insane attacks by brainwashed fanatics like yourself." So it's really not medicine, but rather your beef with the capitalist economy that's behind your caterwauling. Just how do you know that the medical industry and its [note spelling, you've made the same mistake twice in this post] institutions are preverted by corporate greed and corruption? What makes you think that you are qualified to discuss "true natural nutritional medicine," whatever that is? In sum, WHERE'S YOUR EVIDENCE?

      " . . . the majority of people on this page alone reject your one sided ignorant claims that somehow the corporate 'medical establishment' whose only goal is profit, NOT prevention or cure -- is by default suspect at best or guilty at worst." So the more people who believe something, the truer it is. The people who post here do not even represent 1/10 of 1% of the total U.S. population--so much for your argument, fallacious and intellectually-insulting as it is.

      "This is the disease of privatization -- the cancer in American society and culture. Privatized institutions whose very goals of profit go directly counter to any medicinal or curative motivations -- a paradox of greed by the very souls whose job it is to heal, care for and protect it's patients. Entire staffs of Doctors, Nurses and supporting personnel indoctrinated with the same false beliefs -- like brainwashed children, released from corrupt institutions of learning armed with firm beliefs in falsehoods against a misinformed public." What makes you think you are qualified to judge the competence of medical professionals? Is it the approbation of a few individuals as misdirected as yourself who just happen to post here? Once again, WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE?

      "Any and all research by your beloved AMA and it's ilk are obtained through wholly corporate owned falsification factories, where if the desired result is not obtained, tumors are simply removed and documentation manipulated and falsified to meet corporate expectations. Charlatan shenanigans by corrupt yes men, endangering the lives of millions across the globe." How about naming a few of these "corporate owned falsification factories" and after that providing YOUR EVIDENCE?
      .
      "How many new pharmaceuticals are released each year on average? How many of these have been tested in long term (10 year or more) studies? How many of these so readily approved 'wonder drugs"'have incredibly horrendous side effects ranging from rectal bleeding to coma to death? There are now allergy medicines on the market that threaten death and coma, suicidal thoughts and psychiatric disorders. Addiction is a huge problem. Over prescribed drugs by pill pushing quacks with AMA accreditation poisoning our citizens and the environment -- all for profit.
      Again, interesting to note that every single drug recalled by the FDA had to first be deemed 'safe and effective' by the same body -- and then be pushed by the AMA. Drug recalls surged to a record 1,700 in 2009 alone." How about naming a few of these drugs and discussing their effects from a medical standpoint--but I forgot, your proudest boast is having no medical credentials at all. How about provding the source for you 2009 statistic? Once again,WHERE IS YOUR EVIDENCE?

      In short, screed does not equate to evidence or proof and the more you post, the more you fail to provide any evidence to support your allegations, the more ignorant, unbalanced and pathetic you sound. One way or the other, you owe me a retraction and an apology for the libel against me contained in two of your posts and until I receive them, every time you post on this thread, I'm going to remind you. So act accordingly.

    15. Robert, why don't you just go have chemo and call it a day!!

    16. Does this inane comment represent the extent of your knowledge and intelligence?

  78. Main message: there is only one treatment and that is conventional mainstream oncology, there is no other, one option, that's it, full stop, do not event think to try something else because it does not work. That is when the body is ridden with cancer cells, the immune system is weak, it totally makes sense to inject into the body radioactive waste, on top even blast it from outside with radiation. Why? because they are of the opinion that they can kill the cancer cells with this methodology before they kill every single white blood cell which represents your immune system. And after they HOPE that you have enough white blood cells left so that you will be able to regenerate. Mind blowing how they could do that. Does it not make more sense to enhance the immune system with whole foods rich in nutrients which will naturally get rid of tumors. Very funny that they did not touch the Gerson clinic in Tijuana Mexico, where they have all the medical documentation, patient files before and after they they need... I'm not saying ppl are not getting cured at all by conventional mainstream medicine, i am just saying there are a lot of other options that make 1000 more sense than what they are doing, and when someone tells you there is only one single option you should flip the critical thinking switch in your brain at the ON position

    1. For your information, Dr. Gerson was a quack and his "treatments" have not only been proved in effective, but dangerous. Now, what are your medical qualifications?

    2. Big Pharma can't patent juices and natural remedies. Of course they push chemo and radiation - simply follow the money.

      American medicine is built on profit - "fixing" the sick with expensive, toxic pharmaceuticals, pills and expensive technology. Entire industries, institutions and corporations rely on this steady flow of income. Imagine the loss of profits and jobs if we simply treated illness with prevention and healthy diets.

      The only "Cancer Sell" going on is the corrupt and insidious Corporate Medical establishment in America, which lobbied to make alternative treatments illegal.

    3. Accusations require evidence to support them. Where is yours? "Follow the money" doesn't cut it. And by the way, there is no such thing as alternative medicine. Either it's medicine or it's not.

    4. Right back at you, Einstein. You already lost all credibility by labeling Dr. Gerson a "quack", rather than articulating any specific point of contention.

      What "evidence" do you have? Government Institutions? So called "independent" research done by Universities that are FUNDED by the big Pharma companies? lol

      Ironically you try to attack with a statement like, "Now, what are your medical qualifications?

      "Medical qualifications" in my mind simply means a mind taught false corporate medicine through the wholly corporate owned, corrupt and profit driven medical university system. The faculty are outed if they do not tow the pharma line, and are forced to push the latest products that have not been through any long term clinical tests.

      Go ahead and place your faith in the "medical establishment". Interesting to note that any drug recalled by the FDA had to first be deemed "safe and effective" by this same body. Indicative of how "accurate" and reliable the corrupt system really is...

      It is well known that America does not prevent illness - or approach "medicine" with anything other than a capitalistic, profit driven motive.

      Any "Research" done by major corporations is suspect at best by default. These same companies and universities tell us GMO foods, Aspartame and pesticides are all safe for consumption. Even the "mainstream" medical establishment is having a hard time standing by these false statements in the face of clinical evidence.

      When cures for cancer are found, they are attacked by the corporate industrial interests whose profits are threatened. Who wants a natural alternative to big pharma when we can make so much money off suffering? It's an insidious racket and nothing more.

      One of the most brilliant minds in modern history, Dr Albert Schweitzer himself not only endorsed Gerson's work -- he utilized the Gerson method for his own family with tremendous results. Regardless of any argument YOU personally make, you will never convince me (or any rational, logical mind) that you know more on this subject than Albert Schweitzer or Max Gerson. (or even Garrett Kroschel)

      Think about the logic of "mainstream" cancer treatment; poison the body so much that the cancer dies... poison the patient in order to heal? Laughable. Should we bleed patients as well? Maybe stick some leaches on them too?

      "Either it's medicine or it's not?" Look up the defition of "medicine"; at least one common meaning will indicate, "A drug or other preparation used for the treatment or prevention of disease." I see nothing about any requirement for artificial, chemical or even "widely accepted" (corporate mainstream) treatments in order to be considered "medicine". If it treats or prevents an illness, it's medicine. Period.

    5. There's a long article on Gerson on Wikipedia, complete with references as well as another on Quackwatch. In short, Gerson and his "therapy" are no more than quackery--and these alleged endorsements by Dr. Schweitzer seem to be found only on Gerson or Gerson-based websites.

      People of your ilk just hate being asked for evidence, nothingwithstanding this, what do you have to support your allegations against the medical establishment. "It is well known" does not even begin to come up to the level of anything resembling anything to be seriously considered.

      And once again, what are your medical qualifications, i.e., the extent of your mainstream medical background--and don't give me the crap about what a mainstream medical background means in your mind--it's only a dishonest attempt to justify your lack of education and the wilful ignorance that goes with it and it won't wash here--either you have a medical background or you don't and from your statements about cancer, it's obvious that you don't and that you lack even a rudimentary knowledge of this family of diseases.

      You're right about one thing though: if it treats or prevents an illness, it's medicine. Well, except perhaps for the placebo effect, that leaves out the quackery you espouse.

      In all, you are loudly ignorant of medicine and your statement about mainstream medical education makes this ignorance wilful and despicable. You offer no support for any of your allegations against the mainstream medical establishment. In short, you pretend to know something when you really don't which makes you a dangerous piece of trash.

    6. You keep on with your obvious frustration, desperately clinging to easily manipulated sites like Wikipedia as your "proof".

      The only trash stinking up this place is a guy defending the medical establishment with absolutely no evidence of his own.

      You could hold every Cracker-Jack Medical Degree handed out by our corrupt University system -- giving you as you term it, "medical qualifications"; qualifications from a corrupt system that pushes failed and outdated practices. You weaken your own argument and make our case for us with every new post.

      Keep on posting, but obviously from the overall tone of this thread and the responses of others, we aren't buying your corporate blogging garbage.

    7. So our university system is as corrupt and so is Wikipedia, presumably as corrupt as the medical industry. Well, once again, where is your evidence? Is it in your screaming accusations? Or is it merely in your "mind?"
      The achievements of modern mainstream evidence-based medicine are numerous, now what contributions have you and the ignorance you stand for made?

    8. The achievements of corrupt corporate profits are proven! lol

      I ask the same of you, oh angry and righteous one -- what contributions have you and the ignorance you stand for made? The contribution of profit to big Pharma? False beliefs based on "research" done by the very labs owned by the Pharma companies?

    9. Allegations. Allegations. Allegations. No proof. No proof. No proof.
      Your libellous comments about my being a paid blogger have been reported for further action by the moderators. If I knew who you are and where you are, I would not hesitate to sue you for libel. Act accordingly.

    10. To The Esteemed Doctor robertallen1,

      I truly enjoy how you provide in-depth evidence to your rational and well-thought-out responses.

      Clearly you are a brilliant academic who has studied for years to become one of the worlds leading doctors.

      I agree with your genius that alternative medicine doesn't exist. According to the Flexner Report, which I am sure you know about,

      "modern medicine faced vigorous competition from several quarters, including osteopathic medicine, chiropractic medicine, eclectic medicine, naturopathy and homeopathy." -wiki

      Obviously there are zero (or five) alternative medical modalities that compete with modern medicine.

      Cheers
      From a fellow nescient

    11. What was the matter with the Flexner Report which is now over a century old?
      P.S. I am not a doctor.

    12. robertallen, you probably believe that no child has ever been harmed by a vaccination either, right??

    13. Telling people what they believe is a surefire way of being unable to find out what they actually believe, since you have already decided. To rephrase the statement as a question is the only appropriate action, like so:

      Do you believe that vaccinations are absolutely safe?

      My answer would be; Of course not. There is not one chemical compound or element in existence that is absolutely safe for everyone, whether it be part of a food or a medicine. Peanuts are safe for me as far as I know, however for someone else ingesting even a microscopic fragment of one could be fatal. The fact is all medicines carry a risk, which is why you shouldn't take them unless prescribed by your doctor, who by having the experience of similar cases and access to the vast database of statistical data of similar cases can make an informed decision on the risk being an acceptable trade off or not.

      The fact is, most if not all 'alternative' therapies do not have the body of research behind them, at best they have some small studies with suspect controls and several anecdotes. Those that have been diligently researched have been found to have no benefit at all, I.e homeopathy. Many traditional herbs and plants are used in conventional medicine as these have been researched thoroughly in the aforementioned way and the evidence shows that although there are risks, the benefits can sometimes be worth it.

      When we talk about cancer as a disease it is a very general word. It's causes range from dietary, bacterial/virus/protozoa, environmental/carcinogens/radiation, genetic/mutation/damage to the unknown. No two tumors have identical structure. I'm trying to expain how ridiculous it sounds to me when someone promotes a 'cure' for 'cancer' as the variety of conditions and presentations that word encapsulates is incredibly vast.

    14. The despicable thing is that those with no medical training think that by reading a few questionable articles, they think they know more than mainstream doctors with all their years of training and experience and then to make things worse, try to pass on their ignorance and misinformation onto the public at large.

    15. What I probably believe is of no consequence. It's what the facts show.

    16. you mean "facts' generated by pharmaceutical companies with their own interests in mind? Consider the source and what they have to gain by facts from anywhere.

      what about the suppressed facts?

    17. "you mean "facts' generated by pharmaceutical companies with their own interests in mind? Consider the source and what they have to gain by facts from anywhere." Where is your proof?
      And what are this suppressed facts?

    18. Bob,you never give up,I see.wake up before you end up victim of yourself

    19. "follow the money doesn't cut it." Are you serious?

    20. They studied salt water (hypertonic saline) for Cystic Fibrosis treatment and it's become a staple treatment for many people. It's cheap and effective for some.

    21. the "cancer sell" isn't just american,it's global

    22. Mike, thank you for your comments. You said everything about modern USA medicine that I was thinking. Only when enough people just start saying NO to chemotherapy will one of the better treatment methods make it to the market.

    23. And just what are these "better" treatments and do you have the medical qualifications to assess them?
      P.S. There is no medical documentation for the Gerson method other that what is put out by the Gerson Institute. Did it every occur to you why it is located in Mexico.

  79. Is that 25 min the whole thing? she dosent really go into anything except a few clinics and a conman... what about the gerson therapy which works well for non neurological cancers? i didnt find that so open minded

    1. the documentary has nothing to do with open mildness it is more along the lines of brainwashing...

    2. Dr. Gerson was a quack and his methods don't work and are potentially dangerous.

    3. I agree. this movie is dangerous because it might deter someone from getting the natural therapy that could save their life such as the Gerson Therapy. Where's all the credits to this movie anyway?

    4. BTW for all you naysayers of alternative theapies. There is going to be an Alternative Cancer Treatment Center built in Washington State. It is time for the information that has been supressed for many years by the AMA to be revealed. We'll see who the quacks are then.

    5. No, we know who the quacks are now.

    6. That's right it's the people who promote cut poison and burn all for the sake of the almighty dollar! Not the real healers on this planet.

    7. There is plenty of evidence to show that mainstream medicine is the real healer. As for the almighty dollar, what do you think is at the heart of these quacks?

    8. To group all of traditional, natural and alternative therapies together as quacks is reckless. There are quacks in allopathic medicine just as much. You say there is "plenty of evidence" but the allopathic way is failing the war on cancer and degenerative diseases as well.This is a FACT. People are going elsewhere because they are being sent home to die or they are drugged to death. The Gerson Therapy for instance, takes people who's immune systems that have been destroyed by radiation, chemotherapy and has a success rate better than allopathic medicine. Allopathic medicine claims a cure when a person has been cancer free for 5 years but if they die in the 6th year it is not taken into account. So is it really a cure? NO. Those statistics are tweeked. In time this will all be revealed because there will be an alternative cancer institute and they will have better statistics than allopathic medicine. I believe allopathic medicine has a place but it's not with cancer and degenerative diseases.

    9. By definition, there are no quacks in mainstream medicine and by definition, anyone not in mainstream medicine who claims to be practicing medicine is and rightly deserves the opporobrium of the medical profession and hopefully the public at large.

      Not having yet discovered a cure for something means just that and if mainstream medicine with all its resources has not yet found a cure, quackery (or alternative medicine to use the euphemism) hasn't either and this includes the late (thankfully) Dr. Gerson as well.

      The Gerson therapy is sheer quackery from one end to the other and there's a good reason why it's not approved in this country: it's dangerous. Clinical testing so far has shown it to be ineffective in the treatment of cancer. However, let's examine some of the medical (and by this, I mean mainstream) results:

      1. Continued use of enemas may weaken the colon's normal function, causing constipation, colitis and dehydration.

      2. Gerson therapy may be hazardous to pregnant or breast-feeding women.

      3. Coffee enemas can cause colitis, fluid and electrolyte imbalances and septicimia. Three deaths have so far been attributed to use of these enemas.

      Wikipedia: sources, mostly from the American Cancer Society, a more reputable institution than anything you've come up with, included in the article.

      You tout an ineffective, pernicious regime of no proven scientific value, but certainly a monetary one, and yet have the gall to excoriate mainstream medicine for "poisoning and burning" in the name of the almighty dollar.

    10. There is no cure for cancer. So why should people choose mainstream over alternative?
      Gerson Therapy is not 'quackery'. I know people who have undergone this treatment and you obviously do not.
      Stop trying to shove your opinion down the throats of others who do not believe in poisoning their body in their quest to improve their health. Spare us your brainwashed ideologies.
      P.S this documentary is pathetic.
      P.S.S mainstream does not 'heal' - healing is holistic.

    11. I don't care who you know. Gerson Therapy has been shown by mainstream medicine (the only type of medicine that counts) to be ineffective and potentially dangerous and you and those like you who push it are as dangerous as the "therapy" itself.

    12. Is that all you can come back with?
      How can mainstream medicine be the only type that counts?
      This ordinary documentary itself shows that 'mainstream' medicine failed - as it does time and time again.
      If you don't have honesty you don't have science do you?
      Stop calling me and anyone else who has their head screwed on dangerous - you are the poster child for mainstream 'medicine' it seems therefore you yourself are also dangerous - pedaling what you DON"T actually know is truth! Just because a couple of tests have been done and the statistics and results conclude blah blah blah, then heaven forbid it MUST be true...You are as gullible as the rest of them.
      I think you are in bed with the FDA.

    13. No, the documentary shows that mainstream medicine is making progress, however slow. It's the quackery which you and others like you promote which isn't, which can't, which is ineffective and pernicious and which gives people false hope as it gouges them of every cent they have.

      Whether you like it or not, facts are facts and your devaluation of the results of the testing of mainstream medicine (once again, the only type that counts, once again, whether you like it or not) performed on Gerson Therapy says a lot about you, none of it nice.

      Encouraging others to follow in the path of ignorance (let's put the shoe on the right foot) and quackery indeed renders you dangerous.

    14. robertallen1 HAAAAAHAAAAAAA. You are joking with me right? 'The documentary shows that mainstream medicine is making progress, however slow' - yeah nice try.
      Mainstream medicine has had over 40 years to make progress and still hasn't come up with an answer. So why would that be????
      You would think that with all the advancements in science and technology that they would come up with a safer and far more effective method of treating cancer - and what happened to finding the cure? Why is it soooooo difficult to find that answer? All they can offer are hazardous and toxic chemicals which kill all cells in the body good and bad. It's unfortunate that so many people don't actually take responsibility for having a serious illness - they get thrown into the mainstream medical system without proper care and advice. It's also unfortunate that the majority of people believe whatever their doctor or 'specialist' (I laugh at this term what an absolute disgrace) tells them and they don't have the capacity do do a little bit of research to understand the fundamentals of the human body and why they would fall ill with cancer in the first place. As a massage therapist I have seen countless clients come to my clinic desperate for relief not only relating to pain management and stress control but for a range of illnesses and disorders. It's quite amazing to hear their stories of mis-management in mainstream medicine. You do realise that alternative medicine is gaining popularity because mainstream fails miserably don't you???
      Like Abamovich, too much time is wasted on you and your narrow mindedness.

    15. @casper26,

      Mainstream medicine is making progress indeed. You're just not informed enough. Immunotherapy, genetically targeted drugs, targeted chemotherapy (destroys far less healthy cells), robotic surgery and radiation (extremely precise), etc.

      Cancer is not an ordinary disease where you can approach it with some universal drug. It is mutation gone wild. The most that it can be done in future is scanning the whole genome of the patient, finding the irregularity and intervening to shut down the mutation on a genetic level. And that is where mainstream medicine is heading.

    16. I'm informed enough to know what I would choose. Yeah so what mainstream is becoming more refined in their approach but there is still no cure is there? People are dropping like flies all over the place. Your precious mainstream is not exactly doing the trick is it.

    17. @casper26,

      There is no universal cure for cancer and probably there never will be. That is because of the very nature of the disease, which is mutation.

      At best what it can be done is prevention (healthy lifestyle), early discovery thus removal and destruction of the cancer, and in future personalized genetic interventions.

    18. So you're a massage therapist. Is that synonymous with a chiropractor?

      I'm glad Vlatko wrote what he did, for I was getting tired of showing you up for the phony and wilful ignoramus that you are, especially in the area of current cancer research. The tragedy is that all too many give you credence, almost always to their detriment, and this renders you and othes like you extremely dangerous.

    19. The only dangerous one here is you my friend.

    20. one only needs to see bencristine/vincristine in action to understand everything. Wow talk about the living dead! zombies have nothing on these guys.

    21. You only reference enemas as if this is conclusive proof that the Gerson methid does not work -- when in reality the "drawbacks" you cite are much less of a risk that chemo or radiation therapy. Enemas are only a portion of the Gerson method. What about juices and nutrients? What does the research show outside of enemas?

      Your selective comments are indicative of an AMA paid blogger...

    22. How do you know that these drawbacks are much less of a risk than chemo or radiation therapy. Do you have the medical background to back that up?
      If you're accusing me of being an AMA-paid blogger, you'd better be able to back this up. The next time you make any such accusation, I will refer your post to a moderator for further action.

    23. Like I said before, and reiterate; the "medical background" you emphasize as so esteemed and righteous is the very same corrupt establishment that is wholly owned by big pharma and their parent companies. This would make any individual with "medical qualifications" as you term it to be suspect by default -- a crony bent on pushing corrupt practices and policies... it's like saying only Christians are qualified to discuss religion.
      Regarding your bluster on the topic of blogging; from what I could read on the site, there is no rule against me indicating that your tone and language are indicative of a paid blogger. I am fully prepared and indeed happy to face any potential consequences in the name of expression and debate. This same comment was intimated by several others as well -- it seems to be something that others perceived when reading your vitriolic ramblings.

    24. good work keep up the fight over darkness!

    25. whoops that should have been dislike sorr veggiesandy ure on the $$

    26. Yeah, we know who the true quacks are - the AMA.