CANCER INC
 

On 12/2/10 3:42 AM, john wrote:
http://whale.to/cancer.html

Thank you for showing how alternative medicine has a whole bunch of
unsupported claims based on no evidence. All alternative medicine is
interested in is making money.

Allopathic medicine has increased the survival rate for kids with cancer
to over 75% and the survival rate for all people with cancer to around
60%. It is far from ideal, but compared to the alternatives (which in
the case of alternative medicine is really nothing), it is far better.

Jeff

CANCER INC
 

"dr_jeff" wrote in message ...
On 12/2/10 3:42 AM, john wrote:
http://whale.to/cancer.html

Thank you for showing how alternative medicine has a whole bunch of unsupported claims based on no evidence.
All alternative medicine is interested in is making money.

Allopathic medicine has increased the survival rate for kids with cancer to over 75% and the survival rate
for all people with cancer to around 60%. It is far from ideal, but compared to the alternatives (which in
the case of alternative medicine is really nothing), it is far better.

Jeff


More tin can rattling from the allopathic mob.
Don't you ever get tired of rationalising allopathic medicine with cures always "just around the corner" for
this and that?
"Oh science hasn't got all the answers, but alternative medicine is wrong" blah blah blah!

--
carole
www.conspiracee.com
"Its pretty hard to keep in touch with reality when you see so little of it."

CANCER INC
 

On 12/2/10 10:29 AM, carole wrote:
wrote in message ...
On 12/2/10 3:42 AM, john wrote:
http://whale.to/cancer.html

Thank you for showing how alternative medicine has a whole bunch of unsupported claims based on no evidence.
All alternative medicine is interested in is making money.

Allopathic medicine has increased the survival rate for kids with cancer to over 75% and the survival rate
for all people with cancer to around 60%. It is far from ideal, but compared to the alternatives (which in
the case of alternative medicine is really nothing), it is far better.

Jeff


More tin can rattling from the allopathic mob.
Don't you ever get tired of rationalising allopathic medicine with cures always "just around the corner" for
this and that?

75% of kids being cured doesn't sound like "just around the corner."

"Oh science hasn't got all the answers, but alternative medicine is wrong" blah blah blah!

No one ever said science has all the answers. However, alternative
medicine is unproven, at best.

Jeff

CANCER INC
 

"dr_jeff" wrote in message ...
On 12/2/10 10:29 AM, carole wrote:
wrote in message ...
On 12/2/10 3:42 AM, john wrote:
http://whale.to/cancer.html

Thank you for showing how alternative medicine has a whole bunch of unsupported claims based on no
evidence.
All alternative medicine is interested in is making money.

Allopathic medicine has increased the survival rate for kids with cancer to over 75% and the survival rate
for all people with cancer to around 60%. It is far from ideal, but compared to the alternatives (which in
the case of alternative medicine is really nothing), it is far better.

Jeff


More tin can rattling from the allopathic mob.
Don't you ever get tired of rationalising allopathic medicine with cures always "just around the corner"
for
this and that?

75% of kids being cured doesn't sound like "just around the corner."

Doesn't sound too bad if its true.
However, there are some cures that were 100% such as rife's.
What I've heard is that "cured" means 5 years alive from diagnosis.
What I've also heard is on average people live longer with no treatment than conventional.


"Oh science hasn't got all the answers, but alternative medicine is wrong" blah blah blah!

No one ever said science has all the answers. However, alternative medicine is unproven, at best.

On the one hand you say that science doesn't have all the answers, and on the other hand you say that it knows
that alternative remedies don't work.
Which is to say that allopathic knows alternative is no good because it doesn't follow the same rules as
allopathic.
There have been alternative treatments that have been suppressed you know, they say they're "quack" medicine
and get rid of them as quickly as they can in the interests of "getting rid of snake oil salesmen". Well
that's what is called a "cover story". The real reason is protect the profits of big pharma.

--
carole
www.conspiracee.com
"Its pretty hard to keep in touch with reality when you see so little of it."

CANCER INC
 

On 12/2/10 9:11 PM, carole wrote:
wrote in message ...
On 12/2/10 10:29 AM, carole wrote:
wrote in message ...
On 12/2/10 3:42 AM, john wrote:
http://whale.to/cancer.html

Thank you for showing how alternative medicine has a whole bunch of unsupported claims based on no
evidence.
All alternative medicine is interested in is making money.

Allopathic medicine has increased the survival rate for kids with cancer to over 75% and the survival rate
for all people with cancer to around 60%. It is far from ideal, but compared to the alternatives (which in
the case of alternative medicine is really nothing), it is far better.

Jeff


More tin can rattling from the allopathic mob.
Don't you ever get tired of rationalising allopathic medicine with cures always "just around the corner"
for
this and that?

75% of kids being cured doesn't sound like "just around the corner."

Doesn't sound too bad if its true.

It is.

However, there are some cures that were 100% such as rife's.

So? Where is the Rife's cure today? What is the evidence that it works?

What I've heard is that "cured" means 5 years alive from diagnosis.

That cutoff is often used. After all, if you use a much longer
time-frame, you would have to wait like 60 years for cures of kids with
cancer. While there are exceptions, if a cancer doesn't recur within
five years, it rarely does.

What I've also heard is on average people live longer with no treatment than conventional.

You've heard? That's not strong evidence.

People with certain types and stages of cancer are not helped with
conventional. But considering that over 50% are cured, what you heard is
incorrect.

Jeff


"Oh science hasn't got all the answers, but alternative medicine is wrong" blah blah blah!

No one ever said science has all the answers. However, alternative medicine is unproven, at best.

On the one hand you say that science doesn't have all the answers, and on the other hand you say that it knows
that alternative remedies don't work.
Which is to say that allopathic knows alternative is no good because it doesn't follow the same rules as
allopathic.
There have been alternative treatments that have been suppressed you know, they say they're "quack" medicine
and get rid of them as quickly as they can in the interests of "getting rid of snake oil salesmen". Well
that's what is called a "cover story". The real reason is protect the profits of big pharma.

CANCER INC
 

On Thu, 02 Dec 2010 21:46:09 -0500, in misc.health.alternative,
dr_jeff wrote:

On 12/2/10 9:11 PM, carole wrote:
wrote in message ...
On 12/2/10 10:29 AM, carole wrote:
wrote in message ...
On 12/2/10 3:42 AM, john wrote:
http://whale.to/cancer.html

Thank you for showing how alternative medicine has a whole bunch of unsupported claims based on no
evidence.
All alternative medicine is interested in is making money.

Allopathic medicine has increased the survival rate for kids with cancer to over 75% and the survival rate
for all people with cancer to around 60%. It is far from ideal, but compared to the alternatives (which in
the case of alternative medicine is really nothing), it is far better.

Jeff


More tin can rattling from the allopathic mob.
Don't you ever get tired of rationalising allopathic medicine with cures always "just around the corner"
for
this and that?

75% of kids being cured doesn't sound like "just around the corner."

Doesn't sound too bad if its true.

It is.

However, there are some cures that were 100% such as rife's.

So? Where is the Rife's cure today? What is the evidence that it works?

There was no evidence back in the day. That's why there was court
action. It was deemed a scam/con.

What I've heard is that "cured" means 5 years alive from diagnosis.

That cutoff is often used. After all, if you use a much longer
time-frame, you would have to wait like 60 years for cures of kids with
cancer. While there are exceptions, if a cancer doesn't recur within
five years, it rarely does.

What I've also heard is on average people live longer with no treatment than conventional.

You've heard? That's not strong evidence.

Hear-say or is the mere-say?

People with certain types and stages of cancer are not helped with
conventional. But considering that over 50% are cured, what you heard is
incorrect.

I known people that had pancreatic cancer lived over 5-8 years after
treatments. And the nice thing is those extra years are something
they wouldn't have had without the treatments.

"Oh science hasn't got all the answers, but alternative medicine is wrong" blah blah blah!

No one ever said science has all the answers. However, alternative medicine is unproven, at best.

On the one hand you say that science doesn't have all the answers, and on the other hand you say that it knows
that alternative remedies don't work.
Which is to say that allopathic knows alternative is no good because it doesn't follow the same rules as
allopathic.
There have been alternative treatments that have been suppressed you know, they say they're "quack" medicine
and get rid of them as quickly as they can in the interests of "getting rid of snake oil salesmen". Well
that's what is called a "cover story". The real reason is protect the profits of big pharma.


--
Bob Officer

"One of my pet hates is being made an idiot
out of ...but you go right ahead"
Carole Hubbard in Message-ID:
. com

CANCER INC
 

Bob Officer -*-*.@.*-*- jumped out of the airlock. These were their
final words before their head exploded:
:

On Thu, 02 Dec 2010 21:46:09 -0500, in misc.health.alternative,
dr_jeff wrote:

On 12/2/10 9:11 PM, carole wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 12/2/10 10:29 AM, carole wrote:
wrote in message
...
On 12/2/10 3:42 AM, john wrote:
http://whale.to/cancer.html

Thank you for showing how alternative medicine has a whole bunch
of unsupported claims based on no evidence.
All alternative medicine is interested in is making money.

Allopathic medicine has increased the survival rate for kids with
cancer to over 75% and the survival rate for all people with
cancer to around 60%. It is far from ideal, but compared to the
alternatives (which in the case of alternative medicine is really
nothing), it is far better.

Jeff


More tin can rattling from the allopathic mob.
Don't you ever get tired of rationalising allopathic medicine with
cures always "just around the corner" for
this and that?

75% of kids being cured doesn't sound like "just around the
corner."

Doesn't sound too bad if its true.

It is.

However, there are some cures that were 100% such as rife's.

So? Where is the Rife's cure today? What is the evidence that it
works?

There was no evidence back in the day. That's why there was court
action. It was deemed a scam/con.

What I've heard is that "cured" means 5 years alive from diagnosis.

That cutoff is often used. After all, if you use a much longer
time-frame, you would have to wait like 60 years for cures of kids
with cancer. While there are exceptions, if a cancer doesn't recur
within five years, it rarely does.

What I've also heard is on average people live longer with no
treatment than conventional.

You've heard? That's not strong evidence.

Hear-say or is the mere-say?

People with certain types and stages of cancer are not helped with
conventional. But considering that over 50% are cured, what you heard
is incorrect.

I known people that had pancreatic cancer lived over 5-8 years after
treatments. And the nice thing is those extra years are something
they wouldn't have had without the treatments.

"Oh science hasn't got all the answers, but alternative medicine
is wrong" blah blah blah!

No one ever said science has all the answers. However, alternative
medicine is unproven, at best.

On the one hand you say that science doesn't have all the answers,
and on the other hand you say that it knows that alternative
remedies don't work. Which is to say that allopathic knows
alternative is no good because it doesn't follow the same rules as
allopathic.
There have been alternative treatments that have been suppressed you
know, they say they're "quack" medicine and get rid of them as
quickly as they can in the interests of "getting rid of snake oil
salesmen". Well that's what is called a "cover story". The real
reason is protect the profits of big pharma.

The sad thing is that is "Carole" ever "joined the club" (And may she
never receive that dubious honour) - She'd be sitting in an oncology
clinic, just like so many of us have to date.

It is all too easy to make preposterous claims about "The Man", when you
can sit, nice, safe and comfy from a position of non-cancer.





--
Marc Bissonnette
Largest ISP comparison site in Canada: http://www.canadianisp.ca
Web hosting search and comparison: http://www.masterhostlist.com

CANCER INC
 

"Marc Bissonnette" wrote in message
31...


The sad thing is that is "Carole" ever "joined the club" (And may she
never receive that dubious honour) - She'd be sitting in an oncology
clinic, just like so many of us have to date.

Not me. I've had first hand experience being treated by allopathic medicine from my appendicitis incident many
years ago.
A person needs to take responsibility for their own health.


It is all too easy to make preposterous claims about "The Man", when you
can sit, nice, safe and comfy from a position of non-cancer.

Cancer doesn't just happen by accident, its takes years of faulty eating and living -- you know, cause and
effect.


--
carole
www.conspiracee.com
"Its pretty hard to keep in touch with reality when you see so little of it."

CANCER INC
 

"carole" jumped out of the airlock. These were
their final words before their head exploded:
ond.com:


"Marc Bissonnette" wrote in message
31...


The sad thing is that is "Carole" ever "joined the club" (And may she
never receive that dubious honour) - She'd be sitting in an oncology
clinic, just like so many of us have to date.

Not me. I've had first hand experience being treated by allopathic
medicine from my appendicitis incident many years ago.
A person needs to take responsibility for their own health.


It is all too easy to make preposterous claims about "The Man", when
you can sit, nice, safe and comfy from a position of non-cancer.

Cancer doesn't just happen by accident, its takes years of faulty
eating and living -- you know, cause and effect.

Um. No.

Guess what ? I was a firefighter for six years.

Guess what ? I got cancer.

Guess what ? 67% of all firefighters have to deal with cancer (Full time
and on-call)

Guess what ? It wasn't lung cancer, either.

"First time experience with regards to appendicitis" ? Big deal.

My appendix burst - literally - when I was 14. Surgeons corrected the issue
and - surprise, surprise - I am still here today.

While I don't know enough about you to say this categorically, but it
sounds like you have an almost dangerous lack of knowledge of how the human
body works.



--
Marc Bissonnette
Largest ISP comparison site in Canada: http://www.canadianisp.ca
Web hosting search and comparison: http://www.masterhostlist.com

CANCER INC
 

On Sat, 4 Dec 2010 03:00:50 +1100, in misc.health.alternative,
"carole" wrote:

Concerned Netcitizens

I am sorry to see this thread leak over to alt.support.cancer and
sci.med.

Carole IS a very sorry and ignorant persons that is not afraid to
continuously make her self into an idiot.

I have set follow-up out of the support groups in hope this thread
will disappear from your group.



"Marc Bissonnette" wrote in message
. 131...


The sad thing is that is "Carole" ever "joined the club" (And may she
never receive that dubious honour) - She'd be sitting in an oncology
clinic, just like so many of us have to date.

Not me. I've had first hand experience being treated by allopathic medicine from my appendicitis incident many
years ago.
A person needs to take responsibility for their own health.


It is all too easy to make preposterous claims about "The Man", when you
can sit, nice, safe and comfy from a position of non-cancer.

Cancer doesn't just happen by accident, its takes years of faulty eating and living -- you know, cause and
effect.

Actually Carole you are wrong again. Some cancers have been observed
in newborn Children. Google: Neuroblastoma.



you know you are broadcasting you ignorance to several groups. I do
not know why by I have set follow up out of support groups where
people general go looking for real answers to for real problems.

Idiots, like you should keep their ignorance to themselves.


--
Bob Officer

"One of my pet hates is being made an idiot
out of ...but you go right ahead"
Carole Hubbard in Message-ID:
. com