Hokeyopathy

"john" wrote in message
...

"CWatters" wrote in message
...

"Vaccine-Man" wrote in message
om...

Naturopathic medicine focuses on the underlying causes of disease

Oh don't you just love that expression. It makes it sound like every
other
kind of treatment is based on last nights footbal results - anything
but
the actual cause.



Touchy, which is why you can't cure most diseases. Cleansing isn't
something in orthodox meds vocab http://www.whale.to/m/cleanse1.html

Yes, and that illustrates a big difference between modern medicine and
conjecture-based "medicine" (aka, alternative medicine and complementary
"medicine."

For something to be accepted by modern medicine, there has to be evidence
that it works. For example, the treatment of cancer is based on medicine's
understanding some the basic pathology of cancer, physiology, pharmacology
and cell biology. And the treatments have been proven to work. For exmaple,
the cure rate for childhood cancers has gone from about 5% when I was born
to around 75% now. On the other hand, the cure rate with alternative
medicine's treatment of cancer is 0%. (If I am incorrect, please show the
pee-revieweed studies that show this).

Likewise, "cleansing" is not based on any modern understanding of how the
colon, liver and body work. In addition, it has never been tested in any
clinical trials. It based on a theory of toxins that has no backng in modern
science. People who advocate the toxin theory or cleansing are unable to
name or measure the "toxins" or show that their blood levels (or other
relevant levels) change with "treatment."

So that cleansing is not in the modern medical vocabolary is good, because
it is not backed by modern science, clinical studies or evidence that it
works. ANd it is potentially deadly.

the main cause of disease, toxemia, and junk food, apart from poisons like
drugs and metals

Could you please restate your last sentence in English. Maybe a verb would
help.

If you are trying to state that "toxemia" is a main cause of disease, please
provide good references from peer-reveiwed journals, the names of the
toxemia and evidance that getting rid of the toxemia does helps people.

Jeff

"john" wrote in message
...

"CWatters" wrote in message
-


"Under no circumstances should hydrogen peroxide be taken internally."


LOL. Wouldn't want anyone to twig onto oxygen therapy, which is why they
stopped the one person selling drinkable peroxide
http://www.whale.to/c/oxygen.html

"I interviewed 15 people who stated they were cured of cancer by using one
of the oxygen therapies.amazingly enough, one of them had pancreatic
cancer
A man had prostate cancer. Someone else had colon cancer. Dr Otto Warburg
won the nobel prize twice for stating that the cause of cancer is a normal
cell denied 60% of its oxygen requirements..I asked a big cancer
specialist .if he had ever heard of Dr Warburg, and he said no. And this
specialist's title was 'Head of Fermentation Process
Laboratories."---McCabe.

Instead of a quote from some bunghole, how about real peer-reviewed studies?
I mean real evidence that it works.

Jeff

"john" wrote in message
...
medical hoaxes http://www.whale.to/b/hoax.html

Is this page meant as a joke? I mean the person who wrote this must the most
medically illiterate person in the world with a computer.

Jeff

"PF Riley" wrote in message
...


And, of course, if a vaccine had 0.0000001% hydrogen peroxide, the
anti-vaccine assholes would list this as a "toxic" component of
vaccines and cite the above as proof. Yet it's fine for a con-artist
to inject it into someone as long as he claims to be a "naturopath."

PF

Or a great medical doctor like dr wright

"The FDA won't spend a dime on ozone research, but they spent over $1
million intimidating, harassing, and persecuting me alone." Dr Jonathen
Wright http://www.tahoma-clinic.com/

"CWatters" wrote in message
...
Hydrogen peroxide causes cancer in animals - but I admit it seems there is
insufficient evidence to show if causes cancer in humans - so thats
alright
then :-(

LOL. You can fiddle any study to prove anything, as we keep seeing with the
MMR fiasco, when the people who pay for it, the drug industry, get the
results they want, and you can use any animal to get the result you want, if
they used animals to test penicillin it would never have gotten on the
market as it kills rabbits, as i recall

"CWatters" wrote in message
...
Hydrogen Peroxide is a pesticide....


don't use it then, funny how you pharma boys always hate non-pharma med,
pity you can't think four yourselves

"john" wrote in message
...

"CWatters" wrote in message
...
Hydrogen Peroxide is a pesticide....


don't use it then.

I won't.

funny how you pharma boys always hate non-pharma med,
pity you can't think four yourselves

That's funny I thought I was an Elegctronics Engineer.

http://www.bccancer.bc.ca/PPI/Unconv...enPeroxide.htm

"The amount of oxygen contained in the few cubic centimeters of peroxide
included in Donsbach's 4-hour intravenous infusions is less than the amount
in a single deep breath of air."

CWatters wrote:
"john" wrote in message
...

LOL. Wouldn't want anyone to twig onto oxygen therapy,
which is why
they stopped the one person selling drinkable peroxide


So which is it John? For long life do we need to take
oxidisers like
Hydrogen Peroxide of anti-oxidants like some vitamins?

Doublethink- the ability to hold two contradicting points of
view in mind and never realize there is a conflict. Read
1984. John (or should we call him Winston Smith) is the
master.

--
00doc

"john" wrote in message ...

Dr Otto Warburg
won the nobel prize twice for stating that the cause of cancer is a normal
cell denied 60% of its oxygen requirements..I asked a big cancer
specialist .if he had ever heard of Dr Warburg, and he said no. And this
specialist's title was 'Head of Fermentation Process
Laboratories."---McCabe.

Uh, dude, Warburg won the Nobel Prize in 1931 for his work on cellular
aerobic respiration (a process involved in producing the cell's
principal unit of energy, ATP). Just to give you a little context on
this, DNA had yet to be shown to be the molecule of inheritence
(Avery, McCleod & McCarthy, 1941). After this, it became clear in a
few years that mutations in DNA were responsible for oncogenesis.
Warburg's contribution to cancer research was his discovery that
*some* (but not *all*) cancer cells from a tumor can live in the
absence of oxygen. This is because the tumor cells at the core of an
unvascularized tumor are under great hypoxic pressure. They have to
either gain mutations to survive in an oxygen-free environment (which
they sometimes do), or they have to gain mutions in angiogenesis genes
so that blood vessels will form within the tumor (which they often
do).