Authors should be free to write about alternative medical treatments that they personally found useful for a minor ailment, but claiming a recipe cures all forms of stage 4 cancer, or any other serious terminal illness, is unethical. Especially if the hub is plugging a book with the same unsound medical content. I flagged such an article, but it is still published. Does that mean HubPages considers this content acceptable?
I don't think there's anything in the TOS to target this kind of content. If there was, it would open a new can of worms for what can be considered as such.
I think anyone writing such a hub and Hubpages itself should be careful about these types of hubs. We could get sued. A disclaimer should be added to every one of them.
I feel that out and out false medical advice shouldn't be allowed here. What you are mentioning sounds more like spam.
And who will judge and make the assessment of "false medical advice"? Most MDs and Western Medicine practitioners will judge any alternative medicine strategies as "false". They are two different paradigms. It would be like having a botanist evaluate nuclear physics.
Aluminium chelation to cure autism is false and cruel to the parents by treating them like idiots for not just "curing" their kids. Ginger to cure cancer is in the same camp.
It is predatory nonsense used to scam money from desperate people and nothing to do with real complementary mind/body medicine. Equating the two insults real practitioners of holistic medicine.
It is like saying your kid sister with a hack saw is just the same as a trained and licensed surgeon. Its just not true. respecting different paradigms does not mean accepting frauds who exploit people.
My comments were directed to Barbara Kay's point, on page one of this thread, "I feel that out and out false medical advice shouldn't be allowed here [on HubPages]."
I have spent most of my adult life eyeball deep in Western Medicine practice. I am an Occupational Therapist. I have witnessed countless instances of the failure of Western Medicine over the years. I have seen patients treated dismissively and disrespectfully by the WM world. Unfortunately, MDs tend to be of the mindset, ‘If I don’t know what’s wrong with you, then nothing is wrong with you.’ In the last decade I started dabbling in alternatives. In the last 5 years, I have embraced the alternatives, as a personal choice. In my opinion, there is a lot more logic in alternative medicine than in Western Medicine.
I no longer dismiss things as ridiculous that I would have dismissed as ridiculous 10-15 years ago. This is not to say that I embrace everything I read. Just that there are a lot of things I would have immediately dismissed in the past, but now I keep an open mind about many of them. Lack of proof of the efficacy of alternatives is not the same as proof of quackery. Lack of proof of harm is not the same as proof that something is safe.
But as I said, alternative therapies is a choice I've made for myself. I'm very clear what is within my scope of practice when it comes to my clients. I'll share my alternative med opinions with friends however.
I think alternatives and conventional medicine can co-exist in harmony, and there are specific sets of circumstances when alternative treatments are the best option,and at other times conventional medicine the best option. I just think that many here, certainly myself, are concerned that an author on HP is offering a 'cure for cancer' , stage 4 to be precise, to what may be frightened and vulnerable people who are hoping for some kind of miracle.
The author has also stated that people who have cancer should not consult their doctor because they'll stop cancer by themselves.
There's no real evidence to suggest that his cure actually works, or is in anyway effective. Yet he insists that he can cure cancer in two weeks!
Others have said I have claimed one should never see a doctor.
I never said that despite being accused of it at least a few times.
It's okay to SEE a doctor so long as the doctor doesn't do anything INVASIVE or prescribe any drugs.
There are exceptions.
Obviously if a person is in a coma from an accident, or needs to have a broken bone set, then they would need a doctor to do those sorts of things.
But for 95 to 99% of the problems people have there are herbs that are far superior to the treatments doctors offer.
Keep in mind that I recommend grating the herbs are making a tincture. In those forms the herbs can be 10 times more powerful than what is found in a capsule or a tea.
I didn't quote you as saying 'never' see a doctor. These are your exact words:
"People have a better chance of getting rid of their cancer if they do nothing than if they fall into the cook's traps. Autopsies were done and the autopsies showed that most people had cancer that stopped growing several times but didn't know it. So they cured themselves without knowing it.
But if you go to a doctor for cancer you have only a 50/50 chance of lasting 5 years at best. So the person is better off not going to the doctor for cancer because even by mistake, the person will stop the cancer all by themselves."
On this thread > http://hubpages.com/forum/topic/121201
You claimed I said one should not consult their doctor.
That is incorrect. My previous comment should clarify it.
Don't use a doctor to TREAT your cancer. Use them only for evaluation. Most of the ways doctors evaluate the progress of cancer or its remission are also suspect. CT scans promote cancer like crazy. Biopsies spread cancer.
Blood work needs to be interpreted correctly because when cancer is being shrunk, it often leaves through the bloodstream. This results in spikes in the numbers from blood tests which could easily be misinterpreted as an increase in cancer.
Thus a person who was testing my remedy could easily make the wrong decision based on a result that actually showed great improvement.
Another misreading is if the tumor were to become more visible which makes it look like it is bigger than it was before. It's not actually bigger - it's just being discharged from the body including the hidden part. It's akin to an iceberg where the largest part by far is under the skin.
Ok, I digress. You said people should not see their doctor if they have cancer, and shouldn't let the doctor treat their cancer.
They should do nothing, or see you.
Once a person has a diagnosis from a doctor, there isn't a lot of need to see the doctor because the doctor doesn't have the tools to do anything effective.
But the person might want to get bloodwork or an x-ray.
There are tests being done by innovative doctors that preclude the need for those sorts of things, but I'm assuming not everyone has access to them.
There is the Navarro ImmunoAssay that costs somewhere around $50 that allows a person to keep track of their progress.
Also recording the urine pH 4 times a day at 8, 1, 5 and 9 lets a person know on a daily basis what their progress is in terms of being metabolically balanced. Cancer cannot grow when our metabolism is balanced. Cancer patients always have an imbalance in their readings.
Having the imbalance doesn't mean a person has cancer but cancer is one of the things that require an imbalance as a prerequisite.
The patient might want to see their doctor to have the doctor help them get off their medications because medications promote cancer growth.
In cases like that the patient would be using herbs to take care of whatever the drug was being prescribed for.
And you can get false alternative medical advice just as you can get false conventional medical advice.
What makes it false, well the iridologist who gave may neighbor herbs and told her not to see a doctor, causing her to die of a curable condition. That was not just false, it was evil and he went to prison. Are you saying he shouldn't have?
I think the prejudice is saying only conventional doctors can commit malpractice. Anyone in a therapeutic or education role can be greedy or incompetent. I don't see why alternative medicine should be any exception.
I have not read the book, and I doubt you have either. I am not a doctor (although the book title indicates it is about a doctor) so I fail to see how you can declare it features 'unsound medical content'.
Who exactly is going to decide what is appropriate medical content and what is not? You?
And who feels self-righteous enough to decide what is and is not a 'minor ailment'. Not me, that's for sure. Perhaps in the future people would have to deem their own medical condition, minor. To write a hub, should a person claim, "I suffered from minor end-stage cancer ..." ?
I am surprised by the amount of time and effort being spent trying to lobby that hub out of existence. Really, it is silly. Folk like you will dismiss the information. Folk who really feel they need it, may try it.
They'll be eating food, for heaven's sake. Stop underestimating the intelligence of other people, and let them make their own decisions.
I leave you - and everyone else who picks up your cause - with this question ....
"How will you feel if it turns out that 'medical science' validates this hubber's claims in ten year's time (as may well happen) - but you managed to rob millions of people access to that vital information when it just might have saved their lives?"
I don't know about you, but I wouldn't be able to sleep at night. You seem to think you are saving people, but in fact you might just be doing the opposite. If that's the case, then who's the bad guy?
Here's my problem with those types of hubs- and yes I write on alternative medicine- I DO have what everyone thought was a minor cancer which actually turns out was "invasive, aggressive, metastasizing and unresponsive to treatment."
Ironically I wrote a hub years ago about medical quackery when it comes to herbal cures for cancer... I have had to re-read it a couple times because I -quite honestly- am terrified. In my current state, even with knowledge, I would be easy prey to any huckster looking to make a buck. The fact that a book needs bought, implies that someone is making money off of said book. With the costs of treatment/lack of wages etc... that 15 dollars (or whatever is being charged for the book) could mean the difference between not eating/having meds or having food and medicine.
Still, there's nothing to do about the hub... but it is a sketchy topic... ethically (or at least morally)
I'm truly sorry about your illness. Kelley's recipe is posted on his Hub for free; you don't have to pay for it. I don't know if it would work for you, but it certainly can't hurt you to try it.
Why do people make comments when they aren't in the least familiar with the Hubpage in question and then make untruthful, negative comments?
Sometimes my readers have lots of questions. And they come back and ask more. And they visit several times continuing to ask questions.
I've been answering their questions - oftentimes quite extensively - for readers FOR FREE for SIX YEARS. I never asked one of them if they had ordered my book, nor is there any requirement to do so.
NO ONE else is doing that for them.
But there are plenty of people willing to take cheap shots about how they would do it differently. Well, let me tell you something - you AREN'T doing it - differently or otherwise.
Go do it if you know so much. Until then, maybe you could have a little more humility.
There was absolutely nothing that lacked humility in that post and it wasn't a personal attack.
I know the hub and I know there has been at least one thread about it before. I just mentioned that there is an ethical component when dealing with this kind of thing because people are desperate and it's easy to take advantage of people in that situation.
Even if you are doing it for free, you may believe in the "cure" but statistically it is unlikely to work. No matter how much anecdotal evidence exist. There is a certain amount of ethical responsibility-then- that falls on your shoulders if you convince someone it will work, and it doesn't.
You can be defensive about that if you like, and you can type in bold letters as much as you want, it doesn't change that. If you would like to have a conversation about it from here that's fine... but if you are just going to jump down my throat then I'm sorry, I don't have the time for it.
If you actually knew anything about the Hub as you now claim for a second time digging yourself in even deeper to defend your false charge, you would not have made the false statement regarding the requirement to buy my book. And then you went on about it to further disparage me with your own false ideas. Here is what you wrote:
"The FACT that a book needs bought, implies that someone is making money off of said book. With the costs of treatment/lack of wages etc... that 15 dollars (or whatever is being charged for the book) could mean the difference between not eating/having meds or having food and medicine." (caps added)
Don't spread false information if you don't want anyone to jump down your throat.
An example of lack of humility is to pontificate about a topic when you don't know the topic. You don't know my hubpage, but you acted like you did.
Go educate yourself before making false charges.
While I may continue to post in this thread, my conversation with you is now over. Generally, I have no problems getting into pissing contests with random people on the internet... but this time is a topic that I'm really not going to degrade into an insult/rant level.
Have a nice day.
There is a difference between a pissing contest and correcting the record regarding ignorant false statements.
You were wrong. I corrected it.
You didn't like it. I corrected you again.
It's good that you aren't going to answer because it would probably require more corrections from me.
+1. Not on the receiving end of an aggressive and unresponsive cancer, Melissa, but have had my own experiences and it is very frightening. Not just the health aspect, but the everything, the implications for everyone that you care about.
And that's the big part of it Holly. It makes you scared and desperate, not just for yourself but everyone around you. That makes people behave in ways that aren't always logical or responsible. While, technically, no one else has responsibility for what such people do... there kinda is a responsibility, you know? Or there should be.
Yep, because people become vulnerable, frightened and really don't which way to turn. When you're in a heightened state of stress you make decisions based on fear and insecurity rather than logic and reason. Logic and reason is pretty easy to do when you're well and safe. So people can say all they like about responsibility for your own decisions, but until you've been there it's difficult to appreciate another's mindset.
At these times I think we need a rock, or, at least, truth. The whole picture.
I agree completely. That "whole picture" is nearly impossible to find on the internet... and I would venture to say completely impossible to find in an open-platform site such as HP. Reputable and responsible holistic/alternative medicine can and does exist for cancer treatment, in the form of complimentary therapies coordinated with mainstream medicine. The holistics in those practices tend to be more realistic and honest about their treatments. Those practitioners generally will not work without a mainstream physician because they know that something as simple as a grapefruit could react with other treatments.
The writers on HP could not possibly go into the depth needed to judge each case and it is guaranteed that they are giving information that could be harmful in certain instances. Using the jalapeno thing- just for an example- whether or not it could be helpful aside, in my particular case it could be disastrous. You just don't know when something you write could be like that.
"...the jalepeno thing..."
What jalepeno thing? Yet you said, "I know the hub."
No, you don't.
I will apologize for that, it has been a long time since I read your hub. I gave you another view going back to find my mistake. It was habaneros not jalapenos.
Both would have produced the same results in me. Habaneros probably more so.
As an aside, Ginger- your alternative- interacts with over 200 medications. Many of those medications are used in treating cancer.
That's it. The whole picture varies from one individual to another, not every cancer is equal and not every treatment the same, so it stands to reason that the outcomes for each person are determined by many factors. Likewise, one holistic intervention might be great for one person, but disastrous for the next.
I wont go into it too deeply here but when my sister was on dialysis she had to adhere to a very strict diet, which included her liquid intake. Lots of foods that are considered to be very good for us (and are under normal circumstances) were prohibited. But when she suffered with coughs and colds (which was frequently because of her depressed immunity) pure honey and pure lemon juice were the best treatment. Comfrey for treating all the bruises and wheat bags for reliving the aches and pains. Conventional medicines, such as paracetamol, cough medicines or ibuprofen, are a problem for people on dialysis because whilst each exchange removes toxins and basically keeps someone alive, they're not as efficient as a kidney.
So, there can be occasions where the alternative treatments are by far the best option.
I absolutely agree. I mentioned a few pages back about my love of complementary alternative medicine. I don't think I would have the same problem if someone was saying eat these really hot peppers IN ADDITION to mainstream medicine. I seriously don't believe that the hot peppers would ever kill a single cancer cell, just because of the way cancer cells work and the way the body delivers chemicals (natural or pharmaceutical). But, hey even placebo effects are great.
In some cases, alternative remedies work better than mainstream remedies... other than for infections, however, these remedies are best for relieving symptoms... not curing anything. There are just simply limitations.
It is no different to say that drinking a tea will cure a compound fracture than eating a sandwich will cure cancer. They are simply two conditions that are outside of the range of alternative medicine to cure. Are there a ton of herbal/holistic remedies that would help with pain, relieve nausea, encourage appetite, provide relaxation, help build the immune system... etc? Absolutely. Are there any herbal remedies that will kill a cancer cell in the human body? No... at least not any simple ones. I'm open to the possibility that some combination could exist somewhere... however it would have to be in combining several herbs that have never been combined before... I'm just not sure there's that many combinations left that haven't already been tried. With the long growing/cultivation and medical usage of both hot peppers (of all types) and/or garlic and ginger... it's just not happening.
Yep, but just to add, I've found a serum which appears (and I've been using it for almost two years) to treat my psoriasis better than any concoction offered by my GP, or T-Gel shampoo. In fact, I'd go as far as to say that the stuff offered by my GP has treated the symptoms but not the condition. But then I found cucumber seed oil.
I have psoriasis in my scalp and when I'm stressed I itch like a woman with the worst infestion of head lice you've ever seen (honestly) I also have really thick, naturally curly hair, and flaky skin and bits of scab are are not an attractive look when they reach their way to your curls!
I've tried everything in the past and whilst the condition has been controlled, I've not seen that much progress. And the concoctions I've tried really stink! I'm talking aroma here!
I rub cucumber seed oil into my scalp about twice a week and leave it there for a few hours before washing it off. (going out with really greasy serum in your hair is not an attractive look either, unless you're going for the unwashed for several weeks grunge appeal)
It appears to be working for me. Now, when I examine my scalp, I look like I have a very mild dandruff.
That's trivial stuff though, Melissa.
When I discovered from a smear test that I hadn't even worried about, that I had passed the pre-cancer and entered the cancer stage, I opted for what I thought was the best outcome, and that was laser surgery.
It was right for me at the time. I've never regretted it.
I think we just have to go with what we have available, explore the information we have and go with what feels right.
My husband has cancer. He had to have chemo as soon as he went in the hospital because he was so sick if he had not had the chemo I don't think he would have made it through the next couple days. He has also had psoriasis very bad for years. The chemo cleared up the psoriasis. We don't know if it will come back once chemo is done. Doctor says it may or may not.
Doesn't the whole of this hub/discussion show that some people have an inordinate fear of death?
Especially where someone claims a deep belief and faith in an afterlife, with a god waiting somewhere to welcome him/her, then that fear of death seems to be misplaced.
Why not concentrate on doing all the right things and really enjoying the life you have right here and now. Not one of us knows when will be our last breath.
They are now claiming that pot is curing cancer. It has to be boiled down into an oil. It would be wonderful if it is true. I've read that it is being used in Germany, but the USDA won't approve it for that use here. I hope this isn't a hoax going around, because I've read it in several places and it would be wonderful!!!
Yup, that's why so many people jump into getting cut and cooked even though they have probably witnessed how bad those things have been for other people.
The doctors scare tactics and their own fears panic patients into terrible decisions that usually leads to their death.
OTOH, eating a sandwich isn't a big deal.
There is a man who got scared into having stomach surgery who decided to try my recipe using yogurt instead of bread and butter for six days before having stomach surgery for cancer. When he went in for the surgery his stomach cancer was gone.
*sighs* This is a mistake.
I have a skin graft covering most of my lower eyelid and over forty stitches holding it all together. I've been told under no circumstances to cry. Eating food containing the same chemical they use to make tear gas is probably not the best idea for me.
Since you didn't know that personally, and if I had read your hub without that basic knowledge, seriously bad things could have happened... not to mention the possibility of searing horrible pain.
That's kind of the point I was making. You have no idea who you are giving your advice to and what it would do to them if they TOOK it.
You're right with the <sigh> - I wish you didn't need to be corrected again. But you do.
If you hadn't allowed the doctors to cut you, you wouldn't be having the complications you have now.
My recipe is for getting rid of cancer, not for healing skin grafts.
Secondly, if you knew my hubpage - which you don't - I have probably said 10,000 times, "This is what I would do if it were me" or something similar in my replies.
I NEVER tell someone what they should do. They know their situation better than I do, and as an adult they need to make decisions based on what they believe is best for them.
Actually, it was an ulcerative tumour that wasn't recognizable until it had done so much damage to my eye that it nearly blinded me. The surgery would have had to be done to remove the scaring if nothing else.
Or does your sandwich also fix the scaring cause by cancer?
Did you put in your hub that you shouldn't eat your sandwich to treat the rest of your cancer if you have had a skin graft to remove scarring? Or that you shouldn't eat ginger if you are taking aspirin? Food is just as dangerous as medicines sometimes. Doctors know this when they prescribe medicine. You seem to be missing that part. Did you know that Habaneros react with certain medications as well?
Your second point is when you are claiming to cure cancer, you really don't get to skate by with "This is what I would have done, you don't have to do it, BUT IT CURES CANCER". It goes back to the desperate people who are willing to try anything.
If I'd had an ulcerative tumor, I'd be taking borage oil or evening primrose oil every day while recording my urine pH 4 times a day.
Plus, I'd have eaten my sandwich because hot peppers help to heal ulcers! Most people mistakenly believe that because peppers can make a tummy burn, it would make an ulcer burn, too. But just the opposite happens.
Aloe juice and slippery elm are also soothing, so I'd do that too if it were me.
Scarring is the hardening of fibrin. Hot peppers and ginger melt fibrin. It's mostly melted fibrin that runs out of a person's nose when they eat a hot pepper.
If the scarring were too far gone, I'd take a product called Zymessence. The enzymes in it can soften or eliminate scar tissue.
I'd be taking it anyway if I had a skin graft to speed up the healing tremendously. There is a doctor in the town where I live who prescribes bromelain to his patients before and after doing eyelid surgery to speed the healing. He has them take at least one capsule two or three times a day between meals (empty stomach) with 8 ounces of water. I believe it's the Nature's Way 1500 brand.
I've already answered your question regarding whether I tell people this or that. I tell them what I would do if it were me. They need to evaluate it and make their own decisions. Obviously if their doctor had cut them and told them not to cry, they would know not to eat hot peppers.
Whyen someone asks me about whther they should eat a certain food or not based on whether it will interfere with the drugs the doctor has prescribed I tell them the same thing I'm about to tell you.
It's the WRONG question. They question is will the drug interfere with the healing effects of the food? The foods are superior medicine. They are more effective than drugs and they don't kill people or make them blind or deaf.
Drugs promote cancer - all of them - because they screw up the metabolism. So if it were me, I'd find the superior alternatives and use those and avoid all the drugs because the cancer will go away more quickly.
There are three things I can say: (1) I cured my cancer and others have cured their cancer using my recipe, (2) Certain foods cure cancer, (3) This is what I would do if I had cancer.
I can also say with 100 years of history to rely on that cutting and cooking cancer is a primitive approach that has killed 50 million people in the US and many more worldwide.
The doctors don't know what cancer is. They say it's 100 different diseases yet they describe true cancer cells as "highly undifferentiated." They don't even realize the significance of that two-word description.
I wouldn't take my car to someone who didn't know how the car is supposed to work. Yet doctors don't know how cancer works. They will tell you as much. They have a crazy idea that it is a mutation. How stupid is that! All the different organs mutate to the same exact "highly undifferentiated" thing?? That makes zero sense, and it is wrong.
Doctors will tell their patients, "If you don't let me cut or cook you, you will die in 3 to 6 months." I never predict how long someone will live because that is manipulative. The doctor is scaring the crap out of the patient to get the patient desperate and to react from the tyranny of the moment.
Doctors use pure scare tactics. But you seem to be okay with that. I don't use scare tactics because cancer doesn't scare me.
There is little to be afraid of when a person gets a diagnosis because cancer can be easy to reverse. But once they start getting cut and cooked, it becomes much harder.
When you say people become willing to try anything you're right - they will even allow someone to cut or burn them - that's how desperate the are.
But others keep a cooler head and discover that FDA-brand medicine is inferior and they make better choices.
The problem is that so many people have things backwards. They trust the most dangerous things while they suspect the safest things.
In their minds, what doctors say holds the top wrung of the ladder. Everything else is inferior. That's where their biggest mistake comes in.
I know this to be true because I can see their record. Their record sucks. Sucks isn't a big enough word. What is the word that describes accelerating the death of almost every patient they have?
Doctors are smart, they are brilliant, and they are ill trained.
Follow what they have been taught and it's likely not going to turn out so good.
I had an ulcerative tumor, not a stomach ulcer. It was on my eyelid. Are you saying that putting hot peppers on it wouldn't have burned? Again, just to reiterate, are you saying that the huge hole in my eyelid with exposed nerves and blood vessels wouldn't have burned if I put hot peppers on it?
Here, let's make a deal. I have one of the rarest cancers in the world. (Porocarcinoma if you would like to look it up). About 400 people have had it...ever. I'm the 8th person to ever have it on my eye.
In short, absolutely everyone who touches me is getting a paper out of it.
It doesn't respond to radiation, doesn't respond to chemo. Wherever it goes, it's cut or die basically.
So, the next scans I have are just before I get the stitches holding my eyelid shut removed and I should be able to eat hot peppers without worrying about the graft anymore. (May 6th)
I will send you a copy of the scans. I will then try your miracle sandwich... which you claim shrinks lesions in as little as six days (per your stomach cancer story) until my next set of scans. If it works, I will give your name and hub link to all the doctors who will be standing dumbfounded... just before they run to write their papers. You can have those scans too, either way.
If it doesn't... I write a hub saying that it didn't cure my cancer and you link it prominently in every single hub you have promoting it... in the first paragraph. I get to specifically list why your hubs are dangerous and why you shouldn't buy your book.
It doesn't matter where the ulcer is. The compounds in the pepers are able to go anywhere in the body where they are needed.
As I said before, I'd be taking Zymessence or bromelain at this point to speed up the healing if it were my eyelid. The scar tissue that is already there can block even the best remedies. Zymessence helps to remove the scar tissue or at least make it softer and more permeable.
Zymessence has the added feature of making cancer cells naked by removing the fibrin and scar tissue.
I'd want to make sure the area was good and healed before using things that would cause tears to form. I don't know what kind of drugs there might be flowing through your eyelid that the doctor has prescribed for the actions he has taken.
In regards to the name of the cancer you've been given, cancers look different due to the involved tissue, but the actual cancer cells are identical regardless of the name.
This means that what cures one cancer will cure them all once the metabolism is balanced. That means I don't need to see the slides or anything else. Let your doctor interpret them.
What I would do for right now if it were me in addition to the Zymessence would be to get some raw honey from a health food store or vegetable stand and some Ceylon cinnamon (cinnamon verum not cinnamon cassia) from a health food store.
I'd warm up some filtered water just warm enough to soften the honey.
I'd put a 1/2 teaspoon of cinnamon (it could be several capsules) and a tablespoon of honey in a ceramic coffee cup and then pour the warm water over it.
I'd drink that three times a day. Cinnamon and honey has never made me 'cry.'
Honey is attracted to cancer cells. Cancer loves sugar, but raw honey isn't sugar because it has cofactors that cancer cells aren't prepared for. LOL.
One tablespoon of raw honey.
1/2 teaspoon cinnamon verum
slightly warm filtered water
3 times a day
Cutting cancer out turns on hidden cancer cells. Judah Folkman, M.D., who was chief of surgery at the children's hospital at Harvard discovered that. Dr Emanuel Revici discovered that surgery has a localized catabolic response followed by a systemic anabolic response. In short, surgery plays havoc with the metabolism.
But a balanced metabolism is a key to stopping cancer from growing. So even if there were no dormant cancer cells present, surgery promotes more cancer returning. So it's not surprising that your doctor keeps having to do more surgery. He is either turning on dormant cells or promoting new growths.
I would be recording my urine pH four times a day at 8, 1, 5 and 9 using either Vaxa pH strips or getting a pH meter which is even more accurate.
A healthy person will have two readings below 6.2 and two readings above 6.2. Cancer patients always have unbalanced readings.
I'd start with 1,000 mgs of borage oil three times a day if it were me to see if it brought me towards balance. If it moved me away from balance, I'd switch out the borage oil and start taking a tablespoon of emulsified cod liver oil once a day.
When your cancer goes away, your doctors won't be interested in how you did it. At least 99% won't be. It's psychologically difficult for them to have spent many years and so much money learning the wrong things to accept the threat of grocery store cures.
Also doctors are taught - I've seen the actual article - to say this if a patient gets well from alternative practices, "I don't want to know what you're doing. Whatever it is you're doing, keep it up." This protects them from lawsuits for some crazy reason that is beyond my pay grade to understand.
I'm not interested in your proposition. You can either try what I would do or not. That's up to you.
You might want to look up what Dr. Judah Folkman found about surgery and its effect on cancer. It's discussed in the book Folkman's War, but you probably don't have time to read that long dense book.
Basically, the main tumor sends a message to satellite dormant cancer cells to stay dormant. But when the main tumor is removed, the signal is no longer sent to keep the tiny cancer colonies silent.
If you have any more questions, please let me know.
Nope, no more questions. I now know everything I need to know.
Conversely though, I am actually being treated at a "teaching" hospital and I know for a fact that if my "team leader" could find a holistic cure for cancer (the clinic actually employees several holistic nurses) he wouldn't sleep until that paper was published. So the opportunity to get your cure recognized by the medical community is HUGE.
Still not willing to take me up? You will-quite literally-never have a patient so perfect for it. You know, if you want to spread the word.
Your bargain is with yourself. You get what you bargain for. I've explained why you keep needing surgeries. It's up to you to come to the realization that a time will come when the doctor will have bad news that the cancer has spread beyond what a knife can resolve.
Cancer is not caused by a lack of cutting on the body. It is a metabolic imbalance that no knife can fix. In fact the knife aids the cancer by messing up the metabolism even more.
It's all in your hands. I am willing to be of service.
No scare tactics eh?
I needed surgeries because I had a hole in my eyelid. As far as I know, there is no herb that fixes holes in people's bodies. No knife was needed to expose my cancer to the elements-it did that all on it's own.
I've pretty much made peace with knowing that this will eventually be what kills me (barring being struck with lightning etc). My best chance of it not killing me before I see my son ride a bike for the first time is to have them cut where they can. This is hard facts, not grasping at straws.
What I am trying to do is face reality, so that I can spend that time watching my kids rather than chasing butterflies. So that I can prepare rather than deny... and so that when I go, there will be some kind of preparedness that makes the transition easier for those around me.
That takes a grasp on reality that is impossible if one thinks eating a hot pepper sandwich will cure them.
Need anymore evidence of this sham? A person with no medical confirmation that he had cancer is refusing your deal that would undoubtedly help people (and himself) if it helped you. Hmm.
Hahah....it was cut out, probably! Even if that guy did have some kind of miracle cure ( have no belief in such a thing, by the way), it would become "quackery" if you then suggested that others might be cured in the same way by following your advice.
A question for you. If you suggested to a client that they try a particular treatment, and it failed, would you hold yourself up for litigation? That would be from the relatives of the deceased, of course, I doubt if there's an agency or any lawyer, in the here-after. The latter would have been banned for arguing with the Chief Judge.
Anyone can be sued for anything. Prevailing is another matter.
But since you want to go that route, you might want to pay a visit to some graveyards. Probably more than 90% were put there by their doctors. The rest were killed in accidents or their own addictions.
Under your plan, doctors would not have time to attend all the lawsuits against them if they devoted 24/7 only to the lawsuits. They should be particularly wary these days with the reports from UCLA and the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center. UCLA found that radiation makes the remaining cells thirty times more malignant. Hutchinson found that chemo makes cancer spread much faster. So the doctors have been put on notice.
As for the man with the stomach cancer, his cure wasn't a miracle. The tumor followed the laws of chemistry and went away.
FYI, cancer cells have 15 times as much fibrin associated with them as do healthy cells. It's the same stuff that snot is mostly comprised of. We all know what happens when you eat a really hot pepper. The snot in your nose runs out.
The 'snot' around the cancer which protects the cancer cells is also melted. It exposes the cancer cells to the compounds in pepper and garlic that cause apoptosis or cell death in the mitochondria.
The latter part is what the researchers at Nottingham University reported regarding capsaicin. The first part about the effect of hot peppers on snot is so obvious that even you might understand it. If you're wondering why I'm speaking to you so dismissively, I'm simply responding to your dismissive tone.
Quackery is what is taught in medical school. Medical school and medical practice has almost nothing to do with healing. The schools are controlled by the pharmaceutical industry that expects a payoff for its involvement. And they are rewarded handsomely for their investments.
As a result we get doctors prescribing drugs for osteoporosis that causes bones to rot. And the same doctors prescribe drugs for cholesterol that cause an increase in heart attacks.
But worst of all we get doctors to cook their cancer patients, thereby speeding up the spread of their cancer.
You might have bit off more than you can chew.
I was being sarcastic to your earlier response.
You have jumped to conclusions a couple of times in your posts here. First, I noticed you jumped to the conclusion about Melissa's tumour. A real doctor does not jump to conclusions. There is a time-honoured process of investigation and detective work that must be gone through in order to find a dependable diagnosis.
I am not saying every doctor of medicine does it right, or gets it right every time... of course not. But the disciplines are there to be followed by any conscientious professional.
From my own post earlier, you have jumped to a lot of presumptions, and then cast doubt upon my integrity. So I am beginning to doubt your words also. Is that not surprising?
Do you, Sir, follow a strict discipline when you are assessing a person who consults you? It does not sound like it from your posts here. What studies have you done in order that you can address the needs of people who approach you for advice? If you make a mistake, can anyone sue you for damages? To whom do you answer? Do you have any kind of peer-review backup to your work?
When you offer opinions about doctors, scientists, companies, manufacturers, scientific principles, what are your qualifications for doing so?
Melissa, I would like you to answer my earlier question (in the quote above). And Hollie too.
How will you feel if it turns out that 'medical science' validates this hubber's claims in ten year's time (as may well happen) - but you managed to rob millions of people access to that vital information when it just might have saved their lives?
Well, in ten years chances are I won't care, wherever I am.
But if medical science validates this hubbers claim and I managed to rob millions of people-however I would do that-of access to that information I would feel very bad indeed.
Now my question (and a more likely one)
How would you feel if a 38 year old mother of five read that hub-and the suggestions that she would fail the treatment if she didn't believe, and the suggestions that "cutting spreads cancer" and ignored mainstream medicine because of her faith in hot pepper sandwiches. She didn't get the treatment and the small aggressive, invasive tumour on her eyelid spread into her eye then her brain? Instead of the three or four years she could have left dealing with the slower metastasizing into her lymph nodes, she dies within six months... not even knowing her children's names at the end and with no preparations or good memories to leave behind? On top of that, the cancer spread so fast that most of her face was gone when she did die... so the final pictures with her children are so horrible that they can't even be looked at?
Could YOU sleep at night?
MelissaB, I don't believe the scenario you outlined will ever happen.
And, whether you like it or not, it is a widely acknowledged fact that cutting into cancer does encourage it to spread. Anyone who has a biopsy on a malignant melanoma, for instance, is likely to find it spreads elsewhere in the body. The best hope when it comes to surgery is if the entire growth is removed with the first cut, as opposed to a slice being taken for testing.
I am very sorry for you and your family that you are in such a vulnerable position. You've clearly been some kind of guinea pig for mainstream medicine. They've had a shot and not healed you despite their best efforts.
What a shame you didn't stumble upon the hub (and the hubber you seem so intent on undermining) a few years ago. You might have had a different outcome, but we'll never know.
Personally I think it was good of him to offer you his advice. Perhaps you are too far down your current path for it to make any difference. But if I was you, I'd try it.
Perhaps you didn't read that I had an ulcerative tumor. I'm not sure how cutting into it would have spread anything... you know since there were parts of my eyelid falling off anyway.
Regardless, they didn't know what kind of tumor it was until the surgery, which was a complete removal. They assumed it was a basal cell tumor that was small then found the underlying tumor which took most of my eyelid.
I had one of the most skilled optical plastic surgeons in the country. Sorry no experimenting, just doctors trying to help. She actually cried when giving me the diagnosis.
No chemo, no radiation... it wouldn't help anyway. Just a team of very concerned doctors trying to keep me alive as long as they can.
I don't believe the scenario you lined up will ever happen either, but I answered your question. How about you answer mine?
I don't know if you meant me or Melissa B,, but I'll answer. That is a highly flawed, emotional appeal, loaded question. That claim can be made about any treatment under the sun. You are advocating opening the door for anyone with access to a computer to tout they have cured cancer because of the premise...what if they're right?
Yes it's possible the OP could be right, although highly unlikely. It's possible that goldfish crackers can be 'the cure' to all illness. But these hypotheses -must be fully tested- before anyone can advertise to terminally ill patients. The OP dodged a shining opportunity to validate his claim and cure one of our fellow hubbers of a terrible illness and instead delivered a bunch of fancy talk. The burden lies on him, not me, to spread the word of his magic cure through the proper means.
Hi MelissaAS. I did mean MelissaB, but thanks for answering.
I have had the good fortune of actually witnessing people overcome their cancer using chillies as one of their weapons. Not specifically the sandwich recipe, but chillies nonetheless.
Have you witnessed goldfish crackers having the same result?
Anyone would be stupid to accept such a challenge, and the author certainly doesn't strike me as stupid. I would certainly not risk my reputation on someone who doesn't agree with me (and makes that very clear) following my instructions to establish whether or not I'm right. It would be different if I was there and able to see for myself that my instructions were followed ... but no way would I accept the challenge as laid out.
I am puzzled by how you could possibly refer to it as a 'shining opportunity'.
I actually offered to youtube it, holding a newspaper with the date, every day. Publicly. You can't ask for more observable adherence than that.
"Once again, here's your chance to prove it. I'll follow whatever treatment you give me. I'll youtube it with a newspaper with the date each day. Medical proof of cancer before and after."
Here's a difference between you and me, MelissaB. When I wanted to find a way to heal my husband's brain tumour, I just wanted to heal my husband's brain tumour. I didn't want to make a song and dance out of it, I just wanted to heal him.
We tried a number of alternative healing methods and, as I explained in another forum thread, he ate many chillies because his body craved them. The chillies were not one of my deliberate choices. It was only after he was successfully healed that the test results linking chillies to killing cancer hit the news.
Doctors were amazed when my husband had lived for 10 years - without any further evidence of any tumour. If he is still alive after 20 years it will be a 'miracle', according to the doctors who quoted the statistics for his type of tumour.
He is still alive 17 years later, and passes his annual check ups with flying colours. Three more years seems perfectly achievable.
The friends to whom I have suggested chillies (and other things) to battle their cancer had a distinct advantage over you. They knew my husband.
Would it work for you? Don't know. Did it work for them? Yes, those who tried it. (Some didn't, preferring instead to indulge themselves with chocolate in between chemotherapy sessions, and died.)
Don't waste your time and energy battling with the author. Battle with your cancer ... whichever way you choose to do that.
Who knows, perhaps you might still be around in ten years time.
I don't want a song or dance either... I also don't want people dying from lack of treatment because they are putting their faith in unsound internet information.
I'm not trying to win arguments... but the author apparently is getting views. That's dangerous because someone is eventually going to die from ignoring realistic options while eating a sandwich.
I made the offer because if it does work, people live. That seems highly unlikely, but if it did work he really would be making medical literature. There is such a small sampling of people with my type of cancer that anyone who has it is going to make medical literature... if for no other reason because they need the information to study it for the next person.
So that's a plus for both me and him and the world if he's telling the truth.
If it doesn't work, then he would have to put a link... which might save the life of the person who WOULD have forwent treatment and died from his advice. Which is a pretty awesome thing too.
Either way, I would be helping people. Seems like a win/win for everyone but the author...if he isn't confident that his "cure" will work and just wants to sell books and get views. I could see how it definitely wouldn't be win/win for him... but again only if he on some level knew taking his advice could be very dangerous.
MelissaB, I understand that your world revolves around you, and I understand why. That's fine. But this man's hub is not just about you.
You have read it and rejected it. You're not the first and you won't be the last to think it is a load of garbage. That's fine. But you don't have to make it your personal mission to stop everyone else from reading it. In my experience, it just might work - although as I said, I don't have first-hand experience with the specifics in his hub, just the main ingredient (with a few slight differences in other supporting foods). Does my positive experience count for nothing?
And what good do you really think would come from "It didn't work for MelissaB who had such a rare type of cancer that 99% of the world's population will never encounter it in their lifetime."
Similarly, if it did work for you, mainstream medicine (and other individual skeptics) would be saying exactly the same thing. "Worked for MelissaB, but you don't have that type of cancer."
Sadly, your good intention is really no more than a good intention. It is not a great opportunity for the author at all.
If you are going to try his suggestions (and if I was you, I would - particularly as your body has not been ravaged by chemo or radiotherapy), do it for you. Do it for your kids. Do it for all the people you love.
That's the only reason why you might try it, as far as I can see.
"Have you witnessed goldfish crackers having the same result?"
What if I said yes? The OP's sandwich claim sounds almost as strange. There are -many- substances in foods that have been shown to inhibit cancer cell proliferation in a petri dish. I don't know you nor do I have a detailed scientific overview of your friend's condition and their daily routines. You BELIEVE they overcame their cancer with chillies (now I'm just repeating myself), but there is a scientific method for a reason, and should chillies posses the magic that you and the OP claim, they should undoubtedly pass every test.
I don't know if you are reading Melissa B's posts, but being wrong would be an extremely small price for her to pay for her recovery. To think she would be willing to 'fake' test out the chillies just to sabotage the OP to make a point for an internet argument is holding her integrity and sanity in a very poor view.
All you have to ask is how a specific substance kills one cell but not others... which is the problem with cancer in general.
The body doesn't have any neat little road map that tells substance to only kill one kind of cell. If it kills cancer cells it's going to kill healthy cells as well. There's this whole science thing behind how medicines/foods work.
Preventing cancer is easier... curing cancer-that's a whole 'nother ball game.
This should help... since this whole argument is basically been had in other venues... and is the equivalent of an facebook hoax...
If you'd said 'yes', MelissaAS, I would suggest you pass on that valuable information.
On the subject of testing the actual results of chillies when used in people with cancer, if you are in a position to arrange appropriate testing with funding that is not linked to pharmaceutical companies, I will happily donate some cash to it.
And btw, I was not referring to faking anything. I was simply referring to being human. Despite the best of intentions, humans often fail to take their 'medicine' for one reason or another.
You specifically said : "I would certainly not risk my reputation on someone who doesn't agree with me..." suggesting that she would maybe 'forget' to take the chillies properly because she has a secret agenda against the OP, a problem that wouldn't occur if she does make a daily vlog. She would obviously benefit tremendously if the peppers work, her life being saved, and the OP would spread his word, hopefully leading to more research on the compound.
We don't 'disagree' with the idea that the active ingredients in peppers could be cancer cures, but we are against staunchly touting this as 'The Answer' to all cancer without sufficient evidence.
And I'm also doubtful that there could ever be one cure for all cancers, because I believe it's a complex disease. I believe that for something so simple to have evaded scientists for so many years would require some 'catch', like maybe a certain delivery of the substance in a particular form would be the ticket. Yet I also believe that overcoming cancer depends on the strength of the immune system, the type of cancer, and the stage. Is that hard to see?
These posts are starting to make me fear making claims about the evils of big pharma or in my particular interests' case, vets making bad recommendations. People start to adopt the mentality that everything unnatural or doctor-recommended is bad, and vice versa, all natural therapies are good. In my experience there's good and bad in both. People do have an inherent need to categorize life's complexities into neat packages. It's an appealing idea that nature can provide cures to all diseases (and that some villainous tyrannical figure is concealing the truth), but I have a bleaker view that will change instantly when evidence is found.
I hope that you don't choose to ignore the cases of people who do not experience success with peppers. Would Kelley be prepared to face the fact that his cure might not be the end-all to cancer?
I can't answer the question LTM, because it's a 404 page not found.
Okay, Hollie. That's enough to convince me I am wasting my time here. The quote was directly above my question ... and yet you didn't see it. The two Melissa's saw it, and responded. But you say it's a 404 page not found.
I made sure it would be right in front of you when I invited you to respond. Seriously, if that's how much attention you pay, it speaks volumes.
LMT, calm down, go to the other thread and see the link you asked me to comment on, it's a page 404 page not found and that's what I thought you were referring to. If you want to make a big deal, however, from a misunderstanding then that's entirely up to you!
Wow! You got yourself a brand new account on HubPages just so you could make six forum posts, name-calling an established author here, and try to get his Hub taken down. Didn't work. You can go away now.
I would certainly hope that anyone with cancer, me included, would certainly be smart enough to be doing their own personal research on the subject and not just take advise from a nobody. If I write an article on say gargling with sage water for a scratchy throat (example only) I always write a disclaimer and encourage everyone to speak with their own doctor prior to trying anything natural as it may interfere with their medication or other treatments. If someone has something as serious as cancer they are not going to go willy nilly and follow something they have not researched or asked a doctor about.
I write home remedy articles for a different site. At the end I always write a disclaimer such as:
"If you are pregnant or nursing, avoid this herb"
"If you are planning on collecting this herb from the wild, use the advice of a professional herbalist"
Before you start any natural remedy treatment, talk to your doctor"
Most authors that write about medical advice put a disclaimer on it.
If they write about their own personal experience then I don't consider that to be a violation.
One can ask them questions for clarification, but as adults ,we must use our own judgement.
Agreed. I wrote on alternative medicine here during my first year here. I deleted all my hubs (long story) and those left then. I had a disclaimer at the beginning of each hub. It came from a format offered by a friend who has a Ph.D in Holistic Nutrition. There are formats at various sites to follow for legalities offered freely. Google works.
All of her articles always has a disclaimer as well as her website it is displayed prominently. Many mainstream medical websites and medical professionals offer disclaimers at articles and websites too.
I really don't think too many people look to a site like this one for "established, legitimate" medical information; so what's left (that anybody may take at least a little seriously) may be the unconventional type-of-things that either go completely against "established" medicine or else that haven't yet been recognized - or else personal-experience stuff. If someone makes it clear that they're writing from personal experience nobody will be misled.
The one thing that can be a problem these days is that, in the interest of writing something that looks "polished" and/or "professional", writers are often told to stay away from first-person and/or to write "with authority".
I do think people should be good and clear when it comes to writing about their own experience; and other that, I pretty much think most readers know not to put too much "blind stock" into medical stuff on a site like this. BUT, I do think it would still be good if HP required some kind of "this-isn't-conventional-medicine" type of disclaimer for stuff that isn't obviously someone's own experience.
There is the issue of the author risking a lawsuit for practicing medicine without a license. But, that would be a whomever took said author's advice, had a bad experience, and bringing the lawsuit themselves.
I have only a few hubs on medical issues; all have disclaimers as being personal experience, and advising folks to consult their own doctors.
If the hub in question is mostly promoting a book, "about a doctor" (and not by a doctor--a big difference--then I would think the worst that HP would be able to do is flag it as 'overly promotional.'
I report hub making claims that non-FDA approved medicines with a link to the FDA statement that this is illegal. These vary but for conventional foods it is this section: http://www.fda.gov/Food/IngredientsPack … 109603.htm
Your link means nothing because I don't sell food nor do I prescribe food. I tell people what I did and what I would do.
Do you really think the FDA is going to ban habaneros, garlic and ginger because I used it to cure my cancer?
The FDA is tyrannical, but they haven't gotten that tyrannical yet.
I just want to add that no one really knows what they would do if they were faced with cancer until they really are. I have always been of the more natural approach. My sister got cancer and I tried to get her to go all natural, especially when things weren't responding.
Well, when it came down to it, she wanted to go the doctors route. It was her decision because it was her body and I respected that.
Would I chicken out and go the doctor route if I were faced with the same scenario? I hope not. I would want to know what natural cures people have used and had success with in making my decision, especially when the doctor tells you they've done all they know to do. It all comes down to making an informed decision.
What's funny is I adore alternative medicine. I am most of the way through my apprenticeship. I write hubs about it. I love it... when used responsibly.
I have studied several different forms of both holistic medicine and herbology, including native american and Chinese healing.
It is actually used extensively in Japan and integrated with their healthcare system.
After hundreds of years of use and study, there is no holistic or herbal cure for cancer. Period.
There are lots of alternative healing practices that complement mainline medicine, but none that would in any way cure cancer. Specifically recommending that you forgo mainstream medicine in favor of alternative medicine is a death sentence that no practicing herbalist/holistic healer that I've ever met would make.
Your conclusions about holistic remedies for cancer are flat out wrong.
This is why I would not consent to your wacky agreement. Your body would unconsciously defend your belief system. People die over their desire to be "right." We all die, so we can live with dying, but we can't live with being wrong.
No one ever says, "Follow me, I'm WRONG!" The desire to be right is a powerful, powerful motivator.
There have been many wonderful cures for cancer that have been lied about repeatedly by a $200 billion dollar cancer industry.
The reason one needs to avoid the FDA-brand of cancer treatment is that all of them make a person sicker.
It's stupid to try to get over cancer by on the one hand doing things to make us healthier and on the other hand making ourselves sicker.
That's funny... through my training I've met several holistic healers from several disciplines that had nothing to do with mainstream medicine and/or the FDA. They've all said no cure for cancer holistically. Do you think they were paid off by mainstream medicine or big pharma?
The people who told you that are also wrong.
I've interviewed people who were in a coma from their cancer or told they had two months to live who were cancer free 20 or even 30 years later.
One was a Harvard grad and a medical doctor. Everyone he wrote to, including a scientist who won the Nobel Prize the following year, told him they had no answers.
Who cares about people who don't know how to cure cancer when there are those who can and have?
Once again, here's your chance to prove it. I'll follow whatever treatment you give me. I'll youtube it with a newspaper with the date each day. Medical proof of cancer before and after. And a patient with an excessively rare (and almost impossible to cure after metastasizing) cancer who is guaranteed to be written about in journals.
If you are right, this would be your very best opportunity to show them all.
The person you are talking to apparently has no morals. They have the cure for all cancer, but refuse to put it to test, which would save countless lives and alleviate human suffering.
I don't even think it's that. I've actually ran across those who really do believe that doctors are trying to kill their patients in this great conspiracy. They honestly believe that they have the cure because it seems logical in a pseudo-science kind of way. In this case, the link is that if hot peppers clear nasal mucus that it will dissolve the mucus in cancer cells.
Too bad that's not how it works.
The ph thing is brought up a lot too.
But if that's what he -truly- believes, he would love to take your offer. If I knew that fruit was the cure for scurvy, I would confidently tell someone, eat fruit everyday and then see how you feel. I think somewhere deep in the recesses of his mind, he isn't as confident on his cure as he is on the surface. He's suffering from his own accusations, the fear of being wrong, which would of course dismantle his book's claims and source of personal relevance. I know he views his detractors as the cynical villains, but I'm surprised by his extreme evading of your offer, which would help people. I'm really glad you posted here and wish you luck. I wish he would accept your offer and that it would work and that I would be 'proven wrong'.
Thank you. I would love to be proven wrong as well.
Best wishes, Melissa. I hope things go as well as possible for you.
Thank you. I did ramble on a bit... I do apologize to everyone in this thread about that.
The stuff Kelly refers to as "snot," has different terms in different languages. It is referred to as ama in Indian medicine, akin to toxic residue. Phlegm, cysts, tumors of all kinds have this residue -- foreign substances with a presence in the body. Strong spices/foods like curry, turmeric, ginger, and capsaicin are known as cancer preventatives, so I am not surprised that one or more of these foods have been found to be curative.
I would not go the conventional route of chemo, as chemo kills. As an medical herbalist, I would go the natural route. There are herbs that can be used to detox the body from the cancer, as well as stop the cancer. Along with a total diet change, many people can overcome the cancer and have it go into remission. The chemo might not kill you on the first round, but it is still in the body, and will make you sick months later. I have seen it with a friend who went with chemo. Her breast cancer was gone, but she took a med to keep it away. That med made her sick (and also greatly improved her chances for a heart attack by over 50%) She continued on like this for a year, and now the cancer is back. She now has a tumor on the brain, and seizures because of it. She is positive about the whole situation, but in the long run she will not make it as her body can not handle the strain. She does not eat well at all, which doesn't help. You have to feed your body good, healthy foods for it to combat any illness.
She chose the conventional road, and I believe she chose the road to an early grave.
When I write medical hubs, I always put a disclaimer about consulting the doctor. I have no articles that are on the edge. Someone on the site complained a person with little expertise wrote similar articles to him. I think people know not to believe everything on the Internet.
There have been people curing cancers without drugs for years. Take a look at Rene Cassie, a nurse from Canada, whom during the 20's and 30's was using an herbal formula to treat all kind of cancer. Essiac, ( a derivative of her last name) is still used today. She learned from an Indian who told her that if we all ate sheep sorrel each day, no one would get cancer.
It doesn't matter if you had "teaching doctors", they will never tell you that there are alternative ways to treat cancer. It is not in their pockets best interest. Yes, big pharma does play big role in this whole money game. If you knew how to treat your cancer naturally (holistically), more people would live, and big pharma would go out of business.
There is no need to argue about treating cancer naturally, as there are plenty of people who have done it. Open your mind (and heart) to the fact that doctors are not a god, and that they aren't trained in holistic/herbal healing. A true holistic doctor/nurse would, and could treat you without drugs or surgery first. Surgery/chemo would be the last option as chemo kills both bad cells as well as good ones. Many people die from the surgery/chemo, and not the actual cancer.
Apparently you missed the part where I said I was close to completing my apprenticeship in herbal medicine. Legitimate herbal medicine. Not pseudoscience and random guessing... but study at the hands of members of a peer reviewed organization. It's a very long process.
I haven't fallen into the hands of "big medicine and pharma" I have a knowledge base in both mainstream medicine and herbal/holistic medicine. There is no herbal cure for cancer. Period. There are records going back thousands of years (yes thousands) by people who have worked holistically from generation to generation. These records have not produced one single legitimate cure for cancer.
2000 years (plus) of practical, everyday use for every condition known to exist... no cure for cancer. That is the reality of holistic medicine. It is a reality that any trained and recognized herbalist/holistic healer would share.
Can people here actually imagine a headline saying: "Newsflash scientists find that eating peppers cures all forms of cancer at any stage. The world rejoices."
Has there ever been a simple, herbal remedy for a serious disease in recent history?
What would have likely happened, since both cancer and habaneros have been around for a very, very long time... is that the people who practiced folk medicine in the area where habaneros grow naturally would have given it to people who game in with unexplained lumps and masses. If those lumps and masses went away...even for some of the people... they would have continued doing it, making it the "standard" thing to give. When they interacted with people outside of the area, they would have traded the habaneros and they would have damn sure said that it made growths go away.
Herbal medicine-the traditional passed down kind- has some of the very best clinical trial and error practices EVER. You give a root to someone, and they die... you don't give them that root again. You give a root to someone who has an infection, and the infection goes away... you give it to the next person... and so on. If you give a leaf to somebody who has an infection and the infection doesn't get any better, but all of the sudden her periods are regular... guess what?
The reason it ISN'T bunk is because this has been going on with native plantlife in almost every area of the world for centuries. "New" information would require "new" plants.
In short, if the amazon "medicine men" didn't say that eating habaneros cured those lumps... chances are they don't. They are great decongestants though.
Well, I am a legitimate medical herbalist, aromatherapist, nutritional counselor and I disagree. There are herbs that can cure cancer, and have for years. Nature gives us everything we need to heal, and we just have to know how to use it. There are plenty of cases where herbs have been used to treat and cure cancer, as well as a total diet change. I wish you well.
Thank you, cloverleaffarm, for offering the benefits of your experience. I had been wondering how someone undertaking training in herbalism and natural healing could possibly believe that cancer cannot be cured.
An earlier post on this thread claimed: "The body doesn't have any neat little road map that tells substance to only kill one kind of cell. If it kills cancer cells it's going to kill healthy cells as well. There's this whole science thing behind how medicines/foods work."
I was tempted to try to explain the need for oxygen at a cellular level because cancer cannot thrive in a healthy, oxygenated environment; how processed sugar feeds cancer; how some herbs allow oxygen and nutrients to pass through the blood-brain barrier (particularly useful when treating brain cancer) etc, but knew I'd just be shot down in flames.
I don't believe it is fair to expect everyone's cancer to be cured by natural means (particularly when most people who turn to mother nature have already been ravaged by chemicals and radiation and other tools of mainstream medicine, so the task is far more complicated). But I absolutely believe that nature holds the tools to fight - and defeat - cancer, and it saddens me that so many people who have cancer believe it will inevitably kill them and therefore don't bother trying any alternative at all.
I have noticed how quickly doctors are forgiven when they 'get it wrong' and their patient dies ... yet how demanding the same people are when discussing alternative medicine. Suddenly the expectation and demand is for 100% success. Seems hypocritical, but it happens time and again.
A quick visit to your profile page showed some of my favourite herbs. I am so pleased that you are writing about them. I grow a lot of others as well (as you probably do) and put them to good use.
It is wonderful to have access to nature's remedies. I look forward to the day when more people appreciate what is readily available in our natural foods and herbs, and learn how to use them in their natural form to best effect.
" Suddenly the expectation and demand is for 100% success."
Because this is what that author was claiming. I think everyone here advocating the use of only alternative medicine staunchly believes it is far more effective than conventional. I don't think me or MelissaB believe that herbs/diet have never cured or substantially aided a type of cancer with individuals. As I said before, I think it is a combination of the stage, the immune system of the individual, and various other factors. But there is no 'cure' with herbs, just aides. I used to be very much into herbs, until I realized there was a lack of peer-reviewed research.
I see a lot of naturalist arguments here, which involves a bit of faith in the idea that nature is somehow designed to address every condition a human can get, which doesn't make sense to me. There's no reason for that to exist.
Thank you, LongTimeMother Well said.
It is sad to think that someone who studied herbs does not know of their curative powers. If you ask any herbalist that has been practicing long enough, they will tell you what you have said. Be well.
What organizations do you belong to and under whom did you do your apprenticeship? Most legitimate herbalist organizations would put a member under ethical review if they said they could cure cancer with an herbal remedy. In those states that license, that could be forfeit too.
Indeed. Most licensing bodies take the law seriously--and making curative claims without supporting clinical evidence... well, it ain't legal in the US.
I do not belong to any organizations, as I feel this is unnecessary. Most herbal organizations know that herbs have healed many cancers over the years, so I'm not sure what that means. Just google it. There is no licensing for an herbalist in the US, and it is legal to educate consumers that there are alternatives to big pharma. Education is my way of letting people know that there are natural ways to cure disease...of all kinds. Diseases from A-Z are healed and cured using herbs. I've done it myself, and have helped others.
You just have to be open to it.
Wow, actually the licensing falls under naturopathic doctor and it does occur in many states. But since you obviously know the loopholes in the law, you were likely aware of that too.
What you are doing is avoiding the word prescribing by listing your services as "education" or "consulting". It is a common practice that the herbalism community is well aware of and most that I know dislike. Especially since you are, in fact, "treating".
I wouldn't pay 10 dollars for a consultation with you, thanks. You have shown me no credentials, have not told me how you became educated in anything... I'm assuming you read a book or worse, wiki-pedia.
Thanks, but no thanks.
cloverleaffarm, when the next person dies whilst waiting for your herbal potion to work, then I wager you will think up all manner of glib reasons why your proposed treatment did not work.
The fiance of my niece felt a lump in one of his testes. He went a full month "trying" different "remedies" rather than go and get that testicle removed. This would have been a relatively simple operation, carried out very quickly after diagnosis. He would have had a reserve testes available with which to build his family.
Instead, he suffered 6-8 months of agony (shared by his fiance) and died - of course.
In my opinion, the beliefs and superstitions are no match for careful, methodical, painstaking research and the acquisition of knowledge and understanding. There are some in all the medical professions, whether "conventional" or "alternative," who are unscrupulous, because we are all human with common failings. There are institutions and companies that corrupt the scientific process with their ulterior motives. However, you and I today are able to live fairly healthy and active lives because thousands of people have burned gallons of midnight oil working hard on legitimate research. Be thankful, I say. Stop knocking them and casting unfair accusations. You are welcome to your personal beliefs, but it's irresponsible to push them onto others just to please your ego.
Jonny, just because your niece died from trying "natural" remedies does not mean they don't work. One personal case cannot define the whole. Check out Bio-Electric medicine and you will start seeing all degenerative diseases as essentially the same cause. The mainstream medical industry loves to complicate illness when it all essentially distills down to lack of energy at a cellular level. This can have various causes including mental causes, like stress which directly effect the body. If mind and body are not addressed then a person will not heal. If nutritional, energy, and mind "needs" are met then a person is vibrant and healthy. Lastly I understand many peoples frustrations with the "alternative" health industry and I completely understand it. There are many quacks and snake oil salesmen in the industry, which give guys like Dr. Jerry Tennant and Dr. Bruce Lipton, and other brilliant doctors bad names, but don't let the uneducated quacks deter you from the healing possibilities of "alternative" medicine.
Evan, with great respect, I can only appeal to caution and good, common sense.
From Wikipedia, " Quackery is the promotion of unproven or fraudulent medical practices. "
Thumbs up to you, Evan, for understanding that just because one died, does not mean there haven't been more that have not. This is one of the problems in our society. If you're sick...give em a pill, instead of looking at the whole body to see why they are sick. Many illness comes from the body being out of balance.Be well.
By the way, Dr. Oz is a doctor, but he turned his practice into a side show affair...for MONEY. He spouts about things on his show that he knows nothing about. In our local health food store, they have a special section for/about him that states "if you heard it on Oz, you don't want this...but this". Now, that is quackery.
PS. Google lemon balm and the dr. oz fiasco. I have written about this quack many times. He overdosed a woman on national TV, and has yet to answer my letter. Hmmmm....yeah, makes me want to go to see him....NOT.
I'm sorry for the loss in your family. Herbs do not work instantly, and they (as well as some supplements) can be used along side of conventional meds to help the body heal faster, and more efficiently. It is not quackery, and if you google herbs for cancer, you will find a list of them, including cannabis. Not all cancers will be cured with herbs, OR chemo, OR surgery, OR radiation. Sometimes it takes a combination.
Perhaps you should read this....http://www.essiacinfo.org/
Oh, and just an FYI, if it wasn't for Rockefeller, we would all be seeing herbalists, and naturopaths as healers. It was Rockefeller who stuck his nose in in the early part of the 1900's and got the AMA to what it is today. It was his funding that started us all on the path that exists today.
No offense but your comment is so closed minded. The beginning of modern medicine existed hundreds of years before the AMA even existed. I always laugh at these kinds of statements.
Cancer is an international disease with an even amount of breakthroughs coming from across the world. The path that exists today, in your words, is only a reference to the US I presume? I doubt people in Ireland, the UK, Germany, Australia etc etc would stop seeing herbalists and naturopaths because of Rockefeller.
Close minded? No, the truth. While the beginning of modern medicine may have started before that, more people still sought out other forms of healing. You can laugh all you want, but it's the truth. If it were not for Rockefeller and his money, the AMA and other medical associations would not have become what they are today. I will try to find the documentary I got this info from.
I've realized this recently, about how biased, especially the FDA is towards people with money, and yet the public doesn't see their motives, and takes their word for everything without questioning them
And just what motives do you assign to the FDA, complete with evidence and proof of same?
If the FDA was biased by money they would have approved velvet antler as a drug one of the times an application was made. Those people have money. What they don't have is any proof that velvet antler provides therapeutic benefits.
and their motives are simple, to make money. Most of their employees are ex pharma people for the sake of having "experts" in the field. This leads to a lot of biased, dirty business. The evidence on this is almost endless. Do some research for yourself.
The FDA does not "make money". Although the employees are paid a salary, the monies come from tax receipts, not payments by pharma companies.
Or can you show checks by companies/individuals made directly to "FDA" in return for services rendered?
Aww wilderness you are so innocent in your thinking. It is rather refreshing, but it isn't reality. Have you heard of lobbyists? The FDA doesn't necessarily make money but this is what happens. A well known person that lets say works for Pfizer for 20 years then gets a FDA job. They then get money, vacations and benefits on the side IF they pass legislation and help out the big pharma companies. If you "scratch my back, i'll scratch yours". I am not just making this up. There are many "whistle-blowers" that were in the belly of the beast that can tell you exactly how it works. Most people in it aren't evil per say but the system is corrupt and flawed. The main issue is that whenever human health and money are combined with lack of morals you will have a huge problem. The other issue is their massive influence on government, which essentially makes things biased towards whatever industry has the MOST money, whether that be conventional or "alternative" methods.
Um, I work with people at the FDA and have for many years--and I can think of a case like this. Not one. Let alone it being so routine that people would risk crossing the federal government to do it.
Basically the FDA people are bureaucrats that apply explicit and detailed rules in a day to day bass. That have almost no discretion. Also everything is done through 4 layers of seniority with full public disclosure between people the great majority of whom will never work for a drug company. If your drug has the necessary clinical trials, it gets approved. Every scrap of documentation is on their website for the public to see.
The rules themselves are created by the legislature. If you know anything *at all* about the FDA you realize any corruption would have to occur there. That is where the way drugs are approved is determined. The FDA just does the paperwork.
Maybe you haven't seen any corruption, doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Just look at all the cases of whistle blowers, also I just saw a forum today where 3 ex pharma sales reps had to leave the industry because it was literally tearing at their soul. They saw how the industry was preying on the most vulnerable people of society (the sick) and they just couldn't take it anymore. Lastly you assume that the FDA is a non biased, perfectly infallible, Utopian entity. Do you live in the real world, do you understand how most people, especially people in power, LOOK OUT FOR THEMSELVES. Why do you think illegal lobbying is such a problem, and why almost everyone hates congress, its because they let their selfish human nature get the best of them, which is what happens with many people in the FDA, especially the people in real power.
This quote is from your hub and it's very well stated: "Our personal integrity is tied inextricably to our ethical and moral structure, but it does not define that structure. Instead it is our commitment to our ethics and morals, whether self defined or defined by religion, society or politics, that is the driving force behind our integrity. Ethics and morals differ between individuals, but if we ignore our own ethics in favor of personal gain in some manner we have not only lost our morality to some degree but we have lost our commitment to that morality; we have lost our integrity."
The proof you want about the FDA can be found by testing you local tap water and finding the fluoride or by checking the ingredients list on most food in the grocery store. The FDA has done lots of good over the entire history of our society but they have lost their integrity. The FDA protects those in power by not allowing any new products that can be harvested, grown or controlled by the common man. They only allow products to market that they can regulate and control no matter how good it may be. If we can grow it in our back yard and use it relatively for free, the FDA will make it illegal. You don't need any proof for that. And saying that the FDA doesn't make money is amusing. They don't get paid directly, obviously but if you look at the revolving door of Govt Officials, Corporate Execs and White House Lobbyist, you can get a good picture of how compensation and payoffs work for them. You should watch a movie called "Sicko"
I agree, and I think it is sad that anyone would completely trust the FDA.
Even if that were true, I would just say: good for him.
A world without the germ theory of disease, vaccinations, aseptic surgery, and chemotherapy is horrible to even contemplate. Not that I would need to as a few of my ancestors would have died before I had the chance to be born.
Any alternative practitioner who suggest the world would be better without conventional medicine is one I would strenuously avoid.
http://health.howstuffworks.com/mental- … ackery.htm
I am finding this an interesting read.
I didn't say it would be a better place, I said we would not be seeing doctors as we do now. Doctors have their place, but they are not gods. They don't know everything, and they certainly don't know about alternative therapies.
Longtimemother, this is terrific news. Melissa, The number of "terminal" cancer survivors is becoming too many to ignore, and these wonderful people have not forgotten that they are alive today only by the grace of God, because the "legitimate" medical authorities would have had them dead and buried. If you take issue with Kelley's hub, then I urge you to read a book by Tamara St. John. It is also available Amazon. She healed herself of "terminal" cancer. Also, you might be interested in reading about Protocel.
At the moment, I am watching a loved one die from breast cancer, leaving behind four young children. She is afraid of trying anything alternative. She was diagnosed less than a year ago, when her tumor was pretty well contained. The conventional treatments have not helped a bit. Her cancer is now everywhere.
This is the report on protocel...
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/ … ages/Print
Now with Tamara, should I just read her 25 dollar book, or go for the 200 dollar consultation with that?
My fee is $200 for 2+ hours. If you spend 3 with me, that is okay. That is better than any doctor would give to you. Plus, if you can't afford it, I have a sliding fee. Can't afford it at all, I will still meet with you. Why? I would rather help a person along their healing path, then to have them suffer. I don't push products on you as doctors do. I just give suggestions on what has been used for years.
Would a doctor do that? I don't think so.
You haven’t spent years studying to qualify as a doctor of medicine and, judging from what you’ve told us so far, you’ve nothing to prove proficiency of any kind in the medical field. Therefore, you don’t deserve to earn as a doctor does. That you even dare to compare yourself to a doctor blows my mind! Nothing you can give is better than a doctor could give a cancer victim.
You’re in it for a quick buck, and that’s all. The only reason you’re sometimes willing to waive fees is to reconcile conscience and profit motive.
Actually, I have spent years of studying. I've spent over fifteen years studying... to be exact. I continue my studies as well. I have as much training as a doctor, but in herbs rather than pills. I train with doctors, and doctors train with me. I consult with doctors about their patients and we work together. I have many doctors consulting with me when their patients want a different route than conventional medications. Ultimately, it's the patients choice. Oh, and I have doctors buying my product for their private use.
One should not judge someone they don't know. You know nothing about me, yet you talk about my conscience and my lack of knowledge. I work hard for my money, (and for my patients) and I deserve to be paid for my expertise.
I do wave fees for people, but not out of a guilty conscience, but out of empathy for the patient who comes to me after being tired of seeing the doctors and getting no results. They have spent all their money on conventional methods for whatever the ailment they have. They can't pay me in cash, but most pay me in kindness. A barter here, a barter there, and everyone is happy. I am not in it for a "quick buck" as it is my career.
I wish you good health.
My adult daughter's local medical centre has GPs and alternative practitioners working together. I have been to consultations with her, and it is a joy to have them in the room together. The doctor assesses the test results and turns to the naturopath/herbalist for suggestions, asking for evidence of previous use and outcome.
Yes, they use the internet in addition to personal experience ... and yes, they even consider suggestions and research from the patient's mother.
I am sorry to hear of your loved one. Even if she did not totally go the alternative route, there are herbs and supplements that can help support the body through the chemo or radiation. They help detox the body, so the body can "fight" better. A naturopath, or an herbalist may be able to make her life a little better.
I think the main problem is polarizing the issue. Yes people are avoiding alternative options, and then there is my neighbor who would probably be alive today if she used conventional medicine rather than relying on a crank iridologist until after her cancer metastasized.
The answer is to go to a doctor who uses conventional and alternative modalities in harmony. Not to act like either side is 'teh evil'.
Neither side should tolerate blatantly false claims like that any one approach other than surgical excision of an entire localized tumor is a guaranteed cure for cancer. There are evil practitioners of all kind of treatment and those who make false claims about the effectiveness of any treatment and those stop a patient from using something that will help them are the worst. Those I hate with equal fervor not matter what philosophy of healing they follow.
I've had two friends with cancer. When one died, her husband donated about 20 books to the library about different food cures. Poor Jane had purchased all of them and I know they didn't have much money. She did have surgery and chemo. She still passed away.
The other refused radiation which was the doctor's answer for her type of cancer. She was given just 3 months to live. Because it was a lymph gland type cancer, surgery wouldn't work. She took vitamins the doctor recommended She is alive 12 years later, but still has the cancer.
I think it seems to be a matter of when your time to go, it is your time. If it isn't you won't. I should mention the last one had hundreds of people praying. I don't know that there is an answer.
The prayer certainly didn't hurt. I believe it's God who heals, regardless of what type of treatment people choose.
I'd say start with the $25 book, or see if it's available at your local library.
Melissa, this is an NCI publication. It is very well known that studies can be designed any which way, so long as the desired outcome is reached. There are many Protocel testimonies on the web. I like to rely on anecdotal accounts from living people, rather than on government statistics, most of whom are now passed away.
Herbal remedies that work do tend to transition into conventional medicine. That said when they work based on an unknown mechanism this translation can fail. For example we have had anecdotes that dogs can detected cancer better than any mechanical device for at least 50 years. But only a few years ago did researchers start using them for this purpose--only *after* cancer cells were found to produce aromatic chemicals.
If you consider conventional medicine to be drugs and radiation, and complementary medicine to be everything else--both are equally vital. There is no either/or.
I have done a large amount of research on cancer cures lately, and I have come to the conclusion that there isn't ONE miracle cure. However cancer is cured every day around the world. Each situation is unique, that is why so many people claim that "X" cured their cancer. "X" cured their cancer because it either took care of a nutritional deficiency, or helped raise their bodies total vibration. All healing from cancer comes down to those two things. Restoring the cells to a more youthful, higher energy state, while simultaneously giving it, and making sure it is digesting and assimilating all the required nutrients to have a thriving cell. Whatever your body needs to achieve this is what cures cancer. People get cancer in certain places of the body because those cells are particularly weak, and by particularly weak, I mean their energy or voltage has dropped. If you start thinking of the body as a complex bio-electrical system (which it is) then healing starts to make sense.
So How Does One Restore The Cells Energy?
That is the million dollar question that many (mostly "alternative" doctors are slowly figuring out because they have much more freedom than mainstream doctors). The most common deficiencies seem to be of Magnesium, Iodine, and healthy fats, but with nutrition it is often more about what you STOP putting into your body (ex. sweets, sodas, fried foods, chlorinated water). The best ways to raise our cells energy levels are to have moderately paced exercise (walking, yoga, etc.), fresh air, sunlight, physical contact with the earth, and to drink healthy negative ORP water. This is just a summary, there are many other ways. Do your own research and you will be surprised what you will find.
Lastly healing cannot take place while one is in FEAR. Obviously getting cancer can be very scary, but the body literally can't heal if it is stuck in the fight-or-flight response of fear. This response is directly opposed to the relax, digest and repair response of the body. This is THE number 1 reason most people don't heal from cancer. A certain amount of hope and love must be involved to heal from any disease. We aren't just bodies. We are bodies, minds and possibly souls/spirits. All areas must be addressed to heal from cancer. There is no miracle cure. Good Day, and please think for yourself and do your own research, use your common sense and start to see the big picture instead of seeking one miracle cure.
All treatments for stage four cancer have a possible side effect of "death". Chemo Therapy, Radiation, Surgery and all others. Most people don't make it past 5 years. The market is flooded with books about chemo, radiation and various surgeries. Report them to the authorities along with the alternative treatments!
I am going to weigh in here. When one reads hubs which discusses alternative medicines and/or any other type of medical advice, one must use inductive and deductive logic. One should always check with a doctor or another health specialist when following medical advice. This is not even pure logic but natural and instinctual common sense. Always check and follow the advice of a doctor and/or other medical professional above all else.
What happened to educating ones self and trusting ones own intuition when it comes to health? No one knows their own body better than themselves
" No one knows their own body better than themselves" Evan I would not mind betting you know very little about your body, because most of the time it works with you knowing about it, or how it works.
To dismiss years and years of patient study and research just on a whim of what you want to believe is not exactly intelligent.
I am not declaring all research legitimate, not the published reports as necessary honest. There are many charlatans and many manufacturers in existence that twist and cloud the issues. But generally speaking, the people who engage in the research are conscientious and caring.
So please open your mind to this and give credit where it is due.
" No one knows their own body better than themselves"
Having taken biology I can't begin to express how absurd this sentence is.
Really Melissa, so if I walk into a doctors office and don't say a word, the doctor who is outside my body, has a separate nervous from me can somehow know my body better than I can, really?! I think how you were taking this is that a doctor knows much more about human bodies than the average person, and yes that is sadly true. However, I have educated myself extensively on the human body and I will NEVER need a doctor for anything. As soon as I get a pain or ailment, I know what to do to bring it back into balance which usually involves resting, meditating, getting hydrated, and getting my diet back in balance. The idea of NEEDING a doctor is a human flaw because many people are numb and out of touch with their bodies. Animals don't need doctors because they intuitively know when they are sick and they fast and rest. I'm tired of people thinking that we NEED doctors. Do whales and sea turtles who live over a 100 years need a doctor to achieve that, do people who live to be a 100 on Okinawa need a doctor, NO. Most of the ones who lived to be a 100, never saw a doctor in their life. This reliance on someone else to help or heal you is a limited belief.
I read your post in utter amazement. You honestly believe that you will never need to visit a doctor in your entire life? What happens if you experience a deadly viral or bacterial infection, a ruptured appendix or serious internal bleeding? Do you expect to heal these problems on your own?
A hospital doctor saved my sister's life. A vet saved the life of my family's dog. They were both suffering from a very serious emergency that would have killed them without treatment. Trying to maintain your own health by natural means is a great goal, but predicting that you will never have to visit a doctor is unrealistic.
Unless I get stabbed or or a tiger bites my arm off, NO I will never need a doctor, and I will never need an appendicitis. Appendicitis is from inflammation in the intestine area. Have proper health habits and you will never have to worry about an appendicitis. If I get sick when I am very old, I will die in peace in my own bed around my family, not in some hospital bed with chemo or some terrible treatment til the day I die. I accept that I am mortal but I also expect to be physically strong and able to jog well into my 70's like most people do in Okinawa. That this is surprising to people is saddening to me. Why have we accepted disease as the norm?
Well, when you are jogging at 70 and fall and earn yourself a compound fracture... come see me. I have a great peppermint tea recipe that will fix you right up.
"If I get sick when I am very old,....." you really are living in naive hope, Evan!
Whales and sea turtles don't go to the doctor because they understand their bodies?
Evan, I strongly suspect that you might not be old enough to write on HubPages. Have you read the TOS? Are you over 18?
You COMPLETELY miss the point Jayne and yes I am 23 years old. Let me explain it further for your since you obviously <personal attack snipped> to understand the context the first go around. Modern Medicine claims that humans cannot live long without their expertise, help, vaccines, etc etc, which is total bullshit and I will tell you why. How are there millions of people around the world that live longer than everyone else (perfect ex. Okinawa), yet they never take drugs or need Western Medicine? How are there animals that live ridiculously long and have lived long for millions of years WITHOUT doctors. Do you understand that it is the powers of nature or God or whatever that keep you and alive and vibrantly healthy NOT a dude in white coat. You can place your faith in that dude, I'll keep my faith in the powers of nature. Man's arrogance amazes me at times. We truly think we are smarter than nature...
If you're 23, something is obviously very wrong.
How so? Please explain. I give thought out responses, and you give back one line personal jabs? You obviously aren't very good at this debate thing Jayne.
I'd rather debate the subject with my 7-year-old daughter. Her arguments are better thought out than yours.
Says the woman who replies only with personal jabs, and has yet to add anything worthwhile to this conversation. The irony here is hilarious to me. Jayne you really are better than that.
But it was you who responded to me on page 7 of this thread. I didn't even address you. I also express something of my position on page 6.
I find you very irritating, and have no interest in debating anything with you. Didn't I make that clear enough for you in my last post?
Most people do find people irritating who speak truth, because truths hurt. They challenge their previous sets of beliefs. Many scientists HATED Einstein in his day, because they didn't understand how he thought, and people hate what they can't understand. I am part of the "new age" thought on health that we should be self sufficient and take care of our own health. This also implies that if you get sick your health habits, thoughts, actions etc led to your lack of health. This is a HARD pill for most people to swallow, especially if they have big egos.
Again, another personal jab, Jesus. What do you mean what I am condoning? Don't lump me in with other people and some stereotype, have you read a word I said? All I recommend is that people think for themselves, to empower themselves and to learn to take care of their own health and well- being, and no this doesn't need a doctor. You can be perfectly fine without a doctor.
Most people, I would think, cannot ALWAYS be perfectly fine without a doctor. A medical doctor is a doctor of medicine. People who practice as medical doctors have spent many years studying and training. Because of this, these people are able to diagnose disorders and prescribe appropriate treatment.
Many doctors of today also respect alternative medicine.
Competent practitioners of alternative medicine respect conventional medicine.
But you entered this thread in support of somebody who calls herself an herbalist, but has absolutely no medical qualification, and belongs to no professional organisation. This 'herbalist' takes $200.00 for a two hour consultation, and claims that her friend is dying of breast cancer because she took the wrong path--namely the conventional one. No competent practitioner of alternative medicine would imply such a thing! Herbs cannot cure cancer. Medical doctors are very necessary.
Edit: It's also worth mentioning that ever increasing life expectancy in the developed world is due to improved living conditions and medical advances!
Evan, I do commend you for a very entertaining comedy show here. (Presuming that much of your posts are tongue-in-cheek.)
Being serious, though, this world is an enormously complex place. The biology of all living things is also complex, and scientific inquiry is discovering more and more information all the time. For convenience of learning and description we like to separate science into categories, like physics, chemistry and biology. Yet these and all the other aspects of life are so infinitely inter-woven that it's almost beyond our human ability to comprehend.
How then can you boil it down into such simplistic answers like you are doing? As you are 23 years old now, is there any chance that you might go to university and get some real education? That will take lots of disciplining of your mind and many hours of careful study.
Meanwhile, please don't take offense of people seeming to "take a jab" at you. It is only that so much of what you have said so far has been somewhat.... err.... illogical, to say the least.
No hard feelings, Evan, and I am not trying to insult you; just saying how it appears when you post.
Again, just another personal jab. I would love to see one intelligent response.
Me and Jayne L are just in disbelief. You believe that nature allows certain animals to live to be 100, but -most- animals die well away from their maximum age capability. Of course, much of this is due to predation, injury, but also disease. Some animals, and also humans, have genetics that for some reason, likely along with lifestyle habits (but not always) leads them to have better longevity. Nature doesn't 'design' animals to live long, we exist because we produce viable offspring which drives evolution. Any long living is just a by product of selection aimed at success of the species.
You mentioned that animals fast to 'heal themselves'. Sometimes animals will fast themselves to death when they get sick. Animals get sick and die all the time. Their weakness causes them to immediately get eaten. Top level carnivores slowly starve.
For some reason, you are only paying attention to certain animals/people, and inventing a strange naturalist theology. Many people do what you are doing in fragments (i.e, another poster here stated 'nature provides everything we need to heal ourselves'), but I've never seen such an extreme example.
Finally, an actual response. I'm fully aware that not every animal lives to be full age, as most humans don't as well. (That's common sense, don't talk down to me like I don't understand things that basic) My point was that how can these animals , or any human live such long healthy lives without doctors, if doctors are NEEDED as everyone here claims. With fasting you are confusing fasting with getting skinny because of a poor digestive system and dying which happens in old age. Fasting is something an animal does at any age as a break from everything. Humans have long forgot the incredible healing powers of fasting and resting. Most great spiritual teachers have recommended fasting, and I have seen its great benefits in my own life. Also you speak so lowly of nature yet you are only alive because of mother nature, so I find that rather arrogant that you think nature doesn't provide everything you need.
Because some people and some animals get LUCKY. As I explained, genetics, lifestyle, or both come into play. You claim you don't need me to talk down to you and explain simplistic concepts yet you think emulating centenarians will guarantee good health. Many people who've lived to ripe old ages have carried out catastrophically poor health choices such as smoking. You are young, and have just barely started, your time will come unless you are one of these lucky people. Animals do not only fast when they get old, they fast when they get sick. This is due to chronic stress. This happens with pet dogs and cats often, and their caretakers need to help them get nutrition or they die. Fasting also occurs in the wild NOT BY CHOICE.
I'm not speaking 'lowly' of nature, I am stating facts about what it is. It isn't a harmonious force that nurtures lifeforms, organisms struggle, die, and suffer to adapt in order to exist. Nature provides nothing for you, we evolve along with it. 99% of the herbs that advocates of natural healing celebrate come from all parts of the U.S. and around the globe. Are you trying to suggest that nature dispersed its magical healing plants so that only the invention of transport technology facilitated their use?
So, basically, if I discover a lump in my breast, I should avoid conventional medicine. In spite of decades of research, I should understand that conventional cancer treatments only kill people, and were only invented with the ulterior motive of making money, because all involved in conventional medicine are corrupt.
Instead, I should go to somebody purporting to be a ‘herbalist’, who has no medical qualifications or credentials, and pay $200.00 for a two hour consultation. Whatever advice, potion etc. this person prescribes will cure my cancer.
I hope those of you condoning this type of practice aren’t succeeding in convincing (vulnerable, gullible, desperate) people that it’s right. If you are, I sincerely hope you end up getting a taste of your own medicine!
No Jayne. You are speaking in absolutes. Both conventional and "alternative" health care methods are valid. "Alternative" options are much better at prevention in my opinion.
The silliness of what? I'm confused. Maybe you and I just have very different perceptions of what "alternative" medicine. I don't support snake oil salesmen and false health claims, but I also can't support mainstream medicine that has overall terrible results, especially regarding degenerative diseases.
I understand my body pretty well, but last week when I saw an irregular edge developing on my mole I did not expect that understanding to prevent it from being cancerous--I had it checked.
I look after things myself that do not require specialist knowledge--but I respect and consult those that have specialist knowledge when I need to.
I once read a hub regarding thorough washing of the mouth by scrapping the throat to get rid of lot of germs and food remains. I checked with my dentist who advised me that while proper mouth cleaning using tooth brush and paste to clean and maintain the aesthetics and health of teeth is advisable such scrapping of the throat might cause more harm than bring benefits. Everyone has a right to express own views but while publishing such hubs on medical advices expert’s opinion should be sought.
The day may come when you need to see a doctor. They are very helpful when it comes to diagnosing problems. That doesn't mean you have to take the mainstream option for treating the problem of course, but it is important to know what your actual illness or injury is.
Like CloverLeafFarm says, some doctors and alternative practitioners work together. One of my adult children has a condition causing extensive demyelination and she attends a medical clinic where she has a weekly consultation with both her GP and her naturopath in the room together.
Yes, she has also seen Neurologists - none of whom had anything to offer her. In fact, we paid over $300 to another neurologist just recently (to request another MRI and hoping again for some specialised help) and he said she had no hope of recovery.
Well, she's had significant improvement in recent times (thanks to alternative remedies and the support of her gp and naturopath). The gp runs the tests, and the naturopath makes suggestions. (The role of the neurologists in my daughter's case is little more than requesting MRIs, allowing us to monitor changes in her myelin.)
But ultimately it is up to the patient to decide precisely which path to take.
This man must not have gotten the message that tumors can't be made to disappear using herbs:
The video is 1 minute and 9 seconds long.
Drug companies actually do pay the FDA large sums of money to get their drugs fast tracked. This program has become a significant source of added income for the FDA.
They focus on it because there is less red tape in getting money from the drug companies as opposed to the government funding which takes a great deal of time and effort.
Here's another person, a child, who also didn't get the message that herbs -specifically oil from herbs - don't work:
He is in remission.
Little 2 year old Cash hadn't heard that the oil from an herb couldn't help him:
He is now in remission.
Herb improves severely autistic child's behavior. He was so heavily medicated that his doctor said he would die. It's a good thing he hadn't heard herbs are only for mild ailments.
Here is the story as covered by a local ABC affiliate:
It might be important to note that in none of these cases did the doctors recommend the herbs.
Or conversely, she could have tried occupational therapy and a good speech therapist for feeding issues.
Also curious how she got a prescription for medical marijuana without a doctor.
In addition, the autism isn't cured. Just pointing that out. I'm sure if he ate a hot pepper sandwich though, he could be cured of his autism.
The question isn't whether other therapies such as occupational or speech therapy would be helpful. It is whether herbs can have a huge positive effect on serious disease.
It did. As can be seen from the GMA interview, improvements started within hours of the first dose.
There are two circles of doctors. The two rarely intersect. One huge circle is that of the doctors whop know almost nothing about cannabis and won't prescribe it. The second circle is a tiny circle of doctors who will.
The mother had to go outside the huge circle to the tiny circle. Hopefully the size of the two circles will change in relation to each other with a much greater intersection.
To achieve a complete reversal of autism requires removing the mercury and aluminum overloads. Whether cannabis can do that by itself is something I don't know. In this particular case under discussion, the mother used MJ rather than cannabis oil. Generally, the oils are the most potent.
There are two circles of doctors: those who tell huge fibs and those that don't.
Hot damn! You know what causes Autism! Problem... My two children that have it have never been exposed to mercury and/or aluminum ingestion... the body doesn't produce either on it's own. So you will reverse my kid's autism by removing something they don't have in their body anyway?
Does it involve butter?
It's naive to think anyone has avoided exposure to aluminum.
Aluminum exposure is pervasive, coming from many different sources, including from vaccines where the aluminum comes in contact with the bloodstream.
Food cooked in aluminum is another source. Citrus drinks in particular pull aluminum from packaging such as Sunny-Delight and many others.
Aluminum is put into personal products such as deodorants and in drugs.
Aluminum also shows up in our water.
Studies have shown that everyone now has a small amount of aluminum in their body although aluminum has no biological use.. The higher the aluminum we have, the greater the risk of harm to the brain and for cancer.
If I did that, I would be speechless, Melissa!
Here is Good Morning America's report on the same child with autism:
The single anecdote is great, but can we have the link to the controlled study showing peppers dissolve cancer tumors in X percent of cases? The one with several hundred test subjects, blind studies, both control and test subjects and that covers at least a decade of time? The one showing exactly how many people showed remission, the percentage of remission and how many showed no results? The one covering several races, all ages and both sexes?
Or are we limited to a handful of anecdotal cases with any negative results carefully concealed and hidden?
The ability to ignore a good anecdotal account is the hallmark of a mediocre scientist.
Every single doctor in the world accepts that citrus reverses scurvy based on Dr. Lind's "Treatise on Scurvy."
Lind reversed two - count 'em two - scurvy patients of their scurvy in six days by having his patients eat oranges and lemons. In fact, one wasn't totally cured by the sixth day when they ran out of oranges and lemons in 1753 in England.
Lind didn't control for sex, age, socio-economic standing, race or anything else.
Here is another case of a cure using an herb. Keep in mind that the assertion was made several times that herbs can't cure cancer. Period. So any one case invalidates that claim.
And the ability to pretend that studies are not needed to know if a program has any use is the mark of a quack.
I presume from your answer that there are no studies concerning the efficacy of hot peppers to destroy cancer cells? Just claims with nothing to back them?
I used to keep ducks too.... they conversed in a series of Quack, Quack.
You can presume whatever you wish even though it's wrong in this case. Do your own research. I already have done mine and won't do yours.
A quack is someone who does harm to patients which is what doctors do on a regular basis. Doctor caused death is one of the leading causes of death in the US. In addition, 1.6 million patients end up in the emergency room each year in the US due to reactions to prescribed drugs.
Hippocrates said, "First, do no harm." But the doctors ignore this. They do harm regularly and often. Patients suffer strokes, heart attacks, deafness, and blindness due to doctors.
Doctors also give their patients cancer from the drugs and radiation they prescribe. .
Quackery is the promotion of unproven or fraudulent medical practices. Random House Dictionary describes a "quack" as a "fraudulent or ignorant pretender to medical skill" or "a person who pretends, professionally or publicly, to have skill, knowledge, or qualifications he or she does not possess; a charlatan"
I have never seen so much out and out false teaching in my life as coming from Mr. Eidem.
What is it with people who swallow so much rubbish?
They also give them heart attacks from the Lipitor the prescribe. They don't tell you that Lipitor may help to lower cholesterol, but your chances of a heart attack are the same, or worse if you take it. There are also other serious side effects like cognitive impairment, leg pain and muscle weakness. The leg pain and muscle pain will go away, but the CMI does not always leave the patient. The patient, and their family are left with a person who is significantly impaired mentally.
Wilderness, here is an article by the American Cancer Society about Dr Revici, who, correct me if I'm wrong, Kelley Eidem is discussing in his book.
http://www.cancer.org/treatment/treatme … emotherapy
Makes interesting reading.
Yes, the American Cancer Society has knowingly smeared Revici's work several times.
The ACS has played a major role in the unnecessary suffering of tens of millions of people as a result of their behavior.
There is a chapter in my book devoted to discussing the ACS's culpability.
"The only published clinical study of Revici's guided chemotherapy appeared in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1965. It was done by a group of 9 doctors known as the Clinical Appraisal Group. They studied 33 cancer patients referred to Revici for treatment after conventional treatment failed. Twenty-two of the patients died of cancer while on Revici's therapy, 8 showed no improvement, and the remaining 3 showed signs of cancer growth. The group concluded that Revici's method was without value."
Not particularly interesting, I'm afraid. Nor unexpected. It's really odd, isn't it, how an actual test always shows the charlatans for what they are? Leave out the personal anecdotes and what is left is truth...truth that hurts.
There is a long chapter in my book that covers the fraudulent report in JAMA.
Of all the fraudulent papers ever published in peer review journals, that one is probably #1 for being the most egregious.
Let me make three quick points about the article.
1- There were actually 38 terminal and preterminal patients in the study, not the 33 Lyall claimed. He had to leave them out because they were cancer free. None of the patients were curable. So it would be expected that all would die. For that reason, the criteria of the study was tumor size, not deaths.
2- Lyall claimed there was no evidence of benefit either through a pathology report or visible by the naked eye (macroscopically.) Photographic evidence proved that was a 100% false statement. Visible tumors went away.
3- Although the study claims 9 authors, only two saw any patients. This is a breach of ethics. One of the named authors had demanded his name not be included in the list because he found the process to be a sham. His name was included anyway.
There is a lot more shocking skullduggery about the study, but you'll have to read the book to find out.
You know, curing malnutrition by feeding the patient really doesn't count as a cure... right? That's essentially the scurvy argument. Just sayin'
That's funny: autism is a malnutrition disease. hahahahaha
But you are beginning to understand that much disease is a malnutrition disease that disturb the metabolism, including cancer in many cases. So the solution is specific nutrition to solve the particular malady.
Yeah, peddling the bogus chelation cure for autism = complete lost of any credibility in my book. We know where that nonsense idea came from and we know it was shown to be erroneous and based on based on biased and fraudulent data. Anyone clinging to that is operating outside of any rational paradigm.
Ironically the idea came from conventional medicine, but was then investigated, found to be incorrect, and retracted. This being a case where "greedy" allopathy was able to admit a mistake and stop providing an expensive but worthless treatment, and alternative healers were not and continue to charge money for a known fraud product.
Think I'll write a hub on how to cure cancer with prayer. Anybody got a problem with that?
Here is another video of another person who used an herb to cure his cancer.
The single - no, two - anecdote is great, but can we have the link to the controlled study showing peppers dissolve cancer tumors in X percent of cases?
How many times do you need to burn your hand on a hot stove to know not to touch it?
Or do you need a study comprised of men, women, various races, various socio economic strata, smokers and nonsmokers, drinkers and nondrinkers?
You and everyone else accepts Dr. Lind's "Treatise on Scurvy" where two patients recovered from scurvy by eating citrus.
If scurvy were still a mystery disease, today's physicians would be treating scurvy with chemo and radiation with promises of new drugs around the corner. If someone presented 100 cases of scurvy being cured by someone like me, you'd be conditioned not to accept it. There could never be enough studies to satisfy the medical industry.
How can it be claimed no study would be enough? Because there are over 10,000 studies on nitric oxide and arginine with many showing how they relax arteries and lower blood pressure. A Nobel Prize was given for the discovery. Yet almost no doctors prescribe arginine for high blood pressure when it should be the first prescription written.
When it comes to alternative medicine, the peer review process is a spider's maze intended to keep the cures from being put into use. But they are unnecessary as Lind's Treatise proves.
If you don't believe raw habaneros combined with freshly grated garlic along with an oil to help balance the metabolism, then choose something else. Lots of sailors did between 1753 and the early 1800's.
And lots of them died.
Life is a risk. All of us make our choices and take the risks that come with those choices
Sounds like one hell of a risk accepting your stories, Kelley.
"Sounds like one hell of a risk accepting your stories, Kelley."
Then don't use my recipe. It's that simple.
It looks like chemo and radiation will be in ample supply for the foreseeable future for those who feel the need.
Meanwhile, if you're not familiar with the story of Lind, citrus and scurvy, Google is your friend.
The same is true regarding the story about the 1998 Nobel Prize regarding nitric oxide.
It's rather funny how you feel a high risk regarding actual history.
Does this mean that no one has ever done a study on the efficacy of hot peppers in shrinking cancer tumors? No one, including you, has ever proven any of the claims you make?
Or does it mean the study HAS been done but the results were all negative, proving that peppers do not affect cancer at all?
My Hubpages speak for themselves.
Based on the standards of acceptance of Dr. Lind's Treatise on Scurvy that EVERY physician WORLDWIDE accepts, we have exceeded those results.
If you aren't satisfied, that's your decision to make. There is always chemo and radiation if a person feels that's what they need and trust.
After asking several times I begin to think you are refusing to answer the question of testing ever being done. Is there a reason for that?
Test it to our heart's content if that is your desire.
Go for it if that's what you need to convince yourself!
I don't need to convince myself or anyone else; I'm neither making the claim nor encouraging people to ignore doctors in favor of peppers for cancer. I haven't written a book on it and I'm not earning money from untested and unproven claims.
And I certainly won't forgo a hospital if I ever DO get cancer. So no, I have no desire or need to test such a claim.
This thread started because someone who doesn't even write articles on Hubpages tried to get my articles banned. So I am participating to defend my article from its attackers.
Sorry if my sticking up for myself offends anyone.
The article in question has been up for six years. During that time I've given my time to answer questions for those who have cancer regarding my recipe.
If a person is either unconvinced or not using my recipe, there is no reason for them to participate in the question and answer section, because I don't try to convince anyone if they don't believe it.
Imagine for a moment that I had written a recipe for baking a cake. If you're trying to make the cake, you could ask questions, and I'd answer them.
But if you don't believe in eating cake and wanted to argue with me about it - we're not going to have that discussion. My Hubpage is for those who want to use the information.
I've already indicated to you more than once that I'm not going to try to convince you about the validity of my recipe. For some reason, you haven't accepted my answer in that regard.
It's obvious despite your denial that you want a proof. Go use Google or YouTube if you want evidence - or do your own study. It's already been proven to me so I don't need to do any research on it.
While you're at it, look up the scientific proof about citrus reversing scurvy. Good luck finding much of anything beyond anecdotal evidence. The reason why there isn't research on it is that the cure for scurvy was done at a time when people accepted the little evidence that there was. It was plain to see that citrus reversed scurvy.
Today, 100 times as much proof would not be accepted if scurvy were a mystery disease because it would interfere with the prescribing of chemo for it.
I had a forum awhile back about being forced to take a Flu Vaccine and some of these same people in this forum said I should take it. Their reason being that based on the "research" the vaccine was safe. So this is where the game begins. There is a study for everything! Both sides pay money to get a study done to support their claim. Kelly Eidem, if certain people want to totally trust the CDC, FDA and other similar organizations then let them continue to deal with all the illnsses and anxiety that we know will come into their lives unecessarily. People keep asking for studies and research. The research is endless, if we try to give it to them, within a hub, we might as well right a book. If they read your article in the first place, they must care something about their health. If that is the case, then your article gives them a starting point so they can do their own research about what they decide to put in their bodies. You did your job. Let them be.
Concerning this account that is calling you out without having any hubs of their own written. There are many accounts like this in various industries where people are paid just to go online and be the oposition to ideas that could possibly free the public of all the lies and brainwashing in our society. Aricles like yours are a threat to Big Pharma, as small as you may be. I'm sure some one will ask for research an proof. So, start here if you don't believe. Look up The Koch Brothers and another guy named George Soros. Theses guys are billionairs who spend their time creating fake grassroots movements in order to sway public opinion towards various ideas that will allow them to profit.
Thumbs up for you, Kelley Eidem. You are correct. Not much research is done on natural approaches, but there is a LONG history of their use. The reason why there is no research, or very little research is because there isn't enough money in it.
You don't need a research study or paper to know that natural approaches work, and medicine makes you sicker. I wish you good health.
And this is why I don't buy any of these claims. The world is not so black and white in which you can state categorically state that conventional medicine = bad, alternative natural= good. Anyone who believes this, I would never trust with my health.
This forum thread really makes me wish HP had a "Like" button for comments!
Hospitals, not hot peppers, are the third leading cause of death in the United States. Please read the September 2013 issue of the Journal of Patient Safety, which highlights the need of reigning in medical errors.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I am concerned that those who disagree with a more natural approach to healing the body are trying to impose their brand of censorship on what is "acceptable" to write about.
What offends me is people making ridiculous hoax claims and equating that with genuine holistic/traditional medicine.
What offends me is people saying you should avoid allopathic medicine in situations where it is life-saving.
And people mistaking conditional support of genuine holistic/traditional medicine as part of the medical spectrum for opposition to same.
Thank you for your comments, Scott, Cloverleaf, ologsinquito and to all the rest who support freedom of choice and gentle methods for getting and staying healthy..
You are correct. My job is done here.
It's time to get back to helping people who desire my assistance. Being of service is where the most good gets accomplished. It's not my job to change the minds of skeptics. They'll have to do that on their own.
Let me leave you with a cartoon video I made about the American 'Canker' Society that you might enjoy. Well at least some will get a kick out of it. The rest will have steam coming out of their ears.
Medicine is no different than any other science and it should be controlled the same way. Observations that an experimental treatment has a certain effect on a certain disease leads to the formulation of a testable theory. Once the theory is tested, it is then peer reviewed and tested many more times, in-vitro, in-vivo, on animals, then in humans, pre-clinical trials, clinical trials and after all's said and done, if it still proves effective and repeatable with an acceptable level of risk, it gets adopted into what we know as "Western Medicine". Any holistic or traditional medicine that works will eventually BECOME a part of Western Medicine because its efficacy will be validated by other medical professionals. Until that happens, it is not a complete body of knowledge. It is not scientific. All non-scientific methods of treating illness should come with a disclaimer.
by David 6 years ago
I just wrote a hub on making money with HubPages but wanted to make sure it's ok before publishing. I know you are not supposed to mention what you are earning on HP, but is it ok to use titles like 'How To Earn $1000 per month on Hubpages', or 'How To Make $1 Million On Hubpages'? I don't...
by Becki Rizzuti 6 years ago
For the past week and a half or so, one person has asked a lot of questions on my How to Tell if You're Pregnant hub (on my Pregnancy Now hubpages account). I take a lot of time out of my day to answer pregnancy-related questions from symptoms to trying to conceive, and I hide all graphic comments,...
by Becki Rizzuti 6 years ago
For the past year or so, I've been paying very close attention to this subject. Squidoo pushed its lensmasters for a long time into providing personal content full of first-person perspective and personal pronouns. This has been a problem for me, personally, because I prefer to write in the second...
by Liam Hallam 3 years ago
What's the single most important piece of advice you would give to a new hubber?What do you know now that you wished you'd know/ or been told when you started? What's the single most important piece of advice you would give to a new hubber?
by jfay2011 9 years ago
I had to edit one of the hubs because one of my links was my Glorious Money Tree story and it didn't relate to my story. I deleted the link and re submitted.It was a recipe hub. My new hub I just submitted was a recipe hub but I also talked about my upcoming chapter for the story, so I...
by kathleenkat 8 years ago
I like to check Hubpages on breaks at work. Now, I can't access my Hub feed because a Hubber chose to write a Hub about drugs, and Hubpages hasn't caught onto it yet. My organization is pretty fair on what it blocks/allows. Usually blocks things about gun violence, cults, and drugs. They also only...
Copyright © 2021 Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers on this website. HubPages® is a registered trademark of Maven Coalition, Inc. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. Maven Media Brands, LLC and respective content providers to this website may receive compensation for some links to products and services on this website.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|