The cure of all diseases, problems and cancers and look what life has given her, CANCER. Did she cure it? No.
We can safely say this person is a fraud.
I saw her on an interview and I saw how bad she looked, how badly degenerated she looked, no melanin production in her hair, wrinkled skin, uhhhhh... NO! Death is a disease of failing organs, sorry Clark (don't know if I should be sorry to fraudsters), but you don't practice what you preach!
She ripped you off, all these liars and scammers, trying to rip you off, writing their books (hmm, let me SELL this), giving out their products (hmm, let me sell this), lectures (hmm, let me sell this).
But I mean, respect her, say I'm wrong, call me an a**ho**, kill me for questioning this Clark, be just like her at 89! Have all your organs failing and die of cancer (without any disrespect to cancer patients)!
I'm not being harsh, it's the truth. I'm sure she helped and did offer some good test medically, but medically she's still stuck in a loop of 100s of years of horrible results in health care.
While it was thought that cancer (multiple myeloma) was the cause of her illness, this was never confirmed. This is a problem with modern medicine. It is uncommon for modern medicine to look beyond the end of its long nose. Completely erroneous diagnoses are frequent.
Please note that I have corrected the initial statement above because what I said was not entirely correct and was based on old information.
>- I saw how bad she looked
She looked normal for someone her age. I guess that you have a predjudice against being old?
>- be just like her at 89!
I have never seen anyone who looked young at 80 or 89, unless they had a face lift in the past 4 or 5 years. Even then, it was only the face that looked young.
>- medically she's still stuck in a loop of 100s of years of horrible results in health care
She took great strides to break this loop and was successful in the eyes of many.
It is obvious that you have not tried any of her suggestions. It is those who have not tried them that criticize.
A final point. While her methods were extreme, she was very very right.
First of all, NO ONE in mainstream society has the cure for dying of old age. Old age is the organs failing and body becoming weaker. Considering the body becoming weaker, foreign substances/any other problems enter the body and have more opportunity to strive.
The natural medicine community and the pharmaceutical medical community is all BS, they are at war of each other for stake of the gullible market of sick people. They both have reports of them doing wrong, which is in fact good, let the truth be revealed, lift the dress over from the pope and lets see what's really under there!
She look normal for her age yeah? Like mainstream society? Like in mainstream society, if they have a health problem, that health problem is not healed and you're stuck with it. She didn't heal her health problems, because dying of "Natural causes" is in fact a f***ing health problem.
You have never seen anyone at 80 or 89 look as good as her? Heh, let me tell you why, the sheep get lead to the slaughter. You don't really believe that all people die at 70 or 80, do you? You're not that stupid are you? You do understand that there are people that do not age at all and have no health problems?
Actually I tried and now I criticize, don't make sure vague assumptions you weak, pampered, brain dead excuse of a Homo sapien.
And I have not been the only one whom tried and did not have the answer to it. There is only one holy grail, because if somebody took steroids to an inflammation, they would get the same results as anyone, if someone took some poison, they would be sick, if someone shot themselves in the head, they would be dead.
Very, very right. You crack me up and you will not be the ones saved, you will be just one of the sheep left to rot or led to the slaughter.
I am very sorry for the ailment that you experience because that I can see how it is eating you.
Otherwise, no not everyone dies in their 60's, 70's, and 80's. I have known those who did not make it to 1 year and my mother God willing will live at least to her 90's (only a few months away). I recently attended my 40th year High School Reunion. Many old friends and aquaintances were missing, having passed on. To this date, I do not need any prescription medications because I have tried over the years to provide healthy nutrition to my body. Some laughed at this, and I accept their amusement, but in the end we all must go the same path and separate our spiritual beings from our physical beings. Most of my age is due to stress.
Old age is an illness that we often force on ourselves in many ways. In other cases, our genes are in complete control of our destiny or at least limit it.
There are ways that we can extend not only the years of our lives but the productivity of those years. One of those ways is not to carry bitterness, malice, or anger because those are known to destroy our health.
As for not aging, you simply deceive yourself. There is no one at 80 years of age who can completely keep up with a 20 year old, not even Jack LaLanne who is 6 years older than my mother and 4 years older than my mothers oldest brother. Jack's brother lived to be 97, but again, we all must go. Some of us age slower because of our metabolism and certain beneficial genes that we carry.
Fortunately for Jack LaLanne, he learned about the importance of good health and nutrition as a teenager. He aged somewhat slower than most, but he has still aged. Some never learn and they are the ones who age early and die early.
My AILMENT is you humans, that is my ailment.
Heh, you just don't seem to get it. I'm asking very clearly right now and I want you to answer me very specifically.
What is your problem on not being able to comprehend certain things that I am saying? It seems we are going in a circle and you do not GET IT. What is the excuse for your stupidity, ignorance or bad listening skills?
I named MAINSTREAM society as a reason.
Let me explain it very clearly in a manner that you MAY be able to understand. THERE ARE PEOPLE THAT NEVER AGE AND NEVER GET A DISEASE RIGHT NOW IN THIS WORLD, LIVING TO 400 YEARS OLD WHILE STILL LOOKING LIKE A TEENAGER AND NO THEY WILL NOT DIE IN THE NEXT 100 YEARS.
Now right now, when I tell you this George, don't drop your jaw and respond by saying "Uhhhhhhhhh" and then follow it up by saying "Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, no! I have never seen them".
Yeah, everyone in the damn world dies from stress. Melanin production stops from stress. Your bones break from stress. Mainstream homosapien knowledge is that your natural body will get killed by stress. All the BLATANT lies out there and you still get lied to whether in religion or health care and you cannot single out these lies? What's your problem? You get to lied to once, then you don't think the same people that lied to you about one thing lied about the whole thing?
Humans are truly a lost cause, either due to being lazy or not having enough stamina, their world and the world around them turns to complete shit of that fact.
George, I am not talking about 70 or 80 years, that's just an average age of death. Any age, you want to say 100, lets make it 100, you want to say the oldest living persons age, 120, lets make it 120. The numbers 70 or 80 have no MEANING, GEORGE. Old age is forced on everyone and no, I will not explain to you what old age is, why it happens, sincerely on the fact that it's like the saying goes "All men for themselves". I'm not giving you any points of advantage, if you want them, go and get them.
Didn't that guy who only drank Coca Cola beverages for over 56 years and ate only fast food live to 79 and is still living? What was his name? Warren Buffet.
Didn't Harland Sanders die at 90 living on a livestock of fried chicken?
You guys crack me up, people try to lead the blind people when you're blind yourself. It emphasizes the saying the "Blind leading the blind" and when the blind leads the blind, they all fall.
You have no purpose to achieve anything in this debate, your only purpose is to debate.
You're a complete failure.
I'm honestly amazed at your stupidity, George the Dummy. Because I had predicted your reaction and your reply to me was the same reaction I had predicted (to which you had seen).
Let me show you my initial prediction of your reaction.
"Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, no! I have never seen them"
Compared to what you said "If there is a 400 year old human living anywhere, send me the proof." (you basically said, uhhhh, i never seen them, send me proof)
WHY THE f*** WOULD SOMEBODY TELL YOU THAT THERE IS 1000 YEAR OLDS LIVING AND THE CURE FOR ALL HEALTH ISSUES?
Does your retarded mind have any implications of what would happen if the truth would be revealed?
I may be revealing too much to you, you idiot. But what the hell do the banks and businesses that control the trillionaire pharmacy companies have to gain when the true leaders get cancer or die from old age?
And this is how you end your debate, we have come to the conclusion that "No one believes you". Look yeah, billions people live in ignorance of the corrupt world everyday and live in experiments everyday, no one seeks the truth from corruption even that can be seen clearly. Considering that fact, I HAVE NO DESIRE TO HELP EVERYONE.
Also you claim to me being an alien or me claiming to be an alien, listen stupid, I'm a homosapien and you're a homosapien, that still does not excuse the fact that I have an all around general problem with the majority of homosapiens.
This debate is over, you caused that by your last retarded comment, not only that, but you are a m*o*o*n, not only a m*o*o*n, but a m*o*o*n whom takes up excuses and has a hard time of comprehending things. But not only are you a m*o*o*n, you are less of a m*o*o*n, so that makes it even worse, doesn't it?
She looked normal for someone her age. I guess that you have a predjudice
against being old?
>- be just like her at 89!
She was just under 81 when she died. I'm 78 and when I go to my high
school reunions (last one 4 months ago) I see some that don't look
"old" at all, others are haggard.
>- be just like her at 89!
I have never seen anyone who looked young at 80 or 89, unless they had a face
lift in the past 4 or 5 years. Even then, it was only the face that looked
young.
>- medically she's still stuck in a loop of 100s of years of horrible
results in health care
She took great strides to break this loop and was successful in the eyes of
many.
It is obvious that you have not tried any of her suggestions. It is those who
have not tried them that criticize.
A final point. While her methods were extreme, she was very very right
Oh really? If her methods were so good, why couldn't she diagnose her
own disease? Why did she resort to real medical doctors? Her brother
also died of cancer after treatment by Hulda.
From Wikipedia:
"Hulda Regehr Clark (18 October 1928 – 3 September 2009) was a
controversial naturopath, author, and practitioner of alternative medicine who
claimed to be able to cure all diseases, including all cancers. After looking at
all of her symptoms and her lab tests, her doctors decided that she most likely
had multiple myeloma (a blood and bone cancer), which caused anemia and
hypercalcemia and led to her death."
Sounds to me like the real medical field made an excellent diagnosis.
Yup read her books and bought one of her first zappers which I still
have. Did not one thing for me. She made ridiculous claims about all
cancer being caused by a liver fluke found only in South East Asia. If
that's true, I'm swimming in them because I was diagnosed with prostate cancer
17 years ago and still have my prostate. Funny, but they never found any
liver flukes in me nor have they found even one in the cancers they have removed
in the Western Hemisphere. Maybe they are stealth flukes.
>- She was just under 81 when she died. I'm 78 and when I go to my high school reunions (last one 4 months ago) I see some that don't look "old" at all, others are haggard.
I am only 59 but I have seen some who look worse at my age than she did.
>- If her methods were so good, why couldn't she diagnose her own disease?
First of all, sometimes you can not see the forest for the trees that are in the way. Perhaps I heard incorrectly, but AFIK, she only discovered her problem as a result of a neck injury from an automobile accident and by the time that she found what the real problem was, she was so debilitated that she could not physically do anything to stop it.
>- Yup read her books and bought one of her first zappers which I still have. Did not one thing for me.
Sorry to hear that, maybe the one you got was defective. I personally have had tremendous success with using my zapper, as have many others.
>- She made ridiculous claims about all cancer being caused by a liver fluke found only in South East Asia.
That is a lie! How many US citizens went to Southeast Asia during the 1960's and 1970's? Almost 1 million went to Vietnam, drank the water, swam in it, waded in it. I am sure that none of them ever brought 1 single parasite back with them, yeah, right. Over 100,000 US citizens visit S.E. Asia every year. Oh, but they never get parasites, especially flukes.
>- Funny, but they never found any liver flukes in me nor have they found even one in the cancers they have removed in the Western Hemisphere. Maybe they are stealth flukes.
Maybe they did not even bother looking because they were so ignorant as to think that parasites do not exist in the US. We are so clean and wonderful that we can not possibly have parasites here. In the early 1970,s I was in the tropics and found that I had 3 different types of intestinal parasites that I could see in my stool. I went to the county health clinic in Florida, told them about it and they sent my stool sample off. Report came back negativ. I complained and so they did it again, came back negative. I was overwhelmed with the dang things. I took a third sample to the doctor and had him look at it under the microscope. He said "you are right" and sent the third sample off with a blasting letter to the lab. The third test came back positive. The moral is that you are not going to find anything if you do not look for it. Doctors in the US Do Not Look!
>- Maybe they are stealth flukes.
Go look in the Parasites Forum and you will see a lot of people in there who report flukes in their stool after cleansing. Many of these complain that their doctor said nothing was wrong.
>-
She was just under 81 when she died. I'm 78 and when I go to my high school
reunions (last one 4 months ago) I see some that don't look "old" at
all, others are haggard.
I am only 59 but I have seen some who look worse at my
age than she did.
The
majority of attendees at my last HS reunion looked great. 75 is the new
65. I have no wrinkles and have been taken for much younger - have been
asked (recently) for an ID to get a senior discount. If Hulda looked much
older than the 80 years she was at death, then she was a hypocrite in many more
ways than one.
>- If her methods were so good, why couldn't she
diagnose her own disease?
First of all, sometimes you can not see the forest for the trees that are in
the way. Perhaps I heard incorrectly, but AFIK, she only discovered her problem
as a result of a neck injury from an automobile accident and by the time that
she found what the real problem was, she was so debilitated that she could not
physically do anything to stop it.
This is the woman who had devices to diagnose every known
(according to her) illness on the planet - and she never did a
self-diagnosis? She only discovered her problem after a neck injury?
She was obviously ill and depleted long before that. Her diagnosis is a
hoax. I was in contact with a woman who went to her clinic and was
personally "diagnosed" as having terminal cancer. This woman
spent several thousand dollars for her "cure" and only after
recognizing later that Hulda had done nothing for her did she admit to herself
that Hulda's a hoax - and that she never had cancer to begin with. In fact
the vast majority of people she claimed to have cancer had never had a
confirming diagnosis by an MD - before or after.
>- Yup read her books and bought one of her first
zappers which I still have. Did not one thing for me.
Sorry to hear that, maybe the one you got was defective. I personally have
had tremendous success with using my zapper, as have many others.
Ever hear of the placebo effect? It many times has
an even greater ability to heal than any herbs or drugs as high as 65% in
some cases, including cancer. As a cancer survivor (without medical
intervention) I have a book - published 20 years ago, that documented more than
200 contemporary cases of cancer cures without medical or alternative
intervention, including pancreatic cancer. The author himself was diagnosed
with lung cancer in his only remaining lung and given 30 days to live and last I
checked, he's still alive. The placebo effect is truly miraculous and is
in fact you as spirit healing your body. It happens all the time.
>- She made ridiculous claims about all cancer being
caused by a liver fluke found only in South East Asia.
That is a lie! How many US citizens went to Southeast Asia during the 1960's
and 1970's? Almost 1 million went to Vietnam, drank the water, swam in it, waded
in it. I am sure that none of them ever brought 1 single parasite back with
them, yeah, right. Over 100,000 US citizens visit S.E. Asia every year. Oh, but
they never get parasites, especially flukes.
You are the liar. The liver fluke lives only in the
liver of the host animal - not the gut. It is also over two inches
long. It is totally impossible to over look even by the most incompetent
MD on the planet.
>- Funny, but they never found any liver flukes in me
nor have they found even one in the cancers they have removed in the Western
Hemisphere. Maybe they are stealth flukes.
Maybe they did not even bother looking because they were so ignorant as to
think that parasites do not exist in the US. We are so clean and wonderful that
we can not possibly have parasites here. In the early 1970,s I was in the
tropics and found that I had 3 different types of intestinal parasites that I
could see in my stool. I went to the county health clinic in Florida, told them
about it and they sent my stool sample off. Report came back negativ. I
complained and so they did it again, came back negative. I was overwhelmed with
the dang things. I took a third sample to the doctor and had him look at it
under the microscope. He said "you are right" and sent the third
sample off with a blasting letter to the lab. The third test came back positive.
The moral is that you are not going to find anything if you do not look for it.
Doctors in the US Do Not Look!
Every single cancer that is removed in the United States is
put through lab tests. This 2 and a half inch beast has never ever been
found in a single cancer/tumor. They do look. The cancerous tissue
that came out of me during my TURP was put through laboratory exams, including
high powered microscope. No fluke, let alone one 2 or more inches long.
>- Maybe they are stealth flukes.
Go look in the Parasites Forum and you will see a lot of people in there who
report flukes in their stool after cleansing. Many of these complain that their
doctor said nothing was wrong.
I've seen many, many posts in the Parasites Forum and in but
one rare instance was there ever any lab confirmation of flukes. I'm not
denying that we in the USA have parasites, we do - including flukes.
However any fluke that comes out during a bowel cleanse is an intestinal fluke,
not a liver fluke - and they are from the intestines, they do not migrated to
other parts of the body. Hulda says that ALL cancer is cause by
Faciolopsis buskii a liver fluke found only in South East Asia and found only in
the liver! Two and a half inches long and longer at that. Your
claims that medical doctors have missed this GIANT invader are absurd.
>- Ever hear of the placebo effect? It many times has an even greater ability to heal than any herbs or drugs as high as 65% in some cases, including cancer
Actually, I would have to see this number published. It is well documented in medical literature to be about 30 percent.
One FDA agent accused me of hypnotizing my customers becaue of our products high success rate. I find it extremely funny that the FDA itself publishes a "white paper" on the use of electrical pulses to kill microbes in milk, juices, food, etc.
>- This is the woman who had devices to diagnose every known (according to her) illness on the planet - and she never did a self-diagnosis?
As far as I can tell, diagnosing your self uning the synchrometer does not work well. Most doctors do not diagnose themselves, they go to another trusted doctor.
A great many illnesses are discovered as a result of accidental injuries or from visits to the doctor for other reasons.
>- I have a book - published 20 years ago, that documented more than 200 contemporary cases of cancer cures without medical or alternative intervention
Yes, "Remarkable Recovery" is one of my favorite books too. There is a common link to almost all of the cases listed.
>- you are the liar. The liver fluke lives only in the liver of the host animal - not the gut. It is also over two inches long. It is totally impossible to over look even by the most incompetent MD on the planet.
Actually, you are badly misinformed. Cancer patients are almost never autopsied - period -. I am not a liar, every statement that I made was true.
---> Almost 1 million went to Vietnam, drank the water, swam in it, waded in it.
---> Over 100,000 US citizens visit S.E. Asia every year.
It is only narrowmindedness that would make someone not see the truth in the above statements.
>- Every single cancer that is removed in the United States is put through lab tests. This 2 and a half inch beast has never ever been found in a single cancer/tumor. They do look.
Only the cancer is removed, not tissues that may be several inches away. No one ever said that the fluke would be in the tumor. That is just another support for certain groups not looking beyond the end of their noses. They only examine the tumor for cancerous cells, nothing else. These beasts are not always 2-1/2 inches, only the largest.
Liver flukes are not the only flukes to cause cancer.
>- Your claims that medical doctors have missed this GIANT invader are absurd.
No, they are not. Again, cancer patients who die are almost never autopsied. It would show up embarasingly for the oncologists. Even when they are autopsied, the autopsy is not thorough and they never look for liver flukes in the US.
Placebos first came to the general public’s attention in the 1950s. It was
discovered that patients who were given harmless sugar pills and told they were
medicine would often report themselves cured. In an influential article first
published in 1955, Harvard researcher Henry Beecher concluded that between 30
and 40 percent of any treated group would respond to a placebo. Now, half a
century later and beginning a new millennium, we are finding that the
actual success rate is much higher—closer to 60 percent, and in some cases as
high as 75 percent. Remarkably, it’s not unheard of for placebo effects to
exceed those of the normally prescribed treatment. The implications of this are
staggering.
As far as I can tell, diagnosing your self uning the synchrometer does not
work well. Most doctors do not diagnose themselves, they go to another trusted
doctor.
A great many illnesses are discovered as a result of accidental injuries or from
visits to the doctor for other reasons.
That's a laugh and a rationalization. Only a small fraction of disease
is discovered through accidents or visits for other reasons. Hulda's
clinic was available to her where she could have gone for someone else to use
the fake synchrometer on her. She ended up with an MD who did real tests
with real results. You fail to address the fact that Hulda treated her
brother's cancer and he died. Also, she was fat if not obese, and a
horrible example to those she was trying to treat.
>- I have a book - published 20 years ago, that documented more than
200 contemporary cases of cancer cures without medical or alternative
intervention
Yes, "Miracuous Recovery" is one of my favorite books too. There is
a common link to almost all of the cases listed.
That is not the book I was referring to.
>- you are the liar. The liver fluke lives only in the liver of the
host animal - not the gut. It is also over two inches long. It is totally
impossible to over look even by the most incompetent MD on the planet.
Actually, you are badly misinformed. Cancer patients are almost never
autopsied - period -. I am not a liar, every statement that I made was true......
You're still lying. I never said that cancer patients were autopsied, I
said that their cancer was given thorough tests in the lab after removal and the
vast majority of the patients survive the procedure. The reason the
material is tested in minute detail is to determine the type of cancer and the
possible extent of it. When a tumor is removed for example, it may be
benign, or cancer. If the tumor is cancerous much of the time it is in
only a portion of the tumor and a small portion at that. You read a
different book than I did because Hulda claimed that each cancer has a internal
fluke.
You are still living in the medical Dark Ages. Cancer patients are
given X-rays as a part of diagnosis and if a two inch fluke is in the body it
will be found there. Then, unless the doctor is incompetent they are given
a head to toe (entire body) CT scan. If according to your interpretation
of Hulda this monstrous fluke is not really in the cancer itself, the CT scan
will find it as a foreign object wherever it's at. Then if further
evaluation is needed the patient is put through a PET scan. This is
similar to a CT scan with products that can enhance the details of cancer.
Both the CT scan and the PET scan provide minute top of the head/scalp to bottom
of the feet/skin information showing every millimeter of the body in cross
section that is then analyzed on a computer and they (both CT and PET) can
discover foreign objects smaller than a pea. So whether you believe what
Hulda wrote or you believe in "floating" flukes - your conclusion is
simply wild and hilarious hogwash. Almost every cancer patient I'm aware
of gets at least the CT scan.
Again, nary a fluke related to cancer has ever been found in North America
and you concept of knee jerk diagnosis is really really sad, totally ill-informed,
and way out of date.
>- success rate is much higher—closer to 60 percent, and in some cases as high as 75 percent.
Show me the studies. It is easy to put things in a book without much basis. I will review an actual study to see for myself how well it was done and how valid it is.
>- That's a laugh and a rationalization.
Only on your part, I have confirmed this with an MD.
>- You fail to address the fact that Hulda treated her brother's cancer and he died
No, I have no information on this perspective.
>- That is not the book I was referring to.
Actually, that was an error, the book is "Remarkable Recovery". I had to leave in a hurry to run some errands and did not proofread.
>- The reason the material is tested in minute detail is to determine the type of cancer and the possible extent of it.
I am very well aware of this as I have experience of this as well as having cultured cancer cells.
>- You read a different book than I did because Hulda claimed that each cancer has a internal fluke.
No, I read several of her books but did not remember that statement.
>- You're still lying.
Again, you are not correct. My statements are true as I showed before.
>- You are still living in the medical Dark Ages.
No, I am not at all. I have in my closet an entire cancer history, including MRI's, CAT scans, PET scans (for bone metastases), Blood tests, etc. Not only do I have these, I know how to read them. I know what the blood test mean.
Also, I diagnosed my own cancer, even as to type, before I went to the doctor for confirmation. I ended up having to treat myself because they failed. So far with the blessings of my creator, I am still here.
>- Again, nary a fluke related to cancer has ever been found in North America and you concept of knee jerk diagnosis is really really sad, totally ill-informed, and way out of date.
Again, you are mistaken and do not know what you are talking about. Just because you don't know about it, does not mean that it does not exist. There are cases in the US where the liver fluke has been found in cancer patients, but again they are rarely reported or published.
What you fail to understand is that everyone who gets cancer, dies. Everyone who does not get cancer dies. Those who go through traditional oncological treatment die much sooner. Most oncologist would not take chemo or radiation for most cancers.
Oncology ranks cancers with a 5 year survival rate. The reason for this is that at about 7 years, you have a better chance of survival if you do not follow traditional chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery.
What you and the traditioanal medical establishment fail to realize is the how and why of cancer growth being enabled by flukes and other parasites.
>-
success rate is much higher—closer to 60 percent, and in some cases as high as
75 percent.
Show me the studies. It is easy to put things in a book without much basis. I
will review an actual study to see for myself how well it was done and how valid
it is.
One
way to avoid facts is to discredit the source. Go to the link and ask
them.
>- That's a laugh and a rationalization. (i.e. regarding a high
number of illnesses caused by accidents or visits for other reasons)
Only on your part, I have confirmed this with an MD.
Well a "high number" is not the same as a high percentage and while
a large number may be diagnosed this way, you show me the percentages.
>- That is not the book I was referring to.
Actually, that was an error, the book is "Remarkable Recovery". I
had to leave in a hurry to run some errands and did not proofread.
It's still not the book I was referring to.
>- The reason the material is tested in minute detail is to determine
the type of cancer and the possible extent of it.
I am very well aware of this as I have experience of this as well as having
cultured cancer cells.
Ok, we agree then that ALL cancer is subjected to laboratory review
(different than an earlier post you made) and you still think that a monster
fluke is responsible for them? In spite of all the CT and PET scans going
on with cancer patients? Hogwash
>- You read a different book than I did because Hulda claimed that each
cancer has a internal fluke.
No, I read several of her books but did not remember that statement.
>- You're still lying.
Again, you are not correct. My statements are true as I showed before.
Let's flush all of your incorrect statements then and go to Faciolopsis
buskii which you claim you have never seen in her books. Go to
"Curing Cancer" on page 331 of her "Cure For All Diseases"
and carefully read the part that you skipped. Under "Another Fluke
Disease" on that page she says that "the responsible parasite is
Fasciolopsis buskii (i.e. liver fluke) the human intestinal fluke, a
flatworm." (Her highlights, not mine.) She then goes on to
describe how the eggs of these flukes not only go out through your feces but
also enter into your body and how these flukes then enter into ALL cancers (on
page 332).
That liver fluke has a very unique life cycle. The link below provides
a thorough explanation of this "cancer causing" fluke and I'll quote
various portions of it - you can go to the site (and a zillion others like it)
and read for yourself.
Fasciolopsis buski is a parasite, a fluke that infects humans,
pigs, dogs and rabbits in southern Asia. It is often called the giant
intestinal fluke because it is one of the largest flukes to infect
people—adult worms can be 75mm (about three inches) long and 20mm (nearly an
inch) wide.
Though many of us are familiar with the term “liver fluke,” F.
buski does not live in the liver: these large leaf-shaped worms inhabit
the upper regions of the small intestine. When there are many worms, they are
also found in lower areas of the intestine and in the stomach. Fasciolopsis
buski is not found in other parts of the body. (emphasis added)
<snip>
An individual infected with F. buski passes thousands of
microscopic eggs in the stool—each adult worm produces 25,000 eggs every
day. Eggs passed or washed into a body of fresh water continue to develop.
After about seven weeks, tiny parasitic organisms called “miracidia”
emerge. To continue development, they require one of several species
of aquatic snail. (emphasis added) If the appropriate species is
present, the miracidia enter snails and reproduce. If the right
species of snail is absent, the miracidia die. (emphasis
added)
Parasites exit the snails as “cercariae,” another stage in the life
cycle of the giant intestinal fluke. Cercariae find water plants and
encyst on them, building little protective envelopes around themselves.
If the water plants with “metacercariae” are eaten raw by a suitable
species of animal (human, pig, dog, rabbit), the worms can mature to
adults in the intestine. In about three months, they will begin producing
eggs, starting the life cycle over again.
Ok, end of site quotes.
You will notice if you read the whole article that these flukes are found
only in S. E. Asia. You will also note that in order to complete its
life cycle it has to find a host snail of a particular variety.
You will also find that this snail is found only in S. E.. Asia and that as
part of the cycle a human (and many animals) have to eat raw vegetation that
have the "cercariae" on them. It is impossible for them to
complete a life cycle within the human body as Hulda claims in the book
section that I referred to. The eggs have to be passed from the body
before they can continue their life cycle.
Hulda's claim in that book is ludicrous and your saying you've read all
of her books shows you haven't paid attention to them.
>- You are still living in the medical Dark Ages.
No, I am not at all. I have in my closet an entire cancer history,
including MRI's, CAT scans, PET scans (for bone metastases), Blood tests, etc.
Not only do I have these, I know how to read them. I know what the blood test
mean.
Also, I diagnosed my own cancer, even as to type, before I went to the doctor
for confirmation. I ended up having to treat myself because they failed. So
far with the blessings of my creator, I am still here.
Well, you are providing the source of you cure that I completely agree with
and good for you. But Hulda's hocus pocus had nothing to do with
it. The book that I was referring to earlier had more than 200
documented cancer cures including pancreatic cancer, with no medical
intervention and the common thread was a positive outlook. Additionally,
the placebo effect (which is actually "caused" by the human spirit)
has been documented to cure cancer and whether you attribute it to god (which
I do - even if they are non-believers) or something else shows the power of
human ability to deal with all disease without doctors.
>- Again, nary a fluke related to cancer has ever been found in North
America and you concept of knee jerk diagnosis is really really sad, totally
ill-informed, and way out of date.
Again, you are mistaken and do not know what you are talking about. Just
because you don't know about it, does not mean that it does not exist. There
are cases in the US where the liver fluke has been found in cancer patients,
but again they are rarely reported or published.
What you fail to understand is that everyone who gets cancer, dies. Everyone
who does not get cancer dies. Those who go through traditional oncological
treatment die much sooner. Most oncologist would not take chemo or radiation
for most cancers.
Oncology ranks cancers with a 5 year survival rate. The reason for this is
that at about 7 years, you have a better chance of survival if you do not
follow traditional chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery.
Hulda says that the liver fluke is in ALL cancer. That a fluke is
found in a person with cancer in those very rare instances where you say they
have been found (please document) is no different than the number of flukes in
the population at large - but not Fasciolopsis buski. My prostate cancer
was diagnosed about 18 years ago and I refused medical intervention. I
will not die from cancer and I don't have parasites.
What you and the traditioanal medical establishment fail to realize is
the how and why of cancer growth being enabled by flukes and other parasites.
That's another of your utterly ludicrous statements with nothing but Hulda
to back it up. With all the lab tests of every cancer, with CT scans and
PET scans you think that that modern medicine is missing something?
Neither a fluke nor any other parasite has ever been found in me or the cancer
tissue that has been removed from me including lung cancer. It is
impossible for these items you swear by to have been missed with all the
testing that is done today.
You definitely have a tendency to misinterpret, twist, or distort. Additionally, I am well aware of what parasites are and can do from my years of college ad a biology major and from my graduate studies in biomedical engineering. I have learned over the years that what we are taught is not always true and what is thought to be true today is shown to be wrong tomorrow.
The AMA promoted tobacco smoking for their own profit and members lied to jurys for years about the damages of tobacco. US doctors were at one time felt threatened with loosing their license if they washed their hands between surgeries. The AMA blatantly defamed chiropractic for years before being found guilty of this in court. The US medical establishment is seriously harming our children today by injecting vaccines that cause serious neurological and immunological damage.
>- regarding a high number of illnesses caused by accidents or visits for other reasons
I did not say caused, I said "A great many illnesses are discovered as a result of accidental injuries or from visits to the doctor for other reasons." Another distortion on your part.
>- It's still not the book I was referring to.
Are you sure of that too? You seem to be avoiding naming it.
>- that ALL cancer is subjected to laboratory review
No, not all. But yes, most cancer is given a cursory examination to determine the types of cells present, Nothing more. There is no immediate or postmortem examination to attempt to find possible causes in all but a few exceptions. Again, you have misread, misinterpreted, or misrepresented what the original statement was.
>- you still think that a monster fluke is responsible for them?
It is entirely possible, what you overlook, or possibly misrepresent is that each and every fluke will be that size. That is how big they "can get". If a person has several smaller ones, it is easy to overlook them. Most CT scans, MRI's, etc will miss them anyhow. These scans use contrast agents that are specifically absorbed by actively growing cancer cells but not by other normal tissue, including parasites. Also, if you had bothered to read the cancer page that I sent you a link to, you would see that there are other parasites that increase the risk of and even cause cancer. This is according to the NIH. I used to have many more links to their site but as soon as I posted a link, they took the pages down to hide the truth. I now keep a copy of every page that I refer to.
>- Hulda says that the liver fluke is in ALL cancer
Please refer me to that page. What I read was that the liver fluke was present in all cancer patients. Is this another distortion?
>- That's another of your utterly ludicrous statements with nothing but Hulda to back it up
Here you are flat out misrepresenting. I have links to the National Institute of Health that back me up but you do not bother to read them.
>- Neither a fluke nor any other parasite has ever been found in me or the cancer tissue that has been removed from me including lung cancer. It is impossible for these items you swear by to have been missed with all the testing that is done today.
Let me see, hmmmm, what contrasting agent is going to show up a fluke? Oh, well, since PET scans are specifically designed to highlight cancer cells, surely they would show a foreign body? No, they are designed to find cancer cells! Don't be totally naive, tests such as CT, PET, etc. only find what they as designed to find. Everything else is background.
>- F. buski does not live in the liver: these large leaf-shaped worms inhabit the upper regions of the small intestine.
>- one of several species of aquatic snail. ... If the right species of snail is absent, the miracidia die. ... You will also note that in order to complete its life cycle it has to find a host snail of a particular variety
There are snails in North American waters that can serve as the intermediate host although not as well. However, that is mute in many cases.
As I stated before, several million North Americans have been to S.E. Asia. We import foods from S.E. Asia which may be contaminated.
>- It is impossible for them to complete a life cycle within the human body as Hulda claims in the book section that I referred to. The eggs have to be passed from the body before they can continue their life cycle.
I agree with this in general, but oddly, they keep finding exceptions to these so called rules.
>- your saying you've read all of her books
Again, another fabrication on your part. I did not say that I have read all of her books. If I did, it was in error.
In summation, If you are not a doctor, you should be because it appears that you can not look beyond the end of your nose.
Modern medicine is in the dark ages and the candle that you are holding is behind that. The National Institute of Health backs me up. According to their publications, many parasites, including several flukes, cause cancer.
"You
definitely have a tendency to misinterpret, twist, or distort. Additionally, I
am well aware of what parasites are and can do from my years of college ad a
biology major and from my graduate studies in biomedical engineering. I have
learned over the years that what we are taught is not always true and what is
thought to be true today is shown to be wrong tomorrow......"
You've
got it backwards, you are the one who is lying and twisting facts. I don't
remember anywhere that the AMA promoted smoking - but I do remember some doctors
who did. A few doctors are not the AMA.
>- regarding a high number of illnesses caused by accidents or visits
for other reasons
I did not say caused, I said "A great many illnesses are discovered as a
result of accidental injuries or from visits to the doctor for other
reasons." Another distortion on your part.
Picky,
picky, picky. Please tell me the difference between "a high
number" and "A great many." And you accuse me of
distortion? Again, give me some percentage numbers because they are really
low.
>- It's still not the book I was referring to.
Are you sure of that too? You seem to be avoiding naming it.
You claimed to be reading my mind by supplying me with the name of the book
so I figured you could find it on your own. You are such an expert on
cancer and you've never read "50 Essential Things to do When the Doctor
Says It's Cancer" by Greg Anderson? It contains no alternative
medicine, but it does provide a path for people diagnosed with cancer. I
followed his recommendations. I've been prostate cancer free for 18 years
without medical intervention and I don't have one damned parasite in me and
there were no parasites found in the in depth analysis of the cancer material
that came out of me.
>- that ALL cancer is subjected to laboratory review
No, not all. But yes, most cancer is given a cursory examination to determine
the types of cells present, Nothing more. There is no immediate or postmortem
examination to attempt to find possible causes in all but a few exceptions.
Again, you have misread, misinterpreted, or misrepresented what the original
statement was.
You mentioned the fact that there not all post mortem cancers are tested and
I never disagreed with you on that point. However to say that cancers that
are removed are giving a "cursory" review is a humongous distortion of
what really goes on. You are stumbling over your closed mind. The
cancers are given an in-depth analysis and a parasite in the cancer has never
been found in North America, in spite of your claims and in spite of what Hulda
has written.
>- you still think that a monster fluke is responsible for them?
It is entirely possible, what you overlook, or possibly misrepresent is that
each and every fluke will be that size. That is how big they "can
get". If a person has several smaller ones, it is easy to overlook them.
Most CT scans, MRI's, etc will miss them anyhow. These scans use contrast agents
that are specifically absorbed by actively growing cancer cells but not by other
normal tissue, including parasites. Also, if you had bothered to read the cancer
page that I sent you a link to, you would see that there are other parasites
that increase the risk of and even cause cancer. This is according to the NIH. I
used to have many more links to their site but as soon as I posted a link, they
took the pages down to hide the truth. I now keep a copy of every page that I
refer to.
That CT scans and MRI's will miss most of them is out and out trash talk with
nothing to back it up. This "giant" (in terms of a fluke, it is
a giant) can get well over 2 inches. That's a slam dunk for a CT
scan. They find things much smaller than that, and I've experienced
it. There have been no flukes found in conjunction with a cancer in North
America.
>- Hulda says that the liver fluke is in ALL cancer
Please refer me to that page. What I read was that the liver fluke was
present in all cancer patients. Is this another distortion?
I gave you the name of her book, the chapter, page number, and even quoted
some of her writing. Before I did that you claimed to never have heard
that Fasciolopsis buskii (which has been ridiculed all over the Internet besides
quackwatch - including the University of Iowa)? You claim to follow her
advice and have "read her books" yet have not read that?
>- That's another of your utterly ludicrous statements with nothing but
Hulda to back it up
Here you are flat out misrepresenting. I have links to the National Institute
of Health that back me up but you do not bother to read them.
That's because you never provided a link.
>- Neither a fluke nor any other parasite has ever been found in me or
the cancer tissue that has been removed from me including lung cancer. It is
impossible for these items you swear by to have been missed with all the testing
that is done today.
Let me see, hmmmm, what contrasting agent is going to show up a fluke? Oh,
well, since PET scans are specifically designed to highlight cancer cells,
surely they would show a foreign body? No, they are designed to find cancer
cells! Don't be totally naive, tests such as CT, PET, etc. only find what they
as designed to find. Everything else is background.
What contrasting agent do tumors have to make them show up? I have a
neighbor who's lungs are almost filled with small tumors (from fungus, a common
result of living in Southern California and Nevada) and they show up on X-rays
as well as a CT scan. They are no different than 2 plus inch worms - yet
they are much, much, smaller..
>- F. buski does not live in the liver: these large leaf-shaped worms
inhabit the upper regions of the small intestine.
>- one of several species of aquatic snail. ... If the right species of snail
is absent, the miracidia die. ... You will also note that in order to complete
its life cycle it has to find a host snail of a particular variety
There are snails in North American waters that can serve as the intermediate
host although not as well. However, that is mute in many cases.
As I stated before, several million North Americans have been to S.E. Asia.
We import foods from S.E. Asia which may be contaminated
Then why haven't any F. buski been found in North America? They sure
don't have a problem finding them in S. E. Asia. As I understand it the
required conditions go beyond just the snail which is one of several reasons
they are found outside of Asia.
As I stated before, several million North Americans have been to S.E.
Asia. We import foods from S.E. Asia which may be contaminated.
Yes, I've been there too. The foods that carry the required
fluke have to be fresh, not cooked. Despite your insistence that these
giant worms/flukes are in North America, none have ever been found -
anywhere! Why is it that doctors/science in Asia find them and we
can't? Did you flush out flukes in your cancer cure? Did you have a
lab identify them?
>- It is impossible for them to complete a life cycle within the human
body as Hulda claims in the book section that I referred to. The eggs have to be
passed from the body before they can continue their life cycle.
I agree with this in general, but oddly, they keep finding exceptions to
these so called rules.
I think we actually agree on a lot of things, but I think the belief of
Hulda's "findings" and "cures" is mass hysteria. I
have read a book on a guy who cured his bone marrow cancer - by a professor at
Oxford who learned to breathe through his toes and did coffee enemas after visiting
Gerson's daughter. He was given 6 months to live and lasted 10 years when,
refusing medical intervention, he died from an infected tooth. I do
believe that you have to put everything together and go with what you think will
work for you. I seriously doubt the exceptions but if that's what it takes
for your belief system, then have at it.
In summation, If you are not a doctor, you should be because it appears
that you can not look beyond the end of your nose.
Modern medicine is in the dark ages and the candle that you are holding is
behind that. The National Institute of Health backs me up. According to their
publications, many parasites, including several flukes, cause cancer.
Again, you've got it backwards. I have never claimed to be a doctor and
neither was Hulda. Just because Hulda had a PhD in biology, her ND was a
100 hour correspondence course. Please provide the NIH sources. If
they say that flukes cause cancer, Hulda says all cancer is caused that way.
I can see beyond the end of my nose, it is you that is close minded - in
spite of your education - which references to are almost always a sign of very
low self-esteem.
>- I don't remember anywhere that the AMA promoted smoking - but I do remember some doctors who did. A few doctors are not the AMA.
You must be a young wippersnapper, I remember. They even had tobacco ads in their journals. There are videos on youtube.
>- Picky, picky, picky.
Not picky, exposing your false statements. Your claim was blatant and wrong.
>- "50 Essential Things to do When the Doctor Says It's Cancer" by Greg Anderson?
Yes, I read it. Not impressed. While it did have some information, it was very outdated and there was a lot left out. I was impressed with "Remarkable Recovery" which was strictly about the topic of rcovering from cancer without medical intervention and went into more detail.
>- You mentioned the fact that there not all post mortem cancers are tested
No,I made a point that they are almost never autopsied, especially seeking causes such as parasites. US medicine does not look and does not care to look.
>- I don't have one damned parasite in me and there were no parasites found in the in depth analysis of the cancer material
Again, you are missing the whole point. The parasites are not in the cancer. They are living elsewhere in your body, giving off toxins that erode your immune system.
By the way, do you even know the statistics on erroneous prostate cancer diagnosis?
>- to say that cancers that are removed are giving a "cursory" review is a humongous distortion of what really goes on
My mind is far more opened than yours on this. I used to work with a couple of people who had been lab tecnicians. The things that I heard from them was amazing.
What you do not know or understand is that the microscopic review of suspected tumor material is a mundane boring job that is performed by lab technicians. They examine the slide until they find a cell that is definitive for a particular cancer type, take a photo or two for documentation, fill out a form, then at the end of the day, the doctor signs it. The doctor almost never looks at a sample. The technicians do not look for anything but a cancer cell because that is what they are paid to do and they are graded on how fast they find the cancer.
If you think that they do a thorough examination, you are poorly informed. There are exceptions, but they are rare.
>- That CT scans and MRI's will miss most of them is out and out trash talk with nothing to back it up.
Again,
you
have absolutely no experience in this or you would not be saying that. Most cancers do not even show up well on a CT scan unless they use a "contrast agent".
The MRI will work somewhat better but it is still possible to miss some things. Unless a whole body scan is performed, they can miss a lot.
>- That's because you never provided a link.
Yes I did, 3 or 4 messages back. I checked and it is there.
>- What contrasting agent do tumors have to make them show up? I have a neighbor who's lungs are almost filled with small tumors (from fungus, a common result of living in Southern California and Nevada) and they show up on X-rays as well as a CT scan. They are no different than 2 plus inch worms - yet they are much, much, smaller..
They are definitely different than any worm. First, all cancerous tumors are dense and are highly vascularized. They are also thermally active hot spots, frequently being as hot as 104 F locally. They also absorb certain metals such as cesium very strongly where normal cells and parasites do not. That is why cancer shows up stronger. Flat worms are not dense and therefore can easily be missed. While some get very large, they are usually much smaller.
The only way that a CT scan, X-ray, PET scan, MRI, etc can find anything is by seein a specific difference. The PET scan uses the fact that cancer cells absorb more than 10 times as much glucose as normal cells do. A CT scan and X-rays look for differences in density. The MRI looks for rotation variation in certain hydrogen bonds.
From the NIH:
The X-ray Diagnosis of Animal Parasites (Helminthes) in Man.
By J. F. BRAILSFORD, M.B. (Birmingham).
THE possibility of X-ray diagnosis depends on the calcification of the parasites
or their location in the body.
Most of the encysted embryos undergo calcification; this may follow as the
sequel to the death of the parasite, or as some authorities believe it to be, a protective
reaction of the tissues of the host with the subsequent death and calcification of the
parasite, living embryos having been found in cysts, the outer walls of which showed
calcification.
This publications states that parasites do not show up easily on x-rays unless they are calcified (usually but not always after death of the parasite).
Adult worms of F. buski from humans are very rarely seen except at autopsy
>- Before I did that you claimed to never have heard that Fasciolopsis buskii ????
Never heard that it what? Was in a tumor? That is correct. Apparantly Dr. Clark was not entirely correct in all of her statements. But she was and is very correct in that parasites do cause cancer. The NIH has published dozens of studies showing this. Everytime that I would link to one, they would take it down until I started saving copies of them.
She was correct on many points. Her herbal cleanses were not her original products, they have been around for hundreds of years but modern medicine threw them out because they do not make money. She was correct about the zapper but did not go far enough. She was and is correct about cleansing. She was and is correct about many household chemicals and their detrimental effects on us.
>- which has been ridiculed all over the Internet
Dr. Clark was not able to excise or biopsy the material or perhaps she might have seen things differently. What she was saying was that the signal she was finding with her synchrometer was that of F.Buskii. I have said before in other discussions that the synchrometer was crude and was to easy to get false readings from. Unlike you or the other who poopoo it, I tried it and found that it does have a basis and is can be used as a starting point. Eventually, medicine will adopt the use of frequency resonance and there are some advanced units out there today such as the EFX/SCIO which I had an analysis done that found three specific conditions that I was unaware of but was able to verify.
>- You claim to follow her advice and have "read her books" yet have not read that?
No, I read the advice of many and select the things that I feel will work for me. I do Budwig with a mix of Brandt along with others. The one thing that I have gotten the most out of using is the zapper. Thank you Dr. Clark.
>- Just because Hulda had a PhD in biology, her ND was a 100 hour correspondence course.
Yes, Clayton College is only 20 minutes from my house. A 100 hour corrospondence course can be very educational. I am accomplished in electronics and learned much of who I did early on through corrospondence courses. I run circles around some graduates of some colleges and technical schools. Corrospondence does not mean bad.
>- That's because you never provided a link.
Yes, I did, several messages back. You can find it here:
>- If they say that flukes cause cancer, Hulda says all cancer is caused that way
That I never agreed with. I knew that tobacco smoke causes certain specific cancers, I know that asbestos causes mesothelioma, I will say that everyone who has cancer, has parasites and these parasites definitely have an impact on the progression of cancer. As a matter of fact, everyone has parasites, we can not survive without them.
One thing that I have learned from studying parasitology is that parasites have a very strong influence over the host, including turning down the hosts immune system. This in turn allows cancer to develope when it would not ordinarily do so. Perhaps you and your doctor friends should give some further consideration to the role of parasites in the development of cancer before you continue poopooing the idea.
Why are you wasting your time with this guy Parazapper? Every post of his is a cut and paste from either the pharmaceutical controlled NIH or the criminal Stephen Barret's Quackwatch!
In fact this guy sounds like Barret with his obvious hate filed messages, a pharmashill signature!
>- Hulda Clark says they are in the cancer - in various stages of development including the adult stage.
So, you do believe Hulda Clark. Since you are using her word as gospel and to call me a liar on that basis makes you a hypocrit!
My statement is based on NIH funded studies that clearly explain that parasites living in the intestines can cause cancer in other locations in the body.
>- Most cancers do not even show up well on a CT scan unless they use a "contrast agent".
I said "Most", not "all".
>- I've seen the CT scans on a computer, they show up beautifully, and they are very small
Thank you! "Computer enhanced!" The normal images do not show well at all and I have examined several. Even with the computer enhanced ones, not all cancers are eazy to see.
>- Your statement from NIH about parasites does not make any claim regarding their connection to cancer as you claimed earlier
#1 About one-in-five liver cancers are cholangiocarcinomas, arising from branches of the bile ducts that are located within the liver. Certain liver parasites are recognized risk factors for this type of liver cancer
#2 Being infected with certain parasites increases the risk of bladder cancer.
#3 factors that may contribute to the development of bladder cancer include bladder infection with the parasitic fluke Schistosoma haematobium
#4 Bile duct cancer may occur more frequently in patients with a history of primary sclerosing Cholangitis , chronic ulcerative colitis, choledochal cysts, or infections with the fluke, clonorchis sinensis.
>- You say that Clark was not "entirely correct in all of here statements" yet she made the claim that Fasciolopsis buski was in every cancer and she made that statement in each and everyone of her books.
So, that was a wrong statement if that is what she claimed in each and every book but her other thousand statements were not so wrong.
>- present what an (one) eminently qualified parasitologist (and many others) say regarding Hulda's fluke.
I have read his discounts before and not everyone agrees entirely with his statements and conclusions.
Additionally, the very fact that it is posted on quackwatch makes it completely suspect because quackwatch is nothing but a propoganda machine that attempts di destroy naturopathic and wholistic practices just like they did with chiropractic. Why are there no quack M.D.'s listed there? Especially when there have been many exposed?
Support for the zapper 95 percent success according to Dr. Robert Thiel.
I can personally tell you that there is a strong effort to suppress the zapper and Dr. Thiel feels so threatened that he will not run another study.
We sent several zappers to a major university in California for studies with HIV infected individuals. While several of the tests showed improvement, the study was discontinued under undue influence.
>-
Hulda Clark says they are in the cancer - in various stages of development
including the adult stage.
So, you do believe Hulda Clark. Since you are using her word as gospel and to
call me a liar on that basis makes you a hypocrit!
My statement is based on NIH funded studies that clearly explain that parasites
living in the intestines can cause cancer in other locations in the body.
What idiot logic. I DO NOT believe Hulda Clark.
That's the basis of this entire thread. First you ask me to point out
where Hulda even said such a thing - and I did. Now you come back with an
asinine statement like the above.
You have NEVER presented the NIH study and nowhere but nowhere
does the NIH study say anything about parasites in cancer. Besides, we are
not talking about any parasites, we are talking about fasciolopsis buskii,
the parasite that Hulda claims is in every cancer. There is a humongous
difference between your statement and what Hulda claims.
>- Most cancers do not even show up well on a CT scan
unless they use a "contrast agent".
I said "Most", not "all"'.
I strongly diagree. Prove it!
>- I've seen the CT scans on a computer, they show up
beautifully, and they are very small
Thank you! "Computer enhanced!" The normal images do not show well
at all and I have examined several. Even with the computer enhanced ones, not
all cancers are eazy to see.
More bull shit. Get your butt into the 21st
century. They no longer produce X-Rays or CT scans on film, or haven't you
heard. There was no computer enhancement of the small granulomas that I've
seen on the CT scan and they showed up clearly on X-rays as well. CT scans
are sent directly to a computer where no enhancements are made and are analyzed
there.
>- Your statement from NIH about parasites does not make
any claim regarding their connection to cancer as you claimed earlier
#1 About one-in-five liver cancers are cholangiocarcinomas, arising from
branches of the bile ducts that are located within the liver. Certain liver
parasites are recognized risk factors for this type of liver cancer.
You have not presented anything to back up your statement -
other than your statement. Besides, you just proved Hulda Clark to be
wrong - there are no fasciolopsis buskii in the liver. Thank you for
providing a closing to the argument you're presenting trying to support Ms.
Clark.
So, that was a wrong statement if that is what she claimed in each and
every book but her other thousand statements were not so wrong.
That wasn't a wrong statement, she made that same statement over and over
again in many books in regard not only to cancer but a host of other diseases as
well. You have once again supported my claim that Hulda Clark was a hoax
and a liar. You're inability, once more, to read is readily apparent
regarding her books and the S. E. Asia liver fluke.
>- present what an (one) eminently qualified parasitologist (and many
others) say regarding Hulda's fluke.
I have read his discounts before and not everyone agrees entirely with his
statements and conclusions.
Additionally, the very fact that it is posted on quackwatch makes it completely
suspect because quackwatch is nothing but a propoganda machine that attempts di
destroy naturopathic and wholistic practices just like they did with
chiropractic. Why are there no quack M.D.'s listed there? Especially when there
have been many exposed?
Support for the zapper 95 percent success according to Dr. Robert Thiel.
I can personally tell you that there is a strong effort to suppress the zapper
and Dr. Thiel feels so threatened that he will not run another study.
We sent several zappers to a major university in California for studies with HIV
infected individuals. While several of the tests showed improvement, the study
was discontinued under undue influence.
Dr. Pappas had a web site at Ohio State University discounting the fasciolopsis buskii
claim and I cannot find anyone anywhere disputing Dr. Pappas. You are
attacking the messenger without addressing the message.
By your own admission Hulda Clark was a hoax and a liar.
In summation you have presented nothing to support your theories.
You've been the route, so you know that with what information you have presented
here on Cure Zone if you were to take it to a thesis committee and were to try
and defend it - you would be laughed out of the building and off the campus
too. There is no scientific evidence to support any of Hulda's claims
regarding cancer - including the zapper. You are reaching out and not only
claiming that modern medicine is in the Dark Ages, but you are also claiming
that all science is there as well. Are you one of those who believe that
men walking on the moon was a hoax? In the process of your presentation
here on this list you are also denigrating your own education. It would
have been impossible for you to get your PhD with the type of evidence you
present here.
You have a belief/faith in the zapper and many of Hulda's false claims.
That is exactly what is required for the placebo effect. I suggest that
you continue to live in your own little fantasy world because if you were to
accept the truth your cancer would return full force. I do not belittle
your faith because it is completely independent of what you have erroneously
chosen to support it with. However, it's time to call a spade a
spade. You as spirit (not your body) have healed yourself.
Alternative Medicine Success Largely Due To Placebo Effect
Posted on: Wednesday, 11 November 2009, 14:00 CST
Human expectations and the power of the mind may be behind the success of
many natural health remedies, according to an Associated Press report on Tuesday
about the use and potential risks of alternative medicines.
Known as the placebo effect, people sometimes feel better after taking a
dummy pill or a faked treatment simply because they expect the treatment will
work to improve their condition.
In other words, the brain has the ability to alter physical symptoms, such as
pain, anxiety and fatigue.
The healing power of the placebo effect was recently demonstrated during
tests of a new drug that relieves the symptoms of lupus. The test found that one
in three participants felt better after they received the dummy pills instead of
the actual drug.
The placebo effect plays a large part in alternative medicine, which includes
therapies and herbal remedies based on beliefs versus science, the Associated
Press said.
Such therapies are often used to relieve subjective symptoms such as pain.
"It has a pejorative implication — that it's not real, that it has no
medicinal value," said Dr. Robert Ader, a psychologist at the University of
Rochester in New York who has researched the subject.
But placebos can have real and beneficial effects, he said.
"Much of the results of certain alternative procedures are largely
placebo effects, unless you believe there are people who exert magical powers so
they can hold their hands over your body and cure you of disease," Ader
told the AP.
"Make you feel better? That's entirely possible, especially if you
believe it."
Scientists say the placebo effect accounts for roughly one-third of the
benefits of any treatment — even carefully tested ones.
This conclusion dates to a historic report in 1955 called The Powerful
Placebo. The groundbreaking report, in which H.K. Beecher analyzed
dozens of previous studies, found that 32 percent of patients responded to a
placebo.
Beecher’s conclusions were supported by subsequent studies, which found
that placebos could increase pulse rates, blood pressure and reaction speed when
people were told they had taken a stimulant. The reverse held true in
people were told that a placebo drug would make them drowsy.
Scientists do not yet completely understand how the placebo effect works, but
there are many possible explanations.
Brain imaging shows that beliefs can indeed drive biological changes,
including alterations in levels of chemical messengers and stress hormones that
signal pleasure and pain....... rest of story at the link.
Here's a picture of fasciolopsis buskii that Hulda says in
every cancer (and other places as well). And you claim that modern
medicine can't find them? Even after investigating every cancer in the
lab? Hogwash!
One last thing regarding Hulda's treatments - and many alternative treatments
for that matter, that is the placebo effect that I mentioned in another
post. (I do not consider her gallbladder flush or any of her parasite
treatments to be her treatments as they have been used for decades in other
places and she just copied them. If she could cure parasites in the body
she would have been awarded a Nobel Prize because malaria is caused by a
parasite.)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14309026/
Placebo's power goes beyond the mind
Scientists tap into fake pill's effects to
help real pains
Even though medical researchers told
Chuck Park that he might be getting a sugar pill, the 30-year-old software
producer was pretty sure he was getting the real thing. Just a few weeks into
the clinical trial, Park’s depression started to lift. He began to feel less
anxious and sad.
So when Park learned he’d been taking
a placebo all along, it was a surprise.
“I was fully expecting to receive the
real drug even though I knew that the placebo was a possibility,” remembers
Park of Culver City, Calif. “I guess I wanted it to work — and in a way, it
did....... (more at the link)
An article published just a couple of
days ago:
Alternative Medicine
Success Largely Due To Placebo Effect
Human expectations and the power of the mind may be behind the success of
many natural health remedies, according to an Associated Press report on Tuesday
about the use and potential risks of alternative medicines.
Known as the placebo effect, people sometimes feel better after taking a
dummy pill or a faked treatment simply because they expect the treatment will
work to improve their condition.
In other words, the brain has the ability to alter physical symptoms, such as
pain, anxiety and fatigue.
The healing power of the placebo effect was recently demonstrated during
tests of a new drug that relieves the symptoms of lupus. The test found that one
in three participants felt better after they received the dummy pills instead of
the actual drug. ....(more at the link)
That article indicates that over 30% of ALL healing is via the placebo
effect, and yes MDs still use placebo pills, with success.
I in no way negate alternative healing as I've had benefits from it myself,
but when one person becomes a guru and is worshiped as the greatest healer on
the planet with NO scientific data to back it up, I know that the placebo effect
is in play.
There is not one scientifically documented case that Hulda Clark cured a
cancer. Not one that has been diagnosed prior to her treatment and then
found to be healed after treatment via the medical profession.
Hulda's brother died of cancer after her treatment and she died of
cancer. Not very good testimonials for her healing abilities.
>- over 30% of ALL healing is via the placebo effect
Yes, as I said before. The other articles you mentioned were from poorly run studies.
>- Park’s depression started to lift.
Actually, that was not from the placebo effect. He was really starting to improve but he failed to mention the change in diet / lifestyle. It has been documented that most people (60 - 70 percent) in trials do not tell their doctors that they have made changes in their diet or lifestyle.
All it took to lift depression for most people was to substitute turkey for the ham in a sandwich every day for a few days. Tryptophan is such a potent depression fighter that the drug companies had the FDA ban it for 19 years.
The sugar pill is nothing new and it works exceedingly well on a person who has candida. The candida loves it and produces small amounts of alcohol. Ummmm, feeeelll beeettterrrr.
Sorry, one of these days, they will realize that the sugar pill is not a placebo. only something that is non-digestible and non-absorbable will work as a true placebo.
Images Description The Cure For All Diseases by Hulda Regehr Clark Rules
Home
Fraud 
