Hi. My husband had lower back pain 2 years ago. Through a series of phone calls to nurses at hospitals, we figured out that he had a gall bladder problem. So my husband did the liver flush, and got out 100 or more gall stones. His pain ceased, and it has never come back.
So we have been "sold" on Dr. Hulda Clark . Though skeptical at first, we can say regarding THIS procedure that SEEING IS BELIEVING.
My step mom has lung cancer. So I purchased Dr. Clark's book, " The Cure For All Diseases ." In the mean time, I keep searching the internet and came across the following site:
It says that Dr. Clark has been arrested for practicing without a license; that her claims are preposterous; that her syncrometer is a joke; that her brother died of cancer even though she treated him; that her N.D. degree comes from a non-accreditied college . . . the list goes on and on.
Even though the Liver Flush worked, I have two problems with her other claims:
1) I don't want to give my step mom false hope
2) If people REALLY ARE BEING CURED OF CANCER AND AIDS THEN WHERE ARE THE MEDICAL PROFESSIONALS? WHY AREN'T THEY PICKING UP ON THIS AND HELPING PEOPLE GET WELL? WHY ISN'T THERE A REVOLUTION IN THE MEDICAL COMMUNITY AND HEADLINES IN THE NEWS!!!! CURE FOR CANCER FOUND!!!! WHERE IS IT???? It just does not make sense.
Can you see my dilema? Yeah, The Liver Flush worked, but what about the rest of it? Is there ANYBODY out there who can give some commom sense answers to all of this? I'm not trying to be obnoxious or rude. If I seem angry it's because I really want the truth. Is there a professional person out there who can shed some light on this for me WITHOUT BIAS.
First of all, curezone is pretty much at odds with quackwatch. They report a lot of helpful healers as quacks. This is because actual healing and the medical community themselves are at odds. You think that doctors, nurses, etc. want to heal people so that they will be well... and many of the people in that profession whom you know do want that, in some form or another... yet the people at the top are interested in the bottom line - money!
There are different cures for cancer out there, Hulda Clark 's is one but hers is not the only one, others are different. Why hasn't the word spread? Because it's not a drug or therapy with an exorbitant pricetag. Sure, zappers and juicers and herbs aren't "cheap" but they are realistic prices.
First of all, curezone is pretty much at odds with quackwatch. They report a lot of helpful healers as quacks. This is because actual healing and the medical community themselves are at odds. You think that doctors, nurses, etc. want to heal people so that they will be well... and many of the people in that profession whom you know do want that, in some form or another... yet the people at the top are interested in the bottom line - money!
There are different cures for cancer out there, Hulda Clark's is one but hers is not the only one, others are different. Why hasn't the word spread? Because it's not a drug or therapy with an exorbitant pricetag. Sure, zappers and juicers and herbs aren't "cheap" but they are realistic prices.
I recommend you spend a few days browsing older posts and archives here at curezone, searching for posts about hulda clark, and posts that debunk the quackwatch. At the same time, check out www.drday.com and www.hacres.com for some different views on curing cancer. Oh, and while one flush can have a strong effect, it's generally recommended to do a series of flushes until the liver is stone free.
Yes, thanks for your post. I did read it last nite and then read a few more. By the time I came back to respond, I was working back up through the posts and gave credit to Dangerous . . . when I should have given credit to you both.
I'm trying to glean as much as I can from everybody's replys. What I'm really trying to get at is the TRUTH. We want to help my mom (lung cancer), and it will cost a lot of personal funds. I can't raise her hopes too much because it's terminal. And I can't spend thousands of dollars only to find out later that the whole thing is bogus.
I'll check back her in a day or two and look forward to everyone's replies. Thanks again.
Professional in what sense? Why don't you find an ND and have a consultation.
Let me tell you, that most ND's go to school just as long as an MD. Only the education of the ND is better, because they actually learn how the body works and the root causes of illnesses. The learn to cure the problem and not just disguise the problem or use a bandaid approach.
Quackwatch is against any alternative or natural approach to curing disease. This is simply because the MD's are not taught that approach so there is no money to be made for them.
This question comes down to who, at this point in your research, are you willing to accept advice from and that you would regard as professional?
If you feel an orthopedic surgeon who received a medical degree from the University of California at San Francisco a medical professional then read the website at:
http://www.drday.com
There are many interesting insights and articles on the very questions you are asking written by doctor who was chief of surgery there. (..I am going to hyperlink this below..) Others could probably think of other professionals.
Thank you to "Dangerous Produce" for sending this response. I just now went to Dr. Day's sight and skimmed it. I also saved it in my favorites to disect later.
Yes, I would respect an M.D. as being professional. I also appreciated that she tells her own story of how she conquered her own illness with natural therapies.
I really do believe in alternative medicine myself and subscribe to many tennets of it.
The thing I'm wrestling with and trying to come to grips with right now is this: Are the politics THAT BAD? So bad in fact that people are DYING. And there are no physicians anywhere that have either heard of alternative therapies, or would support them if they did? Doesn't every doctor take an oath to "do no harm"? I think that "with holding good" could be included in that oath. Are they all so brainwashed to the point of "catatonia" that they can't think or reason outside of their training and consider something new or different?
OK - I say "none". Yes, there are a few. And what happens to them? They are ostracized . . . like Dr. Day. But what happened to all the medical people that got into their professions because they wanted to help people and see them cured? Where did they all go??????
I'm sorry to go on and on. I appreciate this link, and I will now go back thru it word by word. I want to give my sister a better answer about how we can help mom, and why alternative care may be better than what the doctors are trying to do for her right now.
Doctors have to follow what is considered "widely acceptable standard care" in treating patients. All MD's are subject to peer review if anything comes into question during a patients treatment or follow up. The insurance and the malpractice boards are always second guessing most Dr's decisions as it is. Staying board certified costs a medical professional big time if they want to try a different approach, no matter what happens to the real disease. If they stike out on their own, they will be left all alone by the mainstream medical establishment they got their degree from in the first place. Quite a cliff to jump off for some of the highest paid professionals on this planet.
My dad has a mold in his chest that has clouded up his right lung lobes, one by one, and now after the second surgery, spread to his thymus gland area behuind the breastbone. The surgeon did not want to touch it, so he just closed him up. From the get go, the doctor was sure the mold from California was causing all the problems, but they have yet to do anything about fixing that mess, just chemo and radiation since dad won't do another surgery. I'm real frustrated as he will do what the doctor accepts, not to much from Curezone has been accepted by her. maybe her eyes will be opened when she gets a cancer in 20-40 years. It will be to late for my dad.
Hey, I referred you to dr. day, too! Maybe I didn't make it clear enough...
I think krupaclassy addressed your concerns well. Perhaps part of it is indoctrination during their training. They have good intentions but through their training they perceive there is only one way to treat disease (treat symptoms with drugs/surgery). This leaves them trapped. I know some medical professionals, who want to help people, even go on medical mission trips. When I try to discuss alternative therapy, they can't really even consider it. And they get so much hassle from HMO's, potential lawsuits, terrible demanding or ignorant patients, etc... it's a headache and struggle for them to even do their best as they know how!
I'm sure many of them DO want to help people but at some point their mentality closed to alternatives, be it of their own accord or forced upon them due to outside factors.
Does anyone have a bio on Dr Hulda Clark ? I've looked around and I can't seem to find one. What kind of education does she have? Is she currently practicing in the US? Which state?
What kind of Doctor is she? Is she a traditional doctor? Is she board certified?
I honestly don't know much about her.
Those are not my words.
In the last few months I have spoken with many, many doctors who practice one, or more, form of alternative medicine as well as using conventional methods. (That is normal in Europe, where alternatives are taught at medical schools).
Without exception, when I have mentioned Hulda Clark the response has been along the lines of my heading; though some have expressed their views on that woman rather more forcefully.
The Federal Trade Commission has filed fraud charges against a San Diego company and its Swiss counterpart for allegedly making false health claims about a device marketed as a cure for AIDS, cancer and other serious diseases.
The federal agency Monday said it filed a lawsuit against the San Diego-based Dr. Clark Research Association, its associated Swiss company, Dr. Clark Behandlungzentrum, and their owner, David P. Amrein. The lawsuit alleges that Amrein made unsubstantiated advertising claims about the medical benefits of two devices, called the "zapper" and the "Syncrometer."
The companies promote and sell devices and herbal products developed by Hulda Clark , a San Diego woman who operates out of a Tijuana alternative medicine clinic.
Clark and her son, Geoff, also separately own businesses in Chula Vista and San Ysidro that cater to patients who buy Hulda Clark's books and inventions that she claims can diagnose and cure most diseases. Neither of the Clarks are named in the FTC lawsuit.
Amrein, a Swiss citizen, did not respond to e-mails or telephone calls to his San Diego or Switzerland offices. Hulda Clark could not be reached for comment.
Geoff Clark said his Chula Vista company, the Self Health Resource Center, sells his mother's inventions and other products to Amrein and other Internet marketers.
He declined to discuss how much revenue the center generates through sales to Amrein, but added that "it's not so significant that I'd be in financial trouble if he were no longer a customer."
According to Clark's books, which have reaped millions of dollars in sales, her Syncrometer device diagnoses the "true" cause of all diseases, while her zapper, a battery-operated machine, cures by eliminating parasites and toxins with a mild electric current.
Howard Beales, director of the FTC's Bureau of Consumer Protection, said his agency is targeting "unscrupulous marketers" who use the Internet to prey on the sickest and most vulnerable consumers.
"Zapping outlandish promises that appeal to health and safety concerns of U.S. consumers is one of our top priorities," said Beales. "Unfortunately, questionable products abound on the Web."
Quackwatch, a consumer watchdog group, said Amrein is a prominent player in a network of marketers who peddle Clark's products and books.
"Clark's ideas are promoted by a network that is clearly designed to market products without getting her into legal trouble, but many of those in the network have broken the law," said Stephen Barrett, spokesman for Quackwatch. "Amrein is a major figure in that network."
Among the items Amrein sells through his Dr. Clark Research Association Web site is a "21-day Program for Advanced Cancers" for $1,850. According to the Web site, the program produces "amazing results in hopeless cases . . . that are nothing short of miraculous." A three-month Diabetes Recovery Program, complete with zapper, sells for $800, while a zapper alone sells for $159.
The FTC's lawsuit, filed in Cleveland federal court, seeks a permanent injunction barring Amrein and his companies from making fraudulent advertising claims about Clark's inventions, which are sold on the Internet and through mail and phone order.
The agency is also seeking refunds for consumers who ordered the products and "disgorgement of ill-gotten monies," according to the lawsuit.
Last year, the FTC settled fraud charges with another company, Blaine, Wash.-based Western Herb, that used the Internet to sell the zapper and other products touted by Clark.
Clark's Tijuana-based clinic, Century Nutrition, was shut down in early 2001 by Baja California health officials for operating without a license. It was later allowed to reopen but was prohibited from offering alternative treatments.
Geoff Clark declined to say whether the Tijuana clinic is open or if his mother is working there. However, a staff member at the Chula Vista center said the clinic is open and Hulda Clark is working there, and in a statement on Hulda Clark's Web site, she says that most of her time is "spent at Century Nutrition clinic in Mexico or writing up new findings."
Jesus Octovio Montano, who oversees hospitals and clinics for the Baja California health department, confirmed that the clinic is open. But he said it is not licensed to practice alternative medicine of any kind, and that Clark cannot work in Mexico, even as a consultant.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Staff writer Sandra Dibble contributed to this report.
Penni Crabtree: (619) 293-1237; penni.crabtree@uniontrib.com
So those around you are saying that Dr. Clark is Alternative Medicine's worst enemy. That's because you have carefully selected those persons out of the general population to listen on this topic.
If you want an objective view, why only listen to them? Unless of course they are needed to buttress the view of Dr. Clark that you already have. You share your misconceptions with them and they with you. In ordinary terms you correspond with or hand out with people who agree with you.
When people report their pain and complaints dissipate gradually as they apply Dr. Clark's principles (using biophsics, chemistry, cleansing, frequencies...) on a continuously steady basis, you don't want to believe this reality so you run to your friends and/or their acquaintances to hear the opposite about her. So then you feel better.
That the doctors you quote don't know how to apply those same principles according to her method doesn't appear to bother you, as long as they say, "She's wrong." These individuals who say she is bad news for Alternative Medicine do not practice in the field of Alternative Medicine, do they? So how would they know she is bad news for Alternative Medicine? Did you ask them by what secret pipeline to the Truth did they get this information? Got any supporting evidence for the claim you made? Why would someone who read one of her 500 page books on her research suddenly dismantle all the new knowledge they got into their head, because you wrote a couple lines about the Alternative Field being damaged (by her knowledge)? You wrote a whole 6 lines.
Both the doctors you want to use an an authority on this matter and Dr. Clark, all went to respected institutions of high education, each in his or her own country. They all studied the same principles of Science at major public universities and graduated from them. Perhaps they each have their own specialty, but it is all based on the same principles of science. It is a major point of a University education to teach research and innovation (variety) and to demand innovation from its graduate students. Just because Dr. Clark applied these same scientific principles in a different and new way than the doctors you are familiar with, does not make her wrong. To say someone else is wrong just because that person wants to apply the scientific method in a way that is different (from theirs) but equally valid, is egotistical. Data decides how valid your theories are.
By the way, you never defined what you meant by doctors who practice both Alternative and conventional medicine. This does not give the person reading your post any context by which to interpret what you said and be able to believe you. Doctors know Alternative is popular so even if they weren't trained that way in their medical school most consider themselves as practicing both Alternative and conventional if they prescribe a bottle of vitamins or two. People, such as you for example, will go to them that way and its better for the pocketbook.
You said "These individuals who say she is bad news for Alternative Medicine do not practice in the field of Alternative Medicine, do they?".
The answer is "Yes, they ALL practice in the field of alternative medicine."
They have all been trained in Universities/Medical Schools - some in Europe, some in the Far East. They all, currently practice some form of alternative medecine. Some teach or practice at specialist colleges, where only alternatives are used, some are in general practice and ONLY diagnose and treat in their alternative specialities, some use a mixture of allopathic and alternatives, according to which they consider most appropriate.
The attitude to alternative treatments, in continental Europe, is very different from the US. Even an ordinary doctor, with no alternative specialist training is taught the value of natural products (and I'm not talking about doling out vitamins).
"
Yes, I would respect an M.D. as being professional. I also appreciated that she tells her own story of how she conquered her own illness with natural therapies."
This is not actually true. Dr. Day underwent three surgeries to excise her cancer. She provides path reports for her second surgery where it shows the margins were not cleared of cancer cells. In her second video " Cancer doesn't scare me any more" she describes going in for a third surgery. She does not provide a path report for this third surgery and one has to wonder if this reoprt would indicate that the margins are clear...thus no cancer through surgery. She will not post her third report so I am concerned that her "cure" was not necessarily through natural means after all....if you surgically remove all the cancer chemo is not necessary nor will the cancer return since there are no cancer cells to start growing again. Taht picture of a cyst on her breast does not look like cancer and given her description of the rapid growth of this cyst it points to more of an abcess than anything cancer related.
I'll post the results of the bile experiment later today as well as my recap of the "gall stone debate".
I got the "Cancer Doesn't Scare Me Anymore" video and quickly looked at it. Dr. Lorraine Day does not say anything about a third surgery in it. She didn't even mention the word "surgery" in regard to her own cancer. She said she "went to a doctor who was supposed to be a very good Breast Cancer surgeon" and said that she didn't want a mastectomy but wanted the lump taken out (lumpectomy).
The part of the video in question comes after about a 1 minute reading and commentary on Berkeley Bedell an Iowa congressman who had written about his recovery from lyme disease and prostate cancer through natural means. Then another minute on the contents of a booklet describing the standard therapy for breast cancer. Then Dr. Day begins to speak about her breast cancer.
In the initial information and disclaimer section the video was dated 1994.
You may have gotten this ("Cancer...Scare..") video mixed up with another. Or depended on an unreliable source for the information.
Liver Flush Experiences (there are thousands of messages, most are not related to cancer, but all
are related to general health and to cancer prevention):
Hi Spirit . . .Thanks for you response. I've spent the afternoon reading many of these posts you supplied. Very interesting.
I'm finding through the many, many posts on curezone (including what you sent) that the testimonies of healing are abundant! All these people can't be lying!
On the other hand, I have the words of doctors ringing in my ears, and the cautions from family that are saying "humbug" to alternative medicines and vitamins and ZAPPERS . . . of all things. How could these work, they say.
And then I wonder . . . if they really DO work, then why isn't this REALLY BIG NEWS! Aren't we speding millions and billions of dollars on cancer and aids research? If there was a "cure" - wouldn't everybody jump on it and say harah! Wow! We've arrived! Now let's get these methods out to the sick and the dying so they can be healed?
It all seems so suspect . . . yet, here I am reading the stories from the many people who ARE REVERSING THEIR DISEASES! So,I think that much of what she says is probably true . . . and if she did cross the line at some point with some illegal behavior . . . even so, I still can't throw out what she says, or the healing stories people have shared.
Yes, I'm going to keep reading; I'm not going to dismiss Hulda Clark. I already know her Liver Flush works because my husband saved his own gallbladder through this process.
Finally, I'd like to thank you and all the people (above) who have responded to my initial post "Is Dr. Hulda Clark For Real Or Not?" I really appreciate everyone's input and all the information shared.
Images Description Liver Cleanse/Flush Recipe Rules
Home
Is Dr. Hulda Clark FOR REAL? Or not? 
Re: Is Dr. Hulda Clark FOR REAL? Or not? 
