And keeps repeating itself

No, you didn't mention my name - you just said the Cancer Forum moderator, which is widely known to be me.  In addition, you have made the same false complaint numerous times and clearly identified me as the person you have your ax to grind against.  What everyone should be aware of, as you surely are, is that it was the WM who banned you and he posted the reasons why he did so. He also explained that I had attempted to prevent you from being banned.  I saved  the WM's post if you would like to have everyone see it again.

As a matter of fact, I have never banned you from any forum and have in fact given you several R ratings - incuding on my own private forum.  I have likewise never brought any disagreements with you, much less personal attacks where I list your actual name, into my private forum.  Can you say the same?  I think not, and note that you have just today made a post against me and used my actual name in both the title and the message in your private forum - where you have also conveniently banned me so that I cannot reply to your false accusations.

Now, as to your contention about viruses and cancer: If it were a fact that the vast majority of cancer were caused by viruses, how do you explain the fact that a Google Search for "cancer virus" does not return link after link which lists viruses as a major cause of cancer?  The number of hits for a search for "cancer virus" prove nothing other than that there are lots of links to the term.  A search for "cancer fungus" returns 4,400,000 hits.  A search for "cancer toxins" returns 6,900,000 hits.  A search for "cancer sunlight" returns 12,300,00 hits.  A search for "cancer cigarettes" returns 19,500,000 hits.  A search for "cancer alcohol" returns 77,000,000 hits.

If number of searches were a criteria, then just those searches alone would put viruses as a distinct minority cause of cancer.  In a great many instances, hits turn out to have little to do with the two connected terms and in fact may state just the opposite of what one might try to infer.  I would propose that number of hits of cancer and any other given item is not a criteria for determining whether or not viruses were considered to be the cause of the vast majority of cancers.  However, a search for "cancer causes" would be much more indicative of what is believed to be that major causes of cancer.  The vast majority of hits from such a search indicate that viruse are not believed to be a major cause, much less the cause of the vast majority of cancers.

I note that you once again resorted to taking a shot at oleander, as you have repeatedly done whenever I have disagreed with you.  Many, including myself, view your shots at oleander as nothing more than vindictiveness.  The subject was cancer causes and viruses, not oleander.

As regards oleander, you once stated that there had been no evidence of human effectiveness and likewise stated that an ongoing trial could not even recruit enough volunteers to be conducted.  You conveniently ignored the successful case reports on oleander, the clinical study in South Africa, the 40 plus year history of oleander treatment by Dr. H. Z. Ozel in Turkey AND your own supposedly superior research failed to find out that the latest clinical trial has been completed successfully and is now in the final stages of write-up for the FDA.  And btw, this trial returned very impressive responses and results for cancer tumor.

Did I misunderstand, or did you not state that you would be staying within your own forum and stick to helping people there after you decided to return?  Given your continued pattern of misbehavior that would surely seem to be a wise decision instead of continuing to disrupt the dwindling number of support forums you are allowed to post in.  Certainly you are entitled to your opinions - at least where you are allowed to post them - but there is no entitlement to the kind of misbehavior that you continue to exhibit.

Alert Webmaster & Moderators

4 of 7 (57%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?
How do you feel about this message?     Agree     Disagree       Hide this question