Re: Breast Cancer Diagnosis Application - 99% effective in diagnosis

Tsk-tsk - the pattern repeats itself: I make a post which disagrees with something you posted (generally something pro-mainstream or anti-alternative) and you respond with false shots against oleander and me.  You know, you really should work on handling disagreement better and do as the owner of this website admonishes (attack the message and not the messenger).

"The post that you're responding to is about a brand new diagnostic tool for breast cancer.  You didn't respond to that part at all.  Don't you have any interest in this very significant medical advance?"

Correction: the post I responded to included an upfront shot against alternative treatments which you decided to include in your opening paragraph before you posted the actual report about the new diagnostic advance.  That is what I responded to.  You could have reported the new diagnostic advance without your editorial comment.

If you want to know what I think about the new diagnostic application, I applaude it and hope that many who are diagnosed with the new technique choose a safer and more effective alternative therapy to mainstream surgery, radiation and/or chemo.

Quoting Anaximperator here on this site?  Surely you jest!  Anaximperator is a notorius mainstream apologist site where the blog owner and other main posters have never seen an alternative to mainstream medicine that they like. Few here give that site any credibility - except perhaps the odd mainstream apologists who pop up from time to time to make pro-mainstream posts on this site about alternatives to mainstream medicine.

Just for the record, neither I nor Luella have ever said that only 2 or 3% survive chemotherapy.  What Luella said in the post Anaximperator quotes is that chemo and radiation only have a 2 - 3 % cure rate.  Likely she was referring at least in part to two widely quoted and respected (at least outside mainstram apologist sites like Anaximperator) studies - one in Australia and one in the U.S.  - which demonstrated that chemotherapy only contributed 2.1 % to 2.3% to five year cancer survival rates. Leave it to Anaximperator to twist that into saying only 3% survived chemo.

Speaking of those two studies, it is important to note that it is likely that a high percentage of those who decided to forego chemo decided to either have no treatment at all or else did a few things on their own and did not choose a complete alternative treatment.  Had the study compared those who chose alternative treatments versus those who chose chemo, the results would quite likely have been much worse for the chemo patients.

Studies which have examined survival rates beyond five years have found that after the third year of survival, those who chose no chemo begin to live longer on average than those who chose chemo and by the fifth year there was quite a disparity in favor of those who decided against chemotherapy.

Chemo does not cure, it kills.  It kills cancer cells (though usually not all cancer cells) and healthy cells alike and it kills the patient in more instances than does it kill all of the cancer cells, never have them return and have the patient go on to live a normal lifespan which was not shortened due to the chemo.

Radiation seldom kills off all of the cancer cells and, as a recent breast cancer study found, actually turns normal cancer cells into cancer stem cells which are 30 times more deadly.  I doubt that the survival rates for radiation are any better than they are for chemo.

When a person undergoes chemo or radiation and does live a normal lifespan you can bet that it was their natural body and immune system which ultimately kept them alive and kept cancer from returning regardless of the role chemo or radiation may have initially played.

Garlic is indeed good stuff.  When it comes to oleander, you have once again shown that you don't know beans about it. 

Alert Webmaster & Moderators Already alerted!  Already alerted!

4 readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?
How do you feel about this message?     Agree     Disagree       Hide this question