Yes, EBV not EPV.  My mistake - evidently typing too fast with too little brain power too early in the morning.  Thanks for pointing that out.

Now, to answer your question:  Where do you find me ever posting that oleander is effective against ALL cancers? 

I have seen both you and Luella recommend this every time anyone with any type of cancer has posted on these boards.  Tell every one here where you have posted on which cancers oleander is supposedly good for and which ones it clearly is not?

That is much like you tried to attribute me saying that no cancer was caused by viruses or no Burkitt's lymphoma was associated with EBV in the U.S.  What I have said repeatedly is that nothing works 100% and that no one should rely on any one single item to beat cancer and keep it from returning.

Here is what I know:  Oleander has been found to be effective against a wide variety of cancers. 

In petri dishes, which DOES NOT it does the same thing in the body.

Oleander combined with the other elements in my suggested anti-cancer protocol and oleander combined with the less extensive other suggestions made by the person who devised the SOPC supplement line has been effective against practically all cancers. 

Again, where is the proof of this wild claim in the medical journals.  You did not believe what I said since you could not find it in the journals for John Hopkins, Mayo, etc.  So you need to play by the same standards you require of others.  So let's see the medical reports on oleander from these journals or otherwise by your standards it must not be true.

Nope, no clinical studies - just real world observation, which I give more creedence to than the majority of studies. 

Of course since that is all you have to go on.  in reality this is not real evidence as I pointed out so many times.

After all, studies have been found to be up to 85% flawed or outright fraudulent.  See:

Top Researcher Finds Medical Studies to be Largely Wrong or Fraudulent

Even if this is true what does this have to do with anything?  So they cannot provide non-fraudulent studies on oleander?  Or are you implying that any oleander studies that may exist fit in the 85% flawed or fraudulent studies?

Yes, it is at that dratted "sales site".   :  )

Actual observation always trumps so-called scientific studies and abstracts in my book.

But not to the rational person not trying to sell the product or related items.  Same reason that some studies are fraudulent.  When sales are involved studies and observations are sometimes manipulated to make sure the outcome will support the product.  Same reason that research studies need to be done by independent groups and not by the companies profiting from the product or related products.

After all, what are you going to believe - a study which may have been flawed or fraudulent or your eyes?

Same applies to any oleander studies that may exist.  So I guess we cannot trust these studies.  Especially when someone tries to push petri dish studies as proof the product works.  That is just downright deceptive!!!

Now, in the real world Dr. H. Z. Ozell reported an average of over 70% success against a wide range of cancers in literally thousands of patients (he's been at it for over 40 years now). 

According to you.   I see claims like this made all the time by marketing companies.  They rely heavily on the fact that there is no way for anyone to verify the claims.  So the person is left to put their trust in completely unsubstantiated claims and statistics.   And as we all know statistics are frequently manipulated, even more than research studies.  So is the 70% success claim for real?  Who knows?  There is no way to confirm the claim from a sales site, which being from a sales site automatically puts the claims of the statistics in to question.

Any person with access to the internet can claim they healed 70,000 people using "_______".  And how is anyone going to verify the claim or disprove it?  In fact when people make wild claims like having cured 70,000 people and they do not have a Nobel Prize or at least are more famous than they are that right there pretty much tells me that the claims being made are fraudulent.  Just another sales site making outlandish claims to promote a product.

That is pretty remarkable, since he was a mainstream doctor who was limited to using oleander as either a CAM item or else use it after mainstream treatment had failed. 

And again, where is the proof of these cures?  Where is the proof the cancers remained gone, IF these people were really "cured" in the first place? Why haven't most people heard of him?  Where are all his awards for supposedly curing so many thousands of people?  Why hasn't there been more research in to oleander if it appears to be so promising?  Again, the claims of all the thousands of cures sounds really fishy!!!

It is also doubtful that he recommended much else in terms of diet and nutrition, lifestyle, stress management or other supplements. 

It is doubtful that the claims are for real in the first place.  Sounds more like sales hype.  The same type of claims are made by MLM companies all the time.  Again, where is the proof that these people were cured and if cured that the cancers did not come back later?  And why hasn't this been reported in the media more if the cure rate was so high?  All I hear is lots of hype and NO real evidence to back these wild claims.

Notably, he was brought up on charges of using unproven medicine by the mainstream authorities and the charges were dismissed after large numbers of patients testified of their success in beating cancer due to Dr. Ozel.

Again, without seeing the actual court records to see what really happened this simply remains an unsubstantiated claim.  Since court records are public though show us the court records if this is true so we can see what really happened and to see if you are telling the truth.

In fact I ran a couple of searches and cannot find any real evidence that he was ever arrested and tried.

What I did find is that oleander is NO LONGER in FDA trials as you claimed in an earlier post.  So all this stuff you are claiming is coming more and more in to question.

In the real world, the Naturopathic PhD who devised the Sutherlandia supplements has tracked over 2000 supplement users over the past 5 plus years and he reports that over 85% of stage III and IV cancer victims have survived thus far - most of whom are now cancer free or else have cancer which is being eliminated - and over 95% survival thus far with stage I and II cancers.  Notably, many of the customers came to use the supplements after mainstream medicine had either written them off or else failed to produce desired results.

Again a lot of unsubstantiated hype with statistics that cannot be verified either.   But based on the fact that the claim of oleander being in FDA trials, which apparently untrue, I doubt the other claims being made as well since it appears financial incentives are driving a lot of hype over the product.

You are quite right - what works in a petri dish often does not correlate to what  happens in the human body.  The human body, like nature itself, works synergistically - and thus the combination of oleander and other natural items may work significantly better than what is found in mere petri dish studies. 

"May?!!!  Or it may work significantly worse or not at all.  Again, you have provided NO solid evidence that oleander works.  Just a lot of repeated sales hype.

You still have been unable to show any real evidence that this claim is true.  Until then it is right up there with the hyped claim that it is in FDA trials, which apparently is untrue.  Again, show us in the journals from John Hopkins or Mayo showing that oleander has been shown effective for cancers.  You demanded such evidence from me so you need to play by the same standards you set.

Pllus, what elements may work for one person may not be the same that work best for another.  But in the real world, the success of the overall protocol, which features oleander as a central component, is indisputable.

Wrong again!!!!!  It is disputable as I have shown in this post.  Unsubstantiated claims are not proof of anything other than a lack of real evidence being available.