Where in the post that you refer to do I violate TOS?
I've had and cured medically verified cancer - long before there was a "cure zone." I haven't even begun to discuss my own alternate cures that I've experienced in my own life.
Great story about your uncle. I also had an uncle who was a heavy smoker and was diagnosed with lung cancer 50 years ago at age 62. He went with the then major lung therapy which was total lung removal. He did quit smoking (not all do) and he lived another 20 years when he died at age 82.
It is what you believe that gets you through cancer more than anything else.
Three times major cancer survivor - cancer free from each one and will be 81 in a week. Why don't you like it when real cancer survivors who have used alternative treatment in the process of their own personal cure to post on the cancer alternatives support forum?
If you don't like my life/cancer experiences and the kind of cancer support that I have provided to others - then kick me off of your board.
I did not say that you violated TOS, but rather pointed you to the Webmaster's admonition at the top of the page which says to take skepticism and debate to the Cancer Debate forum. As I have told you before, I feel that you have valuable experience to share here and I have no desire to "kick you off" this forum. However, when discussion turns into debate it is best to take it to the proper debate forum.
That was good to hear about your uncle. Mine is in his nineties now and still using alternatives in preventive amounts.
Dr. Stephen Barrett is actuall a de-licensed former doctor who has been exposed as a shameless agent of Big Pharma and Big Medicine. He has virtually no credubility in these forums and is currently the subject of a lawsuit which should once and for all expose him and o him in, as he so rightly deserves.
That's a very old method of trying destroying the message that the Romans did it centuries ago. If the messenger bore bad news - they killed the messenger. That is also very typical today and is akin to the political morass that we are getting in this election year - by all sides.
If you don't like the message, criticize the message - not the messenger.
By the way, Barrett is not a "de-licensed" physician. That too is an old wives' tale. When he quit his practice he let the license lapse - just didn't renew it.
I was not attacking the messenger, but rather pointing out that the truly vile Stephen Barrett has zero credibility here. Here are just a couple of links that tell you all you need to know about Barrett:
If that isn't enough, do a Google search for "Stephen Barrett quackpot" and see the returns you get.
I will remind you once again that this is the Cancer Alternative SUPPORT forum. As is instructed at the top of the forum page, if you are skeptical about alternative treatments, take it to the Cancer Debate forum. It is OK to disagree, but you aren't likely to get much creedence when you quote sources such as the mainstream cancer organizations and especially sources like Stephen Barrett.
You have to recognize that I am a three times, medically proven, cancer survivor and what I post is what I've discovered on my healing journey which continues to this day. If being cancer free from both prostate and two time lung cancer gets me tossed, then it would be a pleasure. When other's post outright lies and I correct them is this not cancer support? There are many people chasing down a cure for their cancer and it is out there for everyone and lies in many different directions including alternative, allopathic, and spiritual.
Tony I agree that Barrett is one of the most hated human beings in the alternative field. But for what reason? If you go here
you will find that his "suspended license" is simply not true. If anyone has evidence that it is - all they have to do is to contact wiki and wiki will change it and they have done those things many times. You can also look at all the awards that he has received - from the medical community, of course.
Allopathic medicine is far from perfect as I've posted in my own cancer case before. Yet Barrett has done oodles of research into alternative medicine that nobody can refute. He was one of the first to point out the erroneous methods of one Hulda Clark. I bought into her line of bleep long before there was a cure zone. I bought one of her zappers and used it routinely. I bought her original book and found that it wasn't difficult to see that many of her bizarre claims (as in the liver fluke was behind all cancers) were simply not true. Yet to this day there is a full CZ list dedicated to her belief system. I even followed Clark's "liver" (actually gall bladder) cleanse and did it many times long before she published it. I've been into "alternative medicine" and healing since early childhood but you really have to pick and choose as you walk that route. A lot of what Clark wrote was far from original yet here on CZ she still get's credit for the flush.
Many in the alternative field have a history of discrediting valid cures and cure rates of the allopathic field.
I've read many, many books on cancer since my original bout twenty years ago and I give credence to those who have cured their own cancer themselves more than I do to those books that tell you "what" to do. I have also thrown many of those books away but there was one by a British actor who was given six months to live due to pancreatic cancer who personally investigated several different treatments for his condition. In the book his conclusion was that while allopathic medicine had it's faults, alternative medicine's cures for cancer had more than ten times the death rate than allopathic. He did cure his cancer with alternative means (I don't remember which) and was still alive last I heard.
(If you're interested in a saga of stubbornness and outright stupidity then read "Living Proof, A Medical Mutiny" by Michael Gearin-Tosh. This guy was "reader" (British term for professor) at Oxford University and was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer and given six months to live. He searched the world for a cure - even talking to the dean of medicine at Oxford who told him "there are diseases that we just don't have solutions for." He went to the Gerson Institute in Texas for a while and then went home where he did coffee enemas and practiced breathing through his toes for an hour at a time, twice a day which he learned not at Gerson, but somewhere else. He cured his pancreatic cancer. That's the end of the story in the book. Check him out on the Internet and you will find that he got a tooth infection that he tried to cure the same way and ended up dying from his tooth infection. Again, go figure.)
It would be great to see more success stories posted for all kinds of alternative therapies, including ozone treatments. We do see some, and I know that the poster you address has evidently had quite a few, but we don't see a whole lot of success testimonials. It was the same way when a former member here highlly advocated ozone treatment.
I think that part of the problem is that many people are reluctant to post that they have been cured of cancer. Now, some proclaim it loudly to the skies, but others keep their success private. I know that in the cancer group I have at Yahoo, there are now over 2700 members. Yet at any given time there are not much more than 100 people who are actively posting. And, while we have success stories posted on the forum, I actually get more success stories from members sent to me by private email than are posted on the forum. I suppose that is typical of many forums - including here at CZ where I often see well over 30,000 people online but a fairly small number actually posting.
There are now well over 350 different alternative therapies for cancer. Some are much better than others and some are better for certain kinds of cancer than others. And that does not count the people who decide to cobble together a few supplements and such and count that as an alternative treatment. So long as mainstream medicine holds rigid control over the cut, poison and burn (surgery, chemo and radiation) therapies that address the symptoms of cancer instead of the root cause and so long as alternative therapies are suppressed and rejected, it will be very hard to scientifically quantify alternative success rates.
The best the cancer patient can do is do their own due diligence and thoroughly seek out information about the therapies they wish to consider and, imo, then embrace a complete anti-cancer lifestyle and protocol which includes not only some powerful cancer fighters and immune boosters, but also healthy changes in diet and nutrition, physical activity, exposure to direct and indirect sunlight, contact with nature and the soil, elimination of toxins in the body and the environment, management of stress and more.
Too often, people attempt to beat cancer with half measures and without arming themselves with as much information as possible. When the stakes of the game are your very life, then I advise you to go "all in".
As long as we continue to treat merely the symptoms of cancer with treatments that are injurious and damaging to the immune system and, in the case of chemo drugs and radiation, are most oftten themselve carcinogenic, we will continue to see more people die of their treatment than are saved by it - even though the deaths are marked down as due to "cancer".
As noted architect Frank Lloyd Wright once observed:
"The physician can bury his mistakes, but the architect can only advise his clients to plant vines."