No, I reject this oversimplification as conspiracy theory babbling. I refuse to believe that an entire graduate school system, industry, and community of scholars, scientists and doctors are covering up the truth to make a buck. Science requires peer review -- something that tobacco companies did not. I have no doubt that certain pharmaceutical companies will unethically push a drug, but chemo is a whole different story.
You have that right to reject. I'm not saying chemo is all bad. If found late chemo may be the only chance you have at survival. I'm just stating that its not the only method that can work.
You have to remember its all they have ever been taught. I'm not saying its a mass conspiracy. Students today are taught drugs & surgery. From what I've been told the FDA states that only a drug or surgery can cure. If factual, isn't it odd that they would have such a policy? I need to do some research to see if I can actually find that policy. If you went to school in any study, then you are going to believe what your teacher/books are telling you. Who is funding the books is another item that would be interesting to find out. Would you not agree?
Worked with a guy who lived in Raleigh & had numerous friends in the medical field. Going off what he told me their reply to him was there will never be a cure, because they are not allowed to find a cure.
Also, every heard of Tamoxifen? Tamoxifen is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the
prevention of breast cancer and for the treatment of breast cancer.
Ok let me make sure you get this straight. Its a preventive for breast cancer.
Now one of the side effect of tamoxifen is uterus cancer.
Ok let me make sure you understand. The FDA has approved a medicine for the prevention of breast cancer, that can lead to uterus cancer. This is your Gov that you are so undeniably believing would not forsake you in the name of money.
Now on what planet does this make any kind of sense?
Also, how many drugs has the FDA approved only to pull them off later because its killing people? How much money did the companies make off the product against how much they had to pay out in damages? The penalty is never greater than the revenue or any where close.
The Gov is about allowing companies to making money & not protecting us. If they come up with a drug that will kill 1% of the people taking it & help the others. They know that in time they will have to pull the drug but can make a ton of cash before the drug will get exposed.
The Pharm industry is funding the FDA.
Answer me this. Which do you hear the most about? High Triglycerides or high cholesterol being dangerous? If you say anything other than cholesterol then I'd have to say BS.
Now we have big money being spent on preventing high cholesterol. High Triglycerides? You hardly hear about. Why? If you do some research you will find high Triglycerides are dangerous.
However, how much money is being made off anti cholesterol drugs?
Guess what the one of the most well known treatments for high Triglycerides? Fish oil / niacin ( vitamin B3 ).
Just something to make you go Hmmm.
My point in all this. Don't simply take the establishments word on things. The info is out there if you simply take the time to look for it.
You wouldn't be happy to see the alternative medicine numbers, because they would be ineffective or placebo.
Fact or opinion? I agree that the mind can do wonders & that people can take a placebo & get better. We truly do not understand the human body & its own ability to cure itself.
Again, it's about peer review. When these things are tested in scientific conditions, with a control, they don't work. ...that's why they're not medicine.
One question. Who is funding these thing & what were they setting out to prove? Find out who funds the research & you will find out what the results end up being. Most of the research is funded by Pharm to disprove .
If it works, it's medicine. If it doesn't work, the results that are claimed can't be duplicated by a non-biased 3rd party, and it enters the market as "alternative medicine" that's a bunch of hocus pocus garbage. It works for some, because of the placebo effect. You could make patients eat pencil erasers and a certain percentage of them would miraculously go into remission.
You always hear about "I saw a study that suggested [whatever bogus claim]". And that's fine. But science doesn't end there. You have to be rigorous and attempt to continue eliminating variables to disprove. Therefore, preliminary studies are very lax, and suggest things that may not be causal. The problem with alternative medicine is that the studies stop there, because they've been disproved at a further level. It's bad science.
Believe you are being a touch naive here. Don't ever get confused the medicine is about making money.
Explain fish oil then. Most everyone knows the health benefit of fish oil, yet its not recognized by the FDA as a Gov approved method of prevention or treatment, yet doctors constantly refer it to patients.
Don't believe me, ask around & see how many people have been told by their doctor that taking fish oil will provide numerous benefits.
By the way, the 2nd link you posted doesn't support your position. It supports mine. It claims that his reduction in cancer is most likely linked to radiation treatment, not the alternative medicine that he sought in Mexico.
Was not posting it for it content. Just posted it to show that he was still alive.
Also, it claims that his reduction was "most likely" Well its obvious the article was written by someone like yourself who does not believe something not handed down by the Gov would work.
BTW. Would you let someone get away with stating "most likely" here? Don't accepted it there either.
Also who is the 3rd party on conventional medicine?
Author