CureZone
Fraud
Forum: Hulda Clark Debate Forum  
 

>- You are still living in the medical Dark Ages.

No, I am not at all. I have in my closet an entire cancer history, including MRI's, CAT scans, PET scans (for bone metastases), Blood tests, etc. Not only do I have these, I know how to read them. I know what the blood test mean.

Also, I diagnosed my own cancer, even as to type, before I went to the doctor for confirmation. I ended up having to treat myself because they failed. So far with the blessings of my creator, I am still here.

Well, you are providing the source of you cure that I completely agree with and good for you.  But Hulda's hocus pocus had nothing to do with it.  The book that I was referring to earlier had more than 200 documented cancer cures including pancreatic cancer, with no medical intervention and the common thread was a positive outlook.  Additionally, the placebo effect (which is actually "caused" by the human spirit) has been documented to cure cancer and whether you attribute it to god (which I do - even if they are non-believers) or something else shows the power of human ability to deal with all disease without doctors.

>- Again, nary a fluke related to cancer has ever been found in North America and you concept of knee jerk diagnosis is really really sad, totally ill-informed, and way out of date.

Again, you are mistaken and do not know what you are talking about. Just because you don't know about it, does not mean that it does not exist. There are cases in the US where the liver fluke has been found in cancer patients, but again they are rarely reported or published.

What you fail to understand is that everyone who gets cancer, dies. Everyone who does not get cancer dies. Those who go through traditional oncological treatment die much sooner. Most oncologist would not take chemo or radiation for most cancers.

Oncology ranks cancers with a 5 year survival rate. The reason for this is that at about 7 years, you have a better chance of survival if you do not follow traditional chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery.

Hulda says that the liver fluke is in ALL cancer.  That a fluke is found in a person with cancer in those very rare instances where you say they have been found (please document) is no different than the number of flukes in the population at large - but not Fasciolopsis buski.  My prostate cancer was diagnosed about 18 years ago and I refused medical intervention.  I will not die from cancer and I don't have parasites.

What you and the traditioanal medical establishment fail to realize is the how and why of cancer growth being enabled by flukes and other parasites.

That's another of your utterly ludicrous statements with nothing but Hulda to back it up.  With all the lab tests of every cancer, with CT scans and PET scans you think that that modern medicine is missing something?  Neither a fluke nor any other parasite has ever been found in me or the cancer tissue that has been removed from me including lung cancer.  It is impossible for these items you swear by to have been missed with all the testing that is done today.

Hulda was one giant hoax.


 
Tweet
Advertisement
Destroy Parasites Naturally
Destroy Parasites Permanently in 30 Days or Less

  • Re: Fraud (edit) parazapper  7y  7,229  

    Randomly assigned avatar.
    parazapper

    You definitely have a tendency to misinterpret, twist, or distort. Additionally, I am well aware of what parasites are and can do from my years of college ad a biology major and from my graduate studies in biomedical engineering. I have learned over the years that what we are taught is not always true and what is thought to be true today is shown to be wrong tomorrow.

    The AMA promoted tobacco smoking for their own profit and members lied to jurys for years about the damages of tobacco. US doctors were at one time felt threatened with loosing their license if they washed their hands between surgeries. The AMA blatantly defamed chiropractic for years before being found guilty of this in court. The US medical establishment is seriously harming our children today by injecting vaccines that cause serious neurological and immunological damage.

    >- regarding a high number of illnesses caused by accidents or visits for other reasons

    I did not say caused, I said "A great many illnesses are discovered as a result of accidental injuries or from visits to the doctor for other reasons." Another distortion on your part.

    >- It's still not the book I was referring to.

    Are you sure of that too? You seem to be avoiding naming it.

    >- that ALL cancer is subjected to laboratory review

    No, not all. But yes, most cancer is given a cursory examination to determine the types of cells present, Nothing more. There is no immediate or postmortem examination to attempt to find possible causes in all but a few exceptions. Again, you have misread, misinterpreted, or misrepresented what the original statement was.

    >- you still think that a monster fluke is responsible for them?

    It is entirely possible, what you overlook, or possibly misrepresent is that each and every fluke will be that size. That is how big they "can get". If a person has several smaller ones, it is easy to overlook them. Most CT scans, MRI's, etc will miss them anyhow. These scans use contrast agents that are specifically absorbed by actively growing cancer cells but not by other normal tissue, including parasites. Also, if you had bothered to read the cancer page that I sent you a link to, you would see that there are other parasites that increase the risk of and even cause cancer. This is according to the NIH. I used to have many more links to their site but as soon as I posted a link, they took the pages down to hide the truth. I now keep a copy of every page that I refer to.

    >- Hulda says that the liver fluke is in ALL cancer

    Please refer me to that page. What I read was that the liver fluke was present in all cancer patients. Is this another distortion?

    >- That's another of your utterly ludicrous statements with nothing but Hulda to back it up

    Here you are flat out misrepresenting. I have links to the National Institute of Health that back me up but you do not bother to read them.

    >- Neither a fluke nor any other parasite has ever been found in me or the cancer tissue that has been removed from me including lung cancer. It is impossible for these items you swear by to have been missed with all the testing that is done today.

    Let me see, hmmmm, what contrasting agent is going to show up a fluke? Oh, well, since PET scans are specifically designed to highlight cancer cells, surely they would show a foreign body? No, they are designed to find cancer cells! Don't be totally naive, tests such as CT, PET, etc. only find what they as designed to find. Everything else is background.

    >- F. buski does not live in the liver: these large leaf-shaped worms inhabit the upper regions of the small intestine.

    >- one of several species of aquatic snail. ... If the right species of snail is absent, the miracidia die. ... You will also note that in order to complete its life cycle it has to find a host snail of a particular variety

    There are snails in North American waters that can serve as the intermediate host although not as well. However, that is mute in many cases.

    As I stated before, several million North Americans have been to S.E. Asia. We import foods from S.E. Asia which may be contaminated.

    >- It is impossible for them to complete a life cycle within the human body as Hulda claims in the book section that I referred to. The eggs have to be passed from the body before they can continue their life cycle.

    I agree with this in general, but oddly, they keep finding exceptions to these so called rules.

    >- your saying you've read all of her books

    Again, another fabrication on your part. I did not say that I have read all of her books. If I did, it was in error.

    In summation, If you are not a doctor, you should be because it appears that you can not look beyond the end of your nose.

    Modern medicine is in the dark ages and the candle that you are holding is behind that. The National Institute of Health backs me up. According to their publications, many parasites, including several flukes, cause cancer.

     
    Advertisement
    Most Potent Liposomal Vitamin C
    51000mg per 10oz

    5100mg/ounce; Boost Immunity, Reduce Inflammation

  • Re: Fraud (edit) #107689  7y  7,422  


    #107689

     "You definitely have a tendency to misinterpret, twist, or distort. Additionally, I am well aware of what parasites are and can do from my years of college ad a biology major and from my graduate studies in biomedical engineering. I have learned over the years that what we are taught is not always true and what is thought to be true today is shown to be wrong tomorrow......"

    You've got it backwards, you are the one who is lying and twisting facts.  I don't remember anywhere that the AMA promoted smoking - but I do remember some doctors who did.  A few doctors are not the AMA.

    >- regarding a high number of illnesses caused by accidents or visits for other reasons

    I did not say caused, I said "A great many illnesses are discovered as a result of accidental injuries or from visits to the doctor for other reasons." Another distortion on your part.

    Picky, picky, picky.  Please tell me the difference between "a high number" and "A great many."  And you accuse me of distortion?  Again, give me some percentage numbers because they are really low.

    >- It's still not the book I was referring to.

    Are you sure of that too? You seem to be avoiding naming it.

    You claimed to be reading my mind by supplying me with the name of the book so I figured you could find it on your own.  You are such an expert on cancer and you've never read "50 Essential Things to do When the Doctor Says It's Cancer" by Greg Anderson?  It contains no alternative medicine, but it does provide a path for people diagnosed with cancer.  I followed his recommendations.  I've been prostate cancer free for 18 years without medical intervention and I don't have one damned parasite in me and there were no parasites found in the in depth analysis of the cancer material that came out of me.

    >- that ALL cancer is subjected to laboratory review

    No, not all. But yes, most cancer is given a cursory examination to determine the types of cells present, Nothing more. There is no immediate or postmortem examination to attempt to find possible causes in all but a few exceptions. Again, you have misread, misinterpreted, or misrepresented what the original statement was.

    You mentioned the fact that there not all post mortem cancers are tested and I never disagreed with you on that point.  However to say that cancers that are removed are giving a "cursory" review is a humongous distortion of what really goes on.  You are stumbling over your closed mind.  The cancers are given an in-depth analysis and a parasite in the cancer has never been found in North America, in spite of your claims and in spite of what Hulda has written.

    >- you still think that a monster fluke is responsible for them?

    It is entirely possible, what you overlook, or possibly misrepresent is that each and every fluke will be that size. That is how big they "can get". If a person has several smaller ones, it is easy to overlook them. Most CT scans, MRI's, etc will miss them anyhow. These scans use contrast agents that are specifically absorbed by actively growing cancer cells but not by other normal tissue, including parasites. Also, if you had bothered to read the cancer page that I sent you a link to, you would see that there are other parasites that increase the risk of and even cause cancer. This is according to the NIH. I used to have many more links to their site but as soon as I posted a link, they took the pages down to hide the truth. I now keep a copy of every page that I refer to.

    That CT scans and MRI's will miss most of them is out and out trash talk with nothing to back it up.  This "giant" (in terms of a fluke, it is a giant) can get well over 2 inches.  That's a slam dunk for a CT scan.  They find things much smaller than that, and I've experienced it.  There have been no flukes found in conjunction with a cancer in North America.

    >- Hulda says that the liver fluke is in ALL cancer

    Please refer me to that page. What I read was that the liver fluke was present in all cancer patients. Is this another distortion?

    I gave you the name of her book, the chapter, page number, and even quoted some of her writing.  Before I did that you claimed to never have heard that Fasciolopsis buskii (which has been ridiculed all over the Internet besides quackwatch - including the University of Iowa)?  You claim to follow her advice and have "read her books" yet have not read that?  

    >- That's another of your utterly ludicrous statements with nothing but Hulda to back it up

    Here you are flat out misrepresenting. I have links to the National Institute of Health that back me up but you do not bother to read them.

    That's because you never provided a link.

    >- Neither a fluke nor any other parasite has ever been found in me or the cancer tissue that has been removed from me including lung cancer. It is impossible for these items you swear by to have been missed with all the testing that is done today.

    Let me see, hmmmm, what contrasting agent is going to show up a fluke? Oh, well, since PET scans are specifically designed to highlight cancer cells, surely they would show a foreign body? No, they are designed to find cancer cells! Don't be totally naive, tests such as CT, PET, etc. only find what they as designed to find. Everything else is background.

    What contrasting agent do tumors have to make them show up?  I have a neighbor who's lungs are almost filled with small tumors (from fungus, a common result of living in Southern California and Nevada) and they show up on X-rays as well as a CT scan.  They are no different than 2 plus inch worms - yet they are much, much, smaller..

    >- F. buski does not live in the liver: these large leaf-shaped worms inhabit the upper regions of the small intestine.

    >- one of several species of aquatic snail. ... If the right species of snail is absent, the miracidia die. ... You will also note that in order to complete its life cycle it has to find a host snail of a particular variety


    There are snails in North American waters that can serve as the intermediate host although not as well. However, that is mute in many cases.

    As I stated before, several million North Americans have been to S.E. Asia. We import foods from S.E. Asia which may be contaminated

    Then why haven't any F. buski been found in North America?  They sure don't have a problem finding them in S. E. Asia.  As I understand it the required conditions go beyond just the snail which is one of several reasons they are found outside of Asia.

    As I stated before, several million North Americans have been to S.E. Asia. We import foods from S.E. Asia which may be contaminated.

    Yes, I've been there too.  The foods that carry the required fluke have to be fresh, not cooked. Despite your insistence that these giant worms/flukes are in North America, none have ever been found - anywhere!  Why is it that doctors/science in Asia find them and we can't?  Did you flush out flukes in your cancer cure?  Did you have a lab identify them?

    >- It is impossible for them to complete a life cycle within the human body as Hulda claims in the book section that I referred to. The eggs have to be passed from the body before they can continue their life cycle.

    I agree with this in general, but oddly, they keep finding exceptions to these so called rules.

    I think we actually agree on a lot of things, but I think the belief of Hulda's "findings" and "cures" is mass hysteria.  I have read a book on a guy who cured his bone marrow cancer - by a professor at Oxford who learned to breathe through his toes and did coffee enemas after visiting Gerson's daughter.  He was given 6 months to live and lasted 10 years when, refusing medical intervention, he died from an infected tooth.  I do believe that you have to put everything together and go with what you think will work for you.  I seriously doubt the exceptions but if that's what it takes for your belief system, then have at it.

    In summation, If you are not a doctor, you should be because it appears that you can not look beyond the end of your nose.

    Modern medicine is in the dark ages and the candle that you are holding is behind that. The National Institute of Health backs me up. According to their publications, many parasites, including several flukes, cause cancer.

    Again, you've got it backwards.  I have never claimed to be a doctor and neither was Hulda.  Just because Hulda had a PhD in biology, her ND was a 100 hour correspondence course.  Please provide the NIH sources.  If they say that flukes cause cancer, Hulda says all cancer is caused that way.

    I can see beyond the end of my nose, it is you that is close minded - in spite of your education - which references to are almost always a sign of very low self-esteem. 

     
    Advertisement
    Black Seed - NIGELLA SATIVA Oil
    cold pressed black seed oil

  • Re: Fraud (edit) parazapper  7y  7,453  

    Randomly assigned avatar.
    parazapper

    >- I don't remember anywhere that the AMA promoted smoking - but I do remember some doctors who did. A few doctors are not the AMA.

    You must be a young wippersnapper, I remember. They even had tobacco ads in their journals. There are videos on youtube.

    >- Picky, picky, picky.

    Not picky, exposing your false statements. Your claim was blatant and wrong.

    >- "50 Essential Things to do When the Doctor Says It's Cancer" by Greg Anderson?

    Yes, I read it. Not impressed. While it did have some information, it was very outdated and there was a lot left out. I was impressed with "Remarkable Recovery" which was strictly about the topic of rcovering from cancer without medical intervention and went into more detail.

    >- You mentioned the fact that there not all post mortem cancers are tested

    No,I made a point that they are almost never autopsied, especially seeking causes such as parasites. US medicine does not look and does not care to look.

    >- I don't have one damned parasite in me and there were no parasites found in the in depth analysis of the cancer material

    Again, you are missing the whole point. The parasites are not in the cancer. They are living elsewhere in your body, giving off toxins that erode your immune system.

    By the way, do you even know the statistics on erroneous prostate cancer diagnosis?

    >- to say that cancers that are removed are giving a "cursory" review is a humongous distortion of what really goes on

    My mind is far more opened than yours on this. I used to work with a couple of people who had been lab tecnicians. The things that I heard from them was amazing.

    What you do not know or understand is that the microscopic review of suspected tumor material is a mundane boring job that is performed by lab technicians. They examine the slide until they find a cell that is definitive for a particular cancer type, take a photo or two for documentation, fill out a form, then at the end of the day, the doctor signs it. The doctor almost never looks at a sample. The technicians do not look for anything but a cancer cell because that is what they are paid to do and they are graded on how fast they find the cancer.

    If you think that they do a thorough examination, you are poorly informed. There are exceptions, but they are rare.

    >- That CT scans and MRI's will miss most of them is out and out trash talk with nothing to back it up.

    Again,
      you
    have absolutely no experience in this or you would not be saying that. Most cancers do not even show up well on a CT scan unless they use a "contrast agent".

    The MRI will work somewhat better but it is still possible to miss some things. Unless a whole body scan is performed, they can miss a lot.

    >- That's because you never provided a link.

    Yes I did, 3 or 4 messages back. I checked and it is there.

    >- What contrasting agent do tumors have to make them show up? I have a neighbor who's lungs are almost filled with small tumors (from fungus, a common result of living in Southern California and Nevada) and they show up on X-rays as well as a CT scan. They are no different than 2 plus inch worms - yet they are much, much, smaller..

    They are definitely different than any worm. First, all cancerous tumors are dense and are highly vascularized. They are also thermally active hot spots, frequently being as hot as 104 F locally. They also absorb certain metals such as cesium very strongly where normal cells and parasites do not. That is why cancer shows up stronger. Flat worms are not dense and therefore can easily be missed. While some get very large, they are usually much smaller.

    The only way that a CT scan, X-ray, PET scan, MRI, etc can find anything is by seein a specific difference. The PET scan uses the fact that cancer cells absorb more than 10 times as much glucose as normal cells do. A CT scan and X-rays look for differences in density. The MRI looks for rotation variation in certain hydrogen bonds.

    From the NIH:

    The X-ray Diagnosis of Animal Parasites (Helminthes) in Man.
    By J. F. BRAILSFORD, M.B. (Birmingham).
    THE possibility of X-ray diagnosis depends on the calcification of the parasites
    or their location in the body.
    Most of the encysted embryos undergo calcification; this may follow as the
    sequel to the death of the parasite, or as some authorities believe it to be, a protective
    reaction of the tissues of the host with the subsequent death and calcification of the
    parasite, living embryos having been found in cysts, the outer walls of which showed
    calcification.

    This publications states that parasites do not show up easily on x-rays unless they are calcified (usually but not always after death of the parasite).

    ALso: From: Tropical Medicine and Hygene
    http://www.tropicalmedandhygienejrnl.net/article/S0035-9203(03)00022-1/abstract


    Adult worms of F. buski from humans are very rarely seen except at autopsy

    >- Before I did that you claimed to never have heard that Fasciolopsis buskii ????

    Never heard that it what? Was in a tumor? That is correct. Apparantly Dr. Clark was not entirely correct in all of her statements. But she was and is very correct in that parasites do cause cancer. The NIH has published dozens of studies showing this. Everytime that I would link to one, they would take it down until I started saving copies of them.

    She was correct on many points. Her herbal cleanses were not her original products, they have been around for hundreds of years but modern medicine threw them out because they do not make money. She was correct about the zapper but did not go far enough. She was and is correct about cleansing. She was and is correct about many household chemicals and their detrimental effects on us.

    >- which has been ridiculed all over the Internet

    Dr. Clark was not able to excise or biopsy the material or perhaps she might have seen things differently. What she was saying was that the signal she was finding with her synchrometer was that of F.Buskii. I have said before in other discussions that the synchrometer was crude and was to easy to get false readings from. Unlike you or the other who poopoo it, I tried it and found that it does have a basis and is can be used as a starting point. Eventually, medicine will adopt the use of frequency resonance and there are some advanced units out there today such as the EFX/SCIO which I had an analysis done that found three specific conditions that I was unaware of but was able to verify.

    >- You claim to follow her advice and have "read her books" yet have not read that?

    No, I read the advice of many and select the things that I feel will work for me. I do Budwig with a mix of Brandt along with others. The one thing that I have gotten the most out of using is the zapper. Thank you Dr. Clark.

    >- Just because Hulda had a PhD in biology, her ND was a 100 hour correspondence course.

    Yes, Clayton College is only 20 minutes from my house. A 100 hour corrospondence course can be very educational. I am accomplished in electronics and learned much of who I did early on through corrospondence courses. I run circles around some graduates of some colleges and technical schools. Corrospondence does not mean bad.

    >- That's because you never provided a link.

    Yes, I did, several messages back. You can find it here:

    http://curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1523515#i


    >- If they say that flukes cause cancer, Hulda says all cancer is caused that way

    That I never agreed with. I knew that tobacco smoke causes certain specific cancers, I know that asbestos causes mesothelioma, I will say that everyone who has cancer, has parasites and these parasites definitely have an impact on the progression of cancer. As a matter of fact, everyone has parasites, we can not survive without them.

    One thing that I have learned from studying parasitology is that parasites have a very strong influence over the host, including turning down the hosts immune system. This in turn allows cancer to develope when it would not ordinarily do so. Perhaps you and your doctor friends should give some further consideration to the role of parasites in the development of cancer before you continue poopooing the idea.

     
    Advertisement
    Anti Diabetic Effect
    Improves blood glucose tolerance

  • Re: Fraud (edit) #107689  7y  7,744  








    #107689

    >- I don't have one damned parasite in me and there were no parasites found in the in depth analysis of the cancer material

    Again, you are missing the whole point. The parasites are not in the cancer. They are living elsewhere in your body, giving off toxins that erode your immune system.

    That's a damned lie.  Hulda Clark says they are in the cancer - in various stages of development including the adult stage.  I have no liver fluke anywhere in my body, never have, never will.

    >- That CT scans and MRI's will miss most of them is out and out trash talk with nothing to back it up.

    Again,

      you

    have absolutely no experience in this or you would not be saying that. Most cancers do not even show up well on a CT scan unless they use a "contrast agent".

    The MRI will work somewhat better but it is still possible to miss some things. Unless a whole body scan is performed, they can miss a lot.

    More BS.  I have had a CT scan - without a contrast agent.  The scans (multiple) easily found granulomas (tumors) in my lungs.  I've seen the CT scans on a computer, they show up beautifully, and they are very small.  These very small granulomas even showed up on X-rays.  You don't know a thing about what you are talking about.

    Your statement from NIH about parasites does not make any claim regarding their connection to cancer as you claimed earlier.

    >- Before I did that you claimed to never have heard that Fasciolopsis buskii ????

    Never heard that it what? Was in a tumor? That is correct. Apparantly Dr. Clark was not entirely correct in all of her statements. But she was and is very correct in that parasites do cause cancer. The NIH has published dozens of studies showing this. Everytime that I would link to one, they would take it down until I started saving copies of them.

    You say that Clark was not "entirely correct in all of here statements" yet she made the claim that Fasciolopsis buski was in every cancer and she made that statement in each and everyone of her books. 

    One thing that I have learned from studying parasitology is that parasites have a very strong influence over the host, including turning down the hosts immune system. This in turn allows cancer to develope when it would not ordinarily do so. Perhaps you and your doctor friends should give some further consideration to the role of parasites in the development of cancer before you continue poopooing the idea.

    Ok, I'm going to cut through all the BS that you've presented regarding the liver fluke and present what an eminently qualified parasitologist (and many others) say regarding Hulda's fluke.  Alongside Peter W. Pappas both you and Hulda Clark are functionally illiterate in regards to parasites.

    It still absolutely amazes me that you claim to have read Clark's books but didn't find any of her liver fluke insanity.  I pointed out the page number of her "Cure for All Diseases" and you still couldn't find it.  Well, Peter Pappas (and many, many others) read all of Hulda's books and found in each of them that she stated that Fasciolopsis buski (the liver fluke) was the cause of all cancer as well as AIDS and a host of other illnesses - and you didn't know that?????  She also claims that the adult liver fluke can be found in these host individuals - in the affected areas.  

    I used to have a link to Pappas' web site at Ohio State University where there were several pages devoted to debunking the liver fluke theory but the site is now under modification.  However, quack watch has preserved a declaration of Pappas that says much the same thing.  I could care less of your thoughts on quack watch, the messenger isn't important - but the message is.  Pappas makes direct quotes from Clark's books regarding her utterly insane thoughts on liver flukes that you will find below.

    I also with to point out that on cure zone someone calling themselves "Zapperman" sent Dr. Pappas a zapper in 1998 with the joyous anticipation that Zapperman would be blessed with revealing to Dr. Pappas some sort of hocus pocus anti parasite miracle.  Well, you can see from his declaration below that it did not work.  By the way - would you happen to be Zapperman? http://curezone.com/diseases/cancer/cancercured.asp

    Just a few observations from Pappas declaration.  Fasciolopsis buski has never ever been found in relation to cancer (or a host of other Clark liver fluke caused disease) - period.  Also despite the claims of Hulda that liver fluke eggs get into the human blood stream is pure garbage - they don't.  Another valid thing he points out is that Fasciolopsis buski is limited only to S. E. Asia (has never been found anywhere else) and that even there cancer rates are no higher than the rest of the world.  He also points out that parasites do not cause cancer!!!!

    Pappas blows all of your wishy washy evasive responses to my comments out of the water.  Below you will also find a link to Dr. Joseph E. Pizzorno regarding the herbal cures of Hulda clark.  Pizzorno is an eminent ND who founded Bastyr University - the first natural healing university in the country and he points out the erroneous claims of Hulda Clark.

    Have at it and if you don't believe what you read below then take up your case with them, not me.  Your "logic" doesn't hold a candle to either of the gentlemen below.

    Declaration of Peter W. Pappas, Ph.D.

    May 9, 2001

    Peter W. Pappas, Ph.D, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, hereby states as follows:

    1. My name is Peter W. Pappas. I am a United States citizen over the age of 18. I currently reside in Columbus, Ohio.

    2. 1 have a B.A.degree in biology from Humboldt State University in Arcata, California, awarded in 1966. In 1968 1 received an M.A. in Biology from Humboldt State University. I received a Ph.D. in 1971 from the University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, in zoology, parasitology, and biochemistry. I served a post-doctoral fellowship through the National Institutes of Health fi-om 1971-1973 at Rice University in Houston, Texas in parasitology, and served as research associate at Rice in parasitology in 1973.

    3. From 1973 until 2000 1 was a faculty member at The Ohio State University in Columbus, Ohio. I served as an Assistant Professor from 1973 through 1977, as an Associate Professor from 1978 through 1982 and as Professor of Zoology from 1983 through 2000. From 1989 through 1998 1 was chairman of the Department of Zoology at Ohio State. (The Departments' name was changed to "Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology" in 2000.) In 1998 and 1999 1 was the Director of the Introductory Biology Program at Ohio State. I am now retired from Ohio State, having been awarded the title of Professor Emeritus, and I am a technical consultant for LabBook-com in Columbus, Ohio. LabBook.com develops and markets commercial software for managing laboratory information and mining genomic databases.

    4. My specialized academic training is in the area of parasitology -- the study of parasites. In general terms, "parasitologists" study all aspects of the "biology of parasites," including, but not limited to, (1) taxonomy and systematics, (2) life cycles, (3) pathology, (4) epidemiology (including the distribution, control, and eradication of parasitic infections), (5) and treatment of parasites and parasitic infections. Parasitologists might specialize in one or more of the above areas, they might specialize in the study of parasites infecting a specific host (e.g., "human parasitology"), or they might specialize in other biological disciplines related directly to one of the above areas (e.g., biochemistry of parasites in relation to chemotherapy). Many biologists with specialized training in other biological disciplines study parasites as "'model systems," including evolutionary biologists, molecular biologists, taxonomists and systematists, and ecologists. Parasitic organisms are extremely diverse -- virtually every major group of animals has at least one member that is a "parasite," and in some groups of animals all members are parasites. Just like parasites, parasitologists are also extremely diverse in terms of "what" they study and "why" they study it.

    5. While a faculty member at Ohio State University, I maintained an active research program in parasitology, primarily biochemistry, physiology, and cell biology of parasites. I have published approximately 90 articles in refereed scientific journals and edited three reference books. I have also served on the editorial boards of five national/international parasitological journals, and I currently serve as co-moderator of the primary parasitology news group on the web (bionet.parasitology). My CV is attached.

    6. At Ohio State University, my primary teaching responsibility for 27 years was an advanced undergraduate/graduate-level course, Introductory Parasitology. As part of maintaining the course's content with contemporary parasitological concepts and principles, I have read extensively in many areas of parasitology and "human parasitology." This includes reading and studying many general, human, and veterinary parasitology textbooks written in the U.S. or U.K., and extensive readings in the original literature (refereed scientific journals). For the past five years I have maintained a large web site (Parasites and Parasitological Resources) designed as (1) a teaching aid for college-level students and (2) a source of information for the lay person. The web site contains information on over 200 species of parasites and over 500 photographic images of parasites, and most of the important parasites of humans are included. During a typical month, the web site's home page receives more than 10,000 hits, and the entire web site receives >150,000 hits. Through an e-mail link in this web site, I receive and answer many questions from all over the world regarding many aspects of parasitology. The web site's URL is www.biosci.ohio-state.edu/~parasite/home.html.

    7. I became aware of Hulda Clark's claims regarding parasites and disease in 1996 when I developed my web site. As part of developing this web site, I conducted extensive searches of the web for other parasitology sites. In addition to sites that were clearly academic and instructional in content, I came across many sites that espoused the belief of Hulda Clark that parasites cause many diseases including cancer, AIDS, Alzheimer's disease, diabetes, etc. Throughout my 33 years in academia, I had never heard of nor read about such a theory. Initially, I simply ignored Hulda Clark and her theory, as I was simply too busy. However, as my web site developed, I began to get e-mails asking for my "opinion" about Clark and her theories. I also discovered that many of the "proClark" web sites had copied copyrighted images from my web site and were using them without my permission. Thus, I not only purchased Clark's books, The Cure for All Cancers (1993), The Cure for HIV and AIDS (1993), and The Cure for.All Diseases (1995), but I also began an extensive search for and investigation of "pro-Clark" web sites. Over the past few years, I have become familiar with Hulda Clark's theories and many of the web sites that support her theories and sell various cures for parasites.

    8. In her writings, Clark makes a number of claims about parasites and disease. In The Cure for All Cancers, Clark states:

    In this book you will see that all cancers are alike, They are all caused by a parasite A single parasite! It is the human intestinal fluke. [Clark is referring to Fasciolopsis buski, a parasitic flatworm.] And if you kill this parasite, the cancer stops immediately. The tissue becomes normal again. In order to get cancer, you must have this parasite.

    9. In The Cure for HIV and AIDS, Clark states: "This [parasite] is the source of the HIV virus (sic)" and a photograph of Fasciolopsis buski follows. She goes on to say, "The HIV virus (sic) belongs to this fluke," and "[I]f it establishes itself in the thymus, it causes HIV/AIDS." Furthermore, in both of these books, Clark emphasizes that effective treatment for this parasite (and, therefore, a cure for cancer, AIDS, and may other diseases purportedly caused by this parasite) requires the use of both herbal remedies and electrical devices "Zappers").

    10. The claims of Hulda Clark (and many of the web sites that sell herbal remedies and "Zapper") that (1) a single parasite causes cancer, AIDS, and many other diseases, and that this parasite can be killed with electrical devices ("Zappers") are not supported by competent and reliable scientific evidence. This statement is based on the observations and correspondence summarized below.

    11. Cancer, AIDS, and many of the diseases that Clark claims are caused by Fasciolopsis buski, are distributed world-wide, yet the distribution of this parasite is limited to S.E. Asia.

    12. Clark claims that she has diagnosed this parasite in everyone with cancer, AIDS, and other diseases, and that she diagnoses these infections using a "Syncrometer" (an electrical device that somehow indicates the presence of parasites and/or toxins in the body.) However, the only reliable and acceptable method for the diagnosis of Fasciolopsis buski infections in humans is demonstrating the presence of the parasite's eggs in human feces. Thus, her statement that "everyone" is infected with this parasite is based on inaccurate diagnostic methodology. Moreover, if this parasite caused all of these diseases, the parasite would be found during routine pathology procedures. I have been unable to find any evidence that this parasite is found during such routine procedures.

    13. Clark's books contain a number of inaccurate statements about the biology of Fasciolopsis buski and other parasites, so one must question her as an authority on parasites or parasitic diseases. She misspells the scientific name of the parasite; she spells the specific buskii, when the correct spelling is buski. When discussing any species of living organism, the correct spelling of the scientific name is essential. In The Cure for All Cancers, the title for Figure 2 (which is not a photomicrograph) refers to "strings of eggs from the parasite -- the parasite does not produce "strings of eggs," and the eggs are microscopic (cannot be seen without a microscope). Clark states tliat "[T]he adult [parasite], though, stays tightly stuck to our intestine (or liver, causing cancer, or uterus, causing endometriosis, or thymus, causing AIDS, or kidney, causing Hodgkin's disease.)" The adult parasite does live in the small intestine, as stated by Clark, but I have been unable to find any reports (other than Clark's) of this parasite being found in the human uterus, thymus, or kidney. Clark states: "Some of these eggs [produced by the adult parasites] batch in the intestine or the blood." There is no credible evidence that the eggs of any species of fluke will batch in the human intestine, or in the blood or time. There are a few species of flukes in which the eggs normally enter the blood or tissues (e.g., the schistosomes which cause schistosomiasis), but, even with these species of parasites, the eggs do not hatch in the blood or tissue. Clark states that "[w]e all have tapeworm stages in our bodies...." and "[e]very tumor, benign or malignant, has a tapeworm stage in the middle of it, even including warts." I have been unable to substantiate either of these statements in the medical literature. Although Clark has an advanced academic degree (a Ph.D. in physiology) and an N.D., she has no academic training as a parasitologist and she clearly does not have a basic understanding of the most fundamental parasitological principles.

    14. There is overwhelming evidence in the form of peer-reviewed articles appearing in scientific journals that virtually all types of cancer result from the uncontrolled division of cells, and that the uncontrolled division of cells has a genetic basis. That is, cancer is caused by the activation or inactivation of specific genes that control the division of cells; it is not caused by a parasite. If this parasite truly causes cancer and, therefore, kills thousands of people each year, how could this parasite go unnoticed? Even in areas of the world where Fasciolopsis buski is endemic, there are no published studies that demonstrate (1) a relationship between this parasite and cancer and (2) that curing this parasite cures cancer. The only studies that support these theories are those mentioned in Clark's books, and her studies lack scientific integrity. Similarly, there is overwhelming evidence that AIDS is caused by HIV (human immunodeficiency virus), not a parasite.

    Although there's some disagreement as to when and where HIV was introduced first into the human population, it is clear that it was not a prevalent disease until the early 1980s. However, Fasciolopsis buski has been recognized as a human parasite for hundreds of years, a fact recognized by Clark in her books.

    15. Hulda Clark believes that parasites cause many common diseases. In the terminology of the scientific method, Clark is stating a hypothesis or statement of belief. However, the scientific method requires that, for a hypothesis to be accepted as a theory, the hypothesis must be tested. That is, controlled, empirical, unbiased experiments must be done. Moreover, the experiments and their results must be reviewed by other scientists to insure that the experiments were conducted properly and that.the data are unbiased. This is what differentiates good science from bad science. Herein lies a major flaw with Clark's theories. Her hypotheses have not been tested using controlled experiments, and her methods of collecting data are biased. Rather, most of the diseases were diagnosed and treated by Clark, and Clark also claimed the diseases were cured. Thus, Clark's "case histories" represent an egregious example of a highly biased experimental protocol, and her theories are based on bad science.

    16. After reading Clark's books and receiving many e-mails asking questions about Clark's theories, I tried to find information in the original literature. (The articles in refereed scientific journals or reputable reference books) that would support Clark's beliefs. Despite extensive searches of numerous major academic and medical libraries and extensive scientific and medical databases, I could not find a single article that supported Clark's theories about Fasciolopsis buski and diseases.

    17. In early 1999, I posted the following statement on my web site: Hulda Regehr Clark claims that this parasite causes "all diseases, " cancer, and HIV and AIDS, and several web sites use these claims in their advertisements to sell various "cures "for these diseases. There are no peer-reviewed, published, scientific studies demonstrating that Fasciolopsis buski causes any of these diseases in humans. Furthermore, there are no peer-reviewed, published, scientific studies demonstrating that the various treatments, tinctures, cleanses, electrical devices (e.g., the "Zapper"), etc., sold through these web pages have any therapeutic value.

    18. In response to the appearance of this statement, I received several e-mail messages from David Amrein, the President of the "Dr. Clark Research Association." Mr. Amrein asked that I remove this statement from my web site, and, in hopes of finding supporting information, I responded with the following: "Tell me where I can find information that supports the theories of Hulda Clark, information that has been published in peer-reviewed journals, and I will remove the comments from my web page. In fact, if you tell me where I can find this information, I will be more than happy to (1) include the information in my web page and (2) add an apology to my web page. I await anxiously your response." Despite my very clear request for information, Mr. Amrein did not provide any information that would support Clark's theories.

    19. Later in 1999, Mr. Tim Bolen (who is referred to as "a media consultant" on the "Dr. Clark Research Association web site) and Mr. Leo Regehr [Hulda Clark's brother] sent a number of e-mail messages to me and various administrators at Ohio State University complaining about the statements on the website. I made them the same offer that I made to Mr. Amrein. I received no information that refutes the comments that are included in my web site. I must assume that no such information exists.

    I declare under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing statement is true and correct.
    Executed, this 9th day of May, 2001 at Columbus, Ohio.

    Peter W. Pappas, Ph.D.

    Link to Dr. (ND) Pizzorno: http://www.quackwatch.org/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/Cancer/clarkaff/pizzorno.html

     
    Advertisement
    Oxygen Cures & Prevents Diabetes
    -Oxidation Reduction Potential improves blood glucose tolerance

  • Shill #108005  7y  7,421  


    #108005

    Why are you wasting your time with this guy Parazapper? Every post of his is a cut and paste from either the pharmaceutical controlled NIH or the criminal Stephen Barret's Quackwatch!
    In fact this guy sounds like Barret with his obvious hate filed messages, a pharmashill signature!


    http://www.quackpotwatch.org/quackpots/quackpots/barrett.htm
     
    Advertisement
    Foods That Reverse Diabetes
    New discovery shocks scientists - certain foods can reverse diabetes

  • Re: Fraud (edit) parazapper  7y  7,529  

    Randomly assigned avatar.
    parazapper

    >- Hulda Clark says they are in the cancer - in various stages of development including the adult stage.

    So, you do believe Hulda Clark . Since you are using her word as gospel and to call me a liar on that basis makes you a hypocrit!

    My statement is based on NIH funded studies that clearly explain that parasites living in the intestines can cause cancer in other locations in the body.

    >- Most cancers do not even show up well on a CT scan unless they use a "contrast agent".

    I said "Most", not "all".

    >- I've seen the CT scans on a computer, they show up beautifully, and they are very small

    Thank you! "Computer enhanced!" The normal images do not show well at all and I have examined several. Even with the computer enhanced ones, not all cancers are eazy to see.

    >- Your statement from NIH about parasites does not make any claim regarding their connection to cancer as you claimed earlier

    #1 About one-in-five liver cancers are cholangiocarcinomas, arising from branches of the bile ducts that are located within the liver. Certain liver parasites are recognized risk factors for this type of liver cancer

    #2 Being infected with certain parasites increases the risk of bladder cancer.

    #3 factors that may contribute to the development of bladder cancer include bladder infection with the parasitic fluke Schistosoma haematobium

    #4 Bile duct cancer may occur more frequently in patients with a history of primary sclerosing Cholangitis , chronic ulcerative colitis, choledochal cysts, or infections with the fluke, clonorchis sinensis.

    >- You say that Clark was not "entirely correct in all of here statements" yet she made the claim that Fasciolopsis buski was in every cancer and she made that statement in each and everyone of her books.

    So, that was a wrong statement if that is what she claimed in each and every book but her other thousand statements were not so wrong.

    >- present what an (one) eminently qualified parasitologist (and many others) say regarding Hulda's fluke.

    I have read his discounts before and not everyone agrees entirely with his statements and conclusions.

    Additionally, the very fact that it is posted on quackwatch makes it completely suspect because quackwatch is nothing but a propoganda machine that attempts di destroy naturopathic and wholistic practices just like they did with chiropractic. Why are there no quack M.D.'s listed there? Especially when there have been many exposed?

    Support for the zapper 95 percent success according to Dr. Robert Thiel.

    I can personally tell you that there is a strong effort to suppress the zapper and Dr. Thiel feels so threatened that he will not run another study.

    We sent several zappers to a major university in California for studies with HIV infected individuals. While several of the tests showed improvement, the study was discontinued under undue influence.

     
    Advertisement
    Aurora Mega-Liposomal Supplements
    New mega-liposomal breakthrough delivers unprecedented amounts of vitamin C, glutathion...

  • Re: Fraud (edit) #107689  7y  7,350  


    #107689

    >- Hulda Clark says they are in the cancer - in various stages of development including the adult stage.

    So, you do believe Hulda Clark. Since you are using her word as gospel and to call me a liar on that basis makes you a hypocrit!

    My statement is based on NIH funded studies that clearly explain that parasites living in the intestines can cause cancer in other locations in the body.

    What idiot logic.  I DO NOT believe Hulda Clark.  That's the basis of this entire thread.  First you ask me to point out where Hulda even said such a thing - and I did.  Now you come back with an asinine statement like the above.

    You have NEVER presented the NIH study and nowhere but nowhere does the NIH study say anything about parasites in cancer.  Besides, we are not talking about any parasites, we are talking about fasciolopsis buskii, the parasite that Hulda claims is in every cancer.  There is a humongous difference between your statement and what Hulda claims.

    >- Most cancers do not even show up well on a CT scan unless they use a "contrast agent".

    I said "Most", not "all
    "'.

    I strongly diagree.  Prove it!

    >- I've seen the CT scans on a computer, they show up beautifully, and they are very small

    Thank you! "Computer enhanced!" The normal images do not show well at all and I have examined several. Even with the computer enhanced ones, not all cancers are eazy to see.

    More bull shit.  Get your butt into the 21st century.  They no longer produce X-Rays or CT scans on film, or haven't you heard.  There was no computer enhancement of the small granulomas that I've seen on the CT scan and they showed up clearly on X-rays as well.  CT scans are sent directly to a computer where no enhancements are made and are analyzed there.

    >- Your statement from NIH about parasites does not make any claim regarding their connection to cancer as you claimed earlier

    #1 About one-in-five liver cancers are cholangiocarcinomas, arising from branches of the bile ducts that are located within the liver. Certain liver parasites are recognized risk factors for this type of liver cancer.

    You have not presented anything to back up your statement - other than your statement.  Besides, you just proved Hulda Clark to be wrong - there are no fasciolopsis buskii in the liver.  Thank you for providing a closing to the argument you're presenting trying to support Ms. Clark.

    So, that was a wrong statement if that is what she claimed in each and every book but her other thousand statements were not so wrong.

    That wasn't a wrong statement, she made that same statement over and over again in many books in regard not only to cancer but a host of other diseases as well.  You have once again supported my claim that Hulda Clark was a hoax and a liar.  You're inability, once more, to read is readily apparent regarding her books and the S. E. Asia liver fluke.

    >- present what an (one) eminently qualified parasitologist (and many others) say regarding Hulda's fluke.

    I have read his discounts before and not everyone agrees entirely with his statements and conclusions.

    Additionally, the very fact that it is posted on quackwatch makes it completely suspect because quackwatch is nothing but a propoganda machine that attempts di destroy naturopathic and wholistic practices just like they did with chiropractic. Why are there no quack M.D.'s listed there? Especially when there have been many exposed?

    Support for the zapper 95 percent success according to Dr. Robert Thiel.

    I can personally tell you that there is a strong effort to suppress the zapper and Dr. Thiel feels so threatened that he will not run another study.

    We sent several zappers to a major university in California for studies with HIV infected individuals. While several of the tests showed improvement, the study was discontinued under undue influence.

    Dr. Pappas had a web site at Ohio State University discounting the fasciolopsis buskii claim and I cannot find anyone anywhere disputing Dr. Pappas.  You are attacking the messenger without addressing the message.

    By your own admission Hulda Clark was a hoax and a liar.

    In summation you have presented nothing to support your theories.  You've been the route, so you know that with what information you have presented here on Cure Zone if you were to take it to a thesis committee and were to try and defend it - you would be laughed out of the building and off the campus too.  There is no scientific evidence to support any of Hulda's claims regarding cancer - including the zapper.  You are reaching out and not only claiming that modern medicine is in the Dark Ages, but you are also claiming that all science is there as well.  Are you one of those who believe that men walking on the moon was a hoax?  In the process of your presentation here on this list you are also denigrating your own education.  It would have been impossible for you to get your PhD with the type of evidence you present here.

    You have a belief/faith in the zapper and many of Hulda's false claims.  That is exactly what is required for the placebo effect.  I suggest that you continue to live in your own little fantasy world because if you were to accept the truth your cancer would return full force.  I do not belittle your faith because it is completely independent of what you have erroneously chosen to support it with.  However, it's time to call a spade a spade.  You as spirit (not your body) have healed yourself.

    http://www.redorbit.com/news/health/1784461/alternative_medicine_success_larg...

    Alternative Medicine Success Largely Due To Placebo Effect

    Posted on: Wednesday, 11 November 2009, 14:00 CST

    Human expectations and the power of the mind may be behind the success of many natural health remedies, according to an Associated Press report on Tuesday about the use and potential risks of alternative medicines.

    Known as the placebo effect, people sometimes feel better after taking a dummy pill or a faked treatment simply because they expect the treatment will work to improve their condition. 

    In other words, the brain has the ability to alter physical symptoms, such as pain, anxiety and fatigue.

    The healing power of the placebo effect was recently demonstrated during tests of a new drug that relieves the symptoms of lupus. The test found that one in three participants felt better after they received the dummy pills instead of the actual drug. 

    The placebo effect plays a large part in alternative medicine, which includes therapies and herbal remedies based on beliefs versus science, the Associated Press said. 

    Such therapies are often used to relieve subjective symptoms such as pain.

    "It has a pejorative implication — that it's not real, that it has no medicinal value," said Dr. Robert Ader, a psychologist at the University of Rochester in New York who has researched the subject.

    But placebos can have real and beneficial effects, he said.

    "Much of the results of certain alternative procedures are largely placebo effects, unless you believe there are people who exert magical powers so they can hold their hands over your body and cure you of disease," Ader told the AP.

    "Make you feel better? That's entirely possible, especially if you believe it."

    Scientists say the placebo effect accounts for roughly one-third of the benefits of any treatment — even carefully tested ones.  

    This conclusion dates to a historic report in 1955 called The Powerful Placebo.   The groundbreaking report, in which H.K. Beecher analyzed dozens of previous studies, found that 32 percent of patients responded to a placebo.

    Beecher’s conclusions were supported by subsequent studies, which found that placebos could increase pulse rates, blood pressure and reaction speed when people were told they had taken a stimulant.  The reverse held true in people were told that a placebo drug would make them drowsy.

    Scientists do not yet completely understand how the placebo effect works, but there are many possible explanations.

    Brain imaging shows that beliefs can indeed drive biological changes, including alterations in levels of chemical messengers and stress hormones that signal pleasure and pain....... rest of story at the link.

     
    Advertisement
    Cancer Cure & Prevention
    Medical Research proves an abundance of Oxygen -ORP benefits the bodies cells with billions of a...

  • Image Embedded Re: Fraud (edit) #107689  7y  7,516  


    #107689

    Here's a picture of fasciolopsis buskii that Hulda says in every cancer (and other places as well).  And you claim that modern medicine can't find them?  Even after investigating every cancer in the lab?  Hogwash!

    Fasciolopsis buski adult

     
    Advertisement
    cycloastragenol capsules
    telomere support scientifically researched

  • Re: Fraud (edit) #107689  7y  7,311  


    #107689

    One last thing regarding Hulda's treatments - and many alternative treatments for that matter, that is the placebo effect that I mentioned in another post.  (I do not consider her gallbladder flush or any of her parasite treatments to be her treatments as they have been used for decades in other places and she just copied them.  If she could cure parasites in the body she would have been awarded a Nobel Prize because malaria is caused by a parasite.)

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14309026/

    Placebo's power goes beyond the mind

    Scientists tap into fake pill's effects to help real pains

    Even though medical researchers told Chuck Park that he might be getting a sugar pill, the 30-year-old software producer was pretty sure he was getting the real thing. Just a few weeks into the clinical trial, Park’s depression started to lift. He began to feel less anxious and sad.

    So when Park learned he’d been taking a placebo all along, it was a surprise.

    “I was fully expecting to receive the real drug even though I knew that the placebo was a possibility,” remembers Park of Culver City, Calif. “I guess I wanted it to work — and in a way, it did....... (more at the link)

    An article published just a couple of days ago:

    Alternative Medicine Success Largely Due To Placebo Effect

    Human expectations and the power of the mind may be behind the success of many natural health remedies, according to an Associated Press report on Tuesday about the use and potential risks of alternative medicines.

    Known as the placebo effect, people sometimes feel better after taking a dummy pill or a faked treatment simply because they expect the treatment will work to improve their condition. 

    In other words, the brain has the ability to alter physical symptoms, such as pain, anxiety and fatigue.

    The healing power of the placebo effect was recently demonstrated during tests of a new drug that relieves the symptoms of lupus. The test found that one in three participants felt better after they received the dummy pills instead of the actual drug. ....(more at the link)

    That article indicates that over 30% of ALL healing is via the placebo effect, and yes MDs still use placebo pills, with success.

    I in no way negate alternative healing as I've had benefits from it myself, but when one person becomes a guru and is worshiped as the greatest healer on the planet with NO scientific data to back it up, I know that the placebo effect is in play.  

    There is not one scientifically documented case that Hulda Clark cured a cancer.  Not one that has been diagnosed prior to her treatment and then found to be healed after treatment via the medical profession.

    Hulda's brother died of cancer after her treatment and she died of cancer.  Not very good testimonials for her healing abilities.

     
    Advertisement
    Cancer Cure & Prevention
    Medical Research proves an abundance of Oxygen -ORP benefits the bodies cells with billions of a...


  •  

    Donate to CureZone

     


    Share:  Facebook  MySpace  Digg  Reddit  StumbleUpon  Furl this page  Delicious  BlinkList  dzone  Simpy.com  Fark.com  BlogMarks  Wists.com  Google
    Translate This Page:


    Terms of Service - Privacy Policy - Spam Policy - Disclaimer - Guidelines & Rules

    CureZone Newsletter is distributed in partnership with www.netatlantic.com


    Contact Us - About - Advertise - Stats

    Copyright 1999 - 2016  www.curezone.org

    0.272 sec, (1)