Here are some of the basics with whats wrong
>Without question, cancer is one of the simplest disease processes to properly treat.
Mistake cancer is not once disease but a term for over 200 different diseases, all have common traits but it is not one disease. It's primarily based on trophoblast cells as the most dangerours cancer cells.
Cancer has a common originating problem so the critic is in essence wrong.
> Cancer is not a malignant tumor mass,
All cancer researchers would disagree. No, words here obscure what is being said.
>It is when one's pancreas fails to produce the necessary pancreatin to accomplish these tasks that a disease process takes place which we correctly call cancer.
This is nonsense. This guy may know about teeth, he is ignorant about cancer.
The critic is ignorant about the causes of cancer
>The object of Metabolic Medicine's Cancer Cure Program is...
to sell hope to those looking for a cure....
> this is what we call a false analogy.... it has nothing to do with the subject at hand.
The critic is not adding to clarity.
A diabetic going untreated .....
> The physician who describes insulin is not treating diabetes.
This is just wrong.
The critic attacks without understanding the meaning of the message.
>cancer is nothing more than the failure of your pancreas, basically that is a main thrust of the problem.
This guy has no knowledge of biology, this is wrong, wrong, wrong.
> All persons who have cancer die of starvation
Wrong, there are multiple causes, as starvation is not one. Depending on underlying conditions and the type of cancer in question.... there are other issues as well.
>Obtaining a supply of pancreatin
Will not cure you of cancer,
It is a major component to regain health.
>In 1904, only 1 out of 24 Americans had cancer in his lifetime.
Wrong, was diagnosed. In his ignorance Kelley assumes this is the same thing.
> In the 35 years since Dr. Kelley cured himself of terminal pancreatic cancer and > guided some 33,000 cancer victims to health,
Unsubstantiated, and blatantly false.
Teh critic has not done his homework.
The rest of the article is just ignorant rants, or intentional deception designed to sell a product.
The critic rants without substantiating his critical claims.