Re: Old wives' tale

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

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Barrett

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.)