Revici amd Kelley Eidem's claims

Thread view:

Enable EMail Alerts

Start New Thread

Thread rating:

Peter Moran - 27 May 2006 22:00 GMT

> He's < referring to me --PM > not dead...just in mourning. There's a
> chance that on his desk
> there are those photos with the shrinking tumor staring back at him.
> And on the other side of his desk is the bogus Lyall report published
> in JAMA that says no tumors shrank. So his head is spinning back and
> forth and making him dizzy.

I was not stunned, merely away from home on unexpected family matters.

So that everyone can make their own minds up as to the worth of Kelley's
writings concerning the Revici cancer treatment, I have put a scan of the
photos up on my web site.
http://members.bordernet.com.au/~pmoran/cancer/Revici.htm (with apologies
to anyone who cares about a copyright on them - not usual in medical
research).

I invite Eidem to tell us once again what the pictures show, and what they
prove. This will save me having to rummage through month-old discussions
for his exact words.

Those interested should compare the quality of the information he provides
regarding this case with what I have suggested should be the minimum needed
to attract interest in an alternative claim at
http://members.bordernet.com.au/~pmoran/cancer/Showing_it_works_2.htm . I
give a very detailed account of why.

Note the emphasis there on producing *contemporary* data. I believe the
claim to be able to cure cancer is too important to too many people for it
to hang upon information that we cannot go and check. There are dozens of
cancer cure claims hanging upon material we cannot go check.. .

I have also obtained a copy of the Lyall et Al 1965 report and can advise
about that once we hear what Eidem has to say.

I also obtained a copy of the 1953 Angiology paper that Kelley refers to
concerning the anti-haemorrhagic effects of n-butanol in advanced cancer
patients As I predicted (considering its vintage, the very first ever
properly randomised clinical trial only being performed in about 1949)),
this is an extremely poor quality uncontrolled trial in which there was
ample room for the bias of the investigators to manipulate the results.
Typical of the era, there is no attempt at statistical analysis. It is not
even clear how the groups being compared were gathered. Haemorrhage is a
very common terminal or near-terminal event in cancer patients, often from
the gastrointestinal tract. . The results here depended on whether death
was "attributed to" haemorrhage by the researchers, and that can be a very
subjective judgement.

Of course, to Kelley, that is just the inevitable nit-picking of those who
have chosen not to BELIEVE. You will just have to make your own minds up,
folks. .

Peter Moran

www.cancerwatcher.com

Reply to this Message

awthrawthr@yahoo.com - 04 Jun 2006 04:04 GMT

> > He's < referring to me --PM > not dead...just in mourning. There's a
> > chance that on his desk
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> to anyone who cares about a copyright on them - not usual in medical
> research).

You have violated copyright by posting the dustjacket to my book
without permission. The dustjacket is MY copyright, by the way.

> I invite Eidem to tell us once again what the pictures show, and what they
> prove. This will save me having to rummage through month-old discussions
> for his exact words.

Your response is one of the most disengenuous responses in a very long
time. I have repeatedly stated what the photos show...and you've had
access to them all along...meanwhile, the photos speak for
themselves...it is YOUR turn to let us in on what YOU see.

> Those interested should compare the quality of the information he provides
> regarding this case with what I have suggested should be the minimum needed
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>claim to be able to cure cancer is too important to too many people for it
>to hang upon information that we cannot go and check.

More disingenuous generalities...you have a series of photos depicting
a tumor right in front of you...the NOTION that you can't check it is
patently absurd.

>There are dozens of
> cancer cure claims hanging upon material we cannot go check.. .

We're talking about this one...the one pertaining to the pictures you
have in front of you. Try to stay focused.

>I have also obtained a copy of the Lyall et Al 1965 report

You should have it!...I gave you the pertinent info needed to look it
up.

>and can advise
> about that once we hear what Eidem has to say.

I've stated numerous times in a miriad of ways my opinion on Lyall. We
are waiting to hear what YOU think about his report on
Revici...particularly since you are such a big advocate of proper peer
review publishing standards.

>I also obtained a copy of the 1953 Angiology paper that Kelley refers to

YOU obtained it?? By golly, how did you manage that! My, my...you
'OBTAINED' it because I mailed it to you first class!

> concerning the anti-haemorrhagic effects of n-butanol in advanced cancer
> patients As I predicted (considering its vintage, the very first ever
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> was "attributed to" haemorrhage by the researchers, and that can be a very
> subjective judgement.

[I don't have the paper with me at the moment] The objective criteria
is that 17 or 18 out of 25 bleeding episodes died in the group that
didn't receive the butanol... yet only ONE person died while bleeding
in the group that DID receive the
butanol!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!... although they had 300 episodes
of the bleeding since the butanol usually controlled the bleeding for
one to three days at a time.

If they weren't visibly bleeding and they died, then the death isn't
attributable to bleeding...if they were visibly bleeding, and they died
while doing that, then the death is attributable to the bleeding. Gawd!
for being a supposed doctor, you sure are one dumb human being...

...I take that back...it isn't dumbness...it's a stubborn unwillingness
to admit the obvious because you can't handle it psychologically.

It hard to fake death!! As the case studies indicate, even patients
with "coffee ground" expulsions of blood, stopped bleeding in mere
minutes AND STAYED ALIVE. Patients with uncontrolled bleeding died

> Of course, to Kelley, that is just the inevitable nit-picking of those who
> have chosen not to BELIEVE. You will just have to make your own minds up,
> folks. .

You've made up your mind, all right...and you STILL haven't gone on
record publicly on the PHOTOS....do you remember the photos?? Let's
hear what YOU have to say, so that the public can see where YOU are
coming from.

Let's see you point to the changing tumor, and tell us how that lines
up with Lyall's statements. (Lyall's "Report" is one heck of a doozie
isn't it! Come on...tell us what you think of his report in terms of
your own standards of medical studies!! How DARE you criticize the
Revici butanol study without a word about Lyall's piece of garbage!)

Reply to this Message

Steph - 04 Jun 2006 06:24 GMT

> You have violated copyright by posting the dustjacket to my book
> without permission. The dustjacket is MY copyright, by the way.

Pulled any good teeth lately?

Reply to this Message