 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Alternative / May 2008In the last 72 hours, nearly 2,000 visits to a free cancer cure were made
And folks are starting to pass it along to their email buddies. By Christmas of 2008, a million visits are possible. Or it could be ten million. A new day is coming. For some, it is already here. That's a beautiful thing! The best to you. Kelley Eidem > And folks are starting to pass it along to their email buddies. By > Christmas of 2008, a million visits are possible. Or it could be ten [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Kelley Eidem So I see you are still peddling some one else's achievements. Are you still trying to sell your book on Dr Emanual Revici's life works? Your greatest admirer, Rod > > And folks are starting to pass it along to their email buddies. By > > Christmas of 2008, a million visits are possible. Or it could be ten [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > So I see you are still peddling some one else's achievements. Did Revici write my book?? Are you still > trying to sell your book on Dr Emanuel Revici's life works? Sales are higher than ever. Yesterday, the lowest price used copy was being offered for $162 over at that big online bookstore. My softcover version sells for far less. > Your greatest admirer, Rod The best to you as well. > And folks are starting to pass it along to their email buddies. By > Christmas of 2008, a million visits are possible. Or it could be ten > million. > > A new day is coming. For some, it is already here. That's a beautiful > thing! If this is about the cure of cancer by alternative methods, there are about ten times more different claimed ways of doing this, than you can find patients with established cancer that seemed to definitely go away while being treated with those treatments. A massive alternative cancer industry is sustained by a handful of dubious testimonials. http://www.users.on.net/~pmoran/cancer/how_to_read_a_testimonial.htm PM A massive alternative cancer industry > is sustained by a handful of dubious testimonials. > > http://www.users.on.net/~pmoran/cancer/how_to_read_a_testimonial.htm > > PM Let us put a different spin on this statement. A massive and profitable cancer idustry is sustained by numerous but dubious claims about effectiveness. Makes sense to me. DrCee You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons. > > And folks are starting to pass it along to their email buddies. By > > Christmas of 2008, a million visits are possible. Or it could be ten [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > PM Peter, we can agree to disagree on what is effective and what is not. You, for instance when presented with photographic evidence of a tumor disappearing were unable to see what was in front of you, thereby making your definition of dubious, dubious. In my case, I've spent time with a retired physician (Harvard, Yale Medical School) who was supposed to have died from his highly undifferentiated brain tumor in two months. My interviews with him were 33-35 years later. Be that as it may, my message this time isn't about what e disagree on. It's just a message of celebration, because like the effect of the Gutenberg press of 500+ years ago, the Internet today gives the patients and their families the opportunity to make their own informed choices. No longer does the medical profession industry hold all the cards. We can bypass you and we can decline the well practiced failures of the last 100 years. As someone who has been supporting alternative approaches for 30 years, I can tell you that the public's attitude has changed tremendously...in fact, it has changed tremendously from 10 years ago. More people still believe like you do at the moment, but every day your majority shrinks a little more. You can't stop the desire for the truth, even if you can hide it for a century. The fact is that after seeing parents, and brothers and sisters, and children suffer needlessly, most intelligent people start to question. The medical industry succeeded in quelling the questions for a long time. But the Internet has provided a venue for communication that will spell the demise of the medical industry. It's coming faster and faster every day. Your heyday has come and gone. Thank God for that. It would appear that you, Kelley, and I, who ever I am, are in complete agreement. Prior to the internet, the medical monopoly and the Morons reigned supreme. They controlled all the information from the Newspapers to the magazines, to the radio to the TV, to the medical journals ( they still do ) to whatever. Let us make the best use of the internet until the bastards gain control of this unrully child of free speech. DrCee You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons. On May 14, 8:49 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote: > It would appear that you, Kelley, and I, who ever I am, are in > complete agreement. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > Let us make the best use of the internet until the bastards gain > control of this unrully child of free speech. Hear! Hear! > DrCee > You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons. That's a great tag line! On May 14, 8:49 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote: > It would appear that you, Kelley, and I, who ever I am, are in > complete agreement. [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > DrCee > You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons. It's cute to see how we keep getting 1 star. Is there anything more childish than that? > On May 14, 8:49 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > It's cute to see how we keep getting 1 star. Is there anything more > childish than that? What is the value of manipulating the rating system for the pharma shills? The pharma shills always get 5 stars and anyone alternative automatically gets a 1 star rating. This just goes to show everyone just how despicable and loathsome the pharma shills are. DrCee You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons. On May 16, 12:13 am, Kelley Eidem <awthraw...@yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 14, 8:49 pm, drcee...@insightbb.com wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > It's cute to see how we keep getting 1 star. Is there anything more > childish than that? > What is the value of manipulating the rating system for the pharma > shills? > The pharma shills always get 5 stars and anyone alternative > automatically gets a 1 star rating. > This just goes to show everyone just how despicable and loathsome the > pharma shills are. > DrCee > You cannot secure nor restore health with pus or poisons. Or puerile bullshit, fortunately >> > And folks are starting to pass it along to their email buddies. By >> > Christmas of 2008, a million visits are possible. Or it could be ten [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > undifferentiated brain tumor in two months. My interviews with him > were 33-35 years later. So you have two cases some decades old, in whom we are denied any opportunity to recheck the diagnosis, or to find out all treatments that were used. They are being attributed to a method that remains compeltely implausible and unsupported by subsequent research, and that only you, ab unkowledge3able person both medically and physiologically, are championing.. I repeat -- the whole alternative cancer industry is sustained by a few dubious testimonials. > Be that as it may, my message this time isn't about what e disagree > on. It's just a message of celebration, because like the effect of the > Gutenberg press of 500+ years ago, the Internet today gives the > patients and their families the opportunity to make their own informed > choices. Yes, they can be informed thusly -- Cancer is a condition with clear-cut symptoms and physical manifestations. "Cure" means making it go away. Claiming to be able to cure cancer thus means being able to regularly produce cured patients i.e. cases where unmistakable, active, established cancer has been made to go away without help from any other treatments. Everyone should be in the face of cancer quacks demanding that they produce such cases. I know that they cannnot -- they try to sneak in cases that have to be given the benefit of the doubt, or that represent the short term endorsement of poor folk who have just been promised a medical miracle that will never come. . Their methods have no effect on patients with *established cancer*. PM > No longer does the medical profession industry hold all the cards. We > can bypass you and we can decline the well practiced failures of the [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > It's coming faster and faster every day. Your heyday has come and > gone. Thank God for that. > >> "Kelley Eidem" <awthraw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 81 lines] > > It's coming faster and faster every day. Your heyday has come and > > gone. Thank God for that. My book is full of cases...most remarkable cases indeed, yet they are only the tip of the iceberg of cases cured by Dr. Revici. As far as your examining them to provide the golden imprimatur, you've already PROVEN yourself to be unreliable and biased, just like Barrett was found to be biased in a court of law. Furthermore you admitted yourself that you would not even pick up the phone to find out how a lung cancer patient with mets had become cancer free. No one cares about your opinion....it's worthless when it comes to what is and is not a cure. >> >> "Kelley Eidem" <awthraw...@yahoo.com> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 100 lines] > cancer free. No one cares about your opinion....it's worthless when it > comes to what is and is not a cure. Yes, people are free to decide for themselves who they wish to believe. But if they choose to be influenced by sparse, low-quality, unverifiable testimonials, then there are plenty of crooks willing to supply them with fake cancer cures. I suppose even that is OK by me, so long as cancer patients are not induced to entrust their lives to them . Everyone interested in this area should at least learn the basics of assessing testimonial, so that they can at least eliminate some of the more obvious scam artists and deluded fools from the alternative cancer industry. See http://www.users.on.net/~pmoran/cancer/Brenneranecdote.htm , which actually looks at your favorite quack's best cases (Revici), and http://www.users.on.net/~pmoran/cancer/how_to_read_a_testimonial.htm PM www.cancerwatcher.com . PM "Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on.net> Nothing but Quack. > "Peter Moran" <pmoran@internode.on.net> > > Nothing but Quack. He isn't trying to make a dishonest buck off it, unlike the original poster. > > "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> > > > Nothing but Quack. > > He isn't trying to make a dishonest buck off it, > unlike the original poster. Did Mssr. Moran work for free all those years he was slicing into body parts and removing them?? What could be more dishonest than convincing patients that the answer to diseased organs is to remove them instead of heal them? Answer: Convincing patients that large doses of poison heals. You have to be healthy to get well. Removing organs and polluting the blood does not produce health even if it does produce income. >> > "Peter Moran" <pmo...@internode.on.net> >> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] >to be healthy to get well. Removing organs and polluting the blood >does not produce health even if it does produce income. This particular posting made me wonder if "DrCee" is a Kelley Eidem sock puppet. I've seen zillions of postings from Cee that read like the above, but not from Eidem. Identity confusion? -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan > In article <ccda2291-84b9-4875-9ce8-294fba2a2...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > sock puppet. I've seen zillions of postings from Cee that read like > the above, but not from Eidem. Identity confusion? Did it occur to you that he and I agree on this issue? > -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net > These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. > "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." > -- John Dolan There are two types of Democrats: those who vote for their welfare, and those who hate the US. >> In article <ccda2291-84b9-4875-9ce8-294fba2a2...@m3g2000hsc.googlegroups.com>, >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >Did it occur to you that he and I agree on this issue? That's not the point I was trying to make. I don't recall you blathering about this "polluting the blood" crapola in the past, but it's Cee's bread and butter. -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan > In article <ce1b523a-bc0b-453a-aa19-3ed2dcae8...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > blathering about this "polluting the blood" crapola in the past, but > it's Cee's bread and butter. So you think polluting the blood is okay? I've seen Cee's sig line, and thought it was a good one. This led me to think in that direction when replying above. It's not all that complicated. It was Shakespeare who said "There is nothing new under the sun," which applies here. > -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net > These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. > "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." > -- John Dolan The Democrats are the country club effete snobs who think they know what's best for everyone else, even if it doesn't apply to themselves. Good examples of this are the facts that the Kennedy clan and Hillary don't tip waitresses, cab drivers, massage therapists, etc. Cheap bastards. They love spending taxpayer money but they hate to do the right thing when it comes to tipping. >> In article <ce1b523a-bc0b-453a-aa19-3ed2dcae8...@25g2000hsx.googlegroups.com>, >> [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > >So you think polluting the blood is okay? I think it's a meaningless phrase, actually. >I've seen Cee's sig line, and thought it was a good one. This led me >to think in that direction when replying above. It's not all that >complicated. It was Shakespeare who said "There is nothing new under >the sun," which applies here. Actually, it's from Ecclesiastes. >> "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." >> -- John Dolan [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Good examples of this are the facts that the Kennedy clan and Hillary >don't tip waitresses, cab drivers, massage therapists, etc. A canard. Meanwhile, which type of Republican are you: a millionaire, or a sucker? -- David Wright :: alphabeta at copper.net These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct. "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." -- John Dolan > In article <979c40fb-0462-451e-a04b-1b2262945...@a70g2000hsh.googlegroups.com>, > [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > Actually, it's from Ecclesiastes. I've never read his stuff. ;-) > >> "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." > >> -- John Dolan [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > A canard. I speak from personal experience (massage therapist at the Watergate Hotel) and from talking to cab drivers. It ain't no canard. The entire Kennedy klan is well known for stiffing the working guy. They never tipped. Hillary has been reported on two separate occasions for stiffing waitresses. In one case, Hillary took the poor woman's story of working two to three jobs and made it part of her stump speech!...what gall, she stiffs the waitress after ordering two plates of food, and then she stiff the woman, and then she USES her story! There is are few things worse than a rich person who refuses to tip those who serve them, such as waitresses. > Meanwhile, which type of Republican are you: a millionaire, or a > sucker? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "There are two kinds of Republicans: millionaires and suckers." > -- John Dolan
|
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.