Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Cancer / December 2004
Cancer advice
|
|
Thread rating:  |
john - 20 Dec 2004 17:19 GMT Ruth Sackman, Foundation For Advancement in Cancer Therapies, PO Box 1242, Old Chelsea Station, New York, NY 10013. 212 741 2790 Free Advice www.fact-ltd.org
J - 20 Dec 2004 18:18 GMT > Ruth Sackman, Foundation For Advancement in Cancer Therapies, PO Box 1242, > Old Chelsea Station, New York, NY 10013. 212 741 2790 Free Advice > www.fact-ltd.org What ? she hasn't been arrested yet? J
john - 20 Dec 2004 20:02 GMT > What ? she hasn't been arrested yet? > J Saving lives for over 30 years, while you just push people towards the killer monopoly therapies--you need arresting, and given chemo & radiation.
This is one lecture she organised 30 years ago http://www.whale.to/cancer/k/lecture.html
Dr Kelley had one answer to cancer over 30 years ago http://www.whale.to/cancer/kelley.html
100% cure rate for pancreatic cancer, which your lot can't even touch. "First, the stricken cancer victim and their family members have been so deceived by the Establishment that they are completely brainwashed and put in overwhelming fear."----Dr Kelly DDS
J - 20 Dec 2004 20:18 GMT > 100% cure rate for pancreatic cancer, which your lot can't even touch. <http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct/gui/c/a1b/show/NCT00003851?order=1&JServSession Idzone_ct=3lf9lc3r71>J
Gemcitabine Compared With Pancreatic Enzyme Therapy Plus Specialized Diet (Gonzalez Regimen) in Treating Patients Who Have Stage II, Stage III, or Stage IV Pancreatic Cancer
This study is currently recruiting patients.
john - 20 Dec 2004 21:06 GMT > This study is currently recruiting patients. More guinea pigs for the slaughter
"We have a multi-billion dollar industry that is killing people, right and left, just for financial gain. Their idea of research is to see whether two doses of this poison is better than three doses of that poison."-Glen Warner, M.D. oncologist.
In this study (Gonzalez), a total of 22 Kelley pancreatic cancer patients properly diagnosed by the orthodox medical community were broken down into three groups based on their level of following Kelley's protocol. The median survival of the three groups is shown as:
Unit One: Ten patients never followed the protocol: average survival 67 days.
Unit Two: Seven patients followcd the protocol partially, avcragc 233 days survival.
Unit Three: The five patients which followed Kelley's protocol completely achieved an average of nine years survival.
In fact, all five were still alive at the time of the study except one patient who had died (of Alzheimer's) after 11.5 years.
One Answer To Cancer by William Kelley, D.D.S., M.S. www.drkelley.com http://www.whale.to/cancer/pancreas.html
High Dose Intravenous Vitamin C and Long Time Survival of a Patient With Cancer of Head of the Pancreas http://www.healthy.net/library/articles/jom/vita10-2.htm
http://www.mediafocus.com/cancer.htm
ESSIAC I have a site with a number of success stories of pancreatic cancer,even a doctor who had it in 1994, and recovered to return to work within6 months and has been disease free since.The web site is http://www.iinet.net.au/~essiac/can-t.htm
"Professor Friedrich Douwes reported over a dozen (pancreas cancer) cures with his biologic therapy, and enzymologist Karl Ransberger had reported on 38 cases of total remission (collected by no less official than Austrian minister of health) using his world renowned Wobe-Mugos enzyme."---Dr Atkins.
J - 20 Dec 2004 21:14 GMT > > This study is currently recruiting patients. > > More guinea pigs for the slaughter It's the same damned "cure" that you're pushing on your webpage. So now you admit that your altie stuff is for guinea pigs. J
HB Lites - 21 Dec 2004 00:57 GMT > Unit One: Ten patients never followed the protocol: average survival >67 days. [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >In fact, all five were still alive at the time of the study except one >patient who had died (of Alzheimer's) after 11.5 years. Oh, that's crap. IT"S NOT A CURE
It's just another therapy in clinical trial, and the early trial results seem comparable to other treatments for pancreatic cancer in clinical trial. In other words, like a lot of more conventional therapies, it can extend life but it IS NOT A CURE
Here's the results of the pilot study from Gonzalez's own freakin' website.
"As of 12 January 1999, of 11 patients entered into the study, 9 (81%) survived one year, 5 (45%) survived two years, and at this time, 4 have survived three years. Two patients are alive and doing well: one at three years and the other at four years."
Not bad for pancreatic cancer, but hardly 100% and I feel that this sort of early study tends to be biased towards survival through selective patient selection. I looked at Gonzales/Kelley briefly after Chris was diagnosed ( at the suggestion of my personal physician, who knew about the clinical trial). Other informal studies have been conducted since the pilot study and I think once I balanced all that I read I felt the median survival was probably about a year.
But the quality of life was the REAL issue, and 4 coffee enemas a day combined with a highly restrictive macrobiotic diet was a real deal-breaker and it just didn't seem worth it, because IT"S NOT A CURE.
john - 21 Dec 2004 16:50 GMT > other words, like a lot of more conventional therapies, it can extend life but > it IS NOT A CURE I admire your faith in trusting the medical industry and Gonzalez, I never felt I could trust him when Dr Kelley made this comment: "A Cornell medical student, Gonzalez, who had failed after the second year in medical school, was wandering in and out of the unorthodox medical community looking for help for his own mental instability and illness. During this fruitless search, Gonzalez stumbled onto the Kelley Program, which he mentioned to his psychiatrist"
When he then looked at the Kelley case histories he commented:
"I found these results, particularly for pancreatic, quite intriguing. His overall survival rate for all cancer in this first group is 93% - and I have found, going through Dr. Kelley's records, virtually all of his patients have advanced disease. Many have come to him because no further conventional treatment could be offered."
So he must be incompetent if he can't reproduce Dr Kelley's results.
And they have a history of fraud: "Two alleged trials took place under the direction of Dr. Charles Moertel at the Mayo Clinic. However as one might expect from a proven swindler operating at such a dishonoured location, these bore little resemblence to scientific methodology. Moertel cooked the first trial.by packing the trial with patients whose immune systems had already been destroyed by toxic chemotherapy. He then rigged the second trial by treating the patients with ascorbate for only two and a half months and then continuing with the "trial" for another 2 years. He then issued a perjured press statement in which he announced that vitamin C therapy had been proven ineffective, carefully concealing the fact that he had almost certainly caused the death of several patients by reason of this iniquitous fraud. The resulting carefully devised publicity on the subject also caused the deaths of several other patients who had been happily surviving on ascorbate."---Dr Richards & Frank Hourigan.
"This man (Moertel) of the Mayo Clinic, no less..had the effrontery to defend the employment of two toxic preparations, with no curative value, in cases of metastasised intestinal cancer lest they (the patients) otherwise seek it (hope) from the hands of quacks and charlatans. In other words Moertel urged the use of a hramful substance of no value.on patients who are, presumably, paying a fee for their therapy,.and are hoping for a cure,.just to keep some other therapist from trying to save them!...(you) can find a permanent record of the distinguished Dr. Moertel's recommendations in the New England Journal of Medicine, 1978."-Dr Richards & Frank Hourigan.
And Kelley is similar to Gerson, he was curing, according to Frank Hourigan who I have talked to--he did the research for Dr Richards:
"It is well established that a properly conducted Gerson therapy will rescue 50% of terminal patients. Gerson was curing 50% terminal cancers, and 100% stage 1 and 2 cancers."-- Frank Hourigan.
and a recent study found:
In an evaluation of five-year survival rates of 153 melanoma patients. Here, 100% of Gerson therapy patients with Stage 1 & 2 cancers survived, but only 79% survive had conventional therapy. With Stage 3 cancers (regional metastases), the figures respectively were 70% and 41%; with Stage 4a (distant metastases), 39% with Gerson and 6% with conventional therapy survived. How Scientific are Orthodox Cancer Treatments? by Walter Last
And it is well proven chemo doesn't touch most cancers, and seeing as Gerson said the main body condition that leads to cancer is a dodgy liver, I would have thought it unwise to give a toxic drug for the liver to deal with.
J - 23 Dec 2004 08:25 GMT > It's just another therapy in clinical trial, and the early trial results seem > comparable to other treatments for pancreatic cancer in clinical trial. In > other words, like a lot of more conventional therapies, it can extend life but > it IS NOT A CURE I rather doubt that it will even be proven to extend life, by any substantial amount. Apparently those in clinical trials often do a bit better. I forget why that is.
> Here's the results of the pilot study from Gonzalez's own freakin' website. > > "As of 12 January 1999, of 11 patients entered into the study, 9 (81%) survived > one year, 5 (45%) survived two years, and at this time, 4 have survived three > years. Two patients are alive and doing well: one at three years and the other > at four years." It would be important to know which type of pancreatic cancers each had, which were resected, and stage (where else it had spread or hadn't) or what other surgeries they'd had done. Long term survivors - 3 or 4 years are rarer. AFAIK J
HB Lites - 24 Dec 2004 13:41 GMT >> It's just another therapy in clinical trial, and the early trial results >seem [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >Apparently those in clinical trials often do a bit better. I forget why that >is. My theories ( at least with regard to pancreatic cancer
1. When interviewing people for these trials, doctors may (consciously or unconsciously) ecourage patients that they feel will do well and dissuade patients that they don't feel will do as well. I think this is especially true in the pilot studies where patients are hand-picked.
2. The average survival of those with untreated pancreatic cancer is 3-4 months. Most trials require that a patient have a Karnofsky performance status of at least 70% and many require an estimated life-span of at least 3 months at time of enrollment. It takes a certain amount of time to find and enroll in a trial. These automatically weeds out those patients at the lower end of the curve , as a fairly significant number of pc patients die a month or two after diagnosis. In other words, these trials are enrolling people that are *already* beating the odds.
3. Well-educated upper-middle class people are probably both more likely to get an earlier diagnosis and to find and enroll in clinical trials. This can skew survival rates significantly, as survival is measured from time of diagnosis. If you take two patients with hypothetically identical cancers, and one is diagnosed with Pancreatic stage 4B in March and the other, because of less access to good medical care isn't diagnosed with stage 4B until May, the first one will be considered to have survived 2 months longer than the second if they both die on the same day.
>> Here's the results of the pilot study from Gonzalez's own freakin' website. >> [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >other >> at four years." J, I really wish that when you quoted this from me, you would have also quoted the sentence below where I said I felt these results were biased and other studies on this were much less successful. For the record I think this "therapy" is bullshit and if there is any survival benefit it can be attributted to the fact that even God needs a laugh sometimes.
>It would be important to know which type of pancreatic cancers each had, >which were >resected, and stage (where else it had spread or hadn't) or what other >surgeries >they'd had done. Long term survivors - 3 or 4 years are rarer. Of course. With studies on this treatment I would also want to know about patients dropped for "non-complicance"....if you can be dropped when you get too sick to force a gallon of coffee up your a.s every day, the results would be virtually meaningless
Simm Webb - 21 Dec 2004 01:29 GMT >> What ? she hasn't been arrested yet? >> J > >Saving lives for over 30 years, while you just push people towards the >killer monopoly therapies--you need arresting, and given chemo & radiation. NAME SOME!!!!
Be truthful, don't give us a list of tombstones.
Grateful to be back.
Eddie MD OTF
john - 21 Dec 2004 16:54 GMT "Simm Webb" <edvanhuffeI@cox.net> wrote in message
> NAME SOME!!!! > > Be truthful, don't give us a list of tombstones. http://www.whale.to/cancer/k/Ch10.html
J - 21 Dec 2004 18:51 GMT > http://www.whale.to/cancer/k/Ch10.html Since cancer afflicts 25% or more of the earth's population and about a half of these die from it with present treatment methods, it is of intense interest to all to know whether "alternative" treatments work for cancer. Not only that, but their promorters are often charging huge sums of money for their treatments.
It is no longer good enough to have them promoted with misleading testimonials like most of these. Neither of two primary breast cancer patients had biopsies, and when it is known how common benign breast lumps
and cysts are, and how common it is for them to come and go of their own accord, such testimonials are useless. Of course a dentist would not know this, and would be quite happy to go on believing he has cured yet another cancer.
Other patients received conventional treatment such as chemotherapy and radiotherapy which could have explained benefits.
Kelley's own testimonial is an example of a general standard. It contains a number of ridiculous statements about cancer (e.g. that it commonly causes herniae), he also had no biopsies, and his symptoms could well have been explained by the severe depression he had at the time.
Peter Moran
J - 21 Dec 2004 19:23 GMT > http://www.whale.to/cancer/k/Ch10.html Winner of the Internet's Misinformation site of the year.
john - 21 Dec 2004 21:42 GMT > > http://www.whale.to/cancer/k/Ch10.html > > Winner of the Internet's Misinformation site of the year. So Peter Moron is J. Who pays your wages?
J - 21 Dec 2004 22:42 GMT > > > http://www.whale.to/cancer/k/Ch10.html > > > > Winner of the Internet's Misinformation site of the year. > > So Peter Moron is J. Who pays your wages? I'm no more Peter Moran than you are Ralph Moss. You quote him. I quote Peter. Answer # 2 - nobody on your "grudge list", so MYOB J
J - 21 Dec 2004 18:34 GMT > NAME SOME!!!! > > Be truthful, don't give us a list of tombstones. Why would you ask him anything Eddie? What got rid of your cancer? J
Simm Webb - 22 Dec 2004 01:45 GMT It sure wasn't any of his crap.
>> NAME SOME!!!! >> [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >What got rid of your cancer? >J Grateful to be back.
Eddie MD OTF
J - 23 Dec 2004 08:14 GMT > It sure wasn't any of his crap. Thanks Eddie. That's good to read. J
J - 20 Dec 2004 20:14 GMT > Ruth Sackman, Foundation For Advancement in Cancer Therapies, PO Box 1242, > Old Chelsea Station, New York, NY 10013. 212 741 2790 Free Advice > www.fact-ltd.org Bring Richard Mott and Louise Greenfield here (testimonials on that website). Let's see if they're still alive. I challenge you to bring them here with their scans, biopsy reports and medical records. J
john - 20 Dec 2004 21:03 GMT > Bring Richard Mott and Louise Greenfield here (testimonials on that website). > Let's see if they're still alive. I challenge you to bring them here with their > scans, biopsy reports and medical records. > J I don't work for them, or live in USA, so get off your fat arse and ask them yourself.
Here are some Kelley testimonials to go with those http://www.whale.to/cancer/k/Ch10.html
J - 20 Dec 2004 21:13 GMT > Here are some Kelley testimonials to go with those testimonials are useless... J
J - 23 Dec 2004 00:23 GMT If anyone else wants to try reporting him....
To: <abuse@btopenworld.com>
BT Yahoo you have a dial-up subscriber that posts links to his web site whale.to in violation of alt.support.cancer Charter and Usenet AUP. John does not have cancer. John does flood the newsgroup with his posts, nearly all of them have nothing to do with cancer support. Many are outside of the topic for the newsgroup.
Please enforce your Usenet AUP.
-------- Original Message -------- Path: internal1.nntp.dca.giganews.com!border2.nntp.dca.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!elnk-atl-nf1!newsfeed.earthlink.net!newshosting.com!nx01.iad01.newshosting.com!news-peer0-test!btnet-feed5!btnet!news.btopenworld.com!not-for-mail
From: "john" <nospamoridiots@vaccine.com> Newsgroups: alt.support.cancer Subject: Cancer advice Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:19:20 +0000 (UTC) Organization: BT Openworld Lines: 5 Message-ID: <cq71io$6f7$1@titan.btinternet.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: host213-122-120-9.in-addr.btopenworld.com X-Trace: titan.btinternet.com 1103563160 6631 213.122.120.9 (20 Dec 2004 17:19:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: news-complaints@lists.btinternet.com NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:19:20 +0000 (UTC) X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1409 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1409 Xref: number1.nntp.dca.giganews.com alt.support.cancer:100527
Ruth Sackman, Foundation For Advancement in Cancer Therapies, PO Box 1242, Old Chelsea Station, New York, NY 10013. 212 741 2790 Free Advice www.fact-ltd.org
|
|
|