Re: 3+4, Response to Joe, Bard

[Guest guest]

I wish you only the best Bill. It's good that they have a penile rehab program.

My surgical uro was good at cutting but not good at working with ED for his

patients. I went to another doc who is head of urology at the medical school in

my city and he was even worse! I finally found my current uro who works with me

more aggressively and has restored my intimate life.

Now I am stubborn and will ask questions and explore until I get an answer but I

feel for most guys who might accept the advice of docs like the other two I

visited.

>

> Subject: Re: Digest Number 3262

> I'm happy again to have received so much response to my post.

> Joe I have according to my surgeon and Dr. Bard, a diffuse cancer. Bard

> has had much success with his supplements even with those with metastatic

> cancer and he emphasizes that only 3% die from the Cancer. Actually when he

> told me this, I corrected him that this statistic would not apply to someone

> my age with so many cores cancerous. Dr. Bard seems to believe the majority

> of people can continue to go with Gleason 6 but they do need treatment and

> surveillance.

> He has seen 6 become a more aggressive cancer. The reasons for the change

> are not clear or proven. His supplements do contain the ingredients most

> often found for prostate health and he is very vocal about the quality of

> the herbs and their preparation. It is my call that I don't want to risk

> continuing with Bard. The 4D doppler can see growths but apparently can't

> see the discolored tissue that can be seen possibly in an MRI. MRIs can

> have a very high error ratio. This is what I understand.

> Joe - you have cancer on one side of your prostate. The 60% would be

> troublesome to most doctors. So would the gleason 3+4. It seems that you

> could get a second look at your slides and maybe if you are in the NY area

> , a visit to Bard and a scan would be helpful though without GHI or medicaid

> the cost is 950.00

> Unfortunately I spent quite a bit of time solving my insurance problem

> in order to get better treatment that I feel I don't have the time to do

> more Active Surveillance. I have scheduled my open surgery for the end of

> next month. My preference would have been through alternative means but all

> indicators I can find moved me toward surgery. My doctor Eastham also

> extremely experienced in Robotic made an excellent case for open surgery. A

> previous urologist was more conservative also discussed with me the cons of

> Robotic.* If anyone has experiences with Eastham, please let me know about

> it*. I knew and Dr. Eastham started his consultation with me saying that

> I will not be the same after surgery and explained the complications of ED.

> They apparently have a penile rehab program there at Sloan you can sign up

> for before your operation!

> Might I also add that a lot of interesting information can be found at

> the group natural prostate treatments run by Duane Christenson. These

> folks have been at it for a long time and there is a lot of stuff to

> research indicated by the members of this site. If you are opting for

> watchful waiting or doing an aggressive treatment, the game is never over.

> I know for the rest of my life that I will continue refining my diet,

> practicing yoga, getting back into meditation hopefully, investigating the

> emotional causes of illness and playing a lot of Music!

> If you want some book recommendations and diet protocols that Ive been

> looking at, just ask. Have to go

> Have a great day

> Bill

>

[Guest guest]

Hi Bill,

I am also appreciative of the responses I received and the responses you did.

Enormously helpful and balanced.

I agree that the volume and grade of my cancer would be troublesome to most

doctors, although my gp, who is a very conservative guy, has supported me in my

direction-- a shock! I think I am being appropriately cautious without

panicking. I am in the process of getting a second opinion and for those who

are also going through this, if you're interested in Dr Epstein at s Hopkins

go to www.pathology.jhu.edu, click the patient tab and then the second opinion

tab.

I also agree that the vigilance is probably never over, regardless of treatment,

and that for me it's also worthwhile to continue diet and lifestyle changes

regardless of what treatments I undergo. It's interesting that in one study a

certain proportion of men who were given the option of making intensive changes

to diet, were unwilling to do so. And, now that I've started that route, I can

see why. It's a major commitment and tough to follow. More than once I've told

myself, " cut this diet krap and just get it out! " .

Yes, I would appreciate any info on books and articles you've found useful. Once

I've collected some info i can do same.

Finally, best of luck and skill with the surgery. Interesting comments on open

vs robotic. Would be great to hear how you're doing.

Joe

>

> Subject: Re: Digest Number 3262

> I'm happy again to have received so much response to my post.

> Joe I have according to my surgeon and Dr. Bard, a diffuse cancer. Bard

> has had much success with his supplements even with those with metastatic

> cancer and he emphasizes that only 3% die from the Cancer. Actually when he

> told me this, I corrected him that this statistic would not apply to someone

> my age with so many cores cancerous. Dr. Bard seems to believe the majority

> of people can continue to go with Gleason 6 but they do need treatment and

> surveillance.

> He has seen 6 become a more aggressive cancer. The reasons for the change

> are not clear or proven. His supplements do contain the ingredients most

> often found for prostate health and he is very vocal about the quality of

> the herbs and their preparation. It is my call that I don't want to risk

> continuing with Bard. The 4D doppler can see growths but apparently can't

> see the discolored tissue that can be seen possibly in an MRI. MRIs can

> have a very high error ratio. This is what I understand.

> Joe - you have cancer on one side of your prostate. The 60% would be

> troublesome to most doctors. So would the gleason 3+4. It seems that you

> could get a second look at your slides and maybe if you are in the NY area

> , a visit to Bard and a scan would be helpful though without GHI or medicaid

> the cost is 950.00

> Unfortunately I spent quite a bit of time solving my insurance problem

> in order to get better treatment that I feel I don't have the time to do

> more Active Surveillance. I have scheduled my open surgery for the end of

> next month. My preference would have been through alternative means but all

> indicators I can find moved me toward surgery. My doctor Eastham also

> extremely experienced in Robotic made an excellent case for open surgery. A

> previous urologist was more conservative also discussed with me the cons of

> Robotic.* If anyone has experiences with Eastham, please let me know about

> it*. I knew and Dr. Eastham started his consultation with me saying that

> I will not be the same after surgery and explained the complications of ED.

> They apparently have a penile rehab program there at Sloan you can sign up

> for before your operation!

> Might I also add that a lot of interesting information can be found at

> the group natural prostate treatments run by Duane Christenson. These

> folks have been at it for a long time and there is a lot of stuff to

> research indicated by the members of this site. If you are opting for

> watchful waiting or doing an aggressive treatment, the game is never over.

> I know for the rest of my life that I will continue refining my diet,

> practicing yoga, getting back into meditation hopefully, investigating the

> emotional causes of illness and playing a lot of Music!

> If you want some book recommendations and diet protocols that Ive been

> looking at, just ask. Have to go

> Have a great day

> Bill

>

[Guest guest]

Hey Joe

I found that I learned a lot from reading Cousins on diet

even though he is very radical, a raw foodist and very well can turn you off

with his seemingly new agey posture. He is an MD with experience in many

hospitals and extensive training in India. Now

he's a Rabbi too. Just one of those guys who keeps going. " Rainbow Green

Live-Food Cuisine " is worth a careful read. It is half his outlook on food half

recipes. It contains why raw food leads to optimum health and explanation of his

Phase 1 diet for people with disease than his Phase 1.5, and phase 2. Check it

out. I've done many of the recipes and bought a dehydrator but here in the city

I can't make the transition to all living foods but am working on it gradually.

I'm still not certain that I agree that all cooked food is acidifying or

difficult for the body. There are many contrary points of view. There is no

question to me that having a high percentage of living foods gives me a lot of

energy and I'm much lighter feeling(also lost 18-20 lbs in the first 2 months)

The important aspects are low sugar foods, no meat/milk products and lots of

greens.

It's work! His beliefs are really interesting and represent a line of thinking

about holistic health that goes back to Antoine Bechamp.

Other recipe books I have on living foods are " Raw " the uncookbook by n and

" Living Cuisine " by Loux Underkoffler.

Dr Dean Ornish is more commercial but is a worthwhile read especially his more

recent book " The Spectrum " . He talks about his prostate cancer study in this

book.

There is the book " Anti-Cancer " by servan-schreiber

There is Life over Cancer by Dr. Block

On another tack is the book " When the body says No " by Gabor Mate

This explores anxiety and it's relationship to disease.

I also recommend reading " Decoding Prostate Cancer " by Dr. Bard

I wish I would have started earlier and had more support. It's tough to do the

active surveillance. I believe every angle needs to be explored:

Diet-Emotional-spiritual-environment. It really makes a positive difference in

your life but your cancer can keep growing.

Go to that group I last mentioned in my previous post and question all those

dudes over there too. I got into the diet thing because a close friend got

pancreatic cancer and died. I learned about diet through Dr. Kelley and Dr.

two alternative cancer fighters but didn't put much in practice except

organic and juicing. I was still eating white meat and all dairy products,

cooking rich foods etc. I learned better but stayed with my habits. I regret

that now but at the same rate diet is a big factor but only one. My family has

the predisposition. My people have the disposition. There is a relationship to

stress and anxiety, I'm pretty sure for me. It's an ongoing odyssey to

understand, and learn how to heal yourself and live better than you did. I

don't regret my life at all before my high PSA test but there are things I could

have been more on top of in terms of overall health (physical/mental.

Keep in touch

> >

> > Subject: Re: Digest Number 3262

> > I'm happy again to have received so much response to my post.

> > Joe I have according to my surgeon and Dr. Bard, a diffuse cancer. Bard

> > has had much success with his supplements even with those with metastatic

> > cancer and he emphasizes that only 3% die from the Cancer. Actually when he

> > told me this, I corrected him that this statistic would not apply to someone

> > my age with so many cores cancerous. Dr. Bard seems to believe the majority

> > of people can continue to go with Gleason 6 but they do need treatment and

> > surveillance.

> > He has seen 6 become a more aggressive cancer. The reasons for the change

> > are not clear or proven. His supplements do contain the ingredients most

> > often found for prostate health and he is very vocal about the quality of

> > the herbs and their preparation. It is my call that I don't want to risk

> > continuing with Bard. The 4D doppler can see growths but apparently can't

> > see the discolored tissue that can be seen possibly in an MRI. MRIs can

> > have a very high error ratio. This is what I understand.

> > Joe - you have cancer on one side of your prostate. The 60% would be

> > troublesome to most doctors. So would the gleason 3+4. It seems that you

> > could get a second look at your slides and maybe if you are in the NY area

> > , a visit to Bard and a scan would be helpful though without GHI or medicaid

> > the cost is 950.00

> > Unfortunately I spent quite a bit of time solving my insurance problem

> > in order to get better treatment that I feel I don't have the time to do

> > more Active Surveillance. I have scheduled my open surgery for the end of

> > next month. My preference would have been through alternative means but all

> > indicators I can find moved me toward surgery. My doctor Eastham also

> > extremely experienced in Robotic made an excellent case for open surgery. A

> > previous urologist was more conservative also discussed with me the cons of

> > Robotic.* If anyone has experiences with Eastham, please let me know about

> > it*. I knew and Dr. Eastham started his consultation with me saying that

> > I will not be the same after surgery and explained the complications of ED.

> > They apparently have a penile rehab program there at Sloan you can sign up

> > for before your operation!

> > Might I also add that a lot of interesting information can be found at

> > the group natural prostate treatments run by Duane Christenson. These

> > folks have been at it for a long time and there is a lot of stuff to

> > research indicated by the members of this site. If you are opting for

> > watchful waiting or doing an aggressive treatment, the game is never over.

> > I know for the rest of my life that I will continue refining my diet,

> > practicing yoga, getting back into meditation hopefully, investigating the

> > emotional causes of illness and playing a lot of Music!

> > If you want some book recommendations and diet protocols that Ive been

> > looking at, just ask. Have to go

> > Have a great day

> > Bill

> >

>

[Guest guest]

tadikinathom wrote:

....

> reading Cousins on diet ...

> ... I'm still not certain that I agree that all cooked food is

> acidifying or difficult for the body. There are many contrary

> points of view. ...

Yes indeed.

To the best of my knowledge, it is not possible to change the

pH of the blood - which in turn is the " bath " that affects all

cells. The acid/base balance is homeostatically regulated by the

body to stay in a very narrow range, 7.35 to 7.45. If it got out

of that range you'd get very sick, very fast, and if it got more

than a little out, you'd die. But it can't get out of that range

unless your biological systems aren't working - no matter what

you eat.

I'm not an expert, but I would think that trying to regulate your

pH by diet would be like trying to regulate your temperature by

drinking hot coffee, or iced water. Whichever you drink, a

thermometer stuck in your ear is likely to read the same 98.6, or

whatever your normal temperature is.

The stomach is loaded with extremely powerful acids like

hydrochloric acid with a pH very near 1.0. Stomach acid is very

important in breaking down food and in killing any bacteria in

food. No acid or base making it into the stomach is going to

keep its pH. It's going to be overwhelmed by stomach acid.

If you ate foods that neutralized stomach acid, excess acid might

be neutralized, but if you neutralized it much outside it's

normal range, I think the stomach would either produce more acid,

or else it would stop functioning properly in digestion. Putting

basic foods into the stomach to neutralize blood pH would be like

putting ice cubes into boiling water with a fire under the pot.

The boiling might stop for a short time, but it's going to resume

very quickly and the ice will quickly disappear.

If the stomach at pH 1.0 doesn't change the blood from being

7.40, how could putting some pH 6 or 8 foods into the stomach

change the blood pH?

If you search for alkalizing or acidifying food on the net,

you'll find huge numbers of websites giving advice about this.

But then you can also find huge numbers of websites giving advice

about flying saucers.

There's a brief discussion of this on Quackwatch. See:

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/coral2.html

Alan

[Guest guest]

tadikinathom wrote:

....

> reading Cousins on diet ...

> ... I'm still not certain that I agree that all cooked food is

> acidifying or difficult for the body. There are many contrary

> points of view. ...

Yes indeed.

To the best of my knowledge, it is not possible to change the

pH of the blood - which in turn is the " bath " that affects all

cells. The acid/base balance is homeostatically regulated by the

body to stay in a very narrow range, 7.35 to 7.45. If it got out

of that range you'd get very sick, very fast, and if it got more

than a little out, you'd die. But it can't get out of that range

unless your biological systems aren't working - no matter what

you eat.

I'm not an expert, but I would think that trying to regulate your

pH by diet would be like trying to regulate your temperature by

drinking hot coffee, or iced water. Whichever you drink, a

thermometer stuck in your ear is likely to read the same 98.6, or

whatever your normal temperature is.

The stomach is loaded with extremely powerful acids like

hydrochloric acid with a pH very near 1.0. Stomach acid is very

important in breaking down food and in killing any bacteria in

food. No acid or base making it into the stomach is going to

keep its pH. It's going to be overwhelmed by stomach acid.

If you ate foods that neutralized stomach acid, excess acid might

be neutralized, but if you neutralized it much outside it's

normal range, I think the stomach would either produce more acid,

or else it would stop functioning properly in digestion. Putting

basic foods into the stomach to neutralize blood pH would be like

putting ice cubes into boiling water with a fire under the pot.

The boiling might stop for a short time, but it's going to resume

very quickly and the ice will quickly disappear.

If the stomach at pH 1.0 doesn't change the blood from being

7.40, how could putting some pH 6 or 8 foods into the stomach

change the blood pH?

If you search for alkalizing or acidifying food on the net,

you'll find huge numbers of websites giving advice about this.

But then you can also find huge numbers of websites giving advice

about flying saucers.

There's a brief discussion of this on Quackwatch. See:

http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/coral2.html

Alan

[Guest guest]

It's quite a bit more complex than the guy on Quackwatch will tell you. No doubt

I have my doubts about PHwater and a lot of the crock out there but when you

really explore scientists like Bechamp, Bernard and Otto Warburg(nobel prize

for connection of sugar to cancer in 1931 I believe) there is a whole lot of

thinking that the mainstream left aside. Quackwatch is run by the AMA it's been

said. I 've read it's pages and it's good to check the site out but can only be

one viewpoint, one contrary to anything different than the status quo at that.

In my opinion it should never stop your thinking or reading to find out more

about health and disease.

Everywhere they say that lemons are an alkalizing foods but we know lemons are

acidic so there is a lot more than if a food is acid or not. The important

thing to many naturopaths and homeopaths what is the situation in the body. What

kind of environment being created internally that might allow scavengers,

pathogens to proliferate. Pasteur and the line of allopathic doctors focused

on the microbe. The alternative doctor tries to stimulate our natural immune

defenses and optimize our health to combat opportunists. Look at Chinese

medicine and the use of acupuncture and herbs to stimulate chi - another

perspective. I don't believe I'm knowledgeable enough to fight my own cancer

without mainstream medicine. I wish I had the courage or did more research to

not have arrived at the point that I need an operation but I wouldn't for a

second stop trying to optimize my health using my own resources to inquire and

gain more knowledge. My fear about Quackwatch is that instead of stimulating

thinking and research it is a quickfix to stop thinking and further exploration

of health.

Someone else wrote recently that " If there was a way to cure this illness,

wouldn't they already be doing it with us? " This logic is proven to be flawed.

Look how much vegetarian diet is still attacked by the mainstream. Look how

much Dr. Atkins was glorified for how many years when there was plenty of

evidence that what he recommended in the long term could kill you. The food and

pharmaceutical industries are huge business. I don't know need to repeat this.

Even the Chief of Urology at Sloan Kettering made a case to be wary of Robotic

Surgery saying his hospital paid I don't remember how many millions for the

DaVinci machine and have a 300,000 dollar maintenance contract on it. The

hospital has to encourage its use even though in his estimation it isn't better

than open in many situations. You can see this forum on the MSK website. There

is a video with the head of Radiology, Oncology and Urology all discussing

Prostate Cancer and comparing their methodologies

> ...

> > reading Cousins on diet ...

>

> > ... I'm still not certain that I agree that all cooked food is

> > acidifying or difficult for the body. There are many contrary

> > points of view. ...

>

> Yes indeed.

>

> To the best of my knowledge, it is not possible to change the

> pH of the blood - which in turn is the " bath " that affects all

> cells. The acid/base balance is homeostatically regulated by the

> body to stay in a very narrow range, 7.35 to 7.45. If it got out

> of that range you'd get very sick, very fast, and if it got more

> than a little out, you'd die. But it can't get out of that range

> unless your biological systems aren't working - no matter what

> you eat.

>

> I'm not an expert, but I would think that trying to regulate your

> pH by diet would be like trying to regulate your temperature by

> drinking hot coffee, or iced water. Whichever you drink, a

> thermometer stuck in your ear is likely to read the same 98.6, or

> whatever your normal temperature is.

>

> The stomach is loaded with extremely powerful acids like

> hydrochloric acid with a pH very near 1.0. Stomach acid is very

> important in breaking down food and in killing any bacteria in

> food. No acid or base making it into the stomach is going to

> keep its pH. It's going to be overwhelmed by stomach acid.

>

> If you ate foods that neutralized stomach acid, excess acid might

> be neutralized, but if you neutralized it much outside it's

> normal range, I think the stomach would either produce more acid,

> or else it would stop functioning properly in digestion. Putting

> basic foods into the stomach to neutralize blood pH would be like

> putting ice cubes into boiling water with a fire under the pot.

> The boiling might stop for a short time, but it's going to resume

> very quickly and the ice will quickly disappear.

>

> If the stomach at pH 1.0 doesn't change the blood from being

> 7.40, how could putting some pH 6 or 8 foods into the stomach

> change the blood pH?

>

> If you search for alkalizing or acidifying food on the net,

> you'll find huge numbers of websites giving advice about this.

> But then you can also find huge numbers of websites giving advice

> about flying saucers.

>

> There's a brief discussion of this on Quackwatch. See:

> http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/coral2.html

>

> Alan

>

[Guest guest]

It's quite a bit more complex than the guy on Quackwatch will tell you. No doubt

I have my doubts about PHwater and a lot of the crock out there but when you

really explore scientists like Bechamp, Bernard and Otto Warburg(nobel prize

for connection of sugar to cancer in 1931 I believe) there is a whole lot of

thinking that the mainstream left aside. Quackwatch is run by the AMA it's been

said. I 've read it's pages and it's good to check the site out but can only be

one viewpoint, one contrary to anything different than the status quo at that.

In my opinion it should never stop your thinking or reading to find out more

about health and disease.

Everywhere they say that lemons are an alkalizing foods but we know lemons are

acidic so there is a lot more than if a food is acid or not. The important

thing to many naturopaths and homeopaths what is the situation in the body. What

kind of environment being created internally that might allow scavengers,

pathogens to proliferate. Pasteur and the line of allopathic doctors focused

on the microbe. The alternative doctor tries to stimulate our natural immune

defenses and optimize our health to combat opportunists. Look at Chinese

medicine and the use of acupuncture and herbs to stimulate chi - another

perspective. I don't believe I'm knowledgeable enough to fight my own cancer

without mainstream medicine. I wish I had the courage or did more research to

not have arrived at the point that I need an operation but I wouldn't for a

second stop trying to optimize my health using my own resources to inquire and

gain more knowledge. My fear about Quackwatch is that instead of stimulating

thinking and research it is a quickfix to stop thinking and further exploration

of health.

Someone else wrote recently that " If there was a way to cure this illness,

wouldn't they already be doing it with us? " This logic is proven to be flawed.

Look how much vegetarian diet is still attacked by the mainstream. Look how

much Dr. Atkins was glorified for how many years when there was plenty of

evidence that what he recommended in the long term could kill you. The food and

pharmaceutical industries are huge business. I don't know need to repeat this.

Even the Chief of Urology at Sloan Kettering made a case to be wary of Robotic

Surgery saying his hospital paid I don't remember how many millions for the

DaVinci machine and have a 300,000 dollar maintenance contract on it. The

hospital has to encourage its use even though in his estimation it isn't better

than open in many situations. You can see this forum on the MSK website. There

is a video with the head of Radiology, Oncology and Urology all discussing

Prostate Cancer and comparing their methodologies

> ...

> > reading Cousins on diet ...

>

> > ... I'm still not certain that I agree that all cooked food is

> > acidifying or difficult for the body. There are many contrary

> > points of view. ...

>

> Yes indeed.

>

> To the best of my knowledge, it is not possible to change the

> pH of the blood - which in turn is the " bath " that affects all

> cells. The acid/base balance is homeostatically regulated by the

> body to stay in a very narrow range, 7.35 to 7.45. If it got out

> of that range you'd get very sick, very fast, and if it got more

> than a little out, you'd die. But it can't get out of that range

> unless your biological systems aren't working - no matter what

> you eat.

>

> I'm not an expert, but I would think that trying to regulate your

> pH by diet would be like trying to regulate your temperature by

> drinking hot coffee, or iced water. Whichever you drink, a

> thermometer stuck in your ear is likely to read the same 98.6, or

> whatever your normal temperature is.

>

> The stomach is loaded with extremely powerful acids like

> hydrochloric acid with a pH very near 1.0. Stomach acid is very

> important in breaking down food and in killing any bacteria in

> food. No acid or base making it into the stomach is going to

> keep its pH. It's going to be overwhelmed by stomach acid.

>

> If you ate foods that neutralized stomach acid, excess acid might

> be neutralized, but if you neutralized it much outside it's

> normal range, I think the stomach would either produce more acid,

> or else it would stop functioning properly in digestion. Putting

> basic foods into the stomach to neutralize blood pH would be like

> putting ice cubes into boiling water with a fire under the pot.

> The boiling might stop for a short time, but it's going to resume

> very quickly and the ice will quickly disappear.

>

> If the stomach at pH 1.0 doesn't change the blood from being

> 7.40, how could putting some pH 6 or 8 foods into the stomach

> change the blood pH?

>

> If you search for alkalizing or acidifying food on the net,

> you'll find huge numbers of websites giving advice about this.

> But then you can also find huge numbers of websites giving advice

> about flying saucers.

>

> There's a brief discussion of this on Quackwatch. See:

> http://www.quackwatch.com/01QuackeryRelatedTopics/DSH/coral2.html

>

> Alan

>

[Guest guest]

tadikinathom wrote:

....

> Someone else wrote recently that " If there was a way to cure

> this illness, wouldn't they already be doing it with us? " This

> logic is proven to be flawed. Look how much vegetarian diet is

> still attacked by the mainstream. Look how much Dr. Atkins

> was glorified for how many years when there was plenty of

> evidence that what he recommended in the long term could kill

> you. The food and pharmaceutical industries are huge business.

> I don't know need to repeat this. Even the Chief of Urology at

> Sloan Kettering made a case to be wary of Robotic Surgery

> saying his hospital paid I don't remember how many millions for

> the DaVinci machine and have a 300,000 dollar maintenance

> contract on it. The hospital has to encourage its use even

> though in his estimation it isn't better than open in many

> situations.

....

You make some good points and I agree with them.

One of things that we also need to keep in mind is that the

" alternative medicine " industry is also a huge business. It's

not as big as the licensed and FDA approved treatment and drug

business, but it's still huge. It still provides huge financial

incentives to people who can win adherents to their treatments,

whether or not they're good for patients. And the treatments

don't have to be vetted in clinical trials.

Anyone who is skeptical about conflicts of interests between

medical professionals and patients should be _at least_ as

skeptical about conflicts of interest between the alternative

practitioners, writers, and supplement makers and their clients.

Also, we should bear in mind that the guy with the " M.D. " after

his name is at least known to have had four years of college,

four years of medical school, and two or three years of

supervised internship and residency. That doesn't always

guarantee anything, but the alternative guys often have no

training at all. Some have never taken a chemistry or biology

course, wouldn't know the difference between a cancer cell and an

oak tree cell under the microscope, can't explain the changes in

cells that make a cell cancerous, and don't have any idea how

chemotherapy or radiation works, yet they advertise themselves as

people who can cure cancer.

Buyers Beware!

Alan

[Guest guest]

tadikinathom wrote:

....

> Someone else wrote recently that " If there was a way to cure

> this illness, wouldn't they already be doing it with us? " This

> logic is proven to be flawed. Look how much vegetarian diet is

> still attacked by the mainstream. Look how much Dr. Atkins

> was glorified for how many years when there was plenty of

> evidence that what he recommended in the long term could kill

> you. The food and pharmaceutical industries are huge business.

> I don't know need to repeat this. Even the Chief of Urology at

> Sloan Kettering made a case to be wary of Robotic Surgery

> saying his hospital paid I don't remember how many millions for

> the DaVinci machine and have a 300,000 dollar maintenance

> contract on it. The hospital has to encourage its use even

> though in his estimation it isn't better than open in many

> situations.

....

You make some good points and I agree with them.

One of things that we also need to keep in mind is that the

" alternative medicine " industry is also a huge business. It's

not as big as the licensed and FDA approved treatment and drug

business, but it's still huge. It still provides huge financial

incentives to people who can win adherents to their treatments,

whether or not they're good for patients. And the treatments

don't have to be vetted in clinical trials.

Anyone who is skeptical about conflicts of interests between

medical professionals and patients should be _at least_ as

skeptical about conflicts of interest between the alternative

practitioners, writers, and supplement makers and their clients.

Also, we should bear in mind that the guy with the " M.D. " after

his name is at least known to have had four years of college,

four years of medical school, and two or three years of

supervised internship and residency. That doesn't always

guarantee anything, but the alternative guys often have no

training at all. Some have never taken a chemistry or biology

course, wouldn't know the difference between a cancer cell and an

oak tree cell under the microscope, can't explain the changes in

cells that make a cell cancerous, and don't have any idea how

chemotherapy or radiation works, yet they advertise themselves as

people who can cure cancer.

Buyers Beware!

Alan