Guest guest Posted March 22, 2011 Report Share Posted March 22, 2011 To , It's been almost 10 years since you wrote the post below. It would be interesting to know if you continue to hold the same " opinion " , i.e. " the general consensus is that this particular strategy is too problematic " and " none of Manju Ray's results are that impressive. She is a very bright lady and she is doing important research, but it is very premature to get enthusiastic about something that has been so well researched and has performed so poorly " . Can you refer me to other articles that can disprove the above? So far, I've only managed to go through this and related reviews in PubMed: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18533369 Thanks in advance, Steffi List, none of Manju Ray's results are that impressive. She is a very bright lady and she is doing important research, but it is very premature to get enthusiastic about something that has been so well researched and has performed so poorly. V Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 wrote: " One should never take one's eye off the ball - and that ball is verifiable and repeatable clinical results. " > , the only problem with that is all verifiable and repeatable clinical results are from million-dollar drug programs. They're based not only on if they work or not or if they cure but on how much money that drug will make and keep making. Around 1935 synthetic drugs come on the market. before that doctors used mostly herbs to treat there patients and they had great success with them. then someone thought why not get the the active ingrediant out of the herb and use it. I know I have posted about this before but it's still true. I was reading an article about a Synthetic compound that may lead to drugs to fight cancers like pancreatic and lung cancer. I also read that in the EU has past a law that come in to effect in April this year 2011 that said that all herbs have to go through the same testing as Synthetic drugs before they can be used on patients. but I remember seeing a program on TV a few day ago. It was on what would happen once the worlds oil supply runs out.It said the modern world may crumble, but it also said the ability to create lifesaving drugs will be eliminated because most of these drugs in some way come from crude oil and without crude oil, there will be no synthetic compound to create these drugs. So by the time the oil runs out, the only thing we will have left to fight the disease that will plague our grand children will be herbs and yet the world governments are trying to pass laws making it almost impossible to use them. Yet doctors have used herbs to treat patients for thousands of years. To a lot a people it's unbelievable that when the oil runs out, herbs will be all we will have left to treat disease. without herbs our children and possibly our great grand children will die from common illnesses that were once easily treatable. We should not be trying to ban herbs but learning better ways to use them to treat disease so when the time comes we be ready Ray ________________________________ From: Gammill <vgammill> Sent: Thu, 24 March, 2011 Ray, There are hundreds of theories as to the cause(s) of cancer. Almost all have a grain of truth to them. Almost all these theories have many weaknesses. Theories will misdirect your decision-making machinery. One should never take one's eye off the ball - and that ball is verifiable and repeatable clinical results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 24, 2011 Report Share Posted March 24, 2011 That is absolutely making sense! Thank you Yun Shi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 25, 2011 Report Share Posted March 25, 2011 , Thank you for your comprehensive response. Have you also seen cancer return as quickly in your patients who discontinued methylglyoxal? If so, did they recover as fast when they resumed intake? Thanks, Steffi --- " Gammill " wrote: > I do find a practical clinical use for methylglyoxal when selectively used. ..... As cancers in animal models tend to quickly return when methylglyoxal is discontinued, one has to think of long term commitment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 26, 2011 Report Share Posted March 26, 2011 And then there are those of us for whom methylglyoxal doesn't do much of anything ... just like every other therapy. :/ That's the frustrating thing .... you choose therapies, they don't work, and then you're not sure what other thing to try that WILL work. xxoo > > I do find a practical clinical use for methylglyoxal when selectively > used. .... > As cancers in animal models tend to quickly return when methylglyoxal is > discontinued, one has to think of long term commitment. > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.