Re: Re: Enzymes and cancer-non-Conflicting evidence?

[Guest guest]

Where did I mention " non-conflicting evidence "

Here again, as happens all to often, people grab a statement and put words in

someone's mouth that they didn't say. All I said was, and thank you for

printing it:

" For example one can find supporting data by the scientific community and the

Alternative Community for things such as Curcumin, NAC and other often used

Alternative products including herbs " Is there anyone that doesn't believe

there is 'supporting data' for and against almost anything?

There is nothing about 'bias' in the information about NAC rather my use of the

word " supporting " . Does anyone doubt there is 'supporting data'? There are

medical studies regarding Bladder cancer indicating NAC is 'effective' in such

cases and those I found on PubMed. In fact there is 'supporting data' that

indicates it assists in enhancing Glutatione production.

People will be hard-pressed to find such absolutes in my writing that are

attributed to me.

While perfection alludes me regularly, I do strive to avoid 'absolute's and use

vague words because it is appropriate to do so. Who among is is 'expert'?

Few!

Let me repeat, I never said, " non-conflicting' anything! That comes from what

seems to be a vivid imagination.

We also find the words " a ton " of evidence about not taking Anti-oxidants when

dealing with cancer. Why was it even brought up? If there is a 'ton' it comes

from the Allopaths!

Why is anyone refering to my being " treated by " when I have written my

'own' observations and have sent additional information, that I myself found,

that indicates there 'might' be a connection with enzymes and why they might be?

Do we now deny anyone's right to agree or disagree or even bring up a thought

contrary to another's stand?

Finally, all I said to complete my own personal feelings was exactly, " As for me

the jury is out (Regarding enzymes) and it is prudent for me to stick with the

things that seem to have unbiased reporting behind it "

My word, all I said was " as for me " and I was even vague saying, " seems to have

unbiased reporting " .

My only reference to 'bias' was not any person but rather what most of us have

come to the conclusion about--- so-called 'studies'...............that they are

all too often biased in favor of those either funding them or profiting by them.

Anyone disputing that?

Every now and then someone on the list takes issue with someone and that's fine,

but we need to avoid doing so in a hostile way and especially avoid accusations

that someone, such as me in this case, is being biased. Most important is to

not attribute statements to someone that they did not make but rather, differ,

give your reasons, and leave personalities alone and never attribute 'motives'

to people you cannot prove. The list is not a place for accusations and never a

place for the introduction of personalities.

Joe C.