Medical Manicheans

[Guest guest]

I am somewhat dismayed by all the medical Manicheans on this list: those

whose opinions are so dichotomous, so right or wrong, good or evil, black or

white.

Examples:

Vaccines. Why not take a more nuanced approach? My family doesn't use them

unless there is an overriding reason and we know how they were made. We

have seen no need for over two decades. On the other hand I make cancer

vaccines myself and have used them on myself.

Milk. Grass-fed milk is high in the omega-3 fatty acids and that is a plus.

Milk is high in IGF-1 which can be very useful with many non-homeostatic

cancer therapies, but contraindicated in many of the more natural

approaches.

Sugar. Cancer begins in an initiation stage and then at some point further

transforms into a promotion stage. Prior to the advent of the initiating

transformations, one can get away with consuming growth promoters such as

sugar, but one has to avoid all the mutagens. Should a cancer develop then

one is smart to consider reversing this. The promoters should in most cases

be avoided, but one has greater rational license to use the mutagens - e.g.,

some of the chemotherapeutic herbs, say the rhamnosides. It is amazing that

so many people get red in the face without ever stopping to consider whether

a foodstuff component or supplement prevents cancer or treats cancer or

both.

Caffeine. This disautonomia-correcting, calcium ionophore, antioxidant has

many anticancer benefits if you use it wisely; I would switch to theobromine

in the evening though.

Tobacco. Just kidding. Tobacco is never a good thing.