Whether there is or whether there isn't...

If getting bit by a rattlesnake is bad for my health, does that mean that not getting bit by a rattlesnake would reverse the damage?

extracting the venom in a timely manner would. do you know what anti-venom does? is there such a thing or am i just making that up?
 
Correction: you posted a link to another link - which showed a hypothesis. After I'd asked for supporting data for your claim.
Am I to assume that's the best you've got? I.e. no data, just a working guess?


And until the study is done we won't know
A) what the effects are or
B) how to remove the toxins.


Also wrong.
Clinical studies are required to ascertain exactly what is happening and exactly what has what effect.


What is "obvious" to one person isn't necessarily obvious to another: or even true.
And it still doesn't explain the actual link between storks and new-borns.


Like the way you ignore reality and prefer to go with unsubstantiated "common sense"?


REALITY?! here's reality...

the environment is inundated with man-made poisons that we ingest, and many people are very sick because of it. also reality, the fda approves of the poisons, in our food, and approves of the drugs to treat the illnesses. also reality, there's a hell of a lot of money being made off of these substances and the use of them.
 
the environment is inundated with man-made poisons that we ingest, and many people are very sick because of it. also reality, the fda approves of the poisons, in our food, and approves of the drugs to treat the illnesses. also reality, there's a hell of a lot of money being made off of these substances and the use of them.
Blah blah blah.
And you STILL haven't substantiated your claims.
You put 2 and 2 together and claim it makes 11 and then state that it's obvious it makes 11 because you use "common sense".
And then you top it off with slanderous claims against the entire medical profession.
Now THAT'S reality.
 
extracting the venom in a timely manner would. do you know what anti-venom does? is there such a thing or am i just making that up?

Right. Anti-venom is the cure, not simply stopping getting bitten. Once cancer starts, healthy food won't stop it. You have to extract it, or take something that will kill the cells.

In fact, healthy food will feed the cancer cells as much as the normal cells!

It's not like cancer feeds on junk food, it's only that certain chemicals can lead to the mutation where the cell doesn't know when to die.
 
Last edited:
Haven't we got better things to do with our time like cure diseases, end wars, and end hunger for everyone, despite the existance (or non-existance) of a higher power?

Why does this matter? I hope this answers your question :D

If you believe god exists and he created everything, then he created cancer. Stop praying, Mr Cancer Patient, let his will be done.

That is a misunderstanding of religion. What has happened doesn't excuse you from trying to help yourself, this is also one of the things you are supposed to do... It's not God's will that you have cancer and you die with it.... Different things are simply tests for you.

Otherwise God would never ask you to strive for 'x' (x can be of the many things God has asked you to work for)

Peace be unto you ;)
 
Blah blah blah.
And you STILL haven't substantiated your claims.
You put 2 and 2 together and claim it makes 11 and then state that it's obvious it makes 11 because you use "common sense".
And then you top it off with slanderous claims against the entire medical profession.
Now THAT'S reality.

2 and 2 makes 4. do you need a clinical study to back that up?

the medical profession is glorified drug dealing and butchering, and is sustained by a huge and steady market of sick people. if people were to cease getting sick, they would be out of business. promoting health is actually bad for their business see.
 
how childish.

if people were to cease getting sick, they would be out of business.

that is the most ridiculous thing i have read on sciforums. as if peole can just stop getting sick? oh yeah, then they would all be dead.
 
Last edited:
2 and 2 makes 4. do you need a clinical study to back that up?
Because (one more time) what is "obvious" to you isn't necessarily the truth.
That's WHY a clinical study is need.
Example: there was some wonder treatment marketed by a quack ("alternative medicine" fan, like you: don't trust the big boys they're only after profit...)
And what do you know - his "patients" were healthier and fitter.
So he made a killing.
And then a study was done.
Guess what it found?
His "treatments" did exactly nothing. Not one damn thing except lighten the wallets of his "patients".
The reason for the improvement was that the people that fell for his nonsense were very heavily into "healthy lifestyles" and it was the overall effect of a better diet and more exercise that gave the results.
And if a study hadn't been done this quack would still be making money hand over fist for no work all the while making loud noises about how "Big Pharma" was only in it for the money.
Go figure.

the medical profession is glorified drug dealing and butchering, and is sustained by a huge and steady market of sick people. if people were to cease getting sick, they would be out of business. promoting health is actually bad for their business see.
Yes, I see you're back onto libel and arrant stupidity again.
 
how childish.



that is the most ridiculous thing i have read on sciforums. as if peole can just stop getting sick? oh yeah, then they would all be dead.

you believe that health is not an option? this is what i mean. brainwashed!!! sick is the norm. because it makes all the stupid, wrong things that we do to make ourselves sick ok. right?
 
Because (one more time) what is "obvious" to you isn't necessarily the truth.
That's WHY a clinical study is need.
Example: there was some wonder treatment marketed by a quack ("alternative medicine" fan, like you: don't trust the big boys they're only after profit...)
And what do you know - his "patients" were healthier and fitter.
So he made a killing.
And then a study was done.
Guess what it found?
His "treatments" did exactly nothing. Not one damn thing except lighten the wallets of his "patients".
The reason for the improvement was that the people that fell for his nonsense were very heavily into "healthy lifestyles" and it was the overall effect of a better diet and more exercise that gave the results.
And if a study hadn't been done this quack would still be making money hand over fist for no work all the while making loud noises about how "Big Pharma" was only in it for the money.
Go figure.


Yes, I see you're back onto libel and arrant stupidity again.

that's not arrogant, or stupid, or libel. it's a legitimate and true statement. if no one was sick, no one would need to be treated for sickness. are you really trying to tell me that you don't understand that rather basic tenet?

and the documentary i cited originally, and the doctor that it was about, recommended a healthy diet. to be specific, i raw organic vegan diet. nothing he recommended had to be provided by him or any other physician. the only money-making to be had from a diet like that is by your food growers.
 
Right. Anti-venom is the cure, not simply stopping getting bitten. Once cancer starts, healthy food won't stop it. You have to extract it, or take something that will kill the cells.

In fact, healthy food will feed the cancer cells as much as the normal cells!

It's not like cancer feeds on junk food, it's only that certain chemicals can lead to the mutation where the cell doesn't know when to die.

that's not true. from what i understand cancer does (kind of) feed on junk food. cancer thrives in an acidic environment, and junk food and toxins, and everything that is "bad" for you basically promotes an acidic ph in your body. a raw, organic, vegan diet, void of processed sugar, alcohol, and caffeine promotes an alkaline ph in your body, and the cancer cannot grow in it. a junk-food, and toxic-laden diet also overloads your bodies immune system and inherent detoxifiers, such as you liver and kidneys, compromising your ability to ward and fight off disease of any kind.
 
that's not arrogant, or stupid, or libel. it's a legitimate and true statement.
the medical profession is glorified drug dealing and butchering
That bit.
Not to mention the claims they withhold a cure for cancer to maintain profits.

if no one was sick, no one would need to be treated for sickness. are you really trying to tell me that you don't understand that rather basic tenet?
So doctors don't treat injuries? Don't maintain health?
You think that a diet is going to prevent colds? Polio? meningitis? Etc...

and the documentary i cited originally, and the doctor that it was about, recommended a healthy diet.
And now you're missing the point: it I made a point about the need for clinical trials, the hypocrisy was an added bonus. Although note that the guy centred in the video also promoted a total therapy at his institutes... Gotta keep that money rolling in somehow.
 
...a higher power, what does it matter??? Seriously? We are here for such a short time in the grand scheme of things. Does it really matter if there is a god? Haven't we got better things to do with our time like cure diseases, end wars, and end hunger for everyone, despite the existance (or non-existance) of a higher power?

If you believe god exists and he created everything, then he created cancer. Stop praying, Mr Cancer Patient, let his will be done.

If you believe god doesn't exist, then get your ass to work on finding a cure!
there already is a cure,its called prevention. ;)
things like smoking,auto exhaust fumes,air and water pollution,chemicals,too much sunshine... they all cause cancers,if people could avoid all these they would never get sick..
 
there already is a cure,its called prevention. ;)
things like smoking,auto exhaust fumes,air and water pollution,chemicals,too much sunshine... they all cause cancers,if people could avoid all these they would never get sick..

Wrong. You can get sick and have cancer even if you live in a bubble.
 
Back
Top