RE: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

[Guest guest]

Yes, we should certainly listen to them. Especially since conventional

cancer treatment is so successful at killing the patient instead of the

disease.

Uhm, I'm pretty much anti-allopathic medicine, except for trauma and

emergencies.

Kathy

From: nutrition

[mailto:nutrition ] On Behalf Of Eva family

Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:31 PM

nutrition

Subject: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

r#Section_27

If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

Cancer Institute

Sally

[Guest guest]

lets hope you don't get cancer then

Sally

Kathy Dickson wrote:

> Yes, we should certainly listen to them. Especially since conventional

> cancer treatment is so successful at killing the patient instead of the

> disease.

>

>

>

> Uhm, I'm pretty much anti-allopathic medicine, except for trauma and

> emergencies.

>

>

>

> Kathy

>

>

>

> From: nutrition

> [mailto:nutrition ] On Behalf Of Eva family

> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:31 PM

> nutrition

> Subject: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>

>

>

> http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> r#Section_27

>

> If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> Cancer Institute

>

> Sally

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I'm not at all sure why it matters to you, but thank you for your hope for

me. I'll take all the positive energy my way that I can get!

Isn't that why we try to eat like this, to avoid allopathic medicine and all

its associated problems? That's the driver for me! Eat to maintain good

health to reduce my need for allopathic medicine. If I did get cancer, I

would not seek help from allopathic doctors.

Kathy

From: nutrition

[mailto:nutrition ] On Behalf Of Eva family

Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 12:07 AM

nutrition

Subject: Re: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

lets hope you don't get cancer then

Sally

Kathy Dickson wrote:

> Yes, we should certainly listen to them. Especially since conventional

> cancer treatment is so successful at killing the patient instead of the

> disease.

>

>

>

> Uhm, I'm pretty much anti-allopathic medicine, except for trauma and

> emergencies.

>

>

>

> Kathy

>

>

>

> From: nutrition

<mailto:nutrition%40>

> [mailto:nutrition

<mailto:nutrition%40> ] On Behalf Of Eva family

> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:31 PM

> nutrition

<mailto:nutrition%40>

> Subject: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>

>

>

>

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> r#Section_27

>

> If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> Cancer Institute

>

> Sally

[Guest guest]

Hi all, Well I was diagnosed with breast cancer Jan 3 of 2008, the first thing

I did is I went to Black Hills Health and Education center for 3 weeks, I knew

I needed to change my diet and that helped me to do that. After that I did have

the surgery but that's as far as I went. I would not let them take out any

lymph nodes because if they are doing there job they should have cancer cells in

them. Well I must admit since going to the black hills center and the surgery

and the change of my diet I haven't felt this good in decades. I had a cancer

check in October and got a clean bill of health. So praise God all is well. I

never went to an oncologist because I wanted to live and they do not have a good

track record. everyone that I know that has gone to one has died or become an

invalid because of so many radiation treatments. I did not have one. I do

have laetrile in my freezer. When I bought organic apricots I took all the pits

out and put them in the freezer and I have a pit seed every once in a while.

From: Kathy Dickson

Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:40 PM

nutrition

Subject: RE: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

I'm not at all sure why it matters to you, but thank you for your hope for

me. I'll take all the positive energy my way that I can get!

Isn't that why we try to eat like this, to avoid allopathic medicine and all

its associated problems? That's the driver for me! Eat to maintain good

health to reduce my need for allopathic medicine. If I did get cancer, I

would not seek help from allopathic doctors.

Kathy

From: nutrition

[mailto:nutrition ] On Behalf Of Eva family

Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 12:07 AM

nutrition

Subject: Re: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

lets hope you don't get cancer then

Sally

Kathy Dickson wrote:

> Yes, we should certainly listen to them. Especially since conventional

> cancer treatment is so successful at killing the patient instead of the

> disease.

>

>

>

> Uhm, I'm pretty much anti-allopathic medicine, except for trauma and

> emergencies.

>

>

>

> Kathy

>

>

>

> From: nutrition

<mailto:nutrition%40>

> [mailto:nutrition

<mailto:nutrition%40> ] On Behalf Of Eva family

> Sent: Friday, November 14, 2008 11:31 PM

> nutrition

<mailto:nutrition%40>

> Subject: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>

>

>

>

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> r#Section_27

>

> If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> Cancer Institute

>

> Sally

[Guest guest]

This argument is getting rather ideological. Neither side can verify their

position based on first hand evidence and is therefore basing their position on

outside claims and/or belief/prejudice.

Despite its high profile and huge amounts of money... the National Cancer

Institute is NOT an unbiased source of such information as it is subject to

political and economic pressures of enormous magnitudes.

I personally know a former allopathic MD oncologist who, dissapointed with the

abysmal record of his profession's ability to heal cancer, sought out and

learned various alternative treatments for all sorts of cancers which he

incorporated into his medical practice. He had an amazing 95% success rate with

his cancer patients. However, the AMA and FDA found out that he wasn't using

" approved " medical procedures and took away his license to practice medicine AND

forced him to pay back every single one of his cancer patients that he cured

despite the fact that they protested vehemently in his behalf and did not want

the money returned to them. THAT is the actual reality of cancer politics in the

medical world. Based on that alone, and there are thousands and thousands of

other similarly outrageous stories like that out there, the AMA, FDA, NCI and

pharmaceutical industries cannot be trusted to be ethical and unbiased in

anything they claim regarding cancer.

I also personally know several people who have successfully used alternative

methods to heal from cancer and have remained cancer free for decades, including

my mother, who used to be a RN, and used to tell me lots of first hand horror

stories of what went on in the hospitals she worked in, including many instances

where people died because of stupid mistakes, glaring oversights, drug

reactions,... As result I avoid most doctors, and certainly hospitals, like the

plague, except for physical trauma injuries, which they are pretty good at.

She also told me that doctors are pretty ignorant in their understanding and

approach toward many diseases, especially cancer. That was from someone who

learned that lesson on the inside firsthand, as well as hearing many stories

from her collegues.

There are some interesting and revealing studies put out by the Harvard and New

England Medical Journals that statistical reveal that medical interventions in

cancer have a slightly less rate of success than ignoring the cancer and not

treating it all.

Let's be careful about basing our positions on ignorance and unfounded belief

and prejudice. Non of the above is directly firsthand experience for me,

therefore I cannot confirm them absolutely. But I trust my personal two sources

mentioned above. Cancer can be a life and death issue for so many people. Tread

carefully, and speak wisely, or don't speak at all on this matter.

Be well, all of you, and pray to your little microorganism buddies to help keep

you healthy and clear headed so that you can more fully enjoy the life you have.

Tonio

Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>

>

>

>

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> r#Section_27

>

> If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> Cancer Institute

>

> Sally

[Guest guest]

I certainly don't eat this way to avoid allopathic medicine. In virtually every

case I have found it more effective than alternative treatments. That is my

personal experience. And despite your claims allopathic medicine is quite

effective when it comes to many cancers. I personally believe in just trying to

stay healthy on my own and going to whatever healers I need when something

overwhelms me. I realize that it is fashionable in some circles to bash anything

that smacks of either allopaths or government or " official " sources, but I don't

go there. On the other hand, I don't really frequent " quackwatch " either, since

I find them intolerant.

Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>

>

>

>

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> r#Section_27

>

> If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> Cancer Institute

>

> Sally

[Guest guest]

Well, I have to base my comment on the numerous people I have known who had

cancer, underwent the usual allopathic treatments and did wonderfully

afterwards. As compared to 3 who went to " natural " treatment of various sorts

and died soon after. But without taking into account the different types of

cancer, stages, etc this is not very relevant.

Yes, mistakes happen in hospitals since we are dealing with human beings and

often very powerful drugs and treatments. It is easy to say that no one ever

dies of herbs or prayer, or whatever, but the question that I have is whether

they actual received any benefit either. Its easy not to kill or injure someone

with something that has little or no effect.

I am also biased because I have worked either in public health or the FDA for

most of my professional life and I have observed firsthand the dedication and

integrity of the people who have made this their life's work out of love and

concern for people. That they are not perfect is, again, inevitable and reform

is needed, but I would take the work of the FDA of the gigantic " natural herb "

corporations any day. " Natural " is big big money, so what information comes from

there cannot be trusted either.

Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>

>

>

>

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> r#Section_27

>

> If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> Cancer Institute

>

> Sally

[Guest guest]

i am a long term survivor of leukemia. Thanks to chemotherapy, i am

alive a few decades after diagnosis.

As much as i believe in taking matters into your own hands with diet

and lifestyle, sometimes one has no choice but to take drugs to get

well. That being said, leukemia is one of the few success stories

that chemo has! if i had to do it again, i would probably go the

chemo route and add acupuncture, herbs and other therapies as well.

phil

Philip Gelb

vegetarian chef

shakuhachi player, teacher

phil@...

http://philipgelb.com

http://myspace.com/inthemoodforfood

http://myspace.com/philipgelb

http://www.yelp.com/biz/in-the-mood-for-food-oakland

On Nov 15, 2008, at 7:53 AM, SeaDruid wrote:

> Well, I have to base my comment on the numerous people I have known

> who had cancer, underwent the usual allopathic treatments and did

> wonderfully afterwards. As compared to 3 who went to " natural "

> treatment of various sorts and died soon after. But without taking

> into account the different types of cancer, stages, etc this is not

> very relevant.

>

> Yes, mistakes happen in hospitals since we are dealing with human

> beings and often very powerful drugs and treatments. It is easy to

> say that no one ever dies of herbs or prayer, or whatever, but the

> question that I have is whether they actual received any benefit

> either. Its easy not to kill or injure someone with something that

> has little or no effect.

>

> I am also biased because I have worked either in public health or

> the FDA for most of my professional life and I have observed

> firsthand the dedication and integrity of the people who have made

> this their life's work out of love and concern for people. That

> they are not perfect is, again, inevitable and reform is needed,

> but I would take the work of the FDA of the gigantic " natural herb "

> corporations any day. " Natural " is big big money, so what

> information comes from there cannot be trusted either.

>

>

> Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

> >

> >

> >

> >

> http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/

> patient/27.cd

> > r#Section_27

> >

> > If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the

> National

> > Cancer Institute

> >

> > Sally

>

>

[Guest guest]

My intention here is not to convert or to condemn anyone or anything, but to

remind folks to use their critical thinking ability. 'Question authority, and

think for yourself.' 'Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you

see.' These are aphorisms to remind us to educate ourselves and be vigilant so

that we can do the moment by moment job of seperating the wheat from the chaff,

so to speak.

There is so much information and proganda out there. It is virtually impossible

for each of us to determine what is true and what is false. And yet, it is our

responsibility to do that for ourselves. And hopefully not to take others' word

for anything, inordinately.

We are a culture who hate uncertainty, and tend to flock to the most attractive

partisan side of the issue and become warriors or cheerleaders for those

positions without giving it much further thought or reassessing those

positions/arguments periodically. Things are rarely clearly black and white. And

yet we have a strong tendency to believe and act as if they were.

That's all.

Tonio

Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>

>

>

>

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> r#Section_27

>

> If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> Cancer Institute

>

> Sally

[Guest guest]

Amen.

The only point I would make Tonio -- and I'm trying to remember where it

comes from -- is that refusal to make up our minds, ie the refusal to

have a position, if it is carried too far makes us ineffectual and

powerless and may allow others who are much quicker to make up their

minds to dominate (obviously I've got away from the natural remedy/quack

debate here). We are pursuing a good thing (careful consideration of all

options and all opinions) but the result is that the loud and shallow

who don't waste time with nuances dominate debate. Pursuing this good

thing allows a worse one to triumph.

So I would tend to say yes think long and very carefully and very

certainly very independently, but once you have done all that adopt the

view which you feel to be right and support it openly, not thoughtlessly

or " my country right or wrong " but openly, giving reasons if required.

Anyway this is completely off topic though very interesting

Sally

tonio epstein wrote:

> My intention here is not to convert or to condemn anyone or anything, but to

remind folks to use their critical thinking ability. 'Question authority, and

think for yourself.' 'Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you

see.' These are aphorisms to remind us to educate ourselves and be vigilant so

that we can do the moment by moment job of seperating the wheat from the chaff,

so to speak.

>

> There is so much information and proganda out there. It is virtually

impossible for each of us to determine what is true and what is false. And yet,

it is our responsibility to do that for ourselves. And hopefully not to take

others' word for anything, inordinately.

>

> We are a culture who hate uncertainty, and tend to flock to the most

attractive partisan side of the issue and become warriors or cheerleaders for

those positions without giving it much further thought or reassessing those

positions/arguments periodically. Things are rarely clearly black and white. And

yet we have a strong tendency to believe and act as if they were.

>

> That's all.

>

> Tonio

> Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

> >

> >

> >

> >

> http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> > r#Section_27

> >

> > If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> > Cancer Institute

> >

> > Sally

>

>

[Guest guest]

Perhaps I should add (in pursuit of peace) that I do not consider those

who dispute the usefulness of allopathic medicine to be loud or shallow

or lacking in nuance -- though I do consider them misguided. I would

certainly use it myself, very gratefully, if the need arose.

Sally

Eva family wrote:

> Amen.

>

> The only point I would make Tonio -- and I'm trying to remember where it

> comes from -- is that refusal to make up our minds, ie the refusal to

> have a position, if it is carried too far makes us ineffectual and

> powerless and may allow others who are much quicker to make up their

> minds to dominate (obviously I've got away from the natural remedy/quack

> debate here). We are pursuing a good thing (careful consideration of all

> options and all opinions) but the result is that the loud and shallow

> who don't waste time with nuances dominate debate. Pursuing this good

> thing allows a worse one to triumph.

>

> So I would tend to say yes think long and very carefully and very

> certainly very independently, but once you have done all that adopt the

> view which you feel to be right and support it openly, not thoughtlessly

> or " my country right or wrong " but openly, giving reasons if required.

>

> Anyway this is completely off topic though very interesting

>

> Sally

>

> tonio epstein wrote:

>

>> My intention here is not to convert or to condemn anyone or anything, but to

remind folks to use their critical thinking ability. 'Question authority, and

think for yourself.' 'Don't believe anything you hear and only half of what you

see.' These are aphorisms to remind us to educate ourselves and be vigilant so

that we can do the moment by moment job of seperating the wheat from the chaff,

so to speak.

>>

>> There is so much information and proganda out there. It is virtually

impossible for each of us to determine what is true and what is false. And yet,

it is our responsibility to do that for ourselves. And hopefully not to take

others' word for anything, inordinately.

>>

>> We are a culture who hate uncertainty, and tend to flock to the most

attractive partisan side of the issue and become warriors or cheerleaders for

those positions without giving it much further thought or reassessing those

positions/arguments periodically. Things are rarely clearly black and white. And

yet we have a strong tendency to believe and act as if they were.

>>

>> That's all.

>>

>> Tonio

>> Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> >

>>

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

>> > r#Section_27

>> >

>> > If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

>> > Cancer Institute

>> >

>> > Sally

>>

>>

[Guest guest]

For 14 years I was on medication for high blood pressure and diabetes. Also an

inhaler for asthma. In June I changed my lifestyle drastically - 98% raw,

including some fermented foods, totally gluten and dairy free - and am totally

off medication except for an occasional use of the inhaler - a couple of times a

month as oppposed to several times a day. I have nearly died from prescribed

antibiotics, antihistamines, steroids, and a tetanus shot, all at different

times, of course. My best health comes from staying as far away from allopathic

medicine as I can get. My blood pressure and blood sugar readings are nicely

stable and on the low side of " normal " , and this happened within the first two

weeks of my new lifestyle. I would very gratefully use allopathic medicine in

the case of broken bones or other trauma, and hope they don't kill me with their

" lifesaving " medications in the process, but other than that no thank you. Yes,

my food costs a little more now, but I'm saving over $400 each month on doctor

and medicine. That buys a lot of food.

Zelda K

Re: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

Perhaps I should add (in pursuit of peace) that I do not consider those

who dispute the usefulness of allopathic medicine to be loud or shallow

or lacking in nuance -- though I do consider them misguided. I would

certainly use it myself, very gratefully, if the need arose.

Sally

>> > Uhm, I'm pretty much anti-allopathic medicine, except for trauma and

>> > emergencies.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > Kathy

.

[Guest guest]

Tonio

Couldn't agree with you more. The fact is that with the massive amount of

information out there, some true and much untrue, it is possible for find

" facts " to support any position. Just look at the " ideal " diet which ranges from

raw vegan to raw meat to cultures that traditionally consume little or no raw

food to the new wave of " techno-foods " . We really have no choice but to think

for ourselves, look at information critically and make our lives our own

experiment and judge our own results. I find this works better for me than

trying to follow someone else's philosophy or -ism.

Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>

>

>

>

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> r#Section_27

>

> If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> Cancer Institute

>

> Sally

[Guest guest]

My only thought about that is those who just out of hand dismiss a form of

healing without serious investigation. I would lump MDs who consider all

alternative treatment to be bunk but who don't really know in with those who

dismiss allopathy out of hand. I encountered a few folks in the FDA who

routinely referred to health food stores as " health fraud stores " . It reminds me

of a neighbor who despised GW Bush so much for the war that all she could talk

about was hating him and what she would do to him if she could get her hands on

him. I think that we can become so extreme in our positions that we become that

which we dislike so much. Wasn't it from Pogo that the phrase " We have seen the

enemy and he is us " derives?

Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> >

>>

http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

>> > r#Section_27

>> >

>> > If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

>> > Cancer Institute

>> >

>> > Sally

>>

>>

[Guest guest]

My dietary changes have helped with my diabetes and blood pressure as well, but

I continue with my meds because they have helped a lot and I have had no side

effects. Even without insurance I was only paying less than $40 per month for

the meds so was not a problem. I'm glad you got off yours, that's a goal I think

that I will reach someday. Really, who wants to take anything they don't have to

take? I guess at some level I figure that it is all biochemistry though so I'm

not sure what the difference is to me between taking cinnamon or bitter melon

vs eating low-carb vs taking metformin. I guess I'm a pragmatist...whatever

seems effective for me. The metformin keeps my fasting blood sugar low and the

low-carb keeps me from spiking after meals. The herbs that I've tried seem to do

nothing. Gingko makes my fasting blood sugar go UP by 20 points or so!!

Re: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

Perhaps I should add (in pursuit of peace) that I do not consider those

who dispute the usefulness of allopathic medicine to be loud or shallow

or lacking in nuance -- though I do consider them misguided. I would

certainly use it myself, very gratefully, if the need arose.

Sally

>> > Uhm, I'm pretty much anti-allopathic medicine, except for trauma and

>> > emergencies.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > Kathy

.

[Guest guest]

The loud and shallow may dominate the debate, or appear to, but, shallow

arguments only hold sway with those who choose, or default to not evaluate those

shallow arguments.

When I took a class in debate and persuasion in college we learned to argue

different sides of an issue which can be an eye opening experience. I

occasionally find myself in the midst of steadfastly arguing a position and then

realize that I have somehow become emotionally invested in that position and

don't really know with any certainty that I am right.

I think it is ok to act from uncertainty. Probably better than from a false

sense or belief of certainty.

And then there may well be times when it may be better not to act. Who can say

for sure?

That does not mean that we become bogged down in uncertainty or endlessly

thinking things over. Uncertainty can be acceptance of the unknown as it is in

its present moment. And as such can allow for a much greater range of

possibility in the next. Freedom to grow and expand and learn anew.

with uncertainty and peace,

Tonio

I have come to think that it is very important to question my own beliefs and

thinking, which is a very difficult thing to remember to do.

Obviously we cannot rely upon " facts " and absolute truths, as they may not exist

in our relative subjective worlds. That is where our intuition, or whatever you

would choose to call it, can be used to guide us through the murky waters.

Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

> >

> >

> >

> >

> http://www.cancernet.nci.nih.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/laetrile/patient/27.cd

> > r#Section_27

> >

> > If you don't like Quackwatch here is a similar article from the National

> > Cancer Institute

> >

> > Sally

>

>

[Guest guest]

Amen, sista!

Zelda, Congrats on your accomplishment! Very impressive indeed. And I'm sure

your liver loves your new life style, too. I know that it was an incredibly

difficult undertaking and I laud you for the determination, time, and effort

that it took to accomplish it.

Keep up the great work and keeping spreading the word,

Kathy

From: nutrition

[mailto:nutrition ] On Behalf Of Zelda K

Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 12:57 PM

nutrition

Subject: Re: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

For 14 years I was on medication for high blood pressure and diabetes. Also

an inhaler for asthma. In June I changed my lifestyle drastically - 98% raw,

including some fermented foods, totally gluten and dairy free - and am

totally off medication except for an occasional use of the inhaler - a

couple of times a month as oppposed to several times a day. I have nearly

died from prescribed antibiotics, antihistamines, steroids, and a tetanus

shot, all at different times, of course. My best health comes from staying

as far away from allopathic medicine as I can get. My blood pressure and

blood sugar readings are nicely stable and on the low side of " normal " , and

this happened within the first two weeks of my new lifestyle. I would very

gratefully use allopathic medicine in the case of broken bones or other

trauma, and hope they don't kill me with their " lifesaving " medications in

the process, but other than that no thank you. Yes, my food costs a little

more now, but I'm saving over $400 each month on doctor and medicine. That

buys a lot of food.

Zelda K

Re: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

Perhaps I should add (in pursuit of peace) that I do not consider those

who dispute the usefulness of allopathic medicine to be loud or shallow

or lacking in nuance -- though I do consider them misguided. I would

certainly use it myself, very gratefully, if the need arose.

Sally

>> > Uhm, I'm pretty much anti-allopathic medicine, except for trauma and

>> > emergencies.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > Kathy

..

[Guest guest]

But, what about your poor liver and kidneys having to deal with all those

toxins. Rhetorical question.

Its your life and your lifestyle and for now, you have the right to use the

kind of medicine you choose, whether it be pharmaceuticals, herbs, or foods.

My biggest concern on this subject are those that believe allopathic

medicine and pharma is the only way to cure disease and everything else is a

waste of time and money. Unfortunately, there are many of them than those

that think like Zelda and I. National health care will force us to conform.

The best thing about my job is that my health insurance is so cheap. Its

GREAT insurance for that want to run to the doctor for an antibiotic at the

first sign of every little sniffle, or the dermatologist for every outbreak,

you get the picture.

I never use it. But, I ride horses, can't afford to be without it. A fall

could cost me everything. So, fortunately, I have the safety it provides.

But, I have to pay out of my pocket for my actual health care - visits to

the acupuncturist and chiropractor that help keep me healthy.

Kathy

From: nutrition

[mailto:nutrition ] On Behalf Of SeaDruid

Sent: Saturday, November 15, 2008 1:38 PM

nutrition

Subject: Re: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

My dietary changes have helped with my diabetes and blood pressure as well,

but I continue with my meds because they have helped a lot and I have had no

side effects. Even without insurance I was only paying less than $40 per

month for the meds so was not a problem. I'm glad you got off yours, that's

a goal I think that I will reach someday. Really, who wants to take anything

they don't have to take? I guess at some level I figure that it is all

biochemistry though so I'm not sure what the difference is to me between

taking cinnamon or bitter melon vs eating low-carb vs taking metformin. I

guess I'm a pragmatist...whatever seems effective for me. The metformin

keeps my fasting blood sugar low and the low-carb keeps me from spiking

after meals. The herbs that I've tried seem to do nothing. Gingko makes my

fasting blood sugar go UP by 20 points or so!!

Re: Laetrile/Amygdalin - National Cancer Institute

Perhaps I should add (in pursuit of peace) that I do not consider those

who dispute the usefulness of allopathic medicine to be loud or shallow

or lacking in nuance -- though I do consider them misguided. I would

certainly use it myself, very gratefully, if the need arose.

Sally

>> > Uhm, I'm pretty much anti-allopathic medicine, except for trauma and

>> > emergencies.

>> >

>> >

>> >

>> > Kathy

..

[Guest guest]

Hi all

I have been a lurker here so far but had to interject. I wrote/edited a

highschool anthology for cancer for Greenhaven Press (I am a freelance

writer). I did not write the articles used in the book just the intros etc

but I had to do all their research and present pro/con to every topic

listed. i.e.. Yes chemo is fantastic - No chemo kills everyone. - The book

was for highschoolers to use when doing a report on cancer. What an eye

opener!! I can tell from the extensive research done for that - cancer is

big money bottom line.

Cancer is treatable much of the time. Very few cancers are treated well with

chemo/allopathic drugs. That is the fact - and chemo kills -and damages -

that is also an established fact. The exams and screenings they do often

cause cancer. Many people are treated for " cancer " that would never die or

have any problems but for early screenings that caught " it " . Many natural

remedies do work. Not all work for everyone. And sometimes damage do the

body is too extensive to totally heal by the time it is used. Not to mention

many people seek out natural help after they have gone the route of chemo

etc.

I personally know of people who have reversed cancer with natural means. And

yes I know of some who have survived with allopathic means. But keep in mind

survival from oncologist view means living for 5 years after

diagnosis/treatment. You can die of cancer 2 days after the 5 year mark and

you are considered a survivor.

I have a good friend who was an oncology nurse for years. After I did the

book I seen here for the first time in several years. She was no longer in

oncology. I asked her straight up - Would you have chemo if diagnosed with

cancer. Her answer - " Not on your life " Even if you live you are never the

same it ruins quality of wife. She is not a nature " freak " at all. She still

works as an RN in a major hospital and goes the route of typical medicine.

Yet you couldn't her to touch chemo with a 10 ft pool.

Now has the " natural " group also been exploited? yep - you bet - that's why

it is important to go to qualified naturopaths and do your own homework.

Don't buy it will work just because it is something natural. If you want o

read an eye opening book on drug compans check out " Our Daily Med " by Melody

sen - an investigative reporter. I was leery of drugs and the FDA

before I read that book - I want nothing to do with any of it now.

Medicine, evnen allopathic medicine, was once about healing. It's not

anymore. It's about the almighty $$ and keeping you paying for meds. Are

they good doctors, nurses, etc? Yep sure are - many of them do what they can

and use all knowledge at their fingertips. Many take kickbacks from drug

companies and tell themselves they are making people well.

Belinda

www.learningtreasures.com

<http://geo./serv?s=97359714/grpId=13399289/grpspId=1705060950/msgI

d=10066/stime=1226764394/nc1=5191951/nc2=5191946/nc3=4025304>

[Guest guest]

Hello

My name is Alan, and I am new to the group.

In my opinion anyone who has an interest in:

Laetrile/Amygdalin B17 or any cancer treatment

should watch this video, and all, this is just part 1. The speaker is a man

named G. .

The Science and Politics of Cancer (2005) - Part 1