How much longer are we going to let them run this circus in "Alternative medicine"?

loneskipper3 said:My bad, I messed up.

Oh, really? 😁 Like that guy who got diagnosed with prostate cancer at age 63 (back in 2001)—which, by the way, happens to over 50% of men his age—and then started peddling Brezov's books after trying to cure himself with fruit juices? 😁

Just her saying... claiming... and then dropping "facts" with a straight face 😁

Look, German society is super tolerant for historical reasons, but just because a lawsuit fails doesn't mean the defendant's stance or "method" was actually proven right. Years ago, an alternative medicine practitioner publicly claimed there was still zero proof that the measles virus even existed, and he even offered to pay someone $100,000 if they could show him evidence. A microbiologist brought the proof to him, so they went to court. Of course, the judges ruled that the microbiologist was right, but they didn't force the guy to pay out due to technicalities. But naturally, that guy wasn't about to let anyone know he lost, so he advertised it as "the court confirmed there is no evidence." 😁

Do you have any actual serious sources regarding what the lawsuit was specifically about, documented cases of his patients he supposedly "saved" with juice 😁 and the actual reasoning behind the ruling?

A study, huh? This paper has been cited zero times in three years—well, maybe three times, but all by the author himself. And for such "sensational" content, the quality of this journal is basically on par with those rags used to publish promoted Republicans. 😁

Look, a diet for a few days before chemo starts isn't anything new or groundbreaking. It's based on the fact that certain healthy cells reduce their metabolic rate during periods of nutrient scarcity to increase the body's overall survival chances. Since tumor cells lack this mechanism, they end up consuming more cytostatics than the healthy cells do. This doesn't necessarily make chemo more effective, but it improves the ratio of damage dealt to tumor cells versus healthy ones (though it's described pretty vaguely here since there isn't just "one type" of tumor and there are various types of cytostatics—but hey, if you believe in Brezov, maybe it's detailed enough for you). Some studies haven't confirmed this effect, but some oncologists, say in Germany, have had good experiences using it as complementary therapy, so larger studies are being conducted to see if there's a significant effect compared to control groups (just so we aren't relying on "he said, she said" 😁). As for how much this has to do with Brezov's method? About as much as holy water has to do with an energy drink.

Getting better by the minute 😁

Look, if someone wants to try this instead of chemotherapy, they clearly missed the point—it's like trying to build an electric plane without wings. 😁

And as for you guys constantly repeating that chemotherapy doesn't cure terminal patients—do oncologists just not know that? I mean, millions of them worldwide deal with this ten hours a day, and they're all apparently hiding information just so they can make more money? You can go to any official government health site (like the German Krebsinformationsdienst) and find info stating that chemo rarely "cures" an advanced-stage tumor; usually, it just stops or slows growth, or wipes out remaining bits after surgery. Chemo is most effective right after (or before) surgery following early detection, to kill any stray tumor cells that might have left the primary site and prevent metastases (which obviously can't be seen on a CT or MRI at that stage). But again, it depends on the type of cancer—it's not like there's just one single disease called "cancer," right? With breast cancer, for example, the decision often depends on the woman's age or how aggressive the cancer is.

Look, telling a patient at that stage to run away from their oncologist or standard medical practice is straight-up criminal. That topic needs to be locked down. And "alternative medicine"? If we're even going to tolerate the term, it should be rebranded as "complementary." Personally, I’d just call it "medieval medicine, voodoo, and hocus pocus."

As for Big Pharma—yeah, they have some mafia-style structures. For instance, only one out of every six new drugs actually has scientifically proven efficacy that's better than what we already have (most are just "lifestyle pills" for things like libido and other nonsense). But sure, take that one fact and jump to the conclusion that millions of people—hundreds of thousands of researchers at universities and institutes—are all part of some massive cover-up. Apparently, even billionaires, powerful politicians, and their kids dying of cancer is just part of a giant conspiracy. Right.

Also, something isn't clicking here. Have you actually read anything by Brezov or even just his quotes? Do you realize how he described bodily processes, and how his followers still describe them today? Seriously, are you an adult?!? At this point, saying aliens built the pyramids sounds more "rational" than this. You seriously degrade your own intelligence whenever you cite Brezov or Glidden. Why doesn't someone just head to a developing nation and run a real study with 200 patients aged 50 to 60, all with the same stage of cancer? They could take 100 people on Brezov’s juices (Group A) and 100 on standard care (Group B). Then show that after 5 or 10 years, the survival rate in Group A is significantly higher than Group B with a p-value < 0.05. They wouldn't even have to run away; the patients—or victims, let's be real—would gladly hide where and how they're "treating" themselves. They'd be more famous than Newton, Fleming, Koch, or Einstein. But no, it's always just some obscure book, some old wives' tale, or a few patients from 1970s court cases who supposedly "saved everything."

God, if an adult can be this naive, you just can't win.

Look, I'm not looking to get into a slugfest with you or keep arguing about this here. Like I said, this thread is about moderation issues regarding alternative medicine, not a pro-vs-con debate on whether it works...

I'm not going to waste my time explaining the basic postulates of Brezov's therapy to you when it's obvious you don't understand them and have zero interest in looking at them critically...

If you're actually interested in the topic, go look up info on alternative cancer treatments. Find a PDF of the books by Milosav Cabril and you'll find actual facts regarding the results of the therapy itself. You'll also find a list of patients who were cured using the Brezov method—it's all there in black and white (check the intake and discharge papers for Cabril). Two doctors involved in the process are deceased, but two are still alive (Miovic and Domes), so feel free to reach out to them and tell them they're full of it and aren't experts...

Anyway, goodbye. I'm putting you on ignore along with all the other hotshots who think they've swallowed all the wisdom in the world...

I want to start by saying I really welcome the initiative behind this thread, because the atmosphere within the alternative medicine section has become frankly alarming and completely contrary to both our forum rules and any standard of decent, civilized behavior.
The truth is, this level of blatant insults and ad hominem attacks—which we've seen cropping up lately, particularly in the Cancer Treatment thread—is something I haven't encountered in my eight years on this forum.
And honestly, it all seems to be happening because there’s such a lack of moderation...

First off, I’d like to point out that I have absolutely no intention of commenting on posts from users who are just stubbornly insisting on their disagreements with others or pushing their own personal views on certain topics, because that isn't what this thread is about.
Whether someone somewhere else on the subforum claims something is scientifically proven or not isn't the issue here.
This discussion is specifically about the lack of moderation in the alternative medicine section.

Furthermore, as for what this specific subforum is actually intended for —as several people have already mentioned —it's clearly stated at the top of the page, so you might want to take a look u>:
Alternative medicine - Everything that does not fall under mainstream medicine.
So, anything outside of that scope is considered off-topic and should, according to the forum rules, be subject to sanctions. This includes the constant insistence on scientific evidence or the relentless push to discuss mainstream medicine... there are plenty of other threads in the Science and Health subforums for those discussions, where none of us would dare show up to talk about alternative methods or highlight their successes, lest we be kicked off that board immediately.

Anyway, getting to the point... due to this prolonged lack of oversight, things are genuinely getting worse by the day. From daily insults, actual conversation has become virtually impossible. To ensure I'm not just shouting into the void, I'll back this up with some links, so I'd ask the supermoderator and Nica to please take a look...

For instance, look at what this user had to say...

stormyrider28 said:It's good that this thread was started because staying on the alternative medicine board—especially in the cancer treatment thread—has truly become unbearable. The main culprit is Monty's, who insults forum members in the most vile ways in almost every single post.

...is 100% accurate, and I've included the links to prove it.
Just so we're clear, all these links come from the Cancer Treatment thread, which is the primary topic here where people come looking for advice and help regarding their treatment.

So, here are a few examples of Monty's insults and ad hominem attacks that surely wouldn't be happening if someone were actually moderating:

1. Insults

Monty's said:You idiot, you absolute fool.> That's exactly why you are the way you are.

I suppose I should probably weigh in here, though I’m mindful that my perspective might be a bit niche. Looking at the current situation, there seems to be a growing tension between traditional approaches and what some might call alternative medicine. It’s an interesting, if somewhat messy, crossroads we've reached. I’ve been thinking quite a bit about how these different philosophies clash in our modern healthcare landscape. On one hand, you have the established institutions—the big names like the Mayo Clinic or Johns Hopkins—that provide that bedrock of reliability. On the other, there's this persistent, almost restless pull toward alternatives that promise a more holistic path. It isn't necessarily a binary choice, I guess, but the way people frame the debate often makes it feel like a battleground rather than a spectrum. Maybe I'm being too cautious, but I tend to believe the truth usually settles somewhere in the middle, away from the loud extremes. It’s easy to get swept up in the fervor of either side, but I find myself leaning toward a more measured assessment of the data, even when the data feels a bit incomplete. It’s a delicate balance to strike, isn't it? Ethan Barrett22 says:
I suppose I should probably weigh in on this, though I’m not entirely sure if my perspective adds much to the conversation. It feels like we’re circling around the same points without ever quite landing on a definitive conclusion, doesn't it? I mean, I could be wrong, but there seems to be a certain tension here that hasn't been fully addressed. Perhaps I'm overthinking things, but I find myself wondering if we've overlooked the more subtle implications of what's being discussed. It's a bit of a complex situation, I guess, and I suspect there isn't a simple fix waiting for us just around the corner. I suppose people like you just aren't capable of grasping this, no matter how much I try to explain it. And that’s exactly why you write posts like this. Honestly, go ahead and report whoever you want to for whatever you feel like.

2. Insulting behavior.

I suppose I should probably weigh in here, if only to offer a bit of a different perspective on the matter. It seems like we’ve been circling this topic for a while now, and while I understand where everyone is coming from, I can't help but feel that we might be missing a subtle nuance in the middle of all this debate. Maybe I'm overthinking it—that's a common pitfall of mine, I know—but there's a certain complexity to how these regulations actually play out on the ground in cities like Chicago or even New York. It isn't always as black and white as the initial arguments suggest. I guess what I’m trying to say is that while the intent behind the policy seems solid enough, the practical application often hits these unexpected snags that aren't immediately obvious when you're just looking at the high-level theory. It’s an interesting situation, to say the least. I’d be curious to see how this evolves once the actual implementation phase kicks in, though I suspect we'll see plenty of the usual friction along the way. Ethan Barrett22 says:
A The reactions from idiots like Zlikovski and arsen. It honestly just goes to show that we need much stricter legal frameworks in place. We have to find a way to teach people that while living in a democracy means you have the absolute right to say whatever is on your mind, that privilege comes with an equal amount of accountability for the things you utter.

3. It seems we’ve drifted into the territory of ad hominem attacks. I suppose it happens, but it doesn't really move the needle on the actual argument, does it? It feels a bit like throwing stones when we should be discussing the architecture. He’s practically shouting it from the rooftops—he openly wishes that anyone who disagrees with him would just go out and contract cancer.

I suppose I should weigh in here, though I'm mindful that my perspective might be a bit niche. It seems we’re circling back to the same fundamental questions, aren't we? I've been reflecting on this for a while now, and I can't help but feel that we often overlook the nuances in favor of more convenient, black-and-white conclusions. Perhaps I'm being overly cautious, but there’s a certain complexity to these matters that deserves a bit more breathing room. It's easy to jump to a verdict, but I suspect if we look closer, the reality is far less straightforward than most would care to admit. Ethan Barrett22 says:
To be perfectly honest, I honestly wish nothing but the absolute worst for everyone who had the audacity to say that—I hope you all find yourselves facing a cancer diagnosis within the next couple of months. I honestly can't wait to see how much you all start whining once you realize how much these "alternative medicine" perspectives actually clash with what you believe.

4. Insulting someone is such a low blow, isn't it? It’s honestly quite disappointing when discussions devolve into personal attacks rather than actually addressing the points being made. I suppose it’s just easier to lash out than to engage in a real debate, but it really does suck the life out of any meaningful conversation.

monty-zg Ethan Barrett22 said:That’s not quite right. It seems some people just love to squander their "intelligence" on things that don't matter.And I’ll just give them a gentle heads-up that they might want to reconsider. They aren't exactly the brightest bulbs in the box, are they?

5. It seems we’ve veered into the territory of the ad hominem. I suppose it’s easy to fall into that trap when the conversation gets heated, but attacking the person rather than the actual argument doesn't exactly move the needle, does it? It feels a bit like a deflection to me. If we want to actually get somewhere, we should probably stick to the facts at hand instead of making it personal. It seems he’s back at it again, wishing cancer on anyone who dares to disagree with him. Honestly, it's a bit much.

I suppose I should probably weigh in on this, though I’m not entirely sure if my perspective is what anyone was looking for here. It seems like we're circling around some pretty complex ideas, and while I don't want to overstep, I feel like there's a certain nuance being missed in the current discussion. Maybe it's just me, but I've always felt that when we approach these topics, we tend to jump to conclusions a bit too quickly. It feels like we're missing that middle ground—that subtle space where the real answers usually hide. I guess what I'm trying to say is that things aren't quite as black and white as they might seem at first glance. It’s worth taking a moment to step back and look at the broader picture, wouldn't you agree? Ethan Barrett22 says:
Sentences like that are a total trigger for me. The reason I mentioned wanting people who spout this nonsense to experience its consequences firsthand—specifically, to be struck by cancer—is just to see if they’d still cling to their little theories when it actually hits home.

6. Personal insults and ad hominem attacks .

Zlikovski said:I already told you that you're limited. But the fact that you're so narrow-minded and utterly classless that you actually feel the need to analyze this... well, you really are a complete idiot.

Zlikovski said:HERE YOU GO, YOU TRASH SO JUST TAKE IT AND ENJOY IT.

Zlikovski said:Why on earth are you mocking me, you uneducated creep?

Zlikovski said:I honestly want you to feel even a fraction of what she went through; I'm saying it here, loud and clear. Maybe then we'll see if you can still find the words to type anything at all.
You absolute piece of filth.

7. Insults

Zlikovski said:And I don't need any...Assholes acting like they’re some kind of experts or doctors, lecturing everyone on what counts as good or bad practice.

8. Insults b>

Zlikovski says:
You're pathetic, Ethan Barrett22, truly pathetic. b> div>

Quote:

table>
This is just a tiny snippet I managed to dig up...

Does anyone else notice how Zlikovski acts like someone who is absolutely certain he won't face any consequences? And for reasons I honestly can't quite wrap my head around— he actually isn't.
There are plenty more insults and ad hominem attacks out there, but I suppose this should be more than enough evidence...

So, Dyma and Nica, I imagine it's much clearer now why this kind of behavior can't be tolerated here in the alternative medicine section, and why our forum traffic will likely plummet if this chaos keeps up.

Best regards and all the best!

Zlikovski says: Well, I just thought it might be fun to write down exactly what I think. And I think you're an idiot. b> div>

Ibrahime, why on earth are you acting like someone actually wants to contract cancer? Honestly, in your world, does anyone just cure everything with a carrot and a shot of espresso up the backside?

I’ve already touched upon the standards of civilized behavior—it’s pretty straightforward. People practicing unlicensed medicine belong behind bars. Promoting those kinds of charlatans is essentially promoting criminal activity. Unfortunately, it seems America isn't quite a civilized nation yet, so I suppose you all feel free to jeopardize people's lives and health right here on this forum.

People should have the right to choose euthanasia—honestly, someone needs to teach those anti-vaxxers a lesson since we’re stuck with seven billion of them—but meanwhile, those facing terminal illnesses don't even have the right to opt for alternative medicine.

What a self-indulgent little monologue... get a life.
The desperate just grab at any straw they can find, and hey, if they actually believe something is helping them, who am I to judge?

I honestly don't know why I even bother engaging on these boards sometimes because it feels like we're constantly hitting the same brick walls over and over again. Every time I try to bring up a point that actually requires some level of critical thinking or a deep dive into the nuances of how things really work, I get met with this shallow, surface-level noise that tells me nothing. It’s exhausting. You look at the way people discuss these topics and it’s clear there’s no real substance, just a bunch of people shouting into the void without any regard for the actual complexities involved. We need to be more rigorous if we ever want to move the needle on anything meaningful, but instead, we just circle the drain of mediocrity. kaže:
...

Look, we need to start respecting the rules of this thread just like we’re expected to respect the rules in every other discussion on this board. It shouldn't be this difficult to maintain some basic order.

There are plenty of people out there who would be more than willing to step up and moderate this thread—for instance, I’d personally put my money on... bennya ...or anyone else who actually stays on topic and contributes something meaningful to the discussion.

😁
It’s definitely Benny—you know, that guy who claimed he could see stars in broad daylight and then got caught red-handed in his own lies.

There is absolutely no way one of you people could ever serve as a moderator. It’s just fundamentally impossible because your lot can't seem to grasp the basic concept of an actual argument or what a cold, hard fact even looks like.

If we’re actually sitting here debating who should step up as a moderator, I’m putting my money on Beljkija. Now, look, I haven't personally sat down and had a long-winded discussion with Beljkija about anything, but I’ve been watching how he operates. I see the way he writes, the way he lays things out, and frankly, it's pretty obvious the guy is incredibly sharp. He knows his stuff.
I owe Beljkija an apology for coming onto this forum to talk about him without even bothering to ask his permission first.

I honestly don't know why people keep bringing this up, but here we go again. It’s like some people just refuse to look at the actual data because they’re too busy clinging to these outdated, half-baked ideas that have been debunked a thousand times over. You see these arguments popping up in every corner of the internet, and frankly, it’s exhausting to watch everyone pretend there’s even a debate to be had when the reality is staring them right in the face. It's the same old song and dance, a constant cycle of misinformation being passed off as profound insight, and I am just so incredibly tired of playing referee for people who clearly haven't done a shred of actual research. kaže:
...

You people just won't stop, will you? Seriously, you're absolutely nuking this place. I’ve been hanging around these boards for a long time, and I can say with total confidence that I have never seen anything quite like this. It is honestly fascinating—in the worst way possible—how you lot can swoop in on a thread meant for grievances and complaints just to turn it into another complete disaster zone. You take a topic intended for venting and somehow manage to desecrate it further. It’s just unbelievable.

...

If anyone is actually ruining this thread, it’s you and your crowd. You guys are flooding this space with such an embarrassing amount of pure stupidity that it's honestly pathetic—and I'm not even just talking about this specific discussion.
Look, let's say you were out there writing about how to actually fix a herniated disc using Breuss's method.
So, my buddy Ibrahim-Pr was actually telling me that ever since he started staring directly at the sun, his vision has been sharper than ever.
Benny was going on about how his eyesight is so insanely sharp that he can actually spot stars in the middle of the day.

This is exactly how those "alternative medicine" types operate around here.
So, looks like Carl Friedrich Gauss is finally weighing in with his two cents.

loneskipper3 said:I accidentally stumbled into the alternative medicine section of this site, and I was immediately hit in the face by a thread about "cancer treatments." Honestly, you wouldn’t expect to see something like that permitted on a public forum with this much traffic. I went in thinking maybe we could have a rational, high-level discussion about alternative fields of research—you know, looking at areas that have yielded interesting preliminary results but still suffer from tiny sample sizes or methodological gaps. But what I actually read there? It was absolutely unbelievable. You have people here seriously citing charlatans like Breuss and "Dr." Glidden—do yourselves a favor and Google them; their supposed explanations for how the human body works and how healing occurs make the religious dogma of the Holy Trinity look tame by comparison. Worse yet, people are actively sharing advice on this forum that is genuinely life-threatening. To any actual doctor or scientist, it’s blindingly obvious that the people posting here don't have the slightest clue about the basic principles of biology or chemistry, let alone medical science or how the scientific method actually functions.

...

so eventually, because they can't handle an actual reasoned debate, some "alternative medicine" enthusiast will just drop a line like this:

Larry Allen34 said:...

And now I'm out—I'm putting you on my ignore list right along with all the other loudmouths who think they've mastered everything there is to know about the universe...

Ethan Barrett22 said:...

And that’s just the constant insistence on scientific evidence, that relentless push to write about mainstream medicine and whatnot...

😁
Ibro, you are honestly a pathetic individual.

If you're so against it, why on earth are you constantly linking to "doctors" who aren't even licensed?
Monty already proved that the last "doctor" you cited was nothing more than a fraud and a total hack.

Furthermore, if you claim to have no interest in scientific evidence, why do you keep sharing news stories from bottom-tier, sketchy websites that conveniently cite "scientific studies" to back up their nonsense?
I've already demonstrated here that the whole thing is a lie—there was no study, and there isn't a single legitimate peer-reviewed journal in existence where such research was ever published.

Ethan Barrett22 said:<cut>

It’s pretty funny, really. A guy who spends months on end relentlessly labeling anyone with a different opinion as either an idiot or a paid shill suddenly finds the nerve to lecture us on "values."
Just when you think someone has finally hit rock bottom, they grab a shovel and start digging...