138 posts shown.
Angela Wright said:Look, please don't come at me telling me what I should or shouldn't be doing🙄! We DID exactly what we thought needed to be done. If you think we aren't doing a good enough job, go ahead, START AN ASSOCIATION and get out there doing what you think is right.😠 It’s easy to sit back and say "you should do this, you should do that," but hey, step up and actually make something happen, buddy.☕
Listen, you’re insulting our intelligence and our feelings, mainly because every single one of us here has been directly or indirectly hit by cancer. I did everything humanly possible for my old lady—moved mountains, started this thread, helped launch the website, even helped start the association... After her surgery, she actually turned down chemo and radiation to try alternative stuff. She did macrobiotics, changed her whole lifestyle, got super religious, went to all those "famous and successful" bioenergy healers, "famous and successful" homeopaths, herbalists, radio therapists, pumped herself full of every "healthy" supplement under the sun... and you know what? She got a relapse in no time. Once she went back to chemo and radiation, it slowed the tumor down. It bought us more time together, and just knowing she could have gotten Temodal again—knowing they weren't lying to us about it being an option—that was enough for me to buy it and give it to her if I could... Science is the only thing that gave me actual, concrete answers.
...so please, stop suggesting how I should act. If you’re such a huge advocate for what you believe in, we’ll gladly help you out by providing whatever info you need to set up your own association, and then you can deal with it and provide people with real, solid information backed by actual scientific evidence. Everything else is just hearsay and incredibly shaky ground that usually ends in tragedy (because we aren't going to wait around for 100 studies like you suggested, as if scientists just run studies for fun), and that’s exactly what you’re pushing here. That’s charlatanism, plain and simple. It isn't good enough for anyone with half a brain, so you can think whatever you want.😳
p.s. I’m still waiting for an answer to the question and invitation I’ve posted here several times already: I want someone with a real name and surname to come forward with actual medical documentation from before and after an alternative treatment that actually worked for them....
Lepina is the only one who saw any kind of result through fasting. I know plenty of people who tried fasting and just died. With cancer, you honestly never know, and that's just a fact, whether you're using alternative methods or classic medicine. That’s just the nature of the disease.
You guys are doing fine by your own standards. But it’s highly questionable whether that’s actually good for the patients. To put it bluntly, the survival rates for the people discussed here haven't been great. And being one-sided is never the right way to go.
Look, I think you’re insulting people’s intelligence when you assume they shouldn't know anything you don't agree with. Cancer is a serious beast, and a lack of information leads to catastrophe. Do you seriously believe the only truth is whatever the oncologist tells you? Like everything outside that bubble is just total darkness?? I think you're dead wrong.
See, my experiences with loved ones who got sick have been pretty grim. Everyone believed blindly in mainstream medicine, everyone followed every rule to a T, and everyone ended up in a bad way. Not a single one made it past three years from diagnosis. I've talked to countless people who were deeply disillusioned by that kind of medicine, and I've helped many of them with advice. I’m happy that some of them actually improved, even though nobody expected it. So, I'm not nearly as "inactive" as you think I am.
Don't sweat it, if I decide I want an association, I'll make it happen.
slyseal28 said:I’ve been reading up on MMS, and honestly, it’s terrifying how you guys spread this fake news that it can cure basically every disease out there.
I’m just gonna quote one sentence that sums up my entire take on MMS: "I wouldn't even go near that stuff without a hazmat suit, a gas mask, and oxygen tanks!!!"
Our association promotes alternative treatments—not straight-up snake oil. My faith in medicine is rock solid, and as long as I have even a shred of common sense left in my head, I’m going to trust doctors first and foremost.
As for those sky-high drug prices? That’s a whole different beast and a completely different fight. That’s exactly why we push so hard to get medications added to the coverage lists.
MMS is nowhere near being snake oil. Maybe you just haven't done your homework, so you ended up swallowing whatever the first doomsday prophet told you.
Plus, you're being totally hypocritical here. EVERY single cytotoxic drug is way more toxic than MMS. It’s not even surprising, considering those things were developed using mustard gas as a base.
slyseal28 said:Look, let’s get real—our association never claimed Sutent or Tarceva were a "cure." We strictly talk about extending life. You say it only buys a few months? You're wrong. People who reached out to us proved through their own medical records that Sutent actually worked for them. At first, these folks were buying Sutent on their own, finding any way they could... One woman who appeared on our show even sold her house... Her tumor actually shrank by as much as 80%... And most of them eventually had to stop taking the meds because they ran out of cash... Most were forced into a 3-4 month break... During that gap, the tumor just started growing again... Those same people kept fighting for the money for the drugs, and once they scraped it together, they'd start up again. And the tumor would stop growing...
It’s obvious you haven't been following the whole story with Sutent.
And regarding side effects—yeah, they can be brutal, just like any other targeted therapies. They aren't harmless, far from it. And honestly, I don't recall anyone in our association ever saying Sutent and Tarceva were side-effect free???
What people like you just don't get is that when people fight for these drugs, they're really just fighting for a little more time with their families.
For some patients, these drugs work, at least for a while... For others, unfortunately, they won't... That’s the gamble the sick have to take. And what the rest of us, standing by them, should be doing is supporting them and giving them courage in their fight.
To be blunt, Sutent stops cancer growth for an average of 8 months. That's the truth. Since it's an average, it means in some cases, it'll be even better.
I hear you, every extra second matters. For the patients and for their families. But, in my opinion, you guys as an association should also be talking about other types of treatment that show massive success. Don't shy away from alternatives and don't just hunt for scammers. (Trust me, there are fewer crooks out there than in Big Pharma.) Why not mention Dr. Simoncini's method? Or combined MMS Therapy? Don't sit around waiting for 100 clinical trials before you start mentioning them. If you wait for that, you'll be waiting forever. Simply put, nobody wants to fund it because treating people that way is dirt cheap, so it's not profitable for the pharmaceutical industry. (Sadly, they'd rather you sell your house just to afford a monthly dose. They'd rather strip you to the bone in your final months.) Why not present all the options to the patients?
Don't get me wrong, I'm not out here preaching charlatans, but I know there are way better options out there than what mainstream medicine offers right now. Somehow, you guys come off like you're just an extension of the pharma industry. I doubt that's what you want, but that's how it looks.
Matthew Hall37 said:Jane wrote about that book "Chemotherapy Cures Cancer, and the Earth is Flat":
"My honest impression? Someone who did such deep and wide research, wrote a whole book, and then uses the intro to their show to spout total nonsense about heart cancer not existing—while claiming doctors didn't give them an answer as to why cancer doesn't attack the heart ( ), immediately kills their competence and credibility in my eyes. I couldn't even bother to keep watching. This guy clearly doesn't grasp the basics of cancer, let alone offer some sensible alternative treatment."
Can you tell me how many people in America actually have heart cancer?
I haven't heard of a single case.
Watch the show and you'll see there's actual logic to this story. Unfortunately, everyone reading this post can see that all the patients are slowly slipping away, which just proves what the author is saying. Plus, the price of chemotherapy is unrealistically high and just plain inhumane given the results. If the price were realistic, Big Pharma wouldn't be seeing these massive profits—maybe just slightly less than massive. And honestly, getting rich off someone else's misery isn't exactly classy.
Heart cancer is such a basic question that it's barely worth debating. I truly believe most oncologists haven't even seen primary heart cancer in their entire careers.
And it's pretty easy to conclude that current therapies just aren't working. Looking at the way things are heading, I'm afraid we won't see any change for a long, long time.
Angela Wright said:Jamie Rivera78, come on, drop the link to the actual page you pulled this from. This copy-paste job isn't telling me much.
http://www.wddty.com/033638003695753...on-t-work.html
Here’s the deal on Sutent:
http://www.kidneycancerresource.com/index.php/SutentLook, I’m not trying to go out of my way to mess with the association's work, but I feel like people need the full story. To be blunt: Sutent doesn't "cure" anything. At best, it might squeeze out a few extra months of life—and honestly, even that isn't a proven fact. From what I'm hearing, the side effects are brutal. I'm just not sure that's what patients are actually signing up for. It's a similar story with Tarceva.
Bottom line? Sure, Sutent and Tarceva might work in certain cases, but whether they actually extend life is a massive question mark. To me, the cost-to-benefit ratio looks pretty lousy.
Unfortunately, Tarceva just didn't cut it (even with that insane price tag). It looks like, after a certain point, it actually ends up fueling the cancer's growth.
Lung cancer patients are usually prescribed either Tarceva (erlotinib) or Iressa (glefitinib). Doctors will probably tell the unfortunate patient that the drugs stop the growth of the cancers by blocking the signaling from a molecule that's vital to the survival of the cancer cells.
What they might gloss over is that these drugs only really work for about 10 percent of people, particularly those dealing with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)—the kind non-smokers often pick up. And once a little time passes? They become totally useless—actually, they end up encouraging the cancer to spread.
Oncologists know that the drugs seem to trigger fresh tumor growth, which is known as acquired or secondary resistance, but researchers are still scratching their heads trying to nail down why this happens.
In one study, they followed six NSCLC patients on these drugs, and three of them ended up developing new tumors.
They couldn't quite pin down why the tumors build up such a nasty resistance to the meds, but they did confirm that the new mutations held gene variants "they had come across before." Honestly, I guess that's some small comfort.
steelfalcon15 said:Did anyone catch the show??? Thoughts?
Angela Wright, slyseal28, did you guys get my PMs and emails? It’s basically a carbon copy of what went down on that "Science Frontiers" show. Let me know how things are playing out...
That show was a massive eye-opener. Look, I know everything they said is spot on, but I’m worried the propaganda has already done its damage. Big Pharma will do whatever it takes to keep the status quo alive. They’ll just keep peddling expensive snake oil to us forever.
Catch the show Science Frontiers over on PBS 2 at 4:15 PM today. They’re diving into LOTHAR HIRNEISE - HEALING CANCER. Honestly, if people actually listened to this stuff, it might actually do some good for once.
Angela Wright said:Drugs are pricey because you need a massive amount of cash to fund research that drags on for decades, involving endless teams of scientists, mountains of paperwork, supplies, and God knows what else...
Look, maybe don't go out of your way to defend Big Pharma. I've looked into this enough to know that all that "research" talk is basically just a smokescreen for robbing people who are already at their lowest—the sickest among us. No other industry pulls in margins like the pharmaceutical giants do. Trust me, they couldn't care less about your health; they're just focused on squeezing every last cent out of your wallet.
Maria Fox said:I mean, seriously, what gives?!
Everyone’s out here claiming this stuff is great for your blood counts—specifically the white cell count
But you know how doctors are. They won't suggest anything; they just sit there telling you everything will magically fix itself
If you ask me, I'd rather take that kind of blunt advice than be left totally hanging with nothing at all ☕
And honestly, I'm pretty sure my mom eating bacon (without onions) actually helped bump up her blood work. 🤷
Good luck to everyone dealing with checkups, scans, and the whole fight!!!!! 🙏
The sad truth is, both chemo and greasy bacon really tank your body's pH levels, which isn't exactly helping the healing process.
holloworca19 said:I wanna know—I haven't eaten a single thing in 4 days (literally zero) because these mouth ulcers are killing me. But honestly? I feel totally fine. No cravings, nothing. Is that actually normal, or should I be waiting for the crash? Like, extreme fatigue or whatever? (Then again, I'm barely doing anything since I'm just rotting at home)
thanks. (Not even worried if it's "normal," just being nosy 😉)
You’ll be fine. Just make sure you're staying hydrated. And get some sunlight for that Vitamin D fix.
Besides, therapeutic fasting actually speeds up the healing process. I dealt with a ton of mouth sores back in the day, and they cleared up in about a week.
In holistic medicine, those ulcers are basically seen as your body's way of detoxing itself.
Gregory Gomez45 said:Hold on, you forgot to end it with: "And then the little guy wrapped up the chocolate!" 😂 🤣
Amalgam isn't banned in Austria. And while Sweden doesn't use it much anymore, it has nothing to do with what you were saying. It’s more about their move toward composite materials and certain properties of those.
More nonsense. Go talk to an actual authority in Sweden and they'll tell you the real reason they moved away from amalgams. It isn't because of composites; it's because amalgams are toxic.
Do you have any actual proof that you can just eat amalgam fillings without getting wrecked? I talked to three different dentists and they all looked at me like I had two heads for even suggesting that. Amalgams are toxic—that's not even a debate.
When we're talking about knocking out acute pain, chronic aches, or high fevers, everyone points to acetaminophen products—think Tylenol, Advil, or even Percocet—as the "safe" bet. People toss them to toddlers without a second thought because you can just grab them off any drugstore shelf. They’ve become a staple in basically every American household. Honestly, half the time people are taking it on a regular basis, maybe even daily. Let's be real: big pharma's advertising machine worked perfectly. We tend to completely forget that we're dealing with actual MEDICINE here, and nothing that potent is ever truly harmless.
Look, it's common knowledge that acetaminophen is TOXIC TO THE LIVER. THE SYMPTOMS ARE REMINISCENT OF CHRONIC ALCOHOLISM, and we're talking potential organ failure territory. Using it on kids is an even bigger gamble since their little bodies just can't detoxify like adults can. (Don't get me wrong, most of the damage comes from using it way too often over a long period.) On top of that, PARACETAMOL PERMANENTLY DEPLETES YOUR LIVER ENZYME RESERVES—the very stuff meant to break down other toxins you might run into. And yeah, the toxic side effects can hit your kidneys too, though maybe slightly less intensely.
Let’s look at this through a practical lens for a second. Why are you even popping an acetaminophen pill? If something hurts, the logical move is to figure out *why* it hurts so you can actually ADDRESS THE ROOT CAUSE. You shouldn't just mask the symptoms. BECAUSE MASKING SYMPTOMS HAS NEVER ACTUALLY CURED ANYONE. It’s even more idiotic when people treat these pills like candy, popping them when they aren't even really sick. Just out of habit. You'd be shocked, but there are plenty of people like that.
As for using it to bring down a fever, that's even more questionable. Most people probably know by now that a fever is actually a normal defense mechanism for your body, BECAUSE IT HELPS FLUSH OUT TOXINS AND SIGNIFICANTLY SLOWS DOWN THE REPRODUCTION OF PATHOGENIC BACTERIA. I highly doubt you want to stay sick longer, yet that's exactly what happens when you lean too hard on acetaminophen. Basically, SOME UNCOMFORTABLE CONDITIONS CAN GET WAY WORSE IF YOU DEACTIVATE YOUR BODY'S OWN DEFENSE FORCES WITH DRUGS. Sure, if you hit an extreme fever (which is super rare), you should bring it down, but you can do that easily enough with just some cold water. You shouldn't even be intervening unless you hit 104 degrees. (Some natural health advocates say even a fraction higher than that.) For most people, that kind of fever never even happens.
One more thing: acetaminophen isn't a sedative, even though people use it like one. It's true that babies and small kids seem calmer at night after taking it. But THAT IS JUST THE RESULT OF THE TOXIC EFFECT. (It's like how chronic alcoholics find it easier to pass out after a heavy night of "drinking.") It’s a fake sense of peace. Long-term, sleep disorders are definitely going to get worse, eventually turning into real insomnia that’s a nightmare to fix. There's even suspicion that long-term use leads to dependency. At the end of the day, "safe" drugs only exist in someone's imagination.
Gregory Gomez45 said:Honestly, man, it seems like you don't really know what you're talking about and you're weighing in on stuff you aren't qualified for.
1. In the pre-amalgam mixture, there's maybe 5% max (when it's still in the capsule).
2. Yeah, it is.
3. Amalgam isn't toxic because the mercury gets bound up in compounds—mostly Ag2Hg3 and some Sn7Hg. Modern amalgams actually avoid the gamma 2 phase (Sn7Hg) by having the tin bind with copper instead of mercury, which basically makes the amalgam stronger, harder, and more resistant to pressure and everything else in the mouth. As for the "leftover" mercury, it mostly ends up in a much more stable (stronger) Ag2Hg3 bond.
4. Yeah, you could eat it once it's fully set.
I'm still waiting for you to show me some actual scientific evidence to back up your claims 🙂 but all you've got are these elementary questions...
I don't know if you know your stuff, but you are spouting absolute nonsense. It's crazy—you could find the real facts in any medical textbook out there.
1. Mercury makes up about 52% of an amalgam filling.
2. Go ahead, swallow a hardened chunk of amalgam and let's see how that works out for you.
3. Just because it's "bonded" doesn't mean the toxicity vanishes. Mercury vapors are constantly leaking out of those fillings. Dentists actually see double the brain tumor rates compared to the rest of the population. And for female dentists? The risk of infertility or miscarriage is three times higher than average. The link between amalgam and all sorts of other health issues is pretty much settled science at this point.
4. Tons of countries have already banned or strictly limited using amalgam (like Austria or Sweden...). You think they did that just for fun? Maybe you should call them up and tell them they're wrong since the fillings are "edible"?
Once again, I gotta tell you: you keep acting like you're citing science, but you aren't applying any of it.
And one more thing: the fact that you're resorting to insults just shows you've run out of actual arguments.
Dana Wright4 said:Take it down a notch with that tone...
Insults are just going to lead you down the wrong path...
Look, if you want to have a real conversation, then talk! If not, just shut it and move on.
Calling someone else's opinion "nonsense" isn't exactly classy. And since you're so worried about people being in the "wrong place," maybe watch your own mouth first.
I honestly can't tell if you're here to just pick fights off-topic or if you actually think you know what you're talking about.
Dana Wright4 said:Seriously, stop talking nonsense about things you clearly don't understand...
If dental amalgam were actually as toxic as people claim, we'd see massive mortality rates from all the millions of people walking around with these fillings. It's just pure stupidity...
That’s a pretty pathetic way to react—classic move when you've run out of actual arguments. And saying everyone's dying? That's the absolute peak of your logic right there.
So, in your book, something is only "harmful" if it kills you instantly? Is that how you roll?
Come on, since you're so fond of slapping labels on everything, why don't you actually answer the questions! Or is that too much to ask??
Gregory Gomez45 said:We’re talking about dental amalgam here, not pure liquid mercury. So, come on guys, where's the actual proof? I mean, show me one peer-reviewed study...
Before we dive into the whole "scientific proof" thing—which, by the way, you aren't exactly bringing much of to the table either—let me hit you with a few basic questions:
1. Is mercury roughly 50% of what makes up amalgam?
2. Is mercury toxic?
3. So, is the amalgam itself toxic, or did the toxicity somehow just vanish once it was mixed? If it magically disappeared, care to explain how that works?
4. If you're so convinced amalgam isn't toxic, why don't we just eat some and see what happens?
Gregory Gomez45 said:Show me one actual scientific study that proves that! Then we can talk. 🙂
Look, any amount of mercury is poison. It's basic biology. You don't even need a lab coat to tell you that.
Hey everyone, glad to be here!
Do yourself a favor and read this article before you go running off to any doctor for a checkup or treatment:
http://www.svjetlost-online.com/content/view/13/31/From what I’ve seen—and yeah, I’ve even grilled a few doctors about it—most standard cancer treatments end up doing more harm than good. Honestly? It's all just a massive money grab at the end of the day.
Scott Myers2 said:We tried cutting out dairy and sugar for a bit, but when she got sick again even after ditching the milk, we just gave up on the whole idea... Kids need milk, they need that calcium...
This stuff about Klaić sounds awesome to me... I seriously need to step up—she’s starting school soon, and if she’s constantly under the weather, her life is gonna be a total disaster.
What exactly does "for a bit" mean to you? Flushing toxins out of a system isn't some overnight magic trick. If you just blindly trust whatever the doctors hand you, you aren't going to get far. You've gotta make some hard cuts. It might suck, but it's mandatory.
And as for the milk thing? People are totally delusional. For what it's worth, the countries with the highest milk consumption also have the highest rates of osteoporosis. I'm telling you, milk actually CONTRIBUTES to bone issues, it doesn't PREVENT them.