Moderator Tik's behavior on other PDFs

No, look, nobody here is being paranoid. Those of us you label as "alternative seekers"—and I include myself in that group—likely once put our faith in mainstream medicine ourselves. We simply didn't get the answers we were looking for. We felt let down by an entire system that was supposed to think for us, and instead of fighting it, we turned toward something else.
It is common sense. If you break an arm or a leg, or if you need surgery on a crooked nose or pinched ears, or even just a dental issue, you go to a trained professional. You wouldn't dream of walking into some guy's garage to have him work on you with rusty knives. That part is obvious.
The standard argument is that something is recognized as a medicine only after it undergoes clinical trials, passes specific testing phases, proves its efficacy, and is deemed safe for human health. That sounds wonderful in theory, truly. But please, explain to me how chemotherapy fits that definition if everything you say is true. It isn't fully effective, nor is it safe. It causes hair loss and strips a person's immune system down to nothing. Yet, it all comes back to profit, whether we want to admit it or not. Why would a massive pharmaceutical corporation care about you as a human being? They don't know you. They have no emotional connection to you. To them, you are just a number, a statistic. Of course, the same logic applies to those "quack doctors" or "alternative practitioners"—people like Dr. Nenad Rosa, in my opinion, who built a fortune off other people's misery. Now, getting rich isn't the issue; if someone actually cures cancer, they should be rewarded. The problem is those who take the money and help absolutely no one. People like that deserve the strictest penalties.
Alan SP cured his illness, or at least significantly, significantly eased his symptoms. It is perfectly natural that, for him, this is now the ultimate remedy. You would feel the exact same way if a treatment helped you, regardless of where it originated. I think what you’re actually feeling is a blow to your ego because you can't wrap your head around how Alan could find relief through something that isn't officially medically recognized, something that hasn't cleared all the formal trial stages and been sanctioned by mainstream medicine. That is the core of this debate. We have all heard stories of doctors forbidding patients undergoing chemotherapy from using natural products like aloe vera. Why do they forbid it? I already gave you the answer in my previous sentence.

Tim, why'd you have to be so rude? Don't you think you went a little too far?

Kate Bishop76 said:Give me a break. What "pimple pills"? Sure, hormonal imbalances can trigger acne on your neck or face—that’s a thing—but for anything else, you go see an esthetician. Or, if it’s actually a serious issue, you see a dermatologist. There are plenty of clinical cosmetic treatments that clear up acne incredibly well. 😉

🙄 Just because you don't know about prescription meds doesn't mean they don't exist. 😉 And trust me, they definitely do. Do a quick Google search... or better yet, just ask a dermatologist. 😉 Stay out of medical advice when it's obvious you have no clue what you're talking about. ☕

Kate Bishop76 said:The paranoia among you alternative types is getting out of hand. It’s like everyone is poisoning you—through your food, your meds, the air you breathe, the water you drink, who knows what else. Seriously, let's get real for a second. I'm not saying Big Pharma is some saintly organization, but half the stuff you claim about them is just plain delusional.

Secondly, it always comes back to this MMS nonsense. It’s not just about that one thing. (And again, I have to point out that Alan clearly failed basic pathophysiology. Apparently, the body "cleanses" itself of pathogens through bowel movements? Give me a break. It’s pathetic that there are countless textbooks written on this exact subject, yet you people can't seem to finish reading even one of them. NO, you just BLINDLY believe someone who doesn't have a shred of medical training.) Then you have people on those forums talking about swallowing clay. The supposed "mechanism of action" they describe for how clay cleanses the body is absolute nonsense. Not to mention when some forum user suggests that urine is HEALTHY and recommends everyone start drinking it. Look, folks, I don't care if you want to eat literal garbage. Your total ignorance regarding the topics you're lecturing us on is painful to watch. All your rambling is built on faith—there is zero evidence that these "magic potions" actually work. Don't even get me started on vaccines. I'm not saying modern medicine is perfect. The difference is that medicine uses controlled experiments to prove whether something works and HOW it works, whereas alternative medicine relies entirely on blind faith and the placebo effect.

Let's put it this way ☕ since you want to lecture me on medicine.

Chemotherapy. Does it help? What is its purpose? How does it interact with the human body? ☕ That is a product of actual science.
Alternative medicine claims to have better solutions than chemo. Even most doctors would admit that, and besides, it's easy enough to compare the efficacy of the methods. Science isn't infallible either, so don't fall into the trap that both sides stumble into—which is becoming dogmatic. 😉

Btw, I'm a med student at a top-tier university... just so we're clear on where I'm coming from. 😉

This thread is totally closed.

To answer the original question: yeah, moderators are allowed to have different perspectives on their specific subforums. In fact, it would be EXTREMELY weird if the mods over in Health, Natural Science, and Alternative Medicine all agreed on everything. 🤷I can't even imagine it; that would actually be a pretty unhealthy situation.

Moderators shouldn't be insulting people, obviously. They get flagged just like any other user when they deserve it. In this case, none of the mods deserve a strike for being insulting.

The debates you're having about cytostatics or acne medications—like Accutane, for those who aren't aware—should happen in the right sections. The Natural Science section definitely isn't the place to argue the validity of meta-studies regarding therapy efficacy. There are specific sections for THAT... science, alternative, and health.