Issues with discussions regarding cancer treatment

dustypuma5 said:But look, if someone drops some theory or a new method, they gotta prove it. Until there's actual proof, most people are just gonna think it's nonsense.

I don't see anything weird about that. That's just life.

It wasn't me labeling them, it's just what science says, and science is pretty much what our laws are built on. And the law says that trying to treat cancer by rubbing your hands on your head is definitely quackery.
As long as those laws are in place, you kind of have to follow them. 🙂

Now, this is worth discussing. I think it’s actually the minority who will see the stupidity here; the majority will believe absolutely anything as long as there's decent advertising or if they hear it repeated enough times. Just look at those bogus tea brands you see on late-night infomercials...

dustypuma5 said:Whatever, screw all that....
Can I get advice on building a bomb here on the forum?
Or tips on how to break into a Golf GTI?
Or maybe political advice on how to kill a Mexican?
Or the best way to kill cats on KLJ?

I guess the mods just don't get the basic rules of how they should be moderating...

There have actually been open threads on the police forum about poisons and various types of explosives before, and the moment a moderator logs on, those threads get shut down immediately.🙂

Solving this issue is actually pretty straightforward.

In India, they recognize six official branches of medicine, and it’s perfectly legal there to treat people using "alternative" methods—whatever that looks like in their context.

Here in the States, just like in the rest of the EU, allopathic medicine is the standard.

There's no need to shut down the subforum, but the moderators really need to wake up and use some common sense. Telling someone that choosing not to see a specialist or an oncologist is somehow the same as telling them to grab a gun and shoot themselves in the head is a massive stretch.

We need to keep those kinds of extremes out of the discussions. That goes for the pseudo-scientists on this forum, too, and that crowd of undergrad science students who seemingly have nothing better to do than hunt down "evil alternative practitioners" across different subforums.

Balance is key—I've mentioned this before regarding the Politics subforum. For sensitive areas like this, you should always have a moderator who stays neutral and sticks strictly to the rules.

Bioenergetic healers aren't going to hurt anyone, and they probably won't help either, but I know they won't cause harm.
I don't care if someone wants to drop $5,000 on seeing a bio-therapist; that's their business.
But if someone starts acting reckless, like those folks who got permanently banned—like Alan SP or that person encouraging people to skip the doctor—then they need to be shut down immediately.

Ten years ago, my mother was diagnosed with a malignant cervical tumor. She went through cobalt radiation and brachytherapy, and she’s still here, healthy and happy, today.

The tumor was classified as highly aggressive, but she beat it thanks to medical expertise.
Even though my mom is a big believer in spiritual things—coming from a more traditional, tight-knit area in southern Canada—she isn't primitive. It never crossed her mind to skip the specialist or refuse treatment.

I’m genuinely curious: how many of those tumors have actually been "healed" by Braco from Srebrenjak, Domančić, or that schizophrenic The Judge!?

Thanks for reading!

Wise words...

Everything's already been said, I guess. Nothing else to add. 🙂

I think there might be some grounds for it, but you’d actually need a lawyer to figure that out instead of just throwing around guesses without citing any specific statutes.

There's no doubt a doctor isn't supposed to prescribe or give advice on anything outside their scope. But I highly doubt anyone could get in trouble just because a neighbor mentioned over coffee that they think modern medicine is a scam. Where exactly the line is drawn remains to be seen.

Personally, I doubt it's legally actionable, though I might have more concrete info soon. If it isn't illegal, then it really just comes down to the forum rules and how the moderators want to handle it.

Jose Barrett said:Solving this issue is actually pretty straightforward.

In India, they recognize six official branches of medicine, and it’s perfectly legal there to treat people using "alternative" methods—whatever that looks like in their context.

Here in the States, just like in the rest of the EU, allopathic medicine is the standard.

There's no need to shut down the subforum, but the moderators really need to wake up and use some common sense. Telling someone that choosing not to see a specialist or an oncologist is somehow the same as telling them to grab a gun and shoot themselves in the head is a massive stretch.

We need to keep those kinds of extremes out of the discussions. That goes for the pseudo-scientists on this forum, too, and that crowd of undergrad science students who seemingly have nothing better to do than hunt down "evil alternative practitioners" across different subforums.

Balance is key—I've mentioned this before regarding the Politics subforum. For sensitive areas like this, you should always have a moderator who stays neutral and sticks strictly to the rules.

Bioenergetic healers aren't going to hurt anyone, and they probably won't help either, but I know they won't cause harm.
I don't care if someone wants to drop $5,000 on seeing a bio-therapist; that's their business.
But if someone starts acting reckless, like those folks who got permanently banned—like Alan SP or that person encouraging people to skip the doctor—then they need to be shut down immediately.

Ten years ago, my mother was diagnosed with a malignant cervical tumor. She went through cobalt radiation and brachytherapy, and she’s still here, healthy and happy, today.

The tumor was classified as highly aggressive, but she beat it thanks to medical expertise.
Even though my mom is a big believer in spiritual things—coming from a more traditional, tight-knit area in southern Canada—she isn't primitive. It never crossed her mind to skip the specialist or refuse treatment.

I’m genuinely curious: how many of those tumors have actually been "healed" by Braco from Srebrenjak, Domančić, or that schizophrenic The Judge!?

Thanks for reading!

Look, this isn't a doctor's office. It's an online forum, specifically the Alternative Medicine subforum, which has a very clear warning prominently displayed. If someone ignores all those warnings and decides that advice from people like steelsurfer42, Chronic Vlado, vjekos30, or even Jose Barrett is more valuable than a licensed medical specialist with actual credentials... well, that's their choice.

You always have to find a balance...

Are you talking about the kind of "balance" between alternative and conventional medicine you see in those Health PDFs?

Jose White18 said:Look, this isn't a doctor's office. It's an online forum, specifically the Alternative Medicine subforum, which has a very clear warning prominently displayed. If someone ignores all those warnings and decides that advice from people like steelsurfer42, Chronic Vlado, vjekos30, or even Jose Barrett is more valuable than a licensed medical specialist with actual credentials... well, that's their choice.

You always have to find a balance...

Are you talking about the kind of "balance" between alternative and conventional medicine you see in those Health PDFs?

And who actually reads those warnings?
Do you honestly think this site is legally bulletproof just because some former moderator scribbled a few lines after we spent months practically begging her to write them?

If someone still can't figure out where they are after everything, and decides that advice from someone like steelsurfer42, Chronic Vlado, vjekos30, or even Jose Barrett is more valuable than what a licensed specialist with a real medical degree has to say... well, let them.

People get emotionally fragile when they're dealing with serious illnesses, so let's not act like we have all the answers here.
The internet can be a dangerous place, no matter how much we pretend otherwise.

Are you suggesting there's some kind of balance between alternative and conventional medicine over on that Health PDF?

You missed my point, though I see dustypuma5 clearly ☕

We should let the forum members who oppose alternative medicine speak their minds, whether they actually know what they're talking about or not.
If someone starts insulting people or trolling, their post gets deleted, they get a warning, or they get banned. I don't see the issue.

That sub-forum has been a ghost town since the discussions stopped, and you can't really have a "discussion" when everyone is just echoing the same opinion.

Jose Barrett said:And who actually reads those warnings?
Do you honestly think this site is legally bulletproof just because some former moderator scribbled a few lines after we spent months practically begging her to write them?

If someone still can't figure out where they are after everything, and decides that advice from someone like steelsurfer42, Chronic Vlado, vjekos30, or even Jose Barrett is more valuable than what a licensed specialist with a real medical degree has to say... well, let them.

People get emotionally fragile when they're dealing with serious illnesses, so let's not act like we have all the answers here.
The internet can be a dangerous place, no matter how much we pretend otherwise.

Are you suggesting there's some kind of balance between alternative and conventional medicine over on that Health PDF?

You missed my point, though I see dustypuma5 clearly ☕

We should let the forum members who oppose alternative medicine speak their minds, whether they actually know what they're talking about or not.
If someone starts insulting people or trolling, their post gets deleted, they get a warning, or they get banned. I don't see the issue.

That sub-forum has been a ghost town since the discussions stopped, and you can't really have a "discussion" when everyone is just echoing the same opinion.

Whose problem is it, really? 🤷

The internet can be dangerous, no matter how much we stay quiet about it.

Yeah, people fall for internet nonsense left and right. We should probably just ban the whole thing.

We should let the forum members who oppose alternative medicine write freely and share their knowledge—or lack thereof.

As if the folks against mainstream medicine don't get to argue that urine therapy is better than clavocin on the Health forum. Right.

Just to be clear, I’m not using the Health PDF as a negative example. I don't think it's poorly designed or badly moderated at all. I'm just using it as a counterpoint. It shows how different subforums approach the same topics differently. It helps you see which crowd runs which corner of the site, even if they aren't the only ones talking. Everyone just picks what works for them.

Jose Barrett said:And who actually reads those warnings?
Do you honestly think this site is legally bulletproof just because some former moderator scribbled a few lines after we spent months practically begging her to write them?

If someone still can't figure out where they are after everything, and decides that advice from someone like steelsurfer42, Chronic Vlado, vjekos30, or even Jose Barrett is more valuable than what a licensed specialist with a real medical degree has to say... well, let them.

People get emotionally fragile when they're dealing with serious illnesses, so let's not act like we have all the answers here.
The internet can be a dangerous place, no matter how much we pretend otherwise.

Are you suggesting there's some kind of balance between alternative and conventional medicine over on that Health PDF?

You missed my point, though I see dustypuma5 clearly ☕

We should let the forum members who oppose alternative medicine speak their minds, whether they actually know what they're talking about or not.
If someone starts insulting people or trolling, their post gets deleted, they get a warning, or they get banned. I don't see the issue.

That sub-forum has been a ghost town since the discussions stopped, and you can't really have a "discussion" when everyone is just echoing the same opinion.

👍

Man, you basically just said exactly what I was thinking...

And yeah, forums can be pretty sketchy.
But if someone posts a recipe for a bomb, the cops will show up asking why it wasn't taken down immediately.
If someone explains how to rob a Chase Bank, the feds will be right there too.
Or if people share pirated software and tutorials on how to use it, the BSA will swoop in and shut the whole domain down....

Nobody makes a scene over that stuff... There are zero consequences and it's all just a free ride...
So that's that.
Like, on an IT board, you can talk about illegal stuff all day, seriously. But nobody can say:

"hey, ditch those genuine Windows and grab these cracked versions. You can do it like this and like this..."
Because that gets you an instant ban. 🙂

What's even the difference between that and this:
"just skip the cancer treatment and go see some magic healer, I'll give you his number..."

There isn't one. It's just hypocrites who only care about following the law when it suits them seeing a difference.

There’s actually a massive distinction here. In your example, you’re talking about using pirated software, which is a crime. Choosing to bypass conventional medicine is just an exercise of personal freedom. Unless we're talking about people deemed incapable of making their own decisions, there's no legal mandate forcing anyone into a specific treatment.

You can decide to skip medical treatment without breaking any laws. But if you choose to install illegal software, you’re breaking the law every single time.

Why not compare that to a scenario where the government mandates Windows as the only operating system in public schools they fund, and then someone on a forum suggests ditching Windows for Linux?

Okay, maybe that comparison isn't perfect, but it illustrates how biased and nonsensical these arguments are.

Opting out of certain medical treatments isn't illegal in itself, yet you're comparing it to actual criminal acts—like manufacturing explosives or software piracy. I’ll know exactly to what extent, where, and from whom sharing such advice becomes a punishable offense once my lawyer gets back to me. People here seem way too quick to throw around legal threats. I hope the goal isn't to intimidate the forum staff with questionable legalities. As I said, nobody has actually defined what constitutes a crime here, under which specific statute, or in what exact context. It’s all very vague guesswork without a single actual reference. To be honest, it feels more like personal vendettas are at play.

So, you think it's totally fine to refer someone to some hack practicing fake medicine, even though that whole thing is illegal. 😳

The comparison works, you just gotta look at it right.

Basically, in one scenario you're sending someone to a pirate for software, and in the other, you're sending them to some fraud for a tumor. The only difference is that hooking someone up with a software pirate is a crime, whereas actually going to see a tumor quack isn't technically a crime itself.

But I guess that's just how people in Florida handle it: it's not crap, it's just sweetie having a little accident...

Quackery probably isn't actually illegal. What's illegal is practicing medicine without a license. It’s basically the same loophole as dietary supplements—they don't have to meet the same rigorous standards to hit the shelves as actual prescription drugs. If that weren't the case, pharmacies would be packed with the same stuff you see in online ads right now.

I highly doubt sending someone to a bioenergy healer or something similar is against the law; you're just trying to manipulate the definition. You can't legally define everything. Someone provides a "service," and suddenly a bill "happens" to land on their desk. Who's going to police that? Or they could just register the business under some vague umbrella like "consulting services." As long as they don't claim to be a doctor (when they aren't), they likely fall outside the legal definition of practicing medicine without a license. But hey, that's just me speculating, so I won't get too carried away.

The comparison just doesn't hold water, no matter how you slice it.

A software pirate is someone selling protected software without permission. A pirate isn't someone who wrote their own code and you paid them to install it. We're talking about copyright infringement here, which is an entirely different category. Dragging this specific argument into it feels both biased and pointless.

Anyway, like I said, I'm hoping to get an answer from a lawyer soon so we can finally put this to rest. If the answer turns out to be what I'm expecting, we can pretty much write this whole discussion off as trolling—especially if people keep popping up in the alternative medicine circles and acting accordingly. 🙂

bluemason3 said:Quackery probably isn't actually illegal. What's illegal is practicing medicine without a license. It’s basically the same loophole as dietary supplements—they don't have to meet the same rigorous standards to hit the shelves as actual prescription drugs. If that weren't the case, pharmacies would be packed with the same stuff you see in online ads right now.

I highly doubt sending someone to a bioenergy healer or something similar is against the law; you're just trying to manipulate the definition. You can't legally define everything. Someone provides a "service," and suddenly a bill "happens" to land on their desk. Who's going to police that? Or they could just register the business under some vague umbrella like "consulting services." As long as they don't claim to be a doctor (when they aren't), they likely fall outside the legal definition of practicing medicine without a license. But hey, that's just me speculating, so I won't get too carried away.

The comparison just doesn't hold water, no matter how you slice it.

A software pirate is someone selling protected software without permission. A pirate isn't someone who wrote their own code and you paid them to install it. We're talking about copyright infringement here, which is an entirely different category. Dragging this specific argument into it feels both biased and pointless.

Anyway, like I said, I'm hoping to get an answer from a lawyer soon so we can finally put this to rest. If the answer turns out to be what I'm expecting, we can pretty much write this whole discussion off as trolling—especially if people keep popping up in the alternative medicine circles and acting accordingly. 🙂

Here's the excerpt:

Quackery

Section 244.

(1) Anyone who provides medical treatment or assistance to another without the required professional credentials,

shall be punished by a fine of up to fifty days' income or imprisonment for up to six months.

(2) Anyone who commits the offense under paragraph 1 of this section for reward or profit,

shall be punished by a fine or imprisonment for up to one year.

Preparation and production of harmful treatments

Section 245.

(1) Anyone who prepares or produces preparations or products for sale or other ways of being placed on the market that are harmful to human health,

shall be punished by a fine or imprisonment for up to one year.

(2) Anyone who commits the offense under paragraph 1 through negligence,

shall be punished by a fine of up to fifty days' income or imprisonment for up to six months.

(3) Products and means of production shall be seized.

The term "quackery" is just the heading for that chapter in the Penal Code, and you basically wrote your own definition. So, I guess quackery isn't illegal, it's just treating people without a license, and since that's how you defined quackery, it's all the same thing anyway. 🤔
Maybe I'm just getting confused here. 😁

But hey, you just keep insisting you're right. 🙂

The Chang 245 situation is a perfect example, just like I mentioned before. You see all sorts of supplements being sold everywhere—noni, aloe, and even that MMS stuff. As long as they don't label it as a medicine, the authorities won't touch them. They'll keep selling out of pharmacies; look at Citrofite, for instance, which medical studies have proven to be totally useless. If someone decides to take it as a cure, that's on them.

It’s the same deal with a healer who doesn't claim to be a doctor. They won't face any sanctions.

But hey, that's just my take on it. Let's wait and see what the experts say.🙂

Jose White18 said:Everyone is the architect of their own destiny, so you have every right to decide whose advice you listen to and how you choose to treat your body.
It’s the tumor that kills you, not someone else's suggestion.

Some people act as the true architects of fortune for their children and those else they look after. It’s a heavy responsibility, really. That's why I think it would be incredibly helpful if someone could remind us all that the principles of alternative treatment in refuls actually carry over directly to RiD.

Jose White18 said:Everyone is the architect of their own destiny, so you have every right to decide whose advice you listen to and how you choose to treat your body.
It’s the tumor that kills you, not someone else's suggestion.

On those Alternative forums, people are always so quick to jump on anything they can write off as a placebo effect—it’s like their absolute last resort for an explanation. But the second you bring up the nocebo effect? Suddenly, everyone loses interest and shuts down. It's funny how that works, isn't it? 🙄

silverpuma542 said:Some people act as the true architects of fortune for their children and those else they look after. It’s a heavy responsibility, really. That's why I think it would be incredibly helpful if someone could remind us all that the principles of alternative treatment in refuls actually carry over directly to RiD.

On those Alternative forums, people are always so quick to jump on anything they can write off as a placebo effect—it’s like their absolute last resort for an explanation. But the second you bring up the nocebo effect? Suddenly, everyone loses interest and shuts down. It's funny how that works, isn't it? 🙄

Yeah, and? As long as nobody steps in to take their guardianship away, they're considered fit for the job.

So, should we strip them of their rights, or are we going to ban the Internet just because of them? 🤔

Jose White18 said:Whose problem is it, really? 🤷

The internet can be dangerous, no matter how much we stay quiet about it.

Yeah, people fall for internet nonsense left and right. We should probably just ban the whole thing.

We should let the forum members who oppose alternative medicine write freely and share their knowledge—or lack thereof.

As if the folks against mainstream medicine don't get to argue that urine therapy is better than clavocin on the Health forum. Right.

Just to be clear, I’m not using the Health PDF as a negative example. I don't think it's poorly designed or badly moderated at all. I'm just using it as a counterpoint. It shows how different subforums approach the same topics differently. It helps you see which crowd runs which corner of the site, even if they aren't the only ones talking. Everyone just picks what works for them.

Look, please don't go blurring the lines between actual medicine and quackery, or suggesting that people here should just "choose" whichever version suits them better.

What kind of counterpoint is that!?
comparing a PhD researcher like Ivan Đikić against Braco from Srebrenjak 🤣

What's your actual goal here? If you think people like Braco are truly that dangerous, why don't you just file a criminal complaint against them personally for practicing unlicensed medicine?
Cut Braco out at the source instead of trying to ban anyone from writing about him.
Do something productive and useful rather than fighting these endless little crusades on a forum.

Jose Barrett said:Look, please don't go blurring the lines between actual medicine and quackery, or suggesting that people here should just "choose" whichever version suits them better.

What kind of counterpoint is that!?
comparing a PhD researcher like Ivan Đikić against Braco from Srebrenjak 🤣

Look, I'll be blunt, but people have every right to decide what works for them, even if they end up making a mess of things personally.
The only thing you shouldn't be doing is trying to steer someone away from legitimate medical science.

hollowtrucker77 said:Look, I'll be blunt, but people have every right to decide what works for them, even if they end up making a mess of things personally.
The only thing you shouldn't be doing is trying to steer someone away from legitimate medical science.

But what happens when a licensed professional—an actual doctor—is the one doing exactly that?