cancer cure?
 

Maybe it has a lot to do with politics than you might think
for those who can think outside the conventional ways.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature…&v=wvzDHGLEUyw

I went to the program and noticed it was an hour and a half long, so ill catch it another time, but it looked interesting.
All for thinking outside the box, hell if more people did that than maybe we wouldnt have half the problems that exist today. Outside of the box thining gives way for open-mindedness, which gives way for reason and unnderstanding, and then love.
If everyone remembered to love then all would be fine.

One thing though, considering cancer is a scary thing, look into something called Ayahuasca, not many people have heard of it. Im not encouraging you to break the laws of your region, as the drug DMT is schedule 1 illegal here in the states, but I would encourage you to adventure and grow, and to find whats special about you and share it with your community. That community could be the world if you believe hard enough and follow your path man, by now this might sound like a pep-talk but its not, these are words of wisdom that I seldom find the room to exercise, anyone who reads this, just remember to love and learn.
Happy holidays to you all as well

So do the Gershman people still use castor oil, hydrogen peroxide and ozone enemas? I mean I know they stopped using raw calf's liver based supplements after they landed a dozen or so people in hospitals, but I didn't see if they still shove castor-oil, ozone, and hair-bleach up people's butts.

"The uploader has not made this video available in your country. "

uhm, so what is it?

Your country has strong laws against making demonstrably false or misleading medical claims and the poster didn't feel like legal troubles if they ever felt like traveling there?

Actually the poster, New Video Digital, is a distributor which licenses those videos under an ad revenue sharing agreement with the IP owners and not directly associated with that particular video. So the real answer is they have not licensed it for your region/country. They do have Highlander for most regions though so if you want to watch something else in the fantasy genre that might be comparable.

Oh, what's the video? It's a documentary arguing for organic vegetarian juice diets as a cure for cancer and lauding the work of a German doctor who advocated crazy things like hydrogen peroxide enemas alongside a few quite sensible things like "eat less meat and wash your hands before surgery." The "cure for cancer" part isn't exactly something I'd put into the same category as washing your hands and not eating your own body weight in pig every month. The real problem with the documentary though is that it wholly relies on annectdotal examples of people who went through this regimen and also recovered. That makes for a good story but it is dishonest to say "hundreds of our patients recovered" and present that as somehow proving anything without also saying out of how many total.

That's about as compelling as listing several redheads you know who own bycicles and saying that's proof that red-hair causes bike ownership. It's also about as honest an argument as saying that then concealing how many redheads you know who don't own bycicles. It's a little more serious though because in this case the redheads they know who don't own bicycles would be analogous to the patients they treated and charged then died of cancer anyways.

It's a particularly glaring bit of bullshit because they are able to assert that many of our current cancer treatments are rather shitty because, as awful as the pharmaceutical industry is, we actually do have access to data on how many of their customers didn't get better.

Now anectdotes can be valuable in the scientific process and other forms of investigation and inquiring. They can help inform our questions but its a deception to pretend they answer them. If you were a doctor and noticed several of your patients improve dramatically after switching to a certain diet, those anectdotes might suggest to you that it would be worth examining in a double-blind scientific study even though they don't themselves constitute anything that could honestly be called proof.

Similarly if you noticed that supposed third party idependent reviews of pharmaceuticals were both paid for by the pharmaceutical companies who had a vested interest in their outcome and seemed be inordinately positive about those products - you might use that as the inspiration for comparing the accuracy of industry funded trials with wider post-release data sets to see if there was perhaps systemic bias in the former.

You also might notice that the extent of the credits for the executive producer of this "documentary" are pretty all films both sold by Gerson Media and universally glowingly positive about the treatments and products they just happen to sell. Just as one would question the objectivity and motives driving the production of a drug study funded entirely by the company that would like to make that drug, you might also wonder about this film.

Not sure if people here are attacking the idea of alternative cures for cancer so take my words posted as just words.I am super tired and so just skimmed the responses.

I believe the peroxide treatment works as it kills almost all viruses,fungus and other pathogens while leaving the human cells pretty much alone.After all the body produces H2O2 to do just this in the body.The fungus idea is important as an Italian doctor claims that cancer is actually a fungal invasion.He cures many patients by injecting baking soda directly into the tumor wherein the tumor just melts away.There are also baking soda cancer cure videos on Youtube where people have cured themselves of terminal cancer in a few weeks by ingesting ridiculous amounts of baking soda.

A theory of mine is that our diets cause our bodies to become super acidic and its a well known fact that cancer patients are running super low body ph's.I think that a way to combat this is to drink alkaline water but this is negated if you eat a normal diet high in acidifying foods like soda.;)

The newest one to come out is that cancer eats sugar and if you go low carb the cancer dies off.Reason is that while humans can run off glucose or the "fat made alternative" ketones,cancer cells on the other hand do not have this luxury.Many people are now going to very low carb,very high fat diets to kill off the cancer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlbLIJJ4QZM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yl8Y8I_TsjI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqcYpIFiwOk

Nope I'm attacking the idea of people like "The Gerson Institute" and its subsidiaries who try to peddle anecdotes as proof of the soundness of their products, literature, and expensive treatment clinics. How is that any better than systemically biased industry-funded drug trials which give a false impression as to the soundness of their products? I mean its not exactly the same because the drug companies don't offer to sell you a copy of the reports on their website, but its pretty similar in terms of being a fair bit worse than disingenuous. They also use pretty much the same methods; sponsor the production of litterature which takes more than a few liberties with the truth in order to find itself overwhelmingly supportive of what you sell, have it circulate as though it arose naturally and independently within the marketplace of ideas, and say "see, this shows you should buy our stuff."

I see this video being sold alongside several others (Gerson Miracle for example) by Gerson Media where the producer and executive producer for many of them are the same people whose entire resume consists of making films glowingly supportive of products and services also sold by Gerson Media and associated companies. I note the consistent misrepresentation of the testimonials as proof and pretending that asking for data to calculate success rates instead of hand-selected success stories isn't entirely reasonable. After this I feel like I'm watching an infomercial crafted by some failed drug-rep's evil twin.

We should investigate alternative therapies aggressively as it is quite possible some may lead to breakthroughs that may not have otherwise been discovered. We should not however take our cues from people trying to sell us shit. I would not consider a pharmaceutical rep telling me about how there were hundreds of people who took an amazing new diet-pill and lost weight without dying to be proof that diet pills are the real cure to obesity rather than all that healthy diet and clean living stuff. If it also seemed he might just work for the maker of said "amazing" pill I'd probably suspect what I had heard just may have been a bit of a disingenuous sales pitch rather than a concerned citizen candidly offering what he honestly mistook as proof of something's safety and effectiveness.

If you want to know who makes it easy for pharmaceutical lobbies to make research into things that might have a chance of curing something without making them a buck look like pipe dreams and scams, it's these guys running scams like this.

EDIT: Curious to know whether my suspicion that these documentaries are effectively infomercials payed for by The Gerson Institute and its associated subsidiaries dressed up as indie documentaries is justified? Just take a look at the back of the Blu-Ray collection (which packages 3 of these videos of the same author including the ironicly named "The Beautiful Truth.")

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/…500_SS500_.jpg

Gerson Media Productions? A bit like getting your information on the health effects of smoking from articles first printed in an old Phillip Morris company newsletter. Well maybe they just commissioned the anthology so that doesn't really prove they had anything to do with the production of any of them.

It's not like the official website for "The Beautiful Truth" is registered and operated by the guy who runs the Gerson Institute, writes some of books they sell, owns the company and clinics, and operates its book and DVD publisher "Totality Books."

http://www.networksolutions.com/whoi…truthmovie.com

Oh.

Regarding H2O2. It's part of protection against infections, in that it's used as a signalø substance to attract white blood celles. In very small concentrations. H2O2 is outside the body used for disinfection of surfaces, but in much higher concentrations, which is definitely toxic.

Used as an enema it won't kill almost all germs, and if it did, you would certainly be in trouble, we need a well developed flora in our intestines.

As for cancer being a fungal invasion, that's a claim with extremely little support. And you would not want to ingest ridiculous amounts of baking soda, it would give you an alkalosis (too high PH), the huge amounts of sodium could increase your blood pressure and cause heart faliure. Just like salt.

Cancer patients don't run super low body pH's. pH in arterial blood is well regulated between 7.35 and 7.45. You won't get much below that before severe symptoms arise.

A normal diet will not cause a disturbance in blood level pH, it's well within the capacity of the acid base regulation of our bodies. Ketones are acids, so if your cells are significantly starved for sugar, body fluids will become too acidic. Which is what happens with untreaded or insufficiently treated type I diabetes where you despite a high blood sugar level have significant intracellullar starvation.
There are many different types of cancer, cells show different grades of mutation and their metabolism of sugars will vary a lot. So in general there's nothing preventing cancer cells in general from using ketones.

As for the Gerson therapy, it's nothing new - we've seen things like that coming up again and again, but they don't last long.

pibbur

1 day

Interestingly, unless your liver or kidneys are compromised or you have one of a few specific metabolic disorders than a non-starvation level diet will not cause a significant disturbance in blood glucose levels let alone blood pH. Hell even for starvation, your liver with a smaller contribution from your kidneys can produce enough glucose from protein that blood glucose is able to remain pretty damn stable for up to 40 days.

That's a very good thing it turns out because despite what the poster was lead to beleive there are some very important non-cancerous cells in your body that are pretty aweful at using ketones to just even supplement their use of glucose as an energy source. Those cells happen to be your brain cells which only begin to adapt to metabolize ketones once starvation has begun (for someone not consuming carbs this would be when there was there is no longer enough dietary protein and fat combined for the liver and kidneys to convert to maintain glucose levels and the body must begin degrading its own cell proteins.) This is also a slow and at best partial adaptation such that even two weeks into starvation they would only be able to obtain about half their required energy from ketones.

So yeah if a diet were to cure cancer by reducing blood glucose levels it would take the brain with it. Luckily this does not describe most low or no carb diets unless they are so low in protein+fat content that they are just slow ways of starving to death.