The 2 greatest killers cured?

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Cancer - Dr Kelley

Nope.

Quoted message said:

Heart Disease - Dr Rath

Also nope.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

Why?
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Cancer - Dr Kelley

Nope.

Quoted message said:

Heart Disease - Dr Rath

Also nope.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

You should add 'perhaps' Otherwise this stuff could come back and bite you.
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Cancer - Dr Kelley

Nope.

Quoted message said:

Heart Disease - Dr Rath

Also nope.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

Orac,

I just went to one of the Dr. Kelley report sites.
What I saw had logic, but I didn't see information for me to determine
success or failure after following his method for 2 years.

I would greatly like to know why you say his methods won't work.

I'm sure you know that pancreatic cancer in the US is considered 100%
fatal with modern medical diagnosis that offers a less than 1 year
prognosis after discovery. I know people in this situation now.

There are a couple of alternatives I've seen others claim success at
curing pancreatic cancer who I've met after 1 year of medical release,
but like many of those methods they are difficult programs.

What other options do you have for people in this situation?

Thanks for any useful information you have.

Mike

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: The 2 greatest killers cured?
From: "Anth" [email hidden]
Date: 10/9/2003 1:18 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

You should add 'perhaps' Otherwise this stuff could come back and bite you.
Anth

Naa, his peers don't give a damn.

They are busy protecting one another in ye good ole boy and girl club, which is
a liars group.

Jan

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Why?

Because Dr. Kelley has not conquered cancer, nor has Dr. Rath conquered
heart disease. Certainly neither of them has shown any evidence from
well-designed clinical trials to suggest that they have.

Quoted message said:

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Cancer - Dr Kelley

Nope.

Quoted message said:

Heart Disease - Dr Rath

Also nope.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

You should add 'perhaps' Otherwise this stuff could come back and bite you.

No reason to. They haven't shown evidence that they have. If they ever
produce compelling scientific evidence that they have, I'll happily
reassess my opinion. Contrary to what idiots like Glowlife Dave think, I
would actually not mind being proven wrong on this. However, remember,
if they have truly "cured" these diseases, the treatment results should
be very dramatic and therefore not that difficult to prove. They have
yet to produce such dramatic evidence.

Quoted message said:

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Cancer - Dr Kelley

Nope.

Quoted message said:

Heart Disease - Dr Rath

Also nope.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Jan) said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: The 2 greatest killers cured?
From: "Anth" [email hidden]
Date: 10/9/2003 1:18 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

You should add 'perhaps' Otherwise this stuff could come back and bite you.
Anth

Naa, his peers don't give a damn.

They are busy protecting one another in ye good ole boy and girl club, which
is
a liars group.

Oh, goody. Jan is calling people liars again. Jan, I thought you said it
was wrong to "belittle." Or is it only wrong when others do it, not when
you do it?

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>, [email hidden]

Quoted message said:

Orac,

I just went to one of the Dr. Kelley report sites.
What I saw had logic, but I didn't see information for me to determine
success or failure after following his method for 2 years.

I would greatly like to know why you say his methods won't work.

Reason number one: It doesn't make physiologic sense.

Reason number two: He hasn't produced any good scientific evidence that
it has. The only evidence he has published in peer-reviewed literature
that I am aware of is an uncontrolled study with only twelve highly
selected patients. (Ironically, on the basis of this very shaky trial,
the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine coughed
up $1,000,000 for a trial. If I had submitted a grant application for a
conventional treatment based on such shaky data, my application would
have been laughed out of the study section.) Until Dr. Kelley produces
much better evidence, I'm sticking with my assessment that his treatment
doesn't work and that there's no sound physiologic reason to think that
it should. It is possible (although in my assessment unlikely) that his
trial will produce such evidence, but thus far I haven't heard of any
evidence from it yet.

Quoted message said:

I'm sure you know that pancreatic cancer in the US is considered 100%
fatal with modern medical diagnosis that offers a less than 1 year
prognosis after discovery. I know people in this situation now.

Pancreatic cancer is not 100% fatal.

It is, however, highly fatal, with probably only 1% of all patients
diagnosed with it living five years. However, in patients in whom the
cancer can be resected completely, five year survival is approximately
20-25%. Unfortunately, these are only around 10% of diagnosed patients
at best. For patients whose cancer can't be resected completely, there
are no five year survivors, and median life expectancy is on the order
of 4-6 months.

The fact that pancreatic cancer is highly fatal means that for any
treatment that truly dramatically affects survival it should be easy to
demonstrate this effect and require relatively few patients. Dr. Kelley
has not published any dramatically improved survival data with his
regimen.

Quoted message said:

There are a couple of alternatives I've seen others claim success at
curing pancreatic cancer who I've met after 1 year of medical release,
but like many of those methods they are difficult programs.

What other options do you have for people in this situation?

Unfortunately, the options are not good. There are chemotherapy regimens
that can modestly extend survival by a few months, but that's about it.

Quoted message said:

Thanks for any useful information you have.

Mike

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

In article <[email hidden]>,

Orac said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Jan) said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: The 2 greatest killers cured?
From: "Anth" [email hidden]
Date: 10/9/2003 1:18 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

You should add 'perhaps' Otherwise this stuff could come back and bite you.
Anth

Naa, his peers don't give a damn.

They are busy protecting one another in ye good ole boy and girl club, which
is
a liars group.

Oh, goody. Jan is calling people liars again. Jan, I thought you said it
was wrong to "belittle." Or is it only wrong when others do it, not when
you do it?

NOW you're catching on. When Jan does it and is called on it, she
announces that she's just "speaking the truth" or words to that
effect. You'll see. Well, you will if you don't have the sense to
killfile her.

-- David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net
These are my opinions only, but they're almost always correct.
"If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants
were standing on my shoulders." (Hal Abelson, MIT)

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: The 2 greatest killers cured?
From: [email hidden] (David Wright)
Date: 10/9/2003 6:51 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

In article <[email hidden]>,

Orac said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

(Jan) said:

>Subject: Re: The 2 greatest killers cured?
>From: "Anth" [email hidden]
>Date: 10/9/2003 1:18 PM Pacific Standard Time
>Message-id: <[email hidden]>
>
>You should add 'perhaps' Otherwise this stuff could come back and bite

you.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

>Anth

Naa, his peers don't give a damn.

They are busy protecting one another in ye good ole boy and girl club,

which

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

is
a liars group.

Oh, goody. Jan is calling people liars again.

How typical. Rich doesn't give a damn if his groups tells lies.

Orac overlooks it and Jan is baddddddddd for calling lies.

I thought you said it

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

was wrong to "belittle." Or is it only wrong when others do it, not when
you do it?

Calling peoples lies is not belittling. It is being honest and not letting the
liar group get by with the lies.

Furthermore, I have lied about nothing here.

Quoted message said:

NOW you're catching on. When Jan does it and is called on it, she
announces that she's just "speaking the truth" or words to that
effect.

Jan doesn't do it period. There have been no lies here from me. There has been
much twisting and all the usual dirty tricks of the known liars, which includes
the entire debunker bunch.

Like the two lies Orac and you have just told.

Being truthful means speaking the truth and also saying things that reflect
reality. Being truthful is one of the necessities of a human society, one of
the virtues of human behaviour, and brings great benefits, whilst lying is one
of the major elements of corruption in human society, and the cause of the
destruction of social structure and ties, one of the most evil features of bad
conduct, and causes widespread harm.

"Beware of the half-truth. You may have gotten hold of the wrong half."
Author Unknown

He who permits himself to tell a lie once finds it much easier to do it a
second and a third time till at length it becomes habitual."
Thomas Jefferson

Jan

(Jan) said:

Being truthful means speaking the truth and also saying things that reflect
reality. Being truthful is one of the necessities of a human society, one of
the virtues of human behaviour, and brings great benefits, whilst lying is one
of the major elements of corruption in human society, and the cause of the
destruction of social structure and ties, one of the most evil features of bad
conduct, and causes widespread harm.

I agree totally with the above. I applaud Jan for quoting the words of
someone who is most definitely not a Christian (although she forgot to
tell us who that someone is).

Jan has often accused people here of being agents of Satan, as
evidenced by all our lying. It is strange, therefore, that Jan did not
quote a later sentence from the same source which said "Beware of
telling lies, for lying leads to immorality and immorality leads to
Hellfire". Perhaps Jan thought that quoting the Messenger of Allaah
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) might be a bit
unChristian.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/wisdom_4_u_and_me/message/800

--
Peter Bowditch
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight
and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 http://www.ratbags.com/loon
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: The 2 greatest killers cured?
From: Peter Bowditch [email hidden]
Date: 10/9/2003 9:20 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

(Jan) said:

Being truthful means speaking the truth and also saying things that reflect
reality. Being truthful is one of the necessities of a human society, one of
the virtues of human behaviour, and brings great benefits, whilst lying is

one

Quoted message said:

of the major elements of corruption in human society, and the cause of the
destruction of social structure and ties, one of the most evil features of

bad

Quoted message said:

conduct, and causes widespread harm.

I agree totally with the above. I applaud Jan for quoting the words of
someone who is most definitely not a Christian

Oh blah blah blah Peter. They are words of truth. I don't need to go hunt down
who spoke the words.

Unlike you.

You are a known and proven liar.

Heed the words and let them soak in.

Jan

This is the punishment of a liar: he is not believed, even when he speaks the
truth."

Babylonian Talmud

(Jan) said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: The 2 greatest killers cured?
From: Peter Bowditch [email hidden]
Date: 10/9/2003 9:20 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

(Jan) said:

Being truthful means speaking the truth and also saying things that reflect
reality. Being truthful is one of the necessities of a human society, one of
the virtues of human behaviour, and brings great benefits, whilst lying is

one

Quoted message said:

of the major elements of corruption in human society, and the cause of the
destruction of social structure and ties, one of the most evil features of

bad

Quoted message said:

conduct, and causes widespread harm.

I agree totally with the above. I applaud Jan for quoting the words of
someone who is most definitely not a Christian

Oh blah blah blah Peter. They are words of truth. I don't need to go hunt down
who spoke the words.

You must have found them somewhere. Why couldn't you mention the name
of the author?

Quoted message said:

Unlike you.

I like to know who says things, even if they are Muslims.

Quoted message said:

You are a known and proven liar.

Prove it!

Quoted message said:

Heed the words and let them soak in.

Jan

This is the punishment of a liar: he is not believed, even when he speaks the
truth."

Babylonian Talmud

--
Peter Bowditch
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
The Green Light http://www.ratbags.com/greenlight
and The New Improved Quintessence of the Loon with added Vitamins and C-Q10 http://www.ratbags.com/loon
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Orac,

I just went to one of the Dr. Kelley report sites.
What I saw had logic, but I didn't see information for me to determine
success or failure after following his method for 2 years.

I would greatly like to know why you say his methods won't work.

Reason number one: It doesn't make physiologic sense.

Reason number two: He hasn't produced any good scientific evidence that
it has. The

Stating that something doesn't make good physiologic sense to your
understanding and that someone hasn't provided sufficient proof for
you doesn't mean the method is useless. I'm looking for a meaningful
evaluation.

Quoted message said:

only evidence he has published in peer-reviewed literature
that I am aware of is an uncontrolled study with only twelve highly
selected patients. (Ironically, on the basis of this very shaky trial,
the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine coughed
up $1,000,000 for a trial. If I had submitted a grant application for a
conventional treatment based on such shaky data, my application would
have been laughed out of the study section.) Until Dr. Kelley produces
much better evidence, I'm sticking with my assessment that his treatment
doesn't work and that there's no sound physiologic reason to think that
it should. It is possible (although in my assessment unlikely) that his
trial will produce such evidence, but thus far I haven't heard of any
evidence from it yet.

The NCCAM $$$'s show that other professionals believe his information
has merit worth verifying. Just because your criteria aren't met for
a grant application of your own doesn't mean the dispensers for
Kelly's grants aren't looking at more information you don't have.

My purpose here isn't to learn how to discard something just because
it won't fit all standard tests. Kelly's work isn't at that point.

The premise of Kelly's work does make physiologic sense to me. That
doesn't mean I don't have questions regarding the transport he uses.
I haven't seen that information yet.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I'm sure you know that pancreatic cancer in the US is considered 100%
fatal with modern medical diagnosis that offers a less than 1 year
prognosis after discovery. I know people in this situation now.

Pancreatic cancer is not 100% fatal.

Statistics are statistics and can nitpick when you are compelled to
make a point. This isn't a medical review I've talked with many
doctors who agree that pancreatic cancer is considered 100% fatal.
They may turn their heads slightly as the indicator for the small
percentage you quote below which varies depending on the study you
read, but that really isn't an important point here. If you were to
have pancreatic cancer would the statistics below honestly be so
comforting to you.

Quoted message said:

It is, however, highly fatal, with probably only 1% of all patients
diagnosed with it living five years. However, in patients in whom the
cancer can be resected completely, five year survival is approximately
20-25%. Unfortunately, these are only around 10% of diagnosed patients
at best. For patients whose cancer can't be resected completely, there
are no five year survivors, and median life expectancy is on the order
of 4-6 months.

Quoted message said:

The fact that pancreatic cancer is highly fatal means that for any
treatment that truly dramatically affects survival it should be easy to
demonstrate this effect and require relatively few patients.
Dr. Kelley
has not published any dramatically improved survival data with his
regimen.

At this stage of this work, I'm interested in less drama. If Kelly
has proved a foundation to his work, which the NCCAM believes he has,
then I am interested in evaluating his work further.
..
I know 3 people who have been cured of pancreatic cancer by
alternative methods that required exceptional discipline. That's
anecdotal and useless information in this newsgroup, but to a person
whose many doctors have told her that pancreatic cancer is 100% fatal
and that she has only 2 months to live, anecdotal information is the
only hope.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

There are a couple of alternatives I've seen others claim success at
curing pancreatic cancer who I've met after 1 year of medical release,
but like many of those methods they are difficult programs.

What other options do you have for people in this situation?

Unfortunately, the options are not good. There are chemotherapy regimens
that can modestly extend survival by a few months, but that's about it.

Chemotherapy use has allegedly extended the lives of various cancer
victims. Speak to the doctors in the trenches before accepting
double-blind statistics. Chemo was touted to offer a 20% survival for
liver cancer victims. Those were statistics quoted by medical
professionals to me who later in the same year said that in their own
practices they were only seeing 5% survival, but they were obligated
to quote the statistics.

I'm looking for options. By your definitions it is unlikely, if not
impossible, that the announcement of a perfected alternative therapy
will first appear in this news group. By the time it does show up
here, it will be old news over which you will have already become an
expert.

I appreciate your opinions, but Kelly's work still has merit worth
investigating.

Mike

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Thanks for any useful information you have.

Mike

--
Orac

--

"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Subject: Re: The 2 greatest killers cured?
From: "Anth" [email hidden]
Date: 10/9/2003 1:18 PM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id: <[email hidden]>

You should add 'perhaps' Otherwise this stuff could come back and bite

you.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Anth

Naa, his peers don't give a damn.

They are busy protecting one another in ye good ole boy and girl club,

which is

Quoted message said:

a liars group.

Jan

KaChing $8

--

"Jan" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

You are a known and proven liar.

Jan

$ KaChing $9

<[email hidden]> wrote in message news:3f863298.12017734@news

Quoted message said:

The premise of Kelly's work does make physiologic sense to me. That
doesn't mean I don't have questions regarding the transport he uses.
I haven't seen that information yet.

Can you tell us how it makes "physiologic" sense to you? It's a true
mystery to me.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Pancreatic cancer is not 100% fatal.

Quoted message said:

Statistics are statistics and can nitpick when you are compelled to
make a point. This isn't a medical review I've talked with many
doctors who agree that pancreatic cancer is considered 100% fatal.

Not all of it. I doubt that any oncologist would say that.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The fact that pancreatic cancer is highly fatal means that for any
treatment that truly dramatically affects survival it should be easy to
demonstrate this effect and require relatively few patients.
Dr. Kelley
has not published any dramatically improved survival data with his
regimen.

At this stage of this work, I'm interested in less drama. If Kelly
has proved a foundation to his work, which the NCCAM believes he has,
then I am interested in evaluating his work further.
.
I know 3 people who have been cured of pancreatic cancer by
alternative methods that required exceptional discipline. That's
anecdotal and useless information in this newsgroup, but to a person
whose many doctors have told her that pancreatic cancer is 100% fatal
and that she has only 2 months to live, anecdotal information is the
only hope.

Cool. You're asking prognostic questions of people with real world
experience. In advance, I'll tell you that everyone will agree that there
extraordinary exceptions. If you wish to bet your life on your
interpretations of these anecdotes, you have the right. And, nobody's
saying that you're completely wrong. Nobody in oncology or terminal
diseases says that much.
\

Quoted message said:

Unfortunately, the options are not good. There are chemotherapy regimens

Quoted message said:

that can modestly extend survival by a few months, but that's about it.

Chemotherapy use has allegedly extended the lives of various cancer
victims. Speak to the doctors in the trenches before accepting
double-blind statistics. Chemo was touted to offer a 20% survival for
liver cancer victims. Those were statistics quoted by medical
professionals to me who later in the same year said that in their own
practices they were only seeing 5% survival, but they were obligated
to quote the statistics.

[censored]. You're now relegating yourself to the fringe. Oncologists who
lie to their loved ones. Hindreds of them. Get real.

le moo

So you say because there's no evidence (i.e. no clinical trials) that it
isn't true?
Anth

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Anth said:

Why?

Because Dr. Kelley has not conquered cancer, nor has Dr. Rath conquered
heart disease. Certainly neither of them has shown any evidence from
well-designed clinical trials to suggest that they have.

Quoted message said:

"Orac" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
"Anth" <[email hidden]> wrote:

> Cancer - Dr Kelley

Nope.

> Heart Disease - Dr Rath

Also nope.
--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"

--
Orac |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."
|
|"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you
| inconvenience me with questions?"