Medical Study: Untreated Cancer Patients Live Longer

[Guest guest]

Thanks for the reply. I appreciate it.

 

I think you are correct. Five years is considered a more or less " cure. " And I

also agree that there are many treatments out there that need to be studied,

treatments that may well do much more for you than the usual medical procedures

now available.

 

I took the posted article to mean " DON'T GET TREATMENT. " At least that is what

the guy said. He did not mention alternative meds, other than a healthy diet,

which would be a no-brainer anyway. No, I don't think traditional therapy is

the cure-all or end-all for patients. I think the reverse is maybe true. But

treatment is necessary, be it traditional or otherwise.

 

I don't doubt your lady had a lump disappear while doing breathing exercises. I

do doubt it was cancerous.

 

I think raising thought and awareness of non-traditional cancer treatment is a

worthwhile endeavor, and I give you A+ for most of the posts you put out. But

the post we are discussing did not do that. It simply said NO treatments,

period. Quick way to get to our eventual destination.

 

Take care,

 

Roger

-

Misty L. Trepke

Saturday, August 09, 2003 2:27 PM

Re: [s-A] [AltMedForum] Medical Study: Untreated Cancer Patients Live

Longer

 

 

Dear Rodger,

 

I have heard before how cancer statistics can be manipulated. From

my understanding, for instance, survival rate is based on surviving

5 years. In other words if the cancer kills you 5 years and 1 day

later, then technically you " survived " cancer. I don't have the

references for that, but I can look for them... And I have heard

about other shady deals with the numbers... I learned alot while

working with Dr. Bare who has written a book telling people how to

construct their own Rife/Bare Machine- an alternative cancer

therapy...

 

I took the article to mean that traditional medical treatment of

cancer may not be the end all, be all... I agree a very radical

concept for many... And I read into that, that alternatives cancer

treatments therefore deserve attention too... How come we do not

hear about the success rates of Hoxley, Living Food Diets,

Chapparal, Rife, Essiac, and all the other alternative therapies...

From my personal experience, I had a lady whose breast lump

spontaneously and completely disappeared while undertaking a breath

session I was giving! And this is not an either/or situation...

Alternative can be mixed with allopathic, and allopathic with

alternative... Just trying to provoke thought on the subject...

 

Each person needs to drawn their own line, what they are comfortable

with... But since this is an alternative health site, I thought I

would include an article that raises thought on the effectiveness of

traditional cancer treatment... I trust that if it truly sparks

someone's interest, they will continue to investigate and find the

information that will either confirm or deny this as valid for

them...

 

Be Well, and thank you for being part of Searching-Alternatives,

Misty L. Trepke

http://www..com

 

 

 

 

 

, " Roger Kimble "

<rzk357@f...> wrote:

> While I am sure this was posted with the best of intentions, it is

still hogwash. I went to the website, and all that was there was

basically what was posted below. No medical facts, no tests, no

nothing, just an " opinion " and one that is very dangerous at that.

Early detection, coupled with treatment, has saved many lives, and

has cured many people. I did not say all people. The numbers are

there. We all probably know people that are still living that were

diagnosed with cancer many years ago. They are alive because they

sought and received treatment. For an example that everyone knows,

John Wayne, who had a lung removed many, many years before he died.

And no, he did not die of lung cancer.

>

> Dangerous stuff to be posting.

>

> Roger

>