I spent a lot of time researching why sodium bicarbonate works for some forms of cancer. See my blog. It is not my first choice for a cancer cure, but I wanted to know why it works for many people. There are a few therapies that would work, but only if using IV. These things have to be able to get to the cancer for at least osmotic shock. Going through the digestive system would not be optimal if it can make it at all. I include bicarbonate of soda, vitamin C, and MMS in that list of anticancer IVs that would work for most cancers.
"The majority of pediatricians are mean and arrogant and they love their poisonous needles and take every opportunity to inject no matter what the condition is of their young patients."
Yeah I remember last time I was at a pediatrician's office, I wondered what was up with those red horns and forked tongues they had. How could any sane person could buy into such ridiculous rubbish? .
Well let's see could it have something to do with the fact that some of these pediatricians will inject their patients with up to 26 different vaccines in their first year of life?
Do they have slightest idea of what the long term effect of this chemical onslaught will be?
cyber_junkie I have trouble sometimes with gastric reflux, and find that eating a red apple with skin on is very good a bit before and after meals , and also believe it or not, pickled chillies helps me as well, I just add a couple of pieces to a tomato sandwich.
I have also used carb soda and it does help but I try not to use it too often.
I believe taking meds for cholesterol and high blood pressure is what caused my gastric reflux, I weaned myself of all medications about 18months ago, and feel so much better for it.
ozzie
Sorry if any of my comments offend but you not only tragically close-minded and deluded, but are one of the most obnoxious, immature people I have ever encountered, and that's saying quite a lot. From the start you have not only been totally incapable of addressing or disputing any of the comments I've made about the actual topics, but done little exect throw fits and spew insults at me that my 6-year old nephew would roll his eyes at. Didn't your parents ever teach you about this thing called manners? Grow up.
I have to agree with you on that one! Take back what I posted in arrow's thread. You give info to debate on in this one. They are getting you for insults, when really they are insulting you worse!
Quote:
As for "most modern medical doctors don't know what the cause of illness is," can you be a little more specific? FYI the cause of MANY illnesses is well known. The modern/conventional medicine estabishment some of you seem to think is so horrible is the one who discovered (among many other things) germs, bacteria etc AND many ways to treat the diseases we now know cause them. Yes, conventional medicine did all that, not "natural healers." Do you at least realize germs exist and cause many illnesses, or do you consider that some hundreds of years old conspiracy? Are you aware than many diseases (malaria, polio, on and on the list goes) are now all but eradicated, thanks to modern medicine (eg vaccines)?
I definitely believe that medical research has done well at finding the causes of infectious diseases. You really can't deny the existance of bacteria! However, I am leery of the usage on antibiotics. I think they are prescribed too often. Overuse of them will lead to C Diff, yeast infections etc. because your natural flora is dead. I'm cool with antibiotics that already exist in nature (anything that would come from a plant or fungus), but it creeps me out when humans create their own synthetic chemicals to get rid of infections (or any disease for that matter). I personally believe that much of this can lead to other health problems, even though it cured the initial problem.
Bill, I am kind of an oddball here too. I don't agree with most conventional medicine (including the system, not just the drugs), but I also disagree with much of what is posted in this forum. I believe that there is a line that is crossed...If you go too "natural", you become unnatural. Most of the products for natural health are composed by humans in certain concentrations and quantities. Sure, they are natural ingredients, but once you mess with the natural balance of these natural chemicals, they aren't in their natural state anymore. But this MMS...I read (on Jim Humble's site) that it is the stuff they put in city water to keep it safe for drinking. I am partially skeptical to it curing diseases, but my main concern is how it effects your health in the long run. It's really not a "natural" cure...it's city water without the water!! I know what city water tastes like and it's nasty! I'd rather drink nice tap water from a well any day. Also, you have to be so careful how you take mms and what you take it with. Then it actually makes you feel sick after you take it. How can it be natural and healthy? It just doesn't make sense!
I'm the kind of person who will take untouched willow bark instead of an asprin and instead of some "natural" pain relief product on the shelf.
__________________
Consider: Ametures built the ark, Professionals built the Titanic!
Well let's see could it have something to do with the fact that some of these pediatricians will inject their patients with up to 26 different vaccines in their first year of life?
Assuming that is automatically a bad thing (which you did not back up in any way), please note the difference between
The majority of pediatricians are mean and arrogant and they love their poisonous needles and take every opportunity to inject no matter what the condition is of their young patients
and
some of these pediatricians will inject their patients with up to 26 different vaccines
I'd love to know what is "mean and arrogant" about vaccinating children. Can you not see how truly ridiculous that first statement is?
Quote:
Do they have slightest idea of what the long term effect of this chemical onslaught will be?
I can't speak to the specific cases you mention, but generally speaking about vaccines, yes they do. A huge decrease in the incidence of the diseases in people who are vaccinated. As I have said elsewhere, there are a great many diseases which have been effectively eradicated or greatly reduced in places where vaccines have been used. This is not small part of death rates plummeting in the last 100 or so years and life expectancies rising. It amazes me that that actually needs to be said as it's common knowledge that we were taught around 5th grade. Or do you think the people who write all the academic textbooks are in on some grand conspiracy as well?
I have to agree with you on that one! Take back what I posted in arrow's thread. You give info to debate on in this one. They are getting you for insults, when really they are insulting you worse!
Speaks for itself, doesn't it
Quote:
I definitely believe that medical research has done well at finding the causes of infectious diseases. You really can't deny the existance of bacteria! However, I am leery of the usage on antibiotics. I think they are prescribed too often.
That may be. You can have too much or not enough of anything. In fact I have heard some concern about that because bacteria/etc are very "smart" about being able to mutate such that some anti-biotics have become less effective against some of them. Certainly they're no panacea, but what is?
Quote:
it creeps me out when humans create their own synthetic chemicals to get rid of infections (or any disease for that matter).
I think that is an excellent point to bring up as I think it's a big problem with a lot of people who dismiss such treatments (not saying you) and look for "natural" ones - we sometimes associate "synthetic" with something cold and impersonal and unpleasant-sounding. However, unpleasant-sounding doesn't mean bad or ineffective, just like something pleasant or "natural" sounding doesn't automatically mean it's good or is helpful. In fact you had provided some excellent examples earlier eg snake venom; very natural but I'll pass.
Quote:
Bill, I am kind of an oddball here too. I don't agree with most conventional medicine (including the system, not just the drugs), but I also disagree with much of what is posted in this forum.
It sounds like you're trying to take a balanced and objective approach and don't believe/disbelieve in something just because it's "conventional" or "natural" and you realize this isn't some bizarre contest between the 2, but rather look at each thing on its own merit. Very logical and frankly very refreshing.
Quote:
I believe that there is a line that is crossed...If you go too "natural", you become unnatural. Most of the products for natural health are composed by humans in certain concentrations and quantities. Sure, they are natural ingredients, but once you mess with the natural balance of these natural chemicals, they aren't in their natural state anymore.
That doesn't seem to matter to some. Natural = good! Sadly, it's not that simple.
I spent a lot of time researching why sodium bicarbonate works for some forms of cancer. See my blog. It is not my first choice for a cancer cure, but I wanted to know why it works for many people. There are a few therapies that would work, but only if using IV. These things have to be able to get to the cancer for at least osmotic shock. Going through the digestive system would not be optimal if it can make it at all. I include bicarbonate of soda, vitamin C, and MMS in that list of anticancer IVs that would work for most cancers.
Thx for the info (blogs). But I saw no evidence do you have that they work for most cancers - in fact, I saw none that they work in humans for any cancers. Some interesting stuff about baking soda inhibiting tumors in mice was all I saw - but that doesn't mean it works for people. If I missed something on the blogs, pls let me know.
But there is indication that it works for prostate and some breast cancer. It is shown to inhibit spontaneous metastasis in breast cancer. Must be the nature of the cancer. Not all cancer is alkaline. Very few cancer are acid, though all cancer and bacteria (good and bad) generate acid. As I said also, you really have to find a way to get the bicarbonate directly to the cancer. This will at least give you the necessary osmotic shift/shock.
A person, BigAl on this forum, claims that it has cured his bladder cancer. Perhaps he will share again.
The problem with alternative meds and protocols, is that you have to depend upon anecdotal evidence, then do some research on how it relates to mainstream research. Pubmed, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/ is my favorite for that.
Even then, what works for one does not work for all. My biggest problem is that there is such poor diagnoses in both the allopathic and naturopathic worlds.
But there is indication that it works for prostate and some breast cancer. It is shown to inhibit spontaneous metastasis in breast cancer.
In people? If so I did not see-?
Quote:
Must be the nature of the cancer. Not all cancer is alkaline. Very few cancer are acid, though all cancer and bacteria (good and bad) generate acid.
Yep - actually I believe the pH of most cancer cells is similar to normal cells, which even further brings into question the bicarb thing.
Quote:
As I said also, you really have to find a way to get the bicarbonate directly to the cancer. This will at least give you the necessary osmotic shift/shock.
That would make more sense than the idea of eating bicarb (with or without syrup ) to kill cancer cells.
A person, BigAl on this forum, claims that it has cured his bladder cancer. Perhaps he will share again.
The problem with alternative meds and protocols, is that you have to depend upon anecdotal evidence,
Yes, as in the 2 examples given. But as I've said elsewhere, unsubstantiated claims are only that: claims. There is no way to know the accuracy or truth to them as anyone can claim anything and that by itself means little if anything.
Yep they are a good central source, although their site and formatting/etc sure could use a lot of work. Ditto for the clinical trial sites, eg clinicaltrials.gov.
Quote:
Even then, what works for one does not work for all. My biggest problem is that there is such poor diagnoses in both the allopathic and naturopathic worlds.
Cancer is so #$%^ complex and tricky. Nobody has all the answers, to put it mildly. Dealing w/it first-hand has been the most effective incentive to try and live a healthier lifestyle....
I can't speak to the specific cases you mention, but generally speaking about vaccines, yes they do. A huge decrease in the incidence of the diseases in people who are vaccinated.
Really? Why then in a survey I recently read does it show that the US has highest infant mortality rate along with the highest immunization rate? By contrast the countries with the lowest infant martially are also the countries that require the least immunization.
Really? Why then in a survey I recently read does it show that the US has highest infant mortality rate along with the highest immunization rate? By contrast the countries with the lowest infant martially are also the countries that require the least immunization.
I can't speak to the specific cases you mention, but generally speaking about vaccines, yes they do. A huge decrease in the incidence of the diseases in people who are vaccinated. As I have said elsewhere, there are a great many diseases which have been effectively eradicated or greatly reduced in places where vaccines have been used. This is not small part of death rates plummeting in the last 100 or so years and life expectancies rising. It amazes me that that actually needs to be said as it's common knowledge that we were taught around 5th grade. Or do you think the people who write all the academic textbooks are in on some grand conspiracy as well?
Bill, yes some seem to have helped but how about the huge increase autism over the past 20 years? And child hood cancers, I am in my 50's and when I was a child their wasn't even one in all the schools I attended that was autistic...and they were not small schools, something is causing this?
Things that cure or help something often screw up something else, especially perscrip. drugs, yes penicillin can be a life saver but it's way over prescribed by the MD's and like my father's blood pressure medicine, his BP was just a little high so on the meds he went and 7 years later now he has liver disease so it's meds for that....that to me is insane and it's stuff like that why myself and many more are here.
There was one student I know of the got small pox after the vaccine and died from small pox, I didn't get many of these vaccines including small pox, never get the flu shot which is recommended by traditionalists and most I know get the flu shot and get a case or two every year, I haven't had a case of flu in over 20 years...maybe I am just lucky?
That may be. You can have too much or not enough of anything. In fact I have heard some concern about that because bacteria/etc are very "smart" about being able to mutate such that some anti-biotics have become less effective against some of them. Certainly they're no panacea, but what is?
Exactly! A dear friend of mine has been going through so many stubborn infections all because he has been on antibiotics for months. The bacteria can mutate quickly and they are becoming resistant to almost everything.
Quote:
It sounds like you're trying to take a balanced and objective approach and don't believe/disbelieve in something just because it's "conventional" or "natural" and you realize this isn't some bizarre contest between the 2, but rather look at each thing on its own merit. Very logical and frankly very refreshing.
That's basically it. I've kind of taken my own route. I have learned a lot about conventional meds in college and I've researched alternatives since then. Neither seem to please me, so that's why I've grown my own set of beliefs. That is also what I've done with religious beliefs. I went from one to the other to not really believing at all and I found that just taking my own route is better than following what somebody else came up with.
Quote:
That doesn't seem to matter to some. Natural = good! Sadly, it's not that simple.
Oh could you ever get me ranting on this LOL. I tried to go along with the "natural", "environmentalist" movement too, but sadly, they are the same way. Do you know that the recycling process actually puts more pollution out than the original process of making paper or plastic? So this leads to the question: which is better? Waste or pollution? They all try to act like their "eco friendly" products are all that! Yeah right! They mess up the earth just as bad (if not worse) than people who don't give a crap at all!
You can't simply look at a label and believe it's good. More often than not, products will have these labels just so they can sell. Kimberly-Clark made the "eco friendly", waste reducing paper towels for public restrooms. Well, all they did was make the paper "super absorbant"! Who is going to dry their hands and know that it's super absorbant? They're still gonna rip off as much as they can! Yeah, real good way to reduce waste...HA! More like make money. (It probably costs more, but people buy it because it's "environmentally friendly"!)
I don�t recall. I get information from many sources, but it was a recent survey.
I agree with cyber-junkie some vaccines may actually work but for the most part they are best avoided.
Did the polio vaccine actually end the epidemic or, as some believe, was winding down naturally?
How about the swine flu? Oh yes be afraid be very very afraid, rush out and get a shot maybe two shots. Yet it turned out to be a big dud, but not for the drug companies they made millions from it. And the fact that more people were make sick from the vaccine then actually died from the flu, well we don�t talk about that.
What about Gardasil this lovely vaccine to prevent sexually transmitted diseases? That was forced on to six years old school girls. The side effects harming and killing many of them. A vaccine that even if it did what it was supposed to do was only effective against 4% of all sexually diseases.
Then there was some of the anthrax vaccine that was given to our troops before the Gulf war that contained the preservative squalene. This caused those troops to come down with �Golf war syndrome�. The government of course claimed it was wartime stress and that they never used squalene in the vaccine. Unfortunately for the government this was proven to be a lie.
For those of use who have actually looked into vaccines this is just the tip of the iceberg.
Finial how about this from Bill Gates, we all know who he is right, he has announced that his foundation is going to give $10 billion dollars over the next decade to develop and deliver new vaccines to children in the developing world. My! Doesn�t that sound nice he is such a humanitarian, he loves the children.
Of course we need to put that in context with this other quote from him, �Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we (can) lower (world population) that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.� (my emphasis).
OK everyone just step right up and get your Cool-aid over here.
How could any sane person could buy into such ridiculous rubbish? .
Linear Mode
