Prev: Is Your Weight Hurting Your Career?
Next: Why walking?
From: JohnDoe on 15 Feb 2007 07:29
Rod wrote:

>
> "Richard Schultz" <schultr(a)mail.biu.ack.il> wrote in message
> news:er0rgk$nmh$6(a)news.iucc.ac.il...
>
>> In misc.health.alternative PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>> : On Feb 11, 1:14 am, schu...(a)mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote:
>> :> In misc.health.alternative PeterB <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>> :>
>> :> : People living after chemotherapy does not prove they are living
>> longer
>> :> : *because* of chemotherapy. Claiming a survival benefit following
>> such
>> :> : unproven treatment is quackery.
>> :>
>> :> People living after laetrile therapy does not prove they are living
>> longer
>> :> *because* of laetrile therapy.
>> :
>> : Natural medicine advocates are not using aggregated data to make such
>> : claims,
>>
>> You have claimed that consuming laetrile confers a survival benefit to
>> people with cancer. By your own argument, even if that statement were
>> true
>> (which you know very well it is not), your claim is "quackery."
>
>
> Well if it were True then then how can it be quackery.
>
> Facts are that there may well be more to consuming seeds of fruits which
> contain B17. My brother in law was told by his Oncologist to eat more
> nuts and seeds.

For what reason? Maybe just to get more fibers in his diet and not for
any laetrile? (which is NOT a vitamin)

> Apple seeds are a good source of B17 as are nuts as well
> as apricot seeds.
>
> But you, who profess to know all, will not admit that B17 may actually
> help people who are doomed to death by cancer and or its current treatment.
>
> Why?
>
> Rod
>
>
>> : as you and your sponsors do
>>
>> [remainder deleted, as *this* lie is beginning to get rather tiresome]
>>
>> -----
>> Richard Schultz schultr(a)mail.biu.ac.il
>> Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
>> Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
>> -----
>> "There are no fools as tiresome as those who have some wit." -- La
>> Rochefoucald
>
>
From: JohnDoe on 15 Feb 2007 08:31
Richard Schultz wrote:

> In misc.health.alternative Rod <deniecerod1(a)hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> : Facts are that there may well be more to consuming seeds of fruits which
> : contain B17.
>
> If laetrile is a vitamin, then what deficiency disease is associated with
> its absence from the diet? And what do you make of the claim that the
> domesticated hybridized fruit that we consume doesn't have any laetrile
> in it?
>
> : But you, who profess to know all,
>
> Either you don't know the meaning of the word "profess" or you don't know
> the meaning of the word "all" or you are lying. Take your pick.
>
> : will not admit that B17 may actually help
> : people who are doomed to death by cancer and or its current treatment.
> :
> : Why?
>
> What I have said is that there is no actual evidence that laetrile is
> effective against cancer in living creatures, and there *is* actual
> evidence that it is not. Even your main industry shill (PeterB) was unable
> to come up with any studies of laetrile's effectiveness that meet the
> standards that he has set for all other drugs.

Just yesterday I listened to a podcast, the Skeptical Guide to the
Universe, where they had the editor of "The Scientific Review of
Alternative Medicine" as guest. He said that he started looking into
alternative medicine because of Leatrile, when it was first marketed.
According to him, back then, the data on efficacy of Leatrile was simply
totally fabricated. In fact, if I understood him correctly, the whole
Leatrile thing was really not about (alternative) medicine, but about a
pyramid scheme for selling Leatrile! But then, after that, Leatrile got
a life of its own, which is what we are seeing today.

> -----
> Richard Schultz schultr(a)mail.biu.ac.il
> Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
> Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
> -----
> "You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
From: Mark Probert on 15 Feb 2007 09:54
Rod wrote:
>
> "Richard Schultz" <schultr(a)mail.biu.ack.il> wrote in message
> news:er0rgk$nmh$6(a)news.iucc.ac.il...
>> In misc.health.alternative PeterB <pkm(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>> : On Feb 11, 1:14 am, schu...(a)mail.biu.ack.il (Richard Schultz) wrote:
>> :> In misc.health.alternative PeterB <p...(a)mytrashmail.com> wrote:
>> :>
>> :> : People living after chemotherapy does not prove they are living
>> longer
>> :> : *because* of chemotherapy. Claiming a survival benefit following
>> such
>> :> : unproven treatment is quackery.
>> :>
>> :> People living after laetrile therapy does not prove they are living
>> longer
>> :> *because* of laetrile therapy.
>> :
>> : Natural medicine advocates are not using aggregated data to make such
>> : claims,
>>
>> You have claimed that consuming laetrile confers a survival benefit to
>> people with cancer. By your own argument, even if that statement were
>> true
>> (which you know very well it is not), your claim is "quackery."
>
> Well if it were True then then how can it be quackery.
>
> Facts are that there may well be more to consuming seeds of fruits which
> contain B17. My brother in law was told by his Oncologist to eat more
> nuts and seeds. Apple seeds are a good source of B17 as are nuts as well
> as apricot seeds.
>
> But you, who profess to know all, will not admit that B17 may actually
> help people who are doomed to death by cancer and or its current treatment.
>
> Why?

Because there is not one scintilla of scientific evidence to support it.
With Laetrile being over thirty years old, where are the legions of
Laetrile survivors? Why are they not marching on Washington, Canberra,
etc. demanding that the governments allow its use?

The utter lack of clearly well documented survivors is proof of
non-efficacy.


From: JohnDoe on 22 Feb 2007 09:33
PeterB wrote:

- snip -

> Cancer is a very difficult disease to arrest, but individuals
> facing death have the god-given right tochoose the treatment
> they believe is right for them. Any objection to
> that and you are saying to the world that you are not an American.
> And when it comes right down to it, Markey, you and your friends have
> proven you would all be more at home living in Cuba.

Oh boy, that particular piece of BS again. Petey, nobody, I repeat
nobody wants to meddle with the freedom of choice of patients. Patients
are not the target here. They are victims, first of a horrible disease
and second of quacks. There is no blaming the victim here. It's the
people who claim Laetrile is an effective cancer cure, the liars, the
scumbags, who are the target.
And because it's you I'll point out the obvious: a choice between
something that works and something that does not is not a real choice.
It's a mockery of freedom of choice. A perverversion. Although peddlers
of quackery like yourself like to pretend it's not.
 | 
Pages: 1
Prev: Is Your Weight Hurting Your Career?
Next: Why walking?