Re: Which cancer doctor has the highest 'spontaneous' cure rate?

awthrawthr@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
Bozz wrote:
<awthrawthr@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1162305463.573830.313990@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
If you had terminal cancer, you'd want to know who has the highest
'spontaneous' cure rate.

So here's your chance to provide a public service by nominating your
candidate.


My dictionary says:
Spontaneous adj. 1 acting, done, or occurring without external cause. 2
instinctive, automatic, natural.

When you looked up the word, did you include the single quotes I placed
around the word 'spontaneous'?


That would suggest miracles not a good cancer doctor. Maybe you mean witch
doctor?

I meant exactly what I said. Who has the best rate of curing those who
were supposed to be terminal. Often those types of cures are derided as
being "spontaneous".

And possibly mostly erroneously, when not dealing with cancers having
substantial rates of spontaneous remission, such as some kinds of
lymphoma, melanoma, and kidney cancers, and a few others.

As I show at

http://members.bordernet.com.au/~pmoran/cancer/Brenneranecdote.htm

the more usual problem with these presumed cures is that the cases are
not documented well enough to securely establish that a remission
occurred, and that any remission was due to the claimed treatment..


The presence of terminal cancer is assumed rather than actually
demonstrated. Or it is assumed that preceding or concurrent
conventional treatment could not have had the observed outcome. Cause
and effect judgements also require that the timing of any remission be
right, but the remission is not actually demonstrated as it is
occurring, even though that should have been possible in many of the
cases..

In comparable conventional investigations only patients with clearly
demonstrable cancer would be selected and the cancer would be followed
up carefully while the treatment was applied. Then there will be no
doubt when a remission has occurred. The only question is whether it
is 'spontaneous', or due to the treatment under evaluation, or some as
yet unknown factor.

So you have to treat a second similar case and see what happens, and
another, and another. You can quickly establish without any doubt
that it is your treatment that is working, if it works as well as these
cases are intended to imply..

That is what we ask, and no less, of those claiming to be able to cure
cancer.

PM

www.cancerwatcher.com

.

Relevant Pages