Re: laetrile
- From: "TC" <tunderbar@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 21 Feb 2007 07:20:35 -0800
On Feb 20, 6:44 pm, "Jeff" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
"TC" <tunder...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1172007809.399244.117300@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Feb 20, 3:28 pm, "TC" <tunder...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Feb 16, 11:36 pm, "Jeff" <n...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
<capm...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:45d636e3$0$259$1c4686b2@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
"You would think that ANY possible treatments for such a condition as
CANCER would have been thoroughly studied, inside and out, until
there
was no doubt about its efficacy, one way or another. Especially with
the
extremely limited treatment options available and their not
altogether
stellar results.
For any such possible treatment to NOT have been thoroughly
investigated
is blody criminal."
The results in the post are those from the advocates which showed
they
were crap research. Valid scientific studies were done seperatly and
when the first few showed no effect at all no more were done. If you
declare that picking your nose cures cancer and one well done studie
shows it doesn't, nothingmore need be done.
I beg to differ. Not only was did Laetrile not help, it was also
harmful to
some.
So when there was an effect, it was negative.
Jeff
Why do you trolls always talk about the science being so clear and
concise but you never, ever, EVER, back it up with actual links or
cites? You know why? Because you are useless trolls more interested in
making noise than providing provable facts.
TC- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
Hey Jeff, is this one of those studies you were talking about?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&...
Moertel CG, Fleming TR, Rubin J, Kvols LK, Sarna G, Koch R, Currie VE,
Young CW, Jones SE, Davignon JP.
One hundred seventy-eight patients with cancer were treated with
amygdalin (Laetrile) plus a "metabolic therapy" program consisting of
diet, enzymes, and vitamins. The great majority of these patients were
in good general condition before treatment. None was totally disabled
or in preterminal condition. One third had not received any previous
chemotherapy. The pharmaceutical preparations of amygdalin, the
dosage, and the schedule were representative of past and present
Laetrile practice. No substantive benefit was observed in terms of
cure, improvement or stabilization of cancer, improvement of symptoms
related to cancer, or extension of life span. The hazards of amygdalin
therapy were evidenced in several patients by symptoms of cyanide
toxicity or by blood cyanide levels approaching the lethal range.
Patients exposed to this agent should be instructed about the danger
of cyanide poisoning, and their blood cyanide levels should be
carefully monitored. Amygdalin (Laetrile) is a toxic drug that is not
effective as a cancer treatment.
One of the authors:
Thomas Fleming, Ph.D., Professor and Chairman, Department of
Biostatistics, University of Washington, Seattle. Receives between
$10,000 and $50,001 in consulting fees from GlaxoSmithKline and
receives less that $10,001 per year from each of four of its
competitors. (http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/ac/02/transcripts/
3848T1.htm; accessed 2/23/05) Fleming received a consulting fee for a
limited consultation with Boehringer-Ingelheim. (Circulation.
2004;109:e9004-5) Served on oncology Clinical Advisory Board for
Sunesis. ("Sunesis Begins Phase I Clinical Study of SNS-595 for
Cancer; Prestigious Oncology Clinical Advisory Board Established," PR
Newswire, 6/28/04) Speaker on IntraBiotics' live web cast featuring a
panel of experts to discuss iseganan for the treatment of oral
mucositis. ("IntraBiotics to Host a Conference Call and Web Cast with
a Panel of Experts," PR NewsWire, 3/18/02)
****
The fact that he works for Glaxo, and Sunesis, and IntrBiotics kinda
messes with his appearance of being a professional and credible
"independent" researcher, doesn't it?
He was not the only researcher who conducted the study, was he?
Can you provide evidence that Laetrile works?
Jeff
He was one of the researchers. We don't know if he took a leadership
role, do we? And he failed to declare conflicts didn't he? That, by
itself, raises a red flag.
You kinda missed the point there, buddy. I do not have evidence that
laetrile works. I am not saying that Laetrile works. hat I am saying
is that these so-called scientists don't have any evidence that it
does not work. And they are prepared to make scientific calls on
Laetrile effectivity in the absence of any properly conducted
randomized trials. Instead of making statements about the lack of
evidence to support laetrile, they should be either recommending
proper trials or conducting the trials.
You cannot declare that a substance is effective or not effective in
the ABSENCE of data. You can declare that there is no acceptable
clinically tested evidence to support its effectivenes or lack of it.
but you cannot declare it effective or not effective.
TC
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: laetrile
- From: Jeff
- Re: laetrile
- References:
- Re: laetrile
- From: TC
- Re: laetrile
- From: capmack
- Re: laetrile
- From: Jeff
- Re: laetrile
- From: TC
- Re: laetrile
- From: TC
- Re: laetrile
- From: Jeff
- Re: laetrile
- Prev by Date: Re: Fluoride: Friend or Foe - TV Report
- Next by Date: Re: a different view on inoculations
- Previous by thread: Re: laetrile
- Next by thread: Re: laetrile
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|