It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Why don't doctors recommend different types of cancer treatments, besides radiation?

page: 6
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in


posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 03:56 PM
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa

If alternative treatment had the monoply on cancer I'd agree with you but it doesn't. Conventional medicine does and it's a complete and utter failure. Don't worry your industry is well on its way of finding a vaccine for this that and the other...........

posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 04:07 PM

Originally posted by Zosynspiracy
reply to post by Maybe...maybe not

Like anything the medical industry is compartmentalized. Just like government, just like military, just like fianance. It doesn't matter how well intentioned someone is. I can give you the names of LOTS of doctors who have found cancer breakthroughs only to be shunned by the FDA. There are VERY powerful people who are in control of this country. The rest of us are just along for the ride. You're on a conspiracy website.......of all people YOU should understand that. That's like saying........oh well but but there are so many well intentioned people in government. Oh well but but there were so many well intentioned Germans during Hitler's reign.
Your naivety is amazing.


In my naivety, might I presume to ask you again:

Would it be possible for you to post an overview of your background, experience & qualifications regarding these medical issues?

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

posted on Apr, 12 2010 @ 05:35 PM
To the OP:

Its prolly already been stated but theres a wide range of treatments depending on the cancer. Having known plenty of people with cancer I havnt heard any one of their doctors use radiation only as a first attack for their specific cancers.

posted on Apr, 13 2010 @ 01:21 PM

Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa

Originally posted by Velvet1


You know, this is your first reply that genuinely made me smile in good way.

Answer: Nope!

Reason: Not what you think - I don't have time today. BUT, never say never soo...I'll bite.

I will start a foundational ball rolling though with Q's that you and I already know the answers to, but are relevant in your proposed debate.

1) In order to pass the USMLE, how many of the block MCQ's are dedicated to alternative medical knowledge and application?

It varies year to year and topic to topic. No two USMLE exam years are the same. For instance, anatomy was previously a miniscule (if not absent entirely) portion of the USMLE, but has been making a resurgence in the last two years. CAM (complementary and alternative medicine) isn't a discrete section, rather, it is mixed into other topics, such as renal pathophysiology, neoplasia, etc.

2) Same for 9 clinical case simulations - if you presented a well known and positively researched alternative course of treatment only, would you pass 'without' also cross referencing a classic stock treatment programme?

Yes, you would pass. If you are referring to USMLE Step 2, they accept any treatment that had been verified as medically and ethically sound, which includes many alternative treatments such as acupuncture and green tea, for starters. Green tea is a wonderful CAM for lymphoma, in conjunction with modern treatments.

3) How many, once licensed can and do cut through the tightly controlled use of alternative medicines, within the general system, without invalidating insurance claims or getting sacked? This is getting even more tight under the new Codex Alimentarius rules governing many alternative medicines.

The Codex has absolutely nothing to do with how doctors prescrbine anything. It simply requires clear packaging for mineral/herbal supplements. Also, insurance companies, by and large, love paying for alternative therapies as they often are much, much, MUCH less expensive than standard treatments.

If you also practice personally researched positive alternative medical routes (?), then you are admiral, but certainly not the norm and are usually to be found in private practices.

Most doctors I know prefer to either allow or suggest some pain-relieving or symptom-relieving alternative therapies. I guess my anecdote cancels out yours.

When I debate a topic. Unless I say otherwise I am always using a
general-specific pattern to any argument.

If you are unfamiliar with this standard debating principle (or RFAS
Rhetorical Functions in Academic Speaking) from reasoning and being reasonable, then I suggest you take time to learn, if you want to be taken seriously in your opinions, especially by sage contributors and lecturers.

Does that same debate pattern require you to ignore counter-arguments and babble on about topics not related to the matter at hand?


hmm Reasonably constructed, albeit ambiguous answers from you, but not the 'really on the ball' ones I was looking to debate, unfortunately.

I do however admire your inclusion of alternatives (quite rare actually, especially in Gov practices in the UK) but only if you really understand how and why they work. This can only be achieved by setting up your own personal research projects within general or private practice. There are still many grants available for this work, if you are not super rich?

It has been many, many years since I debated with a generally reflective thinker against a truly analytical one, and you have demonstrated to me why that is.


top topics
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in