Cancer Documentary: Cancer - The Forbidden Cures , page 2

Pages: << 1 2 >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 10 times

reply posted on 21-11-2012 @ 05:40 AM by Pardon?

Originally posted by troubleshooter

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by troubleshooter

What do you determin long term?

If you watch the documentary you will hear that anyone who is treated with conventional medical treatments will survive no longer than 3 to 5 years. See if you can find cohort studies for survival beyond this time frame,

You seem to have a bit of an agenda here.
If what you say is true about your partner (forgive me for be sceptical but words are easy to type without proof) then good luck to you.
But to state that people who have conventional medical treatments will not survive past 5 years is pure fabrication. Can you provide any proper proof of this?

I personally know plenty of children who were treated with radiotheraphy and/or chaemotherapy for childhood cancers who are still with us in their twenties and have been cancer free for over 10 years. Let alone the adults who are still going strong years after treatment.

People like you spread dangerous misinformation.

reply posted on 21-11-2012 @ 04:51 PM by troubleshooter

Originally posted by Pardon?

Originally posted by troubleshooter

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
reply to post by troubleshooter

What do you determin long term?

If you watch the documentary you will hear that anyone who is treated with conventional medical treatments will survive no longer than 3 to 5 years. See if you can find cohort studies for survival beyond this time frame,

You seem to have a bit of an agenda here.
If what you say is true about your partner (forgive me for be sceptical but words are easy to type without proof) then good luck to you.
But to state that people who have conventional medical treatments will not survive past 5 years is pure fabrication. Can you provide any proper proof of this?

I personally know plenty of children who were treated with radiotheraphy and/or chaemotherapy for childhood cancers who are still with us in their twenties and have been cancer free for over 10 years. Let alone the adults who are still going strong years after treatment.

People like you spread dangerous misinformation.

I have no agenda other than to suggest people investigate other options.

Everything I have said is true but I have only given you a summary. This was a terrible time for us, I was recovering from a traumatic injury when my partner was first diagnosed with cancer after a couple of years of undiagnosed symptoms. She was given a couple of months to live if the lesions continued to grow at the same rate that they observed in successive observations. She was under the care of Oncologists at a large city hospital and had major surgery to remove a node from her thoracic area adjacent to the interior side of her spine. She has a seven inch scar on her abdomen and her medical records are on file.

The five year figure is not mine, it is from the video in the OP of this thread...
...and you are always welcome to review the medical literature on Google Scholar.

reply posted on 21-11-2012 @ 05:20 PM by Phage

reply to post by troubleshooter

The five year figure is not mine, it is from the video in the OP of this thread...

And the claim is a complete fabrication. I wonder why they think they can get away with a lie like that.
I have been cancer free for 25 years after chemo and radiation therapy. I had Hodgkins lymphoma, 100% fatal without treatment. I knew of another Hodgkins patient who declined conventional therapies. He's dead.

It helps if you are diagnosed in your youth though. You'll have a hard time finding 20+ year survival rates for those who are diagnosed in their 60s, even for a lot of them who don't have cancer. It also depends upon the type and stage of cancer at detection.

...and you are always welcome to review the medical literature on Google Scholar.

Or you could review the statistics yourself.
seer.cancer.gov...

Interesting to note the increased survival rates in spite of all those repressed treatments.

edit on 11/21/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

reply posted on 21-11-2012 @ 05:35 PM by troubleshooter

reply to post by Phage

The young survive better ... you were young ... I am pleased you did.

reply posted on 21-11-2012 @ 05:45 PM by Phage

reply to post by troubleshooter

Thank you. I was young, strong, and very healthy at the time.

But the young live longer in general. That's the point. Someone who is successfully treated for cancer at 80 years old will never appear in the long term survival statistics.

Pages: << 1 2 >> ^^TOP^^