We may have cured father-in-laws cancer naturally - symptoms are gone in three weeks!!

reply to post by JohnnyCanuck

I have one, thanks to radiation treatment for my cancer. And your excuse is...?

I don't have cancer.

But my friend does.

He is dying and there is nothing that modern medicine can do.

I'd fix it for him if I could, but I can't.


Too young he will leave behind a beautiful wife and kids.

One of the hardest working men I know, and because of the economy, he didn't have enough work to keep his medical insurance.

Then cancer.

Life savings gone.

And other complications,.

He's almost done.




I initially saw this thread and it made me smile.

Today I saw the last couple pages, and its a bunch of whining ATS'ers demanding empirical proof.


Is the OP making it up?


Am I making my friends story up?


How do I know Johnny, if you aren't an overweight Latina chick with fantasies of being a Canadian lumberjack with cancer?



How do we know anything that is written on this site is ever true?


One persons life experiences and perspective is certainly not another's.


Saying it doesn't make it true.

And not believing, does not make it untrue.





That being said, I wish you the best with your recovery.

reply to post by dusty1


Well said dusty.

It's too bad this thread has gone in this direction. A bunch of whiners. The folks who believe in these alternatives won't even post anymore because they're tired of the whiners and it's not worth arguing about. I've posted the positives about G curing his cancer, or at the very least, adding many more years on to his life, and they still deny it. I'm sure when I post the evidence that "I'm not lying" they'll still deny it.

meat/dairy cause cancer...
pesticides and chemicals on food cause cancer..
chemicals in your shampoos, conditioners, soaps and deoderants cause cancer...
sunscreen lotions cause cancer..
anything man made can cause cancer...

get back to nature, heal your body, mind, spirit...

get your body into an alkaline state..

stay hydrated with pure water..

go vegan, at least until your body is healed..

Check out this doctor, there is a video on the link I left.

Dr. Leonard Coldwell: In my experience, every cancer can be cured in 2 to 16 weeks. Some cancers can be cured in minutes because every doctor in the world that's been in office for 20 years or longer knows cases of spontaneous healing. There's even a book out called "Spontaneous Healing" by a guy that I really don't like, just stating that there are cases of spontaneous healing.


That means, if it's possible, we just have to find a way to access this. That's number one. We all know about this. It also happened very often when people went to Lourdes or to these religious places and, it's not really the place that cures them. It's the expectation and the way to that place that cures them.


The second, you get rid of acidosis and toxemia. The second, the body gets alkaline and oxygen rich. Which, choosing a lot of greens like chlorophyll, everything that's green has a lot of chlorophyll, gives the body a lot of oxygen. Getting your body alkaline with good calcium, with good nutrition, with good trace supplements, trace minerals, will help to alkalize the body. So, that means the second you are alkalized, the cancer already stops. It can take a couple of days, a couple of weeks, but it stops.

www.ihealthtube.com...

Death is a very real thing. And cancer is not a joke.

So I do not think asking for full disclosure of all details ( full names places and dates etc..... ) is too much to ask. And if this is not given for any reason. Doubt is the only logical conclusion.



As a mortician I will tell you. Death is logical and does not keep secrets. And it does not play favorites.

reply to post by Rezlooper

Well said dusty. It's too bad this thread has gone in this direction. A bunch of whiners. The folks who believe in these alternatives won't even post anymore because they're tired of the whiners and it's not worth arguing about. I've posted the positives about G curing his cancer, or at the very least, adding many more years on to his life, and they still deny it. I'm sure when I post the evidence that "I'm not lying" they'll still deny it.

Thanks.

I ain't saying that I believe your claim.

But I certainly hope it to be true.


I think eating a good diet can't hurt in this, or any situation.


It could be possible that G was missing an important nutrient in his diet.



Continue getting checkups from a physician.

Hope for the best.

reply to post by thedeadtruth

So I do not think asking for full disclosure of all details ( full names places and dates etc..... ) is too much to ask. And if this is not given for any reason. Doubt is the only logical conclusion.

Great.

Maybe all the naysayers can also include all their personal information as well.

Please include your Social Security numbers while you are at it..........

I have been following this thread, and am glad that G is making progress and recovering. It is sad that the whiners keep detracting from what is a wonderful story of healing. It is not like you are claiming to be a doctor, and testing out a cure, or even like you are suggesting that anyone else should do what G is doing. You are simply stating that "this is what we are doing, and here is the result."
People can either believe it or not, but trying to belittle you is totally uncalled for, and shows very poor integrity on the belittler's part, in my opinion .
I believe your story, and would also be using a natural cure over chemo treatment, if I am ever diagnosed with cancer. But those who choose to be treated with chemo, are doing what they feel is right for themselves , and we all have the right of choice.
Thank you for caring enough to share, and for persisting, even through persecution. Looking forward to many more good reports from you and G.

Here are three documents in regards to G. The first two are the diagnosis of his cancer back in January. The third document is from his visit with the original doctor on March 21.



This next document is results of the biopsy



In this next document, you'll notice that the doctor never acknowledges his improvements. This was what G said about this original doctor. He never congratulated him on his improvements and simply told him to keep doing what you're doing because it's working. He never even asked G what he did to improve. He did tell G that he went from 2-4 years of life left to 8 to 12 years.

Notice how the doctor says in this report below "patient says he has no new bone pain" rather than what G really said..."I have no pain" The doc tries to say he has no "NEW" pain when he essentially had no pain. Also, the doc says he is "voiding better" rather than his voiding from 10 stops per session to one stop, sometimes no stops at all.

This is why I just don't trust all doctors! This is obviously a doctor having an attitude problem with a patient curing himself. And like I said, even if he isn't 100% completely cured (which I think he is) he is still 150% better and has more than doubled the expected life expectancy.

But I ask this one question to all the doctors here...isn't a cancerous cyst normally hard and not soft? When a cyst is determined to be soft, isn't that usually indicative of benign rather than malignant tumors? Both doctors told him he was soft.



Also, I want to post the other report from the 2nd doctor he visited in Mid-March.

Originally posted by Rezlooper
reply to post by dusty1

 

Well said dusty.

It's too bad this thread has gone in this direction. A bunch of whiners. The folks who believe in these alternatives won't even post anymore because they're tired of the whiners and it's not worth arguing about. I've posted the positives about G curing his cancer, or at the very least, adding many more years on to his life, and they still deny it. I'm sure when I post the evidence that "I'm not lying" they'll still deny it.

Asking for evidence is not whining. Complaining about being asked for evidence is.

So far you have produced zero evidence that the patient is "cured." He certainly is feeling better, likely due to an improvment in his nutrition and removing toxins from his diet, but it is not a proof of cure. In fact, the physical exam of doctor one is pretty much unchanged to docotor two with "enlargement" and "Nodularity" mentioned on both exams. Obviously, one can only say that there is a cure if a follow on biopsy is negative and one has not been done yet.

He feels better, most likely due to his weight loss, nutritional supplimentation, and detoxification. That is great and you should be happy that you had involvement in getting him feeling better. However, you can't say he was cured.

reply to post by NavyDoc


Well, I've posted, so what's your verdict doc? Is a soft tumor indicative of cancer or not?

You edited your response after I asked this question. But, you still make me laugh. You're great comedic relief I tell ya. I'm glad I could help make G feel better anyways.

Originally posted by Rezlooper
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

Well, I've posted, so what's your verdict doc? Is a soft tumor indicative of cancer or not?

He has had an exam that is essentially the same and his PSA is not changed, so you cannot say he was cured...in fact both those indicated that he still has his cancer. A second biopsy that was negative of pathology would be your proof.

I'm not sure what you mean by "soft tumor" as cancer takes many forms: hard, soft, no tumor at all but glandular spread, blood cells, etc.

Originally posted by Rezlooper
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

Well, I've posted, so what's your verdict doc? Is a soft tumor indicative of cancer or not?

You edited your response after I asked this question. But, you still make me laugh. You're great comedic relief I tell ya. I'm glad I could help make G feel better anyways.

edit on 5-4-2013 by Rezlooper because: (no reason given)

Not quite. I didn't see your response while I was typing, hence my reply below yours.

I'm glad he is feeling better, but you can't claim he was cured and even the physicians notes you presented demonstrate that the cancer is still there. The physical exam is the same from doctor to doctor and even the doctor you intentionally did not give history to noted the same enlargement and nodularity the other doctor did. YOu said that the repeat PSA is still the same. You can't say you cured him at all.

reply to post by NavyDoc


I see the words in the 2nd doctors assessment that says benign hypertrophy. I see him saying slight nodularity. I see him saying the prostate is symmetrical. I see him saying that the prostate his 3+ which is a significant shrinkage, but yet a normal enlargement for his age. The doctor told him he was smooth and soft and didn't suggest he was cancerous in any way. Oh well, I give up with you. I said you would still deny it and I knew you would, this is no surprise, as would any doctor with a vested interest. Oncologists make an average $260,000 a year selling their poison (chemo) while they would only make $60,000 a year without it. You can't make anything on natural cures because you can't put a patent on a plant, or bicarbonate of soda, or....

reply to post by Rezlooper

I see him saying that the prostate his 3+ which is a significant shrinkage, but yet a normal enlargement for his age.

Significant shrinkage? 3+ is 50-70 g. He was only 30 g in January.

reply to post by Rezlooper


Could you post pages 2 and 3 from the visit of 3/21? Also, the last page is out of order which could lead to confusion if the dates aren't noticed.

I haven't posted before but have been following this closely.

Originally posted by Rezlooper
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

I see the words in the 2nd doctors assessment that says benign hypertrophy. I see him saying slight nodularity. I see him saying the prostate is symmetrical. I see him saying that the prostate his 3+ which is a significant shrinkage, but yet a normal enlargement for his age. The doctor told him he was smooth and soft and didn't suggest he was cancerous in any way. Oh well, I give up with you. I said you would still deny it and I knew you would, this is no surprise, as would any doctor with a vested interest. Oncologists make an average $260,000 a year selling their poison (chemo) while they would only make $60,000 a year without it. You can't make anything on natural cures because you can't put a patent on a plant, or bicarbonate of soda, or....

He noted nodularity on the same side and an enlarged prostate. That is a very similar exam with the nodularity being the crucial similarity. "Smooth and soft" actually contradicts "nodularity" and is a comment on the general swelling and inflammation on the organ, not cancer itself and I don't doubt that he has reduction of inflammation due to an improved nutritional status. I know you've never given a prostate exam nor understand the anatomy, and subtle variations of feel when doing one. His inflamamtion is down, he is peeing better, his weight is down. I say good job!

However, as good as he feels, this is not an evidence of a cure. We would have to see the PSA drop down and see a biopsy come back as negative before we could say for sure if he was cured or not. That is how this thing known as "evidence" works.

It is laughable to think tha bicarbonate of soda will cure cancer and those who do so do not understand physiology and homeostasis. Physiologic PH is between 7.35 and 7.45. You body uses the lungs and kidneys to keep that balance. If you drink a large amount of bicarbonate, your kidney will adjust the urine and make it more basic to maintain that PH balance. A cancer would not see a PH shift out of normal from drinking bicarbonate.

You FIL feels better because he is now on an organic diet and has detoxified his body of chemicals and processed food. You've probably added a few years to his life and made his body better able to fight his cancer and improved his quality of life with a simple lifestyle and nutritional change. Excellent! His cancer, however, is still not gone and he should continue to have the proper regular checkups.

As for that rather stupid comment about oncologists making only $60K a year without selling chemo...for the first and last time: doctors do not make money from drug sales. A doc prescribes you an antibiotic, you get a script, you go to RiteAid, and fill it. Wite aid takes your money. The doctor has nothing to do with it. I find it funny that people get all suspicious of doctors who do not profit from drug sales (and it is illegal to do so) but have no problem buying the premise of alternative medicine people who are actively selling their product.

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Rezlooper

 

I see him saying that the prostate his 3+ which is a significant shrinkage, but yet a normal enlargement for his age.

Significant shrinkage? 3+ is 50-70 g. He was only 30 g in January.

Well caught.

Originally posted by Rezlooper
Here are three documents in regards to G.

Thanks for posting those. Please convey to G that we wish he and his family well. Let us know how it goes.

Originally posted by NavyDoc

Originally posted by DenyObfuscation
reply to post by Rezlooper

 

I see him saying that the prostate his 3+ which is a significant shrinkage, but yet a normal enlargement for his age.

Significant shrinkage? 3+ is 50-70 g. He was only 30 g in January.

Well caught.

That seems like a large increase in what appears to be only about 8 weeks. Isn't that a cause for major concern?