reply to post by Pardon?
Looking at the information I found on the internet, I don't see very much science in the analysis. It seems to be a mix bag, mainly resulting in
inconclusive results, with questionable claims. People who had sought out conventional methods, and then sought out the Hoxsey method, and were
cured, but mainstream science claims it was the mainstream treatment that cured them. If the mainstream cure worked, then why did they seek out
alternative treatment. Then there are those who survived, but the researchers claim they still have active cancer. Then there were lots of people
who could not be found. Chances are they did not want to be found, and did not trust the medical establishment.
Sure, Hoxsey wasn't a scientist, but lets not forget that the first known vaccinations were not carried out by doctors or scientist, but by farmers.
Hoxsey's father was a Veterinarian, and it is he who developed the treatment for animals, and later humans, so it is conceivable that Hoxsey has some
medical training. Vacination is a home remedy that had been carried out for a long time before it became recognized by the scientific community,
whose main technique back in the day was blood letting. What I am surprised to see is that Hoxsey's methods didn't get investigated until decades
later, and there doesn't seem to be any real research going on in herbal remedies for cancer.
You state things in absolutes, which are not absolutes.
I agree with the point that there's no science in the analysis.
The reason for that is there's no science to say it works.
Vaccination isn't a home remedy that's been carried out for years, you're thinking of inoculation which is quite different.
The only absolute I state is has the treatment cured anyone and if so can it be proven?
If it's reliable it can be proven.
If it's not then it can't.
Again, the fact that they refuse to go down the tried and trusted method of scientific verification should tell you that it's a sham. If it did work,
proving it scientifically would catapult them to the top of the medical and scientific eschelons and they would no doubt receive the Nobel Prize for
They'd be able to licence their treatment for billions, if not trillions of dollars.
They won't do that because if they did it would prove that it was worthless.
They reside in an ex drug-lord's mansion in Tijuana for a reason.
What you've found are stories with no corroborating evidence.
They mean absolutely nothing.
Anyone can write anything about anything especially when they don't need to back it up.
Hoxsley himself developed prostrate cancer and used his own therapy to treat it,
Unsurprisingly it didn't work so he opted for conventional surgery and chemo.
Should tell you a fair bit.
Since the "treatment" consists of a tonic, this should be quite easy for pharma companies to get hold of and analyse.
What a pharma company would do then would be to isolate the active compounds and produce a drug therapy based upon it (around 60% of drugs from pharma
are developed this way).
That's how pharma work and regardless of your view of them, they are very successful in what they do.
The fact that they haven't done this with the Hoxsley therapy should speak volumes.
What I've also read is that in the Hoxsley clinic part of the treatment is the promotion of an alkaline diet which does absolutely nothing for
cancer. That's something which has been proven time and time again, even basic human physiology tells us that this is hokum.
Yet people believe it.
There's no mention of ultrasound exams, PET, CT or MRI scans, just X-Rays and blood tests. So just using these quite basic methods of diagnosis how
can you be sure that they've actually diagnosed you correctly? How can you be sure that they're monitoring you correctly? How can you be sure that
when they tell you you're "cured" that they haven't missed something?
The fact is, you can't.
You state that "there doesn't seem to be any real research going on in herbal remedies for cancer
As I mentioned before a large proportion of drugs are derived from natural sources, pharma have people all over the world looking for these so that
comment is completely without any credible basis.
What tends to happen is that a compound from a herb is tested in the lab and shows some promise. Then when it goes to the next stage it fails.
Thousands of compounds have done this.
My favourite cancer-cell killer is paracetamol (acetaminophen). Delivered directly to cancer cells it will kill 100% of them, 100% of the time.
Ingested orally it will get rid of your headache or if taken in large enough quantities will ruin your liver. Your cancer will remain undisturbed
Sodium chloride is another good one. It will kill cancer cells directly but if enough is ingested at one time will kill you too.
Desperate people take desperate measures and clinics like that take full advantage of that knowledge and the understanding that these people have no
medical comprehension or at the best that gleaned from the University of YouTube.