It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Ziath
Has anyone looked into the banned "Vitamin B17" that also cures cancer? It was of course under the boogeyman scare tactic that it can kill you like arsenic, although it is naturally found heavily in certain nuts. It was apparently banned in the 90's and i haven't heard much about it since my original read.
Thoughts?
originally posted by: 123123
I recommend all of you to watch Cancer is Curable NOW (2011) and What If Cannabis Cured Cancer (2010) and decide for yourself. It seems it is really very very difficult for this information to reach those who really needed it.
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: 123123
I recommend all of you to watch Cancer is Curable NOW (2011) and What If Cannabis Cured Cancer (2010) and decide for yourself. It seems it is really very very difficult for this information to reach those who really needed it.
Why watch a lie? It's not a cure.
originally posted by: 123123
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: 123123
I recommend all of you to watch Cancer is Curable NOW (2011) and What If Cannabis Cured Cancer (2010) and decide for yourself. It seems it is really very very difficult for this information to reach those who really needed it.
Why watch a lie? It's not a cure.
Why do you resist cure? Why is it so hard for you to accept this?
There is more truth in that documentary than what the media has been feeding you.
originally posted by: 123123
Then why don't you watch it and decide after? This is not some hollywood sci-fi bullcrap, hollowood only likes to distract you.
originally posted by: 123123
What about the thousands of patients these doctors(real PH.D doctors) cured ? Not proof enough? You are so blinded with your b.s. (belief system).
originally posted by: 123123
I recommend all of you to watch Cancer is Curable NOW (2011) and What If Cannabis Cured Cancer (2010) and decide for yourself. It seems it is really very very difficult for this information to reach those who really needed it.
I have watched every DVD on cancer made for the lay public I can get my hands on, including some of the more technical ones such as Nicholas Gonzalez explaining enzyme therapy. This is the video I would suggest people start with. Many of the videos out there expend a lot of effort knocking down the mainstream cancer establishment...and while my second favorite is Healing Inside Out, it spends more time on the negative than on offering insight into how cancer is caused and how and why integrative and natural therapies do indeed reverse cancer. Cancer is Curable Now covers the broad spectrum of issues involved in cancer, and provides details about what can be done. Cancer is Curable NOW
originally posted by: 123123
Why would I need this information to be peer reviewed as proof? It is not proof enough that patients are cured?
is it not proof enough that you are responding to this thread or do I need to peer review this thread so I can prove that you are responding to this thread? Peer review journals are probably owned by those who don't what this information public or (too public). Why do you believed that peer review is the source of all truth?
I see you worship science like a religion. I don't need to be a scientist to respond to this thread. Are you a scientist?
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: 123123
Why would I need this information to be peer reviewed as proof? It is not proof enough that patients are cured?
No, it's not. If you understood anything about science or medicine you would understand why.
is it not proof enough that you are responding to this thread or do I need to peer review this thread so I can prove that you are responding to this thread? Peer review journals are probably owned by those who don't what this information public or (too public). Why do you believed that peer review is the source of all truth?
Except for the fact that there is plenty of peer reviewed literature on this exact topic. You should really consider not responding to topics you are completely ignorant about, unless the goal is to learn, which you clearly are not interested in.
originally posted by: 123123
I see you worship science like a religion. I don't need to be a scientist to respond to this thread. Are you a scientist?
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: 123123
Why would I need this information to be peer reviewed as proof? It is not proof enough that patients are cured?
No, it's not. If you understood anything about science or medicine you would understand why.
is it not proof enough that you are responding to this thread or do I need to peer review this thread so I can prove that you are responding to this thread? Peer review journals are probably owned by those who don't what this information public or (too public). Why do you believed that peer review is the source of all truth?
Except for the fact that there is plenty of peer reviewed literature on this exact topic. You should really consider not responding to topics you are completely ignorant about, unless the goal is to learn, which you clearly are not interested in.
originally posted by: 123123
Why would I need this information to be peer reviewed as proof? It is not proof enough that patients are cured? is it not proof enough that you are responding to this thread or do I need to peer review this thread so I can prove that you are responding to this thread? Peer review journals are probably owned by those who don't what this information public or (too public). Why do you believed that peer review is the source of all truth?
Many studies have shown that peer review does not improve the quality of scientific papers. Scientists themselves know it doesn't work. Yet the public still regards it as a sign of quality... as if that meant something. It doesn't. The whole concept of scientific "peer review" is suspect. Peer review has not been and never has been a meaningful guage of the validity of scientific conclusions. It has been hijacked to stifle debate and filter out conclusions that disagree with a particular dogma. To a real scientist it is meaningless.
What Would We Do Without Peer Review?
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: 123123
I see you worship science like a religion. I don't need to be a scientist to respond to this thread. Are you a scientist?
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: 123123
Why would I need this information to be peer reviewed as proof? It is not proof enough that patients are cured?
No, it's not. If you understood anything about science or medicine you would understand why.
is it not proof enough that you are responding to this thread or do I need to peer review this thread so I can prove that you are responding to this thread? Peer review journals are probably owned by those who don't what this information public or (too public). Why do you believed that peer review is the source of all truth?
Except for the fact that there is plenty of peer reviewed literature on this exact topic. You should really consider not responding to topics you are completely ignorant about, unless the goal is to learn, which you clearly are not interested in.
Thread title is scientists find the cure. You are welcome to think science is evil and youtube is the source of all knowledge. Sorry I doubt the mighty wisdom of the great youtube and anonymous ATS poster who says believe me, I have zero evidence, but believe me!
anonymous ATS poster who says believe me, I have zero evidence, but believe me!
originally posted by: Murgatroid
originally posted by: 123123
Why would I need this information to be peer reviewed as proof? It is not proof enough that patients are cured? is it not proof enough that you are responding to this thread or do I need to peer review this thread so I can prove that you are responding to this thread? Peer review journals are probably owned by those who don't what this information public or (too public). Why do you believed that peer review is the source of all truth?
100% correct, you can't get any more biased than "Pal" reviewed sources.
It is with good reason that they are often referred to as the cult religion of Scientific fundamentalism.
Many studies have shown that peer review does not improve the quality of scientific papers. Scientists themselves know it doesn't work. Yet the public still regards it as a sign of quality... as if that meant something. It doesn't. The whole concept of scientific "peer review" is suspect. Peer review has not been and never has been a meaningful guage of the validity of scientific conclusions. It has been hijacked to stifle debate and filter out conclusions that disagree with a particular dogma. To a real scientist it is meaningless.
What Would We Do Without Peer Review?
originally posted by: 123123
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: 123123
I see you worship science like a religion. I don't need to be a scientist to respond to this thread. Are you a scientist?
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
originally posted by: 123123
Why would I need this information to be peer reviewed as proof? It is not proof enough that patients are cured?
No, it's not. If you understood anything about science or medicine you would understand why.
is it not proof enough that you are responding to this thread or do I need to peer review this thread so I can prove that you are responding to this thread? Peer review journals are probably owned by those who don't what this information public or (too public). Why do you believed that peer review is the source of all truth?
Except for the fact that there is plenty of peer reviewed literature on this exact topic. You should really consider not responding to topics you are completely ignorant about, unless the goal is to learn, which you clearly are not interested in.
Thread title is scientists find the cure. You are welcome to think science is evil and youtube is the source of all knowledge. Sorry I doubt the mighty wisdom of the great youtube and anonymous ATS poster who says believe me, I have zero evidence, but believe me!
Did I say anything about youtube? Did I say believe me? Did I say science is evil? Did I say youtube is the source of all knowledge? NOPE NEVER
Now you have your belief system. You automatically believe I did say those text above.
anonymous ATS poster who says believe me, I have zero evidence, but believe me!
The hypocrisy.