He has time to find independant evidence but no time to try a cure?

If I were him I would try anything...that spelled out a cure with out killing me!

There are tons of independent studies showing what cancer is and how to deal with it other then Hulda Clark s, the net is filled with them just place cancer+alternative therapies in a search engine and you will come up thousands of responses! Here is just one link listed below! You have the power at your finger tips, research and be persistent and you should be able to come up with enough info to convince any one who is not totally conditioned by the media and the medical establishment which is responsible for three quarters of a million deaths each year, many of them through the treatments they provide! The answers are out there and there are many answers here at the Zone also! Good Luck! Grog

http://www.cancer-prevention.net/

if there is a mass of any size and can be removed without too much mutilation, i would do it to keep the level of toxins the body has to process down. then ozonating the blood and B-17 would be my first choices. i have not gotten to the zapper so i dont know enough to comment.

Along the same lines of thought as the other posts I would have to ask him how well thought through is his request? Is it a knee-jerk reaction as it is with the majority of people who ask that question, "Where is the independent evidence?" You have to know what independent evidence (ie. other than the experimenter/researcher's test) means before you can start to look for it. (I can relate to you my experience. The people for whom I found the independent evidence they asked for and handed it to them, never read it. They never had any intention of reading it. They simply asked for it because they knew there wasn't any, and so, I wouldn't be able to find any. That would end the quarreling and they could feel safe knowing they had looked at all of their options before choosing conventional therapy. It's called the psychological principle of Rationalization, but not the good, logical kind of rationalizing. It's a rationalization not to rock the boat and upset their usual way of thinking, their beliefs in who to trust.)


Suppose you find the independent evidence to Dr. Clark's work/result that the other posts suggested. And then he has either on his own or through his oncologist/doctor an example of a study showing the results of the therapy the conventional doctor prescribes.

By what standard of Science is he going to evaluate the two results? How is he going to compare them? Is he going to ask, "Where is the independent evidence" for this study of the results of this drug the oncologist wants to give him, like he did with the Clark evidence? Most chemotherapy drugs have drug trials that are run and evaluated by the manufacturers of the drugs themselves. That is not considered independent evidence in any branch of science. If drug A is made by company A, then he has to read a result of a test of drug A by company B to get the independent evidence he wants, if he wants to be fair to himself.
The same thing is true for radiation or surgery. Where is the evidence it helps? The FDA simply hands over to the public only that evidence which the drug manufacturers want the public to know. I think it was with Vioxx that the FDA tried to stop one of its own investigative scientists recently from publishing/talking about Vioxx's dangerous side effects so the public wouldn't know and sales could go ahead.

There is a much lower scientific standard for the safety of drugs and medicines of conventional medicine to pass then there is for Alternative Medicine, like Dr. Clark's.

There is plenty of independent evidence that treatments like Clark's work and don't cost you your life. But you or he or both have to read how to evaluate both sides of the evidence. There is a website to read that is not loaded with medical terminology and statistics but helps you think through each step in your evaluation. This may help. It compares various treatments. If he is sincerely interested in discovering independent evidence he should read it. I think the website is called "CancerTutor.com" and I'll post a correction if there is one.

If he goes to conventional therapy its because he thinks its better. But if he read the real facts behind how they get those statistics on chemotherapy, for instance, he would run the other way. Liars do use statistics to convince and persuade people. The majority of people do not know anything about the people who run a major pharmaceutical company. Yet they put their faith in these corporate officers and think they are being told the truth about side effects or results of a particular drug. On what basis do they think this?

Go to Dr. Ralph W. Moss's website and look at his books on "Questioning Chemotherapy" and "The Cancer Industry." Or read one. Dr. Moss(Ph.d.) explains the reasons behind why your brother will not get the benefit--except usually a shorter life--he is expecting from conventional cancer therapy. This is independent research and evidence. Where you are in society will influence how you see other parts of society and whether you consider them to be in competition with you or not. These cultural influences will determine what you deem to be independent research and what you say is self-serving research.

If your brother is actually looking for independent evidence, why hasn't he run across it himself and put the separate facts together into a conclusion? There are miles of information on the benefits of using methods in the alternative field.

Why doesn't he search this website and search for actual people who have done what he is considering doing and e-mail them asking about their experience. I think there is one place here that has to do with Testimonials. You might find something there. If the only person that does Clark's work is Clark, then you can't go to another Alternative practitioner to see how the Clark method works. Unless that practitioner happens to know of some former cancer patients who had used her methods.

It would be helpful to state how many Science courses you both have had in order to enable some people to better answer your questions. For those people who haven't had any Science or do not know someone who has regained their health using Clark's method, they won't be able to accept the laws of science in her protocol as rational. They will drop out of the program as soon as they start to heal because they will think they are getting worse instead of better. They are acting based on their beliefs and the amount they know about it. They can't trust Clark because her face hasn't been on t.v. like all the soaps, deodorants and pills have.

There are people who have been stricken with cancer and after they hear their favorite t.v. news anchor tell them to look for independent research so they can safeguard themselves against the quackery of the alternative field of medicine they ask for independent research. Yet all they know about it are those 2 words. How far do you think they are going to get?

I just want to tell her continued story her now.
My wife had 16 tumors throughout her body, in her intestines,
liver, and breast. All the doctors said there was nothing they could do and that she had 6-12 months. My wife found a new experimental chemo treatment that "had a 80% cure rate". She did the chemo for 9 months and it was killing her. The doctor said her system was starting to shut down. I had been looking at alternative treatments from various sources & doing research on my own & found ozone. We didn't want to try it because of what the EPA & everyone else said about it, but since her system was starting to shut down, what did we have to lose? We drank ozonated water & breathed it while we slept every night, also did juicing and she continued with the chemo. Within 3 months she was cancer free.
Now if that isn't enough, a year and a half later when she went in for her check up to see if the cancer was still gone, they said she had two more tumors. One on the bile duct & one in her intestines again. The doctor told her they couldn't give her any more chemo & there was NOTHING they could do this time. We had slacked off on the ozone for several months so we decided to flood our bodies again. Guess what? Within 6 months the tumors were gone again. This time all we did was the ozonated water, breathing ozone & juicing. The doctor couldn't believe it & sent the tests out to 4 other doctors & they all said there was no cancer. He said they should hire me. By the way my wife is the only one out of 54 who is still alive from the group that was given that chemo. Like they say I think they play
with the numbers a little. ;-)
Also I have cured athletes foot, a rash or something like that on my head, and removed age spots with ozone. (I don't go to doctors) I believe I have at least cured an enlarged prostate, (verified by doctors before I quit going to them) but probably prostate cancer with ozone & apricot seeds. (Thanks for the apricot seeds tip Ralph Moss!) My dad died from prostate cancer & I had the same symptoms.
Take Care,
Gaylen