Sounds good, but can we have full disclosure?

Now, this sounds like a good offer - you only pay if it works.  But when I look at the rules, it raises some questions I would like answered:

Rules:

 All participants must have stage II or III cancer.
Special Circumstances for stage IV cancer.  

•  All participants must fill out three forms.
•  All participants must live within the United States.
•  All Participants must disclose allergies.
•  All Participants must provide tumor markers, C.B.C.  Chem panel results that are current by 30 days.
•  All participants must provide last x ray summary, scan summary current by 60 days.
•  All participants must re-check markers and scans after 30 days of treatment.
•  After thirty days if growth and metabolic activity  of illness has not increased, (as they normally do,) if markers stabilize and/or reduce all participants will be responsible for reimbursement. But only if the protocol works.
•   Special circumstances exist for pain management.
• Most pain management situations resolve in 24 to 48 hours. Terms for pain management are much shorter in time duration.

 
 Other terms apply!
Call or E - mail us for additional details!
***

602-754-1584
Email Contact

How about we get full disclosure of what other terms apply?  How much is owed at the end of thirty days if the markers stabilize or reduce?  What is the estimated costs of all the required x-rays, scans, panels, etc.?

I also have a bit of a problem with the qualifier of a 30 day stabilization or reduction. Many mainstream and alternative cancer treatments are able to achieve a short term stabilization or reduction in tumors and markers, but that is not at all the same as achieving a long term cure.  Mainstream medicine calls such initial reductions "reponses" and uses the term to market chemo drugs and radiation treatments, without disclosing that in the large majority of instances the initial apparently positive response is followed by the cancer beginning to grow again and the ultimate failure of the mainstrea treatments.

I think such information and acknowledgement of the fact that 30 day stabilization or reduction does not constitute a cure would be essential to let the above offer remain posted in a support forum - especially since all we know of the person who posted the article is that they joined CZ and promptly made two posts about the offer. In addition, the "article" is copyrighted by Media Services Inc, which is primarily a marketing company, and the only Jarrett St.Armand (the name of the author) I can find is the owner of an electronics firm catering to the construction industry.  See:

http://www.linkedin.com/pub/jarrett-st-amand/16/404/69b (and note the same lack of a space between "St." and "Armand")

I mean no disrespect towards Bret Pierce, who has contributed here before, and I surely would favor the approach he and his site recommend over mainstream treatments, but I would nevertheless like to see some answers to determine whether this is a bonafide offer or a novel marketing approach.