Re: biological facts

I'm very much a newcomer in this forum, but I must share Mighty's indignation at actualhealth casting aspertions on ChrisB's integrity, regardless of how much one finds his defeat of cancer incredible. Doing so is unbecoming of forum members, little short of scurrilous, but above all, not conducive to useful debate. The bottom line I think is you either believe him or you don't, and I believe him 100%. His participation in this forum speaks of a person indebted at finding an escape from a death sentence and wanting to help others. Any other reason simply beggars belief.

Also, actualhealth, aren't you confusing hearsay evidence and anecdotal evidence? Hearsay is in fact admissable in certain circumstances in most legal systems - it is in both in the USA and the UK. Surely you mean anecdotal evidence, of which there is an enormous amount, and the forum members here could provide a great deal. Anecdotal evidence, whilst being undocumented, is still convincing. There is plenty of documented evidence that chemotherapy is ineffective and indeed kills people, (and I could give citations should you ask) but its use continues unquestioned and unabated, which calls into question the value of documented proof. Even if there were proof of the mechanisms and efficacy of fasting, would people who "believe" in conventional medicine use it? I doubt it. One is inclined to think that people ultimately believe what they want to believe and that is that. Science could prove the existence of God, but people would still die in poverty and there would still be wars.

Nothingbetter: I think you raise some interesting points, and I believe that if toxins are indeed being excreted then it should be possible to find traces of said toxins being eliminated. But who would fund such a study? I would be willing to contribute, but we'd have to pay for it ourselves. In any event, I don't need proof. When I was fasting, why did I feel like I was being poisoned if in fact it wasn't the release of toxins from my own tissues? To me, it's just common sense. But I think you're right to be skeptical. Again, to me, it's just common sense and I don't need further proof. Before I fasted for the first time, I read a great deal and when I fasted the informtaion proved to be correct. Nothing beats practical experience. I don't need any more proof, but having it wouldn't be a bad thing.

The saddest thing, as far as I am concerned, is that when people form separate groups in issues of this kind, the real search for truth is lost when discussion degenerates into a slanging match between different factions.

Regards,

Koldo.



Tweet