Re: Sure, but some of yesterday's got wiped off.....

I can't see any missing posts. What do you think is missing??

I come from a scientific background. I am well versed with statistics, proof, experimentation etc.

I have the "Cure for all .." book. I agree it makes very entertaining reading. Its difficult to take someone seriously who refuses to believe in HIV/Aids.

The Zapper stuff is interesting, but without proper testing that kind of device is open to all kinds of claims.

But personally I don't associate the Liver Flush with any one person. Although the flush done here is the "Clark" flush, it doesn't mean that Hulda Clark invented the liver flush.

Indeed Curezone has done far more than Hulda Clark to popularize the liver flush.

The Liver Flush is based on sound physiological and nutritional principles. And it works. There is a sound theoretical basis for it - which I can elaborate on. And now there is even extensive empirical evidence for it - just have a look at the new " Liver Flushing and Science forum". The same old conditions keep on coming up. So clearly Liver Flushing has great curative power for some specific conditions. Conditions which aren't necessarily associated with the liver by standard medicine.

There are many unknown questions. My reasons for why these questions persist is slightly different from yours.

1. The alternative medical community - curezone et al. These guys are suspicious of anything to do with "science" and see science/proof as akin to Big Pharma. People don't understand that Big Pharma isn't about Science - its about capitalism. In fact Big Pharma is more often guilty of bad Science - subverting science for profit. But they can get away with it because their oponents aren't interested in science.

2. The standard medical community - if it isn't a pill, if it can't be patented then they are not interested. At least not officially. Of course you get the odd GP who will discuss these "folk" remedies, but always off the record. When was the last time that free medicine was seriously researched? Hardly ever. Research costs money, so is usually funded by profit-seeking bodies, who naturally seek profitable rememdies. Its a vicious circle.

If the secret of Liver Flushing got out, and it was put on a sound theoretical footing an entire industry (i.e. the gallbladder removal industry) would vanish.


©†ƒ……•™¼‡_Original_Message_¾€š½ž¢«»¬ï°©

I can't see any missing posts. What do you think is missing??

I come from a scientific background. I am well versed with statistics, proof, experimentation etc.

I have the "Cure for all .." book. I agree it makes very entertaining reading. Its difficult to take someone seriously who refuses to believe in HIV/Aids.

The Zapper stuff is interesting, but without proper testing that kind of device is open to all kinds of claims.

But personally I don't associate the Liver Flush with any one person. Although the flush done here is the "Clark" flush, it doesn't mean that Hulda Clark invented the liver flush.

Indeed Curezone has done far more than Hulda Clark to popularize the liver flush.

The liver flush is based on sound physiological and nutritional principles. And it works. There is a sound theoretical basis for it - which I can elaborate on. And now there is even extensive empirical evidence for it - just have a look at the new "Liver flushing and science forum". The same old conditions keep on coming up. So clearly liver flushing has great curative power for some specific conditions. Conditions which aren't necessarily associated with the liver by standard medicine.

There are many unknown questions. My reasons for why these questions persist is slightly different from yours.

1. The alternative medical community - curezone et al. These guys are suspicious of anything to do with "science" and see science/proof as akin to Big Pharma. People don't understand that Big Pharma isn't about science - its about capitalism. In fact Big Pharma is more often guilty of bad science - subverting science for profit. But they can get away with it because their oponents aren't interested in science.

2. The standard medical community - if it isn't a pill, if it can't be patented then they are not interested. At least not officially. Of course you get the odd GP who will discuss these "folk" remedies, but always off the record. When was the last time that free medicine was seriously researched? Hardly ever. Research costs money, so is usually funded by profit-seeking bodies, who naturally seek profitable rememdies. Its a viscous circle.

If the secret of liver flushing got out, and it was put on a sound theoretical footing an entire industry (i.e. the gallbladder removal industry) would vanish.

Tweet