Date:   2/23/2008 10:51:02 PM ( 16 y ago)
Hits:   6,777
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1118725

1 of 1 (100%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

- > Cancer is not a malignant tumor mass,

"All cancer researchers would disagree. No, words here obscure what is being said."

What qualifies you to speak on behalf of all cancer researchers? Would you please quantify all cancer research as a means of acrediting yourself as their speaker? How many researchers, exactly, make up all cancer research in the context you stated? As such, your statement appears grossly misleading. Did you avoid noticing the fact that William Kelley was himself a cancer researcher; in vivo, in person, or did you overlook the fact of noticing? Your assertion would at least approach validity if revised to the effect of "orthodox research would generally disagree with that". At least on the treatment end of orthodox research, orthodox research, by law, does not treat cancer, but instead only treats the tumor[s] produced by cancer. I do not agree with that philosophy but do agree that is the philosophy orthodoxy follows. Although I am not entitled to speak for William Kelley, in his stead I suspect that he would agree likewise. This was the crux of what distinguished Kelley's research from orthodoxy; he preferred to focus on the root causes for the disease - which he called cancer, that often times manifest visible signs - like tumors, as indicative of the presence of the disease. He also searched and researched for other causes behind this cause and in the process confirmed what a few others, namely Gerson, had discovered as this cause in back of the cause; cumulative effects of corrupted diet. On the other hand, orthodoxy does not focus on cause. As such they obviously cannot be interested in causes behind causes as well, but instead prefer to focus only on visible symptoms produced by causes - like tumors. Somehow you either avoided noticing or overlooked noticing how orthodoxy gave up on their opportunity to further research William Kelley's cancer, by way of treatment, beyond the point of advising him that his cancer was more than they could handle and as such they could do nothing for him other than send him home with expectations to die shortly with several an estimated / diagnosed 6 weeks. Strangely enough, during the course of William taking another 30 years to die, orthodoxy retroactively altered their original diagnosis so that it then fell more in line with a person living 30 years after the fact of having been diagnosed terminal. I don't know about all orthodoxy, but I do know that sometimes, some peopel in orthodoxy characterise this as "you've experienced a miracle", while some of the more hard line orthodoxers call this "remission", and even some others call it "quirk".



 

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.02 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=1118725