Frank Swain is a science writer and blogger. He is based in the UK.
Stay in touch with Twitter
Keep up to date with RSSIs it possible to pack a DVD with idiocy so dense that light bends around it? I don't know, but I found someone who gave it a damn good try. The Beautiful Truth is a 2008 documentary about Gerson Therapy, the supposed diet-based cure for cancer. It produced by earth NOW! a small indie label from the Cinema Libre Studio. There are numerous excerpts from the movie on YouTube, which give a fascinating insight into the nonsensical, incomprehensible world that the filmmakers live in.
(weirdly, YouTube links all of them to a video entitled 'How masturbation damages the body'. It's not clear why, but it's an appropriate signpost to the bizarre territory we're entering). Let's start off with the trailer:
First we're asked to accept that every medical expert on the face of the earth is bound up in a global conspiracy orchestrated by drugs companies. With these conspiracies, I always wonder at what point every doctor, nurse, surgeon and other medical expert is indoctrinated into the shadowy cabal. Are they steadily brainwashed over several years of medical school? Or is there some small print in the Hippocratic Oath that no-one notices until it's too late? Regardless, pay attention, because this is the closest to reality we'll ever get during this article. To prove the existence of this conspiracy, we're shown antique film clips of 'doctors' endorsing Camel cigarettes. Well what do you know, doctors smoked cigarettes at a time when their carcinogenic effects weren't well known (shock, some doctors still do!). Never mind the fact that collectively, doctors were one of the first professions to stop smoking once the dangers became apparent. All doctors are untrustworthy, got it? Before your mind has managed to digest that cockamamie argument, you're asked why it was that Dr Albert Schweitzer declared Gerson 'the most eminent genius in medical history'. But wait - we've just been told that we can't trust medical experts. Now the film-makers are invoking a doctor endorse Max Gerson. THIS MAKES NO SENSE. I've seen less than three minutes of this film and already my brain hurts.
Anyway, the trailer ends by encouraging us to find out more, and that's exactly what we're going to do. When you first arrive at the website, you'll see this image:
You might recall also that the trailer started off with some satellite-eye shots of a cloudy Earth. Well you can forget both those slices of imagery now because they have absolutely nothing to do with the film. This is a film about cancer and nutrition. The only reason they're included is that the folks at Cinema Libre are hoping some of the glow from Al Gore's An Inconvenient Truth will wash off on them, or that people in the video store might pick up a copy of The Beautiful Truth thinking it was his film. So the people behind this movie are already trying to trick us. Not a good start.
So what is this film about anyway?
After the unexpected and tragic death of his mother, 15-year old Garrett, who is an animal-loving teenager, was spiraling downward and fast... Growing up on an Alaskan animal reserve, Garrett's father recognized his son's interest in the dietary habits of their animals. That prompted him to assign a book written by Dr. Max Gerson, which maintains that there is a direct link between diet and a cure for cancer. Fascinated and curious, Garrett embarks on a cross-country road trip to investigate the merits of The Gerson Therapy. He meets with scientists, doctors and cancer survivors who reveal how the multi-billion dollar medical industry has made it their mission to dismiss the notion of alternative and natural cures.
Wow! Pretty exciting stuff. Let's see what kind of evildoers and machinations young Garrett uncovers during his quest.
The opening salvo is on Harold Hodge, a toxicologist who, we are told, approved the use of fluoride. Garrett tells us that the doctor oversaw injecting people with plutonium and uranium like this is a bad thing. It is, of course, but Hodge didn't know how bad - he was working to ascertain the elements' safety limits. The reason his reputation was so battered by this episode was because he didn't give informed consent to his patients, which is pretty unforgivable. This important difference whooshes like a cruise missile past Garrett, who is already preparing to drop his own bombshell, telling us: "Harold Hodge, along with a group of scientists, helped develop the atom bomb.".
Are you f*****g kidding me? That is your argument?! That Hodge palled around with a group that happened to include some of the greatest minds this planet ever saw, and developed a whole new branch of science? So, Hodge, you know, he's just a guy who happens to have Albert-goddamn-Einstein on speed-dial, and you're expecting me to take the word of a fifteen-year-old over his?! Are you serious?
OK, let's take a moment to calm ourselves and proceed onto the second clip. It's not going to get any more coherent from here on in, so prepare yourselves. Garrett is still laying it down like it is on fluoride, and he's got an ace up his sleeve. Because, you know who else wanted to put fluoride in water, don't you? Yeah, you know who.
AMIRITE? Adolf Hitler, that's who! The filmmakers tell us that the Nazis planned to mass-medicate water with sodium fluoride because they wanted to sterilise people and force them into submission. This argument literally makes no sense. Hitler was going to conquer people by sterilising them? Was he planning to wait until his enemies died of old age, and wanted to make sure they didn't have kids who might grow up and fight him in the meantime? How was he going to put this into the water supply without sterilising the rest of the population? Of course, there isn't any stock footage of Nazis adding fluoride to water supplies (we must presume, because it never happened) so instead we're shown canisters of Zyklon B. Cyanide, fluoride, same difference, right?
Now that Garrett has invoked Godwin's Law, I really don't feel the need to spend any longer on his fluoride takedown. No-one associated with this film could even spell fluoride. No, really, they can't. Take a look at the film clips and you'll see it spelled as 'flouride'. Every. Single. Time. Deadly, dangerous flouride.
If you can bear it, we'll jump ahead to Clip 12:
The mind-boggling stupidity continues! We're being shown two slices of carrot, analysed with Kirlian Photography. "What's that", I hear you ask, "some kind of scientific measurement?" No, it's an outdated parlour trick used to create 'auras' from any object you attach the electrodes to. Carrot, crystal or coin, it makes no difference what the object is, or if it was ever alive. And what are Garrett and co. claiming to measure with this 'photograph'? Energy. That's all we're told. Just energy. Mystical, unquantifiable energy. You may as well say the Force is strong with the uncooked carrot. Anyway, the arbitrary differences between the two images leads the narrator to utter the following earth-shattering revelation:
Pasteurised food... is dead
OF COURSE IT IS you slack-jawed idiot, that's what pasteurisation is supposed to do! What the hell would the point of pasteurisation be if you swilled down gobfulls of E. coli and liver flukes every time you ate? I mean, why the hell do you think we cook food in the first place? Or do you think cooking is just a conspiracy maintained by the oven manufacturers of the world?
There are many other clips available to watch online, if you can stomach Garrett and his crew crashing from misconception to missed point, blathering about Terminator genes and 'revealing' that agricultural multinationals also make chemicals, and other rot. I can't, so I swung back to the Beautiful Truth homepage to see if there was some kind of sense to be found there. After all, you can watch all 12 clips and still not know what the Gerson diet is or how it's supposed to cure cancer, or any evidence that it does. There's just a calendar-worth of feeble-minded hysteria, with each month represented by a different flavour of stupid.
Unfortunately back on the website, we discover that nothing coming out of earth NOW! makes any sense. Just check out the cover for another one of the videos, 'Healing Cancer':
Do you see? One half is all healthy and colourful, while the dead 'allopathic' half covered in pills is represented by ... err ...a Joshua Tree? A plant that can thrive in deserts and lives for up to a thousand years?? Even these peoples' metaphors make no goddamn sense!
The worst part of all is that there are very real worries about the treatment of cancer to be aired, including the influence of drug companies, but this label manages to miss all of them. It would be easier if earth NOW! was completely barmy, the kind of batshit insane that claims cancer can be cured with aliens and orgone and morphogenic rays. But instead we're presented with a group of people who have the complete inability to form a coherent argument or construct a meaningful debate. These people aren't mad, they're stupid. And that's the saddest part.
In my heart, I wonder whether this is really some form of subtle rebellion by the young Garrett. Perhaps he resented being taken out of school and send on a wild goose chase around the country. I think maybe he's getting back at his hippy dad by compiling the most absurd, poorly-conceived documentary in film history and presenting to the old man like it was a cinema vérité version of Gandhi. That definitely seems like the more plausible scenario to me.
Or perhaps this is some kind of titanic deception? Maybe earth NOW! is really a false-flag sock puppet for Big Pharma, trying to debunk alternative treatments by compiling two hours of mindless tongue-flapping and sticking it in a box with Gerson's name on the front.
I've watched these clips over and over again, and every time I do it looks less like a beautiful truth and more like a flabby hooker with stretch marks and liver spots who insists she's just nineteen. That is to say: there is no beautiful truth, just an ugly, unconvincing lie.
Medicine & Health
Comments
Great post! And welcome to SciBlogs.
:)
Posted by: ctenotrish | January 27, 2009 10:36 PM
I've watched these clips over and over again, and every time I do it looks less like a beautiful truth and more like a flabby hooker with stretch marks and liver spots who insists she's just nineteen.
This is the most awesome sentence I've read on scienceblogs. Well done, sir!
Posted by: Foole | January 27, 2009 10:47 PM
Is it possible to pack a DVD with idiocy so dense that light bends around it?
Looks like Expelled has company!
Posted by: James F | January 27, 2009 11:02 PM
But I'm sure Garrett adheres strictly to Gerson's diet and he's been cancer free for 15 years. Proof!!
Posted by: Clinto | January 28, 2009 2:21 AM
Oh my. Are these the same people who ran a 'cancer cure' clinic in Mexico 10± years ago? There was an expose on Dateline NBC, or 48 Hours, or some other similar program. I forget which show, as it has been some time.
All these poor terrified dying people - stage 4 cancers of various types - were convinced by a quack doctor to give up their radiation therapy, rip out their IVs and head to Mexico where they were put on the 'cancer cure diet' and given 'oxygen enemas' for a few weeks. Then they were sent home 'cured.' As people left, they told the investigators that they were indeed cured (although only the quack doctor claimed them cured) and were going home to enjoy their life. (Of course they felt wonderful. They had come off the chemotherapy and stopped radiation!)
During the follow up at the end of the show, the TV producers tried to track them all down six months later to see how they were feeling, and all of them were dead. The only people the producers could locate were grieving family members, furious that their deceased loved ones had been duped into spending their life savings on fruit smoothies and oxygen enemas. One or two of them might have even lived had they finished their prior traditional treatments.
Posted by: Jules | January 28, 2009 4:51 AM
There is always a vague emotional thread to this kind of BS. A lost loved one followed by a determined quest for a cure; lots of "studying" or "investigating" and POOF!, they've figured it ALL out. Sadly, this crap comes a dime a dozen on the internet.
This guy's site even has a page warning his followers against other hucksters that are "plagiarizing" his BS.
Also, I looked up Gerson on Wiki. Apparently his grandson wrote most of the entry. The talk page is pretty hilarious.
Posted by: pjb | January 28, 2009 6:23 AM
You know, if you keep spelling your profanities with asterisks, the readers are going to think we've started using censorship.
This post actually made my side hurt. I think it was the Joshua Tree that really sent me over the edge.
Posted by: Arikia | January 28, 2009 6:54 AM
As is customary whenever we mention the Illuminati taking over the world by fluoridating the water, can I put in a good word for our favourite fictional paranoid, Dr Strangelove's General Jack D Ripper?
Posted by: Dr Aust | January 28, 2009 11:28 PM
I've been able to, for awhile, stomach Ray Comfort claiming that a banana was an atheist's worst nightmare. I've managed to repress my gag reflex long enough to read part of Deepak Chopra's claims that the whole model for our science of mind and brain is fundamentally wrong. Saying "Music points to a truth that science isn't set up to accept: music is a function of the mind" -- but not brain because the "mind" is some sort of free floating consciousness that doesn't need anything physical for it to work. And I've even watched Derren Brown convert atheists with a touch.
So, I've paid my skeptical dues and I leave Gerson Therapy to you.
Posted by: Norman Doering | January 29, 2009 1:00 AM
*watches maybe a minute of the trailer*
The money argument? That's where they go? What idiots.
Hey, how about an example where drug companies actually lost money because of a discovery to treat a disease. For a long time peptic ulcers were thought to be caused by stress and an excess of stomach acid. Treatment was typically very expensive drugs that had to be taken for the rest of the patient's life. Then it was discovered that they were actually caused by a bacteria. Helicobacter pylori to be specific. Easily treated with an antibiotic, the ulcer can be completely healed within weeks. Not only that, but the antibiotic is cheap, it cost pharmaceutical companies millions of dollars. Dr. Marshall and Dr. Warren were awarded a Nobel Prize for their work.
It's because of examples like this that I cannot believe that doctors are the bad guys just after your money.
Posted by: Eric | January 30, 2009 5:40 AM
No, No, Eric! It's a conspiracy of EVERYONE WITH A MEDICAL PHD + ALL PHARMACEUTICAL COMPANIES! Those bastards are clearly out to get us. They are obviously all in it together, because it would only take one to ruin the conspiracy and leak the secret and get filthy stinking rich + Nobel Prize for curing cancer.
Posted by: Nichole | January 30, 2009 6:15 PM
no comic sans? =(
Posted by: Nichole | January 30, 2009 6:17 PM
great!
Posted by: ezinelee | February 3, 2009 10:33 PM
This article simply uses the mention of Hitler as a means to skirt around the real issue of whether fluoride is truly good or bad for your health.
"The Beautiful Truth" brings up a valid point with Mercury amalgam. It is a well known fact that that Mercury is unhealthy. So all that needs to be established to show Mercury amalgam as a risk is whether the amalgam allows Mercury vapor to escape under normal conditions of the mouth. It clearly shows visual proof of the Mercury vapor with a phosphorescent screen.
I will agree with the article the documentary did miss the true punch line. That is Harold Hodge didn't give informed consent to his patients that they were receiving experimental radiation testing. That mention would have gone even further to discredit his work on fluoridation's so called benefits. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harold_Hodge
If this is truly a scientific article I would expect some discussion around fact rather than an argument focused on insult and mockery.
I love science it supposed to be the pursuit of truth. Unfortunately today science is very political and the search for truth has sadly taken a back seat.
Posted by: Mark | March 19, 2009 8:33 AM
"I love science it supposed to be the pursuit of truth. Unfortunately today science is very political and the search for truth has sadly taken a back seat."
How much experience do you have with scientific research? What professional scientific organizations (ones that produce pier reviewed work) are you part of?
I bet none, and none.
It's just too easy to make fun of stupid people with insult and mockery - and here's a clue: THIS IS NOT A SCIENTIFIC ARTICLE. If you had scientific background you would realize that this is social commentary much more than a scientific critique. There is this idea out there that someone with a computer and internet connection can spend several thousand hours of "research" and arrive at "truth" which contradicts (or discovers some conspiracy) concerning established scientific principles. I really find it humurous when they emphasize the "several thousand hours", as if it gives their argument more weight. I recently watched a video from another quack website where this guy equates the scientific method with "mind control"... the site also preaches alternative medicine and the evils of Big Pharma.
The type of social commentary contained in this article is refreshing, and the mockery and namecalling is well deserved.
Posted by: Evan | March 19, 2009 5:25 PM
I didn't say I was a scientist. I said "I love science".
"this is social commentary"
Agreed, but even as social commentary it would be useful to provide fact to backup the position stated in the article.
"several thousand hours"
Scientists are people that studied for "several thousand hours." It is nonsensical to disqualify anyone on that term.
The pursuit of knowledge and truth require a mind that is open, inquisitive and curious. A mind that questions everything and looks at all theories and hypothesis despite whether they are popular or unpopular. These traits are not reserved for scientists only. Unfortunately they are becoming more and more rare.
Posted by: Mark | March 19, 2009 10:55 PM
according to this beautiful truth there diet is this
----
The Gerson diet is naturally high in vitamins, minerals, enzymes, micro-nutrients, extremely low in sodium and fats, and rich in fluids.
The following is a typical daily diet for a Gerson patient on the full therapy regimen:
Thirteen glasses of fresh, raw carrot/apple and green-leaf juices prepared hourly from fresh, organic fruits and vegetables.
Three full vegetarian meals, freshly prepared from organically grown fruits, vegetables and whole grains. A typical meal will include salad, cooked vegetables, baked potatoes, vegetable soup and juice.
Fresh fruit and fresh fruit dessert available at all hours for snacking, in addition to the regular diet.
---
what kind of bullshit diet is this? VEGETARIAN!? this diet will get you killed thats for sure
here is the counter to this crappy beautiful truth diet
http://www.biblelife.org/history.htm
i belive the diet stated on biblelife is very good alot better than that of beautiful truth and may cure cancer,type 2 dieabetes, heart diesease and obesty
however i dont 100% agree with everything they have unlike with the Atkins Diet where i agree 100% with everything so the Atkins diet is still my fav diet and also i know 100% cures obesty and type 2 dieabetes and also most likely prevents and or cures cancer and heart diesease but havent tested the cacner and heart diesease parts out yet
http://www.atkinsdietbulletinboard.com/forums/
Posted by: ziggy | March 24, 2009 3:41 AM
"The pursuit of knowledge and truth require a mind that is open, inquisitive and curious." - Mark's reply to my reply.
I only came back today to check on my earlier comment - thinking someone would bite. This statement is simplistic and misleading. Scientists require something much more than this. The life of a "student of science" is not all that illuminating. There are sleepless nights working out seemingly absurd (to everyone else) proofs for things that many people find to be common sense (like the concept of Zero in Mathematics), or setting up experiments in a lab to replicate experiments that have already been done thousands of times before - which can be meticulously frustrating even when it's all just academic. They do this because they must learn how to achieve knowledge through scientific inquiry. Every scientific discipline has some form of hypothesis testing, critical thinking, and logical reasoning. Most people give it up as undergraduates - seeking more satisfying lifestyles.
It takes more then just an open, inquisitive, and curious mind. There is an enormous amount of scrutiny, discipline, and rigor that goes into scientific research and scientists have thousands of hours doing this before they even begin to choose the topic for their PhD thesis - long before they even get a crack at real scientific research.
The truth is that science is a very slow march toward progress, with countless scholars putting in lifetimes of work - most of them never getting formal recognition or awards. Finding original work which results in new science is very rare, and most Scientists (speaking of people I have known) quietly pass away without ever experiencing that Science shaking "Aha!" moment they dreamt about their whole lives. Their reward is to be ostracized by society for being "boring", "nerdy", and "kill-joy" in this culture where sci-fi goes to absurd lengths to entertain while real science takes a back seat.
All this, the scientist does gladly because their vision isn't one of a global conspiracy, power over people, or even the narcissism displayed by those (like you Mark) who think they must uncover these so called “experts” through thousands of hours of internet research. Scientists would happily be proven wrong about something. Their vision is to contribute toward knowledge in some small way... regardless of the size or magnitude of the fruits from their own personal labor. This does involve an open, inquisitive, and curious mind, but it REQUIRES something that most people in our society do not have. Above all, the pursuit of knowledge requires great discipline of the mind.
I know from experience that the majority of the people, who consider themselves smart, do NOT even have the basic reasoning skills, or mental discipline required to understand the knowledge we already have. I know it because I taught Algebra (basic stuff here) at the University when I was a graduate student, and I failed 1 out of every 3 of my students - all earned their grade.
There is, however, the occasional office clerk who stuns the scientific world (speaking of Enstein). Nobody making this film, or taking this film seriously, will EVER be that person Mark.
Posted by: Evan | March 25, 2009 4:20 AM
Escalation and money causes many of the problems pointed out in this film. Getting rediculously cynical or throwing every criticism of status quo into the conspiracy pile doesn't aid progress. Get Real.
Posted by: Eric H | March 25, 2009 2:21 PM
woops on my March 24, 2009 3:41 AM post i put the link
http://www.biblelife.org/history.htm
i havent read that history yet and the link i ment to put was the myths one
http://www.biblelife.org/myths.htm
Posted by: ziggy | March 28, 2009 3:52 AM
You guys are right. I mean COME ON!!! If it were up to people like this guy, they'd pull EVERY toy off the shelf because it might "contain lead". Obviously small amounts of lead are okay to put in your mouth from time to time. Its not like people take it by the spoonful. It must be a conspiracy from EVERY SINGLE TOY MANUFACTURER ON THE PLANET!!! Lets keep making fun of a young kids research project.
Posted by: Charlie | March 28, 2009 6:39 PM
some of your comments are so ignorant. Really? the Atkins diet?
Posted by: JG | April 7, 2009 1:04 PM
All I can say is 'don't knock it till you try it'. If everyone would consider just for a minute that some major corporation will be in control of our food possibly in a few short years... what , when and how much food we are able to buy, it will be a scary fact and too late for you to do anything at that point. It will be too late. Fortunately, a lot of people DO see what's happening quietly in the tall glass-walled boardrooms of companies like Monsanto and are getting busy fighting through their congresspeople to put the brakes on GMOs, overuse of pesticides, etc. EDUCATE YOURSELVES, BUY ORGANIC, instead of ranting on about how stupid you think something is. JEEZ, if you put as much energy into researching as concept-bashing, you'd be as asset to your communities.
Posted by: health101 | April 7, 2009 3:11 PM
As I was reading all of this I was reminded of a wonderful quote by Albert Einstein:
" Great spirits often encounter violent opposition from weak minds. "
I was also reminded of how those same weak minds often resort to using insults and mockery against people they disagree with in order to make themselves feel smarter than they really are.
Just curious...all you people bashing Gerson's diet, what have you done to find a cure for cancer? Nothing? I thought so. I guess it's so much easier to mock and insult those people who are actually trying to do something about it.
Critics are a dime a dozen.
Posted by: i weep for humanity | April 11, 2009 8:30 AM
I haven't seen the movie but I did attend a lecture by a retired doctor who has found nutrition to be a great healer. He explained that when he went to medical school their training on nutrition existed of about 20 minutes of laughing at it. A recent medical school grad told him that it has improved. They now laugh at it for an hour.
I have seen nutrition bring people from death's door and give them their life back. I don't know about Gerson's method, but I know that nutrition can keep one healthy and restore lost health.
I also know that some doctors are rewarded for "pushing" certain drugs. A friend was in a doctor's office when a drug company rep was talking to the receptionist. The rep explained that if the doctor wrote a few more prescriptions for a certain drug he would be eligible for a trip to Hawaii. A month later the doc went on a vacation to Hawaii. You do the math.
Drugs normally address symptoms and have side effects. Some even have side effects that can cause death. I know the FDA has declared that only drugs can cure disease, but I don't believe it. I have seen alternatives work where drugs have failed.
Despite the FDA's propaganda, nutrition is a powerful tool for restoring and maintaining good health. It may even help with your "Severe Anal Contraction About The Cerebral Cavity."
Posted by: octive9 | April 20, 2009 1:32 AM
Negative ignorance! Keep following the wide path to no where; see where you'll end up. Back where you started.
Patrick Swayze is a perfect example. He was a meat lover, and consumed it regularly, so he said. He also smoked, and drank most of his life, and continues to smoke. Interestly, he also refuses to try any alternate methods to try and fight his disease, because he doesn't want to be a slave to it. Well, guess what genius.. You are right back where you started, no where. At this point, it is probably too late, though, if he continues this path, it will most likely kill, not cure him. Using radiation is toxic, and destroys, not strengthen.
Our bodies are extremely efficient and strong, when we are healthy. If we cut out the toxicity, we can stay strong and heal ourselves. Western medicine will not teach you this, at least probably not in our lifetime. Doctors, and the medical industry would be a wash. Is it a big business, is it not? Hmm.. I think you know the answer. Wake up people! Don't believe the naysayers, especially the cynic who wrote the review on this page. It only makes sense that through proper diet, education, which includes organic farming, and eating right that will strengthen our bodies, immune systems, and allow us to be strong enough to ward off disease and illness. Sounds utopian, maybe, but it's true. Illness is a product of diet and lifestyle. Our bodies were never meant to handle all the junk most people consume.
Don’t knock this way of thinking until you actually try it. It will change your life for the better, as it has mine. I am grateful I learned of the Gerson clinic and diet. I now have energy and stamina I did when I was 20. I have overcome a disease, which I attribute to this understanding, lifestyle and diet change. Had I continued living blindlessly, and not finding an alternative, I would not be here to so proudly reference my take on this lifestyle, including this beautiful film. It is beautiful, because it's so simple.
My advice to anyone questioning the power of a good diet, is to make the change, at least for three weeks. Don't give into bad habits. You will be astonished with the benefits!
Posted by: brkitdwn | April 22, 2009 1:23 PM
Ignorance is en masse in this locale. I have often wondered what would drive one to be so deluded to the lies pervasive in the "science" realm that they would destroy lives in the process of holding to the lie but then I found that "the heart is deceitfully wicked and who can know it"? Even my own to the point that were I to be let go I too would follow the insanity of this original post and try to marry a factual, revelational, and very comprehensive exposition of the cancer industry and their battle against truth and against mankind in their battle against the Gerson Therapy in particular, the Beautiful Truth with some video on self gratification? Come on you sick nut that is absolutely ridiculous and shows how desperate you are to grasp at anything to distract someone from watching and learning that in 1928 cancer was cured and has been being cured by multiple methods since in spite of the efforts of the "cancer research industry".
The stupidity most pervasive Frank is that shown by you and your cohorts who call themselves scientists. You don't even seem to know the meaning of the word science - knowledge - that which is KNOWN, provable and reliable to consistently repeat its results.
Watch the DVD and judge for yourself - don't let some utterly despicable sloth prevent you from knowing the truth about the corrupt greed that has killed millions upon millions in the effort to control the profit streams. I mean really Frank, in an age of "advanced medicine" is surgery, chemotherapy and radiation really the best available option to remedy cancer? Are we really to believe that the archaic "chop and burn" methods are "the best"? Now that is stupidity.
Posted by: kctruth | April 23, 2009 4:28 PM
I love how you fucktards witter on for hundreds of words without addressing any of the arguments I've made in my article.
You think Gerson Therapy works? Show us some scientific evidence.
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | April 23, 2009 6:42 PM
YOU'RE CRITIQUE OF THIS FILM IS HORRIBLY FLAWED, BIASED AND EXAGGERATED, and addresses issues that are not present in th film. I wish i could run a blog where i just fabricated an opposing point of view into a straw man and just cut it down with ease. At no point do the film-makers accuse all medical practitioners of being part of a global conspiracy. In fact the film argues very clearly that most people in the medical field have no clue about the influence wielded by the trade association in favor of large corporate interests, and they do not argue for a conspiracy at all. They argue that a very small group of people with a large amount of power are able to control the medical establishment by subversive means, and that the suppression of information is what has allowed their influence to have this control. They also argue that science should be allowed to pursue further mainstream research to verify the truth either way, which is not allowed by the AMA and other trade associations who serve the special interests. The point of the film is that these are ideas that have never been addressed scientifically by mainstream science, which does not disprove them. In fact if the trade associations had any real interest in the truth instead the special interests, they would push for research to debunk false ideas, but just like many legitamite ideas to pursue that are a threat to people with money they are ignored and buried because to even address them as fale would give them more legitamacy. as you rant about fucktards wittering about nonsense, why can't you see that instead of addressing the ideas presented in the film, you have replaced them with those that your narrow mind can tear down that were never there. Skepticism would research these ideas, where as cynicism would have them buried. you are a fool and a the promoter of bullshit my friend. I myself am not arguing that everything in this film is true by calling you out on your errors, by all means i am arguing that you missed the big picture and that only rigorous testing, not blogging and misrepresentation of the facts will wield answers. Since when has science writing become so retarded? The truth lies in the middle of everything, and picking a side and playing favorites is no better than lying, and you have done no different than what you argue the film does.
Posted by: adam | April 26, 2009 6:03 AM
Notice how all the Gerson nuts flocked in within the same period of time. They must have arrived here through google after the entry had been indexed rather than the earlier commenters who probably frequent this site.
Posted by: Benn | May 12, 2009 9:52 PM
Despite some unanswered questions this movie brings up, hopefully it gets the population thinking. I, for one, agree with Mark that a scientific mind needs to be "open, inquisitive and curious" otherwise you only see one side of the coin.
I do see a correlation between, food additives like MSG, making unhealthy food taste great and leaving one wanting more, and the current obesity issue. I'll throw in a stab at corporations for wanting to increase the "bottom line", by keeping us coming back for more. And eating healthy food in the first place helping to keep us healthy (go figure).
However, I believe if a person asks a nutritionist about juicing versus eating the whole food, the nutritionist would vote on eating the whole food hands down. You get very little fibre out of juice, fibre being an important componant of cleaning out your system.
Unless this movie was actually covertly sponsored by the Gerson Institute, I think it was a good little wake up call to just plain eat healthier, especially before cancer ever enters the picture!
Posted by: Jeanette | May 13, 2009 2:44 AM
Yes, the movie has an undeniable conspiracy theory, propaganda, "the whole world is out to get us" quality. However, much of information is not factually inaccurate.
It is interesting that you viciously attack all of the theories presented in the movie and criticize them as having no functional and rational basis in argument. Yet, the only thing I get from your post is someone who is offended by the presentation of a variety of points, but someone who offers nothing to show why the information is incorrect or invalid.
I have no doubt that certain aspects of the movie are misleading, or even potentially incorrect. But you yourself - attacking their inability to make a "good argument" - have made no arguments yourself. Nothing which contradicts their points except to say that "this is unreasonable" or "this is stupid."
If it is so profoundly unreasonable to you, then I think the most effective use of your time in making a post would be to take the specific factual and scientific theories proposed - not just what they use to illustrate those theories (e.g. your Hitler example, or the Camel cigarette commercials) - and scientifically explain why they are inaccurate.
Not just "this is ridiculous because doctors would have to have to been aware that they were operating under false pretenses or to have taken an oath making them complicit in a global scheme to conquer the world."
For instance, you admittedly and openly acknowledged that doctors smoked cigarettes before they knew it was unhealthy. That they even promoted cigarettes. But. Then they learned it was very bad for your health. So they stopped.
How on earth is it that you believe the same thing might not happen in a few years with certain prescription drugs, with dental fillings, with processed foods? There was a time when people were laughed at for thinking cigarettes were bad for you. Do you honestly believe that the same could not be true for chemically processed foods, molding foreign elements to your teeth and body, and regularly ingesting manmade chemical treatments?
There's a reason why every single medication comes with a list of side effects and potential hazards. The medicines we have cannot cure one thing without the risk of incurring another health malady. There is an ever increasing truckload of lawsuits over prescription drugs that have already been shown to have very negative side effects despite being widely endorsed, prescribed, and promoted by doctors the world over.
It's not like this would be the first time we've been wrong.
It's fine that you don't like the movie. But I suggest you don't debunk the entire thing as a giant farce unless and until you can provide some informational proof or argument as to why it is a waste of time to listen to.
Posted by: Lily | June 10, 2009 9:30 PM
Wow! What a tragedy to see an attack on a sensible picture of what we should question as human beings in this world. I don't have the time or will to go through about the crooked thinking of this critique.
The critic, just like many others, does not have the direct experience or the understanding of nutrition. Unfortunately the writing expresses offense with those that question the status quo and is enslaved by the modern scientific model. Instead of BEING his own scientist, the critic decides to be an arm-chair academic looking to debunk a film based on the presentation of the material-- what a shame. I am however, entertained as an observer of behavioral/cognitive processes to marvel at the nature of this review! Poorly done!! Good luck Frank!!!
Posted by: Geno | June 14, 2009 6:20 PM
Well I come to this blog seeing as it calls itself a science blog to be filled with bigots.
The point of this documentary was to bring up the high amount of corruption within the existing medical industry. Certainly not all that modern medicine is doing is unhealthy, nor is this documentary purporting that all of modern medicine is one conspiracy. However the funding of "research" by private corporations, the quieting of any alternatives that might damage in industry, and the entire "He is a fear monger with this information because there is no solid-100-proof" is all too common when dealing with many of the world's science related problems, from evolution, vaccination, Global Warming, Pollution, Energy, and medicine. Like ALL media intended to convey a message, it has bias. it is an unreachable ideal for such a medium to lack bias. It has bias because the point of the film is to shake you out of your complacency and ignorance regarding the administrations controlling our food water and drugs. but i think that the people above have talked enough about the scientific or rational merit of the film.
I for one recalled thinking how absurd the world has become while watching the film. that our food is stuffed with chemicals left and right, that many people, including myself have suffered from so many illnesses ranging from schizophrenia, attention deficit disorder, diabetes. Then think about how reliant we've become on the drug and food industry. Indeed it is true that small amounts of mercury, lead, etc are harmless to the body, but consider what happens when you have some lead, mercury, msg, this-that-and-the-other and it becomes a very valid thought that all this might be causing many of the problems in the world that we just might do without.
Not all evidence presented in an argument must be peer reviewed by hundreds of scientist. Experiental evidence is just as valid. and everyday we meet people who are thin, healthy, with strong immune systems, and unfailingly many state that they try to eat as healthy as possible, consuming organic foods, avoiding processed food, and very few of them seem to take a lot of drugs. infact the most people who seem to take drugs are the people with the most problems, many of whom never seem to get any better.
We need to free science from industry and personal or corporate interest, so that it can be used to the advantage of everyone, not the few that can manipulate the system. Alternative medicine deserves greater research and verification not silencing, ignoring, and shunning. It said alternative medicine is unhealthy, it must be stopped. if it works on the otherhand and without the damage, costs, and sideeffects of pharmaceutical drugs, then it must be promoted. It is the beauty of the self correcting system of science and its applications. however as long as there are forces who wants to undermine this, there will always be questions of veracity towards those who are responsible
Posted by: dissappointedhuman | June 26, 2009 6:37 AM
I feel sorry for those that truly cannot see the truth. Raw foods are alive and if you spend even one day on a raw foods diet then you should feel the amazing transformation that happens inside your body. That is, if you aren't too disconnected from it. I have one question for you. Do animals living in the deep wild get cancer? No. And the reason they don't get cancer, is because they live off the earth as God intended, eating what nature provides for them. I deeply suggest that you look for the Essene Gospel of Peace and read it, and there you will be futher astonished, and find the most beautiful truth you have never stumbled upon. How brainwashed are you that you would completely write off the fact that those living in complete harmony with nature, eating raw and living foods, would surely not attain true health. You are misguided, my friend, and it sounds like the pharmaceutical companies dwell deeper in your heart than any other. I pray that you can someday accept the truth, but first you must seek it.
Posted by: Lauren | June 28, 2009 6:42 PM
@35 Lauren
If wild animals don't get cancer, what do you call this?
This isn't a unique example. Canine Transmissible Venereal Tumour is spreading through dog populations. Endogenous caners in wild animals also exist - we don't hear about them much because
1) the animals weakened by tumours are eaten by predators
2) the animals killed by cancer are eaten by scavengers
3) wild animals are really bad at turning up for their screening appointments.
The rest of your nonsense isn't worth commenting on, save to say any food you eat, alive or dead, is absorbed through the gut wall at a molecular level after being bathed in acid, washed with caustic enzymes, and broken down by microbes. Digestion finishes what cooking starts.
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | June 29, 2009 10:21 AM
This article is obviously written by a "scientist" who has never tried any of the suggestions offered by Dr.Gerson. Frank, can't you articulate your thought's without profanity. You fit in perfectly in the world of drug companies and the balance of liars for hire that our greedy world seems to produce, one after another. If you tried juicing for just one month, that's actually doing it on yourself with organic fruits and vegatables for one month I am convinced that your sanity would return and then you could print a retraction to the pure garbage that you've written here.
Posted by: Mike Palmer | June 30, 2009 8:16 PM
The author of this article ought to be ashamed of himself, but he most certainly wont be.
His rage and frothing at the mouth anger are obvious to anyone reading his tripe.
But hey, nobody is stopping you. You are free to be as ignorant, uneducated and as angry as you want to be. It wont affect me and my life.
The only problem is when you try and get other people on board with your warped and shallow views and attempt to shame them for doing the right thing. That will lead to you creating bad karma for yourself.
Go ahead and slam anyone and everything that you dont understand and dont believe in, I just hope other people reading your ignorant filth dont take a single word of it as any kind of truth, beautiful or not.
Do your own research people. Don't be led astray by popular opinion and let the rage of an angry "science man" dictate how you live your lives.
The author is clearly an educated person, but what he is saying is harmful and nothing he said has any wiff of credibility or truth, just rage and anger.
Let him poison himself and go to his grave screaming his tirades to the masses of "stupid people." But I emplore you not to let a single word of his hollow, heartless diatribe ring true.
Posted by: Edward Livingston | July 1, 2009 12:40 AM
Once again, you Gerson fans launch into personal attacks without addressing any of the errors and misinformation contained in the film.
Stop being cowards, engage in debate and tell me where I've gone wrong. Show us hard evidence that this therapy works. All we see at the moment is a flock of dogmatic vultures selling false cures to vulnerable ill people. Shame on me? Shame on you!
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | July 2, 2009 7:07 PM
http://www.caracoltv.com/producciones/informativos/elradar/video143670-un-testimonio-vivo-del-metodo-gerson-sanar-el-cancer
Posted by: Jorge Correa | July 4, 2009 7:09 AM
Just wondering if anyone with cancer has actually tried the diets suggested?
I personally am free of any diseases mentioned; in fact I don’t get colds or flu. Well ok, maybe a sniffle every 5 or 6 yrs but that’s about it and I'm 65.
I do remember about 25 yrs ago an aunt was admitted to a hospice with terminal cancer so she could "die with dignity", which sadly she did.
We visited her daily and in the same ward was another lady also with terminal cancer.
Her family refused to give up and put her on a macrobiotic diet which was the "in diet" at that time. The instructed the nurses not to feed her anything "normal", they came in on shifts and fed her their macro diet mixes.
We of course thought it sad that they would try in vain to save their mother.
In fact they did. She made a recovery and went home to live many more years.
So I do tend to keep an open mind and definitely don't believe everything that is published - more so the corporations who only serve their balance sheets.
Posted by: Scatterling | July 18, 2009 7:01 PM
keep an open (although skeptical) mind.... but do not hate on something because it is a bit different from what you have already determined to be truth. there is so much more to reality than what so many have determined to be etched in stone (or close to it). the closer we are to nature and living in harmony with it (both internally and externally, physically and mentally) the healthier we will be. that just seems like common sense to me. anyways... hope you haters can sit back and listen for a change. you may learn something.
Posted by: atm | July 21, 2009 8:19 PM
Hey SciencePunk, why don't you explain what's happening in Japan?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=10Xq2TUhFnw
Posted by: Lubo | July 22, 2009 8:33 PM
Quote: "Stop being cowards, engage in debate and tell me where I've gone wrong. Show us hard evidence that this therapy works. All we see at the moment is a flock of dogmatic vultures selling false cures to vulnerable ill people. Shame on me? Shame on you!"
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | July 2, 2009 7:07 PM
On the other hand I have seen no hard evidence that any other medical treatment works 100%. seems all treatments are prety much hit or miss..
Posted by: Scatterling | July 24, 2009 5:50 AM
Read the China Study! Its the most comprehensive nutrition study ever conducted. (its related to his post/movie- and very enlightening!)
Posted by: winter cantagallo | July 26, 2009 3:40 AM
@43 Lubo
The description for the video you linked says firstly that the film-maker uncovered no hard evidence that the treatment worked - just testimony. There's plenty of testimony that Elvis lives with aliens, but that doesn't make it true. Secondly, the description states:
That sounds like class A nutjob stuff to me. A YouTube video is NOT hard evidence. Try starting at PubMed.
@44 Scatterling
I think most doctors would disagree that all treatments are "pretty much hit or miss". All treatments have varying degrees of evidence to support them, yes, and it's the job of those working in healthcare (from doctors to regulators) to study this evidence and decide which treatments are suitable for which complaints. Gerson Therapy has zero evidence to support its use in curing cancer, so no responsible doctor or regulator promotes Gerson Therapy.
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | July 27, 2009 12:40 PM
Science punk,
I asked you to explain the results that are being achieved in Japan. In a classic “let’s change the subject move”, you talk about hard evidence vs. testimony, Elvis and aliens and then you try to discredit the author by calling him a nutjob for trying to expose the illuminati. That’s all very hilarious, but you still have not answered my question which is “why don’t you explain what is happening in Japan”? Regardless of what you think of the author and the King of Rock & Roll or the Bilderberg Group, there are certain results being achieved by doctors in Japan as it relates to cancer and the Gerson Therapy. EXPLAIN IT! The doctors meticulously document everything and I’m sure if you wanted to put in the effort, you could verify everything for yourself. Get on a plane and go to Japan and see what is going on. Follow one of their patients from the start until the end of their treatment and witness the results. Would that not be “hard evidence”? Are the Japanese doctors perpetrating a fraud onto the world by falsifying the record of all of their “fake patients”? Are these “fake patients” so bored that they will spend two years at a time visiting a doctor to help him perpetrate a fraud? And for what gain? What exactly are you saying when you ask for “hard evidence”? Nobody is going to do a 5 year multi-phase clinical trial for you with control groups my friend because I doubt the organic food growers of this world will fund that study, and I’m pretty sure that the pharmaceutical industry will not fund a study involving food as a treatment. Until you verify for yourself (to prove of disprove), you are just a guy sitting at a keyboard spouting off.
Explain what is happening in Japan? Is it just the world’s most incredible coincidence? Do God’s miracles happen to repeat themselves only in this doctors office and are in no way connected with the therapy that he is administering?
Explain it and quit trying to distract people with your rants.
Posted by: Lubo | July 27, 2009 10:11 PM
@ 47 Lubo
Just for you, I sat through 10 minutes of c-rate film making. So to explain what is "happening" in Japan, as you put it: not very much.
In one town, in one clinical practice, there is one doctor, who is positive toward Gerson Therapy. However, he has yet to publish a single paper on any of his 500 patients that the film maker believes were cured by Gerson Therapy. Note that the doctor never claims to cure anyone - he says patients are on Gerson Therapy, and some of those patients survive. There's no discussion of what other treatment these people are on, if any. His research is still in progress. There are no studies on Pubmed that I can find by a Hoshima Y on cancer and nutrition.
So: what do we have? Nothing. Someone who is convinced of Gerson Therapy and is supposedly investigating it. We have no clue about his methods, types of cancer, survival rates, follow up rates, statistics, treatment, etc.
Here's how the real world works: you have some evidence, and that leads you to form a hypothesis. You test the hypothesis, and adjust your ideas accordingly. Then after much more testing you can call it a theory. And so forth.
This is the opposite: insisting Gerson Therapy works, then telling people that you're busy working on some research that might be able to prove it some day.
If you think Gerson Therapy works, it's up to YOU to prove it. Not the other way round.
Like I said before: YouTube videos are not evidence. Come back with something meaningful.
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | July 28, 2009 2:58 PM
Frank, just out of curiosity, how would YOU test the Gerson therapy against traditional forms of cancer therapies? What kind of experimental design would you come up with that would test the validity of the Gerson therapy vs chemo/radiation? It's not like you could have a control group... Also, have you watched the entire film or just clips of it?
Posted by: Adnash | July 31, 2009 4:13 PM
@ 49 Adnash
Why, is there something in the film, not shown in these clips, that balances all the stupidity? Some magical saving grace of an argument? If there is, I'm all ears.
How would I test Gerson Therapy: I wouldn't. Because Gerson Therapy doesn't have any basis in reality - no plausible method of action. Gerson believed that nutritional deficiencies were the cause of most chronic diseases, and if that was true, all medicine as we know it would be wrong. So there's no way to ethically test it in humans. You could do it in rats, but I suspect the Gerson crowd would complain it wasn't a suitable model or some such bilge.
The sickening thing is there are people like Lubo out there who think that we should give unproven, implausible treatments to dying cancer victims, presumably because the idea of a 'natural organic food diet' panders to their pre-conceived notions of Western Medicine = bad, natural Mother Earth remedies = good.
All treatments, whether Western or organic or hippy or Chinese or whatever, should be tested thoroughly to the highest possible standards before (and during) their use.
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | July 31, 2009 6:37 PM
I feel that if you are writing a blog about this film you should watch it entirely. It's easy to take things out of context when it's not understood in it's entirety. People do this all the time with quote mining. Just as a film critic (and you are critiquing the film) has to watch the entire film, not just clips to give a full review, I think you should as well. How can you be an expert on something if you haven't completely studied it.
I completely agree with you about any treatments being thoroughly tested. How would you test chemo or radiation? How have they/ do they test that? How do they know it works? How is it proven? What is the survival rate of those undergoing such therapies? No way causality can be determined by todays standards of ethics of testing. I am genuinely curious about the studies done and the results.
So instead of you filling up more space with logical fallacies and ranting, how would you test the Gerson therapy? EVERYTHING in our natural world can be tested with science. Even things such as dark matter, so I am sure something as simple as the Gerson Therapy can be tested. You say, "All treatments, whether Western or organic or hippy or Chinese or whatever, should be tested thoroughly to the highest possible standards before (and during) their use." So how should it be tested? Offer a solution and backing to your argument instead of just skating around what TRUE science does, seeking to find answers to difficult questions.
Posted by: Adnash | July 31, 2009 8:16 PM
This is entertaining!
Posted by: adnash | July 31, 2009 8:50 PM
@51. adnash
I don't know how different cancer remedies are tested - I'm not a oncologist. At a guess, I would say the treatment is tested first in vitro in a lab against cancer cells, then in animals, before being trialled for safety in humans and finally recommended tentatively for cancer patients and carefully studied for any signs of efficacy.
But you're missing my point (intentionally?) by demanding I set up a test for Gerson Therapy. The point is these tests haven't been done - and yet, there are people out there promoting Gerson Therapy. How do they know it works without testing it? How can they sleep at night recommending an unproven, improbable treatment?
Similarly, demanding I watch the whole film is a straw man. Firstly, it's just a canard to avoid addressing the criticisms I've already made. E.g. How can anything in the film mitigate the fact that they can't spell fluoride? Secondly, I didn't choose the clips - the film makers did. So I can hardly be accused of taking things out of context.
Critical discussion is indeed fun - isn't science great?
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | August 1, 2009 6:45 PM
There's only one way to solve whether or not Gerson Therapy works....MYTH BUSTERS!
Posted by: Jeff | August 6, 2009 2:42 AM
Just wanted to join in (although a few days late). Radiation and chemo obviously don't work for everyone. And even if they do provide a patient with a few extra months or even years of life, it all comes down to the issue of "quality of life." My mother beat breast cancer with chemotherapy. She had a relapse three years later. Some may say, "Well, at least she had those extra three years she might not have had otherwise." Yes, but her quality of life was poor. She was exhausted, nauseous, and irritable on a daily basis. She could not perform normal daily tasks that she was able to perform prior to the chemo. Even simple trips to the grocery store were too much for her. For three entire years.
We're always trying to find the best way to live as long as we can, but what's life if it's of poor quality? My mother suffered a great deal during those three years. I'm sure the issue of length of life vs. quality of life will always be widely debated. If simple nutrition provides a person with better quality of life rather than merely keeping them alive but in a miserable state (as chemo tends to do to patients), then why is that a bad thing?
In terms of what physicians support, most physicians will tell patients to exercise and eat healthy foods. That's just common sense. The "moral of the story" that I took away from "A Beautiful Truth" was just that - eat healthily. Maybe once you weed through the blah blah blahs of all these grassroots documentaries, and once you speak with "trusted" physicians, you'll find that one common piece of advice...
Posted by: Julian | August 6, 2009 9:40 AM
@55 Julian
Thanks for commenting. You make a good point on the importance of quality of life (and I believe physicians do take account of this in their recommendations for treatment).
However, the videos above are claiming that Gerson Therapy is a CURE for cancer. That is evil.
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | August 6, 2009 11:47 AM
I didn't read all the comments, but "beautiful truth" is another obvious effort to embarrass the plain truth - that fluoride, aspartame and unbound glutamates are seriously harming the population. Countless opposition/awareness movements are being run into the dirt via false representation of this very sort. Watch the film again with the right question in mind. Remember - we are in the internet age, and it's incredibly easy to embarras and disinform when infultration isn't even necessary. Surprised?
At any rate, there's no need for a huge conspircy, at least not outside the politically appointed 'LEaDeRShIp' of the FDA and EPA - private & public sector media is deliberately ignore-ant and career-dependent ADA and AMA stooges innocently defer to corrupted heirarchies of their own. Yes, it's real - an entire population is being dumbed with most people still testing 'normal.' To really understand the problem you need to think your way through a few things, firstly, that many are only marginally affected while some are much more sensitive than others. I happen to be one of the more sensitive types. Again there's no need for a huge conspiracy when the debilitating effects of glutamates from hidden sources (mostly unknown to the public,) and other ubiquitous chemicals, will prevent people from recognizing the full disparity of where they would be vs. where they are.
Most of you are feeling like crap and don't know it.
Remember, the person who wrote the above review watched this film in exactly the way the fimlmakers intended.
It really is a very very sad situation.
Posted by: pssd | August 16, 2009 6:59 PM
My best friend's mother chose the Gerson therapy instead of chemo for her advanced breast cancer. She gave up all processed foods, ate only organic local fruits and vegetables, juiced, did coffee enemas and wheatgrass and her tumors shrank and went away within a years times. She saw cancer specialists from around the country and every single one of them told her if she doesn't get chemo and surgery she would die. Well...4 years later, she's still doing fine and no cancer at all. She continues the diet and makes sure her fruits and vegetables have not been genetically modified or sprayed with pesticides, growing much of what she eats herself.
Nuff said.
Posted by: Jeannie | August 28, 2009 3:38 PM
Oh...and since I personally know of 1 person who had terminal breast cancer who was cured from the Gerson therapy, I think it would be in the best interest of cancer patients to keep an open mind.
Eating genetically modified, irriadiated, pesticide sprayed fruits and vegetables grown in depleted soils is not something I choose to do but to each their own. I have been raw vegan for 8 years now and am in my forties, look great, feel great, never diet and have more energy than most teens. Before that, I was on the SAD (Standard American Diet) and drank pasteurized juices, ate fast food and hormone, antiobiotic filled meat and I suffered from depression, weight struggles, headaches, irritability and frequently got sick.
I've tried both diets for many years and I'll never go back to the SAD because I have seen and felt how different I look and feel.
To each, their own.
Posted by: Jeannie | August 28, 2009 3:46 PM
So, to boil everything down; you believe that chemotherapy is better than any alternate treatment option?
That's extremely ignorant.
I don't know if you have seen a person go through chemotherapy, but I sure have and it's a very disturbing process. The abuse that the body takes through chemo is absurd.
And the main thing that makes sense is that with good nutrition the body can self heal.
Posted by: Ivan | September 2, 2009 5:19 PM
@60. Ivan
Ah yes, let's organise medicine according to what we feel makes sense. Never mind objective evidence, yawn, who wants FACTS and shit messing up their preconceived notions, right?
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | September 2, 2009 9:10 PM
I can't believe a ppiece of Euro-Trash like yourself would be the one to write an article like this. I thought it would've been an American, especially since I see the problem all to frequently in this U.S.A., which I love dearly, a so called "science writer" whose only skill is putting the same kind of skewed editorial panace into bashing something "Scientifically" despite the fact that you don't cite any facts or reasearch data to support your theory, just sort of a blanket "you fool your wrong." If you call yourself a scince writer lets see some reasearch not some verbose way of saying "Nuh Uh, Ur Dumb :}" Come on you don't even watch the dvd and you cite it as being bad because of 15 min of you-tube clips? And here I though know nothing, yet everything jerks were a predominately American problem. Next time, at least act like a contributing member of society, and try to do a little more reasearch. Your supposed to inform people not just bs your way through your work, lazy slob.
Posted by: Andrew 147 IQ 2nd grade | September 9, 2009 12:37 AM
What is it about the self referncing of a persons IQ that screams idiot? Especially when delivered with an insulting rant notable only for the total absence of supporting evedence. Perhaps andrew would like to cite any facts or reasearch data to support his theory?
Posted by: Ramel | September 9, 2009 6:48 AM
Well Ramel the refrence to IQ was stated in an area designated for a short name/self descrition, and given the nature of the discussion I figured it would give you all a little more perspective about me, allowing you all to judge my statements accordingly. Especially since were dealing with 2nd grade concepts here. And you want some facts too? Kudos. Any Biology Teacher in any grade will tell you that in order for any biological system to funtion correctly the system needs to achieve a point of equilibrium or homeostasis, not just within itself but with its surrounding environment. Homeostasis is necessary at levels ranging from cellular to entire ecosystems.So basically as we have evolved we have turned into creatures that have specific needs of nutrient intake and that we have already adapted the means of best getting these nutrients from our natural environment, something that, acordding to laws of basic biology, IS NECESSARY FOR US TO DO. The move provides some compelling agruements to that FACT. The Gerson Theory states that aciving homestasis within the organism is the most logical first step to fixing a problem where due to cancer, and most likely other contributing factors due to non natural foods (meening we aren't genetically adapted to it properly), has been thrown out of homeostasis. And I apologize for being obtuse about the subject initally, but this is survival to me. For me, my kids, you, for Christ's sake our whole planet. I realize this is any issue of drastic import to all of us and when something important to me, and those around me, is ostracized due to what appears to be a poor work ethic and gigantic EGO, I, being the imperfect individual I am, get a little upset. Fair enough?
Posted by: Andrew 147 IQ 2ndGrade | September 9, 2009 5:52 PM
Yes, yes it did. Especially if you think biology at 2nd grade level is adaquate for understanding cancer and cancer treatment. Gerson therapy is quackery, I mean coffee enemas and raw vegan food to cure cancer? Are you honestley taking this crap seriously? If your kids get cat cancer will you really subject them to this bollocks instead of actual medicne the stands an actual chance of saving their lives?
Cancer is cauased by damage to the mechanisms that govern cell lifespan and replication, yes environmental influences can cause this damage, lung cancer from smoking is the obvious example, and changing how we live can lower the odds of getting cancer. However, once the cancer exists it will not be cured by the removal of whatever caused it, you need to actually remove the cancer cells either by surgically removing them or killing them in situ with radiation or chemotharapy. Gerson therapy rants about 'toxins' while never really defining what they mean or the mechanisms involved, jabbers on about 'detoxing' again failing to explain what their talking about, and makes claims that increased nurtrients will somehow magicaly breakdown diseased tissue. This is what we call bullshit.
Try this post from Orac, an oncologist who specialises in breast cancer, for more a more detailed look at "The Beautiful Truth": http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/11/the_notsobeautiful_untruth.php
Posted by: Ramel | September 9, 2009 9:01 PM
I'm 53 and in reasonably good health. I believe that smoking and drinking are vastly underrated components of an enjoyable life.
A dimwit relative of mine asked me to watch this movie. I got through about 20 minutes of it (all the idiocy I could bear), then lit up a smoke and threw back a few rum and cokes.
Sincerely,
Whatever
Posted by: Whatever | September 10, 2009 5:12 PM
Congratulations on wasting your time writing this nonsense and being completely oblivious to reality. Have you ever heard the word CAPITALISM? Do you understand that EVERYTHING in this world is motivated by money? Maybe you should spend some time researching the truth next time, and good luck with cancer dumb ass.
Posted by: Ross Heidebrecht | September 23, 2009 7:16 PM
I always like to read someone elses opinion on something, but when all I am reading are a bunch of cynical minded insults, I am not moved.
I watched this little flick. It was great! What's wrong with what they're saying? Do you think chemicals in our water supply aren't harmful to us? Are you saying that Mercury is fine & dandy? Are you of the opinion that the FDA is protecting us from the harmful effects of all this? Do you think there is no truth to how diet is linked to disease? Do you think all of that is bullshit but you can sure trust the drug companies? Fine then, man. I think if that's what you think...then perhaps you're the one who isn't very smart. C'mon! The government and drug companies get rich off us being sick! It couldn't be any more clear! I see your problem with the conspiracy idea of things, but the fact is, conspiracy or not, as long we people keep getting sick and taking drugs and getting chemo and getting sicker, the drug companies and government will remain rich, rich, rich. This is not a myth, dude. It's a fact.
This was just a small budget film attempting to offer to us a peek behind the scenes and you're jumping all over it like a rooster going cock-a-doodle-do...
When's the last time you had a good coffee enema? Maybe you could use one...
Posted by: Andrea | September 25, 2009 2:06 PM
I have just, very recently been diagnosed with Non Hodgkins Follicular B cell lymphoma. At almost 55 years of age, I have practiced a healthy and vigorous lifestyle and always kept a healthy, mostly vegetarian diet, that could only be better, if it were easier! I've always kept my weight low and been a non smoker, who prefers organic and unprocessed food, as fresh as possible. I won't go the opposite way now. If anything, I'm going to be even more careful and serious about optimum nutrition.
I wish I didn't find so much vicious contention to search through. I'm suspicious of all extremes and that includes extreme cynicism. There is an old spanish proverb about the folly of a traveler saying they will never drink from a particular well, that my MIL likes to quote.
I'm not likely to ever buy into 5 coffee enemas a day, since I don't even drink it, although most aspects of the Gerson diet sound like wonderfully nutritious, common sense.
I'm considering a customized blending of alternative recommendations from multiple sources, in combination with and following an intitial blast of chemo and Rituximab.
Posted by: Heather | September 30, 2009 12:38 AM
Thanks for commenting Heather, and I wish you the best for your health. I don't think anyone is arguing against the merits of a healthy diet and frequent exercise; rather, Gerson fanatics believe they can CURE cancer, any cancer, just by diet changes alone. This is obviously:
1) incredibly untrue
2) incredibly damngerous
3) morally reprehensible
I think you have your head screwed on, Heather, and if I was in your position I'd certainly be open to consider anything that might help. But sadly in this world there are evil people who know this fact only too well, and will exploit it for their own gain. Watch out for them!
Posted by: Frank the SciencePunk | October 1, 2009 12:18 PM
From firsthand experience: I tried a lifestyle of high stress, high caffeine and aspartame, little sleep, fast food and heat-and-eat meals. At that time, daily life involved headaches, little or no short term memory, and chronic sinusitis that would linger for months even after five different antibiotic prescriptions.
I then took 3 days to eat only organic vegetables, nuts, brown rice and organic juices. I kept a blog during that time to record the experience.
After three days, my mind was remarkably clear, my energy shot up, and my moods stabilized. The following two years were entirely free of respiratory allergies or sinus infections.
Conclusion: Standard food and water sources do have a negative impact upon health. Dietary choices can make pronounced change in immunity and brain function.
The tone of your review is so reactive and inflammatory, it makes me wonder why. It could be
1) You've been paid to put down this film.
2) You're stirring controversy to bring more page views and, therefore, more revenue.
3) The film caused some cognitive dissonance, and it scared you.
An objective overview of the film with a thoughtful, insightful critique would have gained respect from the reader. Instead, this submission sounds like a teenager who feels powerful through name-calling. Surely there must be more for you to offer your readers.
Posted by: JDL | October 5, 2009 4:51 PM
I tried a lifestyle of high stress, high caffeine and aspartame, little sleep, fast food and heat-and-eat meals.
Posted by: rx1 | October 7, 2009 12:42 PM
The person writing this article is a small minded biased idiot. The Joshua tree being taking down by pills signifies the strength of these toxins, I'm sure they know how long they live, and I'm sure your stuck believing sixty, seventy years is enough for you. Yet you don't know how long we can live.
Believing what they have said would destroy the whole basis of your reality and threaten you. In fact you may be paid to discredit the documentary. With immature and inside the box thinking.
Posted by: Mitchell Umbdenstock | October 18, 2009 9:24 AM
Evan, at first I was really interested in what you had to say. Now I think you're just an angry dick and you've lost your chance.
Posted by: erin kelly | October 18, 2009 7:56 PM
Maybe this documentary is hokie - but one thing it did make me do is think. There is a lot of information given that does make sense. The people that made this film are trying to do something to help others in general, not make money, they have good intention. I think that anger and sarcasm don't do anything to help you in your blog. You sound like an unhappy angry person.
Posted by: amy | October 29, 2009 5:19 PM
Our bodies will take care of us as long as we take care of it. So unless we grow our own food, stop consuming animal flesh, stop taking ALL prescribed meds and OTCs we will continuosly fall I'll, be unhealthy and die young! I have been in the medical research field for over 30 yes until I was diagnosed with Ocular Melanoma. Uncurable without radiation. I cured myself competely using Gerson's method. SO THERE!!!!!
Posted by: Mina | October 30, 2009 3:38 AM
I just finished reading every single comment - whew! I also watched the entire film, unlike Frank.
I get that Frank's main point here is the claim that the Gerson diet can cure cancer, and he says saying that without scientific evidence to back it up is "evil."
Within the film, there is mention of hundreds of documented cases of recovery of, and interviews with patients who were sent home to die or offered chemo by their traditional doctors, who instead regained their health on the Gerson diet. This is evidence enough that if the intent of modern medicine is truly to heal rather than merely manage disease, scientifically based studies would begin immediately. Scientists may want to be proved wrong, but multi-millionaire businessmen (and women) do not.
What I personally think, as a non-scientist mind-you, is that it is evil to profit from expensive, invasive and chemically-based approaches that are scientifically proven to kill more people than they help.
Another reason outside of proper funding that I think alternative treatment is not yet anywhere near mainstream is because people are not willing to give up their habits like smoking, drinking, junk food and the like. They want a pill or treatment that will fix them (or suppress the symptoms) so that they can just pick up where they left off. Alas, you can't save people from themselves...
Posted by: Tracy | November 1, 2009 7:19 PM
It amazes me that people can listen to information that doesn't fit in with their understanding of the world and then dismiss it, and make fun of it, without looking at actual data. Sure, there's a LOT of crazy stuff out there. But how do you know what to believe? I know of two people that were cured of cancer using the Gerson method, and another two that are in-process.
Among other topics discussed in the movie:
I personally had negative health affects for years and wondered whether my mouthful of amalgam fillings (which have mercury content) had any part in that. Had my fillings replaced with gold and non-toxic composites, and those effects went away (headaches, bizarre metallic tastes in my mouth, etc.). Mercury is a poison. We're told to be wary of fish. But if a dentist tries to go up against the American Dental Association to do something about that then he's in for trouble (I've had two dentists describe this to me).
It's worth your time to do some REAL research regarding fluoride.
Is the world still flat?
I have a degree in Physics, I know a little about science. I wonder about people...
Tom
Posted by: Tom | November 22, 2009 9:29 PM