Patrick Swayze

You stay away from Ziggy Stardust and Severus Snape, Mike Adams!

oracknows — Tue, 19 Jan 2016 02:31:59 +0000

You stay away from Ziggy Stardust and Severus Snape, Mike Adams!

I've been a big fan of David Bowie ever since high school. True, I didn't appreciate his less mainstream stuff as intensely as I do now until I had been in college a couple of years, but it's not an inaccurate to characterize the effect of David Bowie's art on my life as significant. Basically, I own pretty much everything he ever committed to CD or vinyl and have seen him in concert every time he's toured, starting with his Serious Moonlight Tour in 1983 and ending with his appearance at Madison Square Garden during his Reality Tour in December 2003. I saw him with Trent Reznor in 1995, and I saw him when he came as close as he ever did in his career to a Spinal Tap moment, namely his Glass Spider Tour in 1987. I do regret never having seen him in his 1970s heyday, but I was definitely too young to see him as Ziggy Stardust and borderline too young (junior high age) when he was the Thin White Duke. He was an amazing artist.

Not surprisingly, I was very much saddened by David Bowie's death a little more than a week ago, particularly given how it was such a surprise. No one knew that Bowie had cancer, and I was increasingly in awe at how he had managed to hide his illness for the 18 months since he was first diagnosed. We still don't know for sure what kind of cancer Bowie died of. Bowie's friend Ivo van Hove, the director of his musical Lazarus, has been quoted in an interview as saying that Bowie died of liver cancer, but I have been unable to find corroboration of this from other sources elsewhere. (My first guess would have been lung cancer, given Bowie's longtime smoking habit.) Given that I've been in the biz long enough to know that lay people often refer to metastases of cancers from other organs to the liver as "liver cancer," I wonder if Bowie had a different kind of cancer that had spread to his liver. I have no way of knowing that; so for now it is best to accept that he died of liver cancer. It doesn't really matter. What does matter is that something's happened that I hoped wouldn't.

Regular readers know that I really, really detest Mike Adams, the quack apologist who has built a woo empire around his NaturalNews.com website. One thing that I detest about him in particular is something I first noticed him doing a long time ago. Basically, whenever a celebrity dies of cancer (and sometimes of other things), Adams manages to find a way to paint it as the evil oncology "industry" pushing that evil chemotherapy to kill the celebrity. His most recent target was Beau Biden, whose fatal brain cancer Adams blamed on GMOs (specifically glyphosate pesticides) and whose death Adams blamed on chemotherapy. At other times, he's pulled variations of the same stunt, in essence spitting on the graves of Tony Snow, Patrick Swayze, Elizabeth Edwards, and Farrah Fawcett.

Every time, Adams' MO is the same. He claims that it wasn't the cancer that killed, but rather the chemotherapy, to which he often adds a faux-plaintive, regretful, "If only [insert name of dead celebrity] had used 'natural treatments' she would still be alive today." Whenever he can, Adams likes to find a photo of the celebrity who died taken not long before death, when inevitably that celebrity, ravaged by cancer, appears shockingly emaciated (as Patrick Swayze did) and use for shock value to blame the celebrity's condition on the chemotherapy, rather than the real cause, the cancer. I suppose that's one good thing about how David Bowie kept his disease from the prying eyes of the press; there are no such photos of him near the end, as there are for Patrick Swayze and Steve Jobs, where Bowie looks extremely emaciated. True, there are fairly recent photos of Bowie out there. The most recent include photos taken at the opening of Bowie's play in early December and photos from a photo shoot from an unknown time but presumably within a few weeks of his death. Although in both sets of photos there were hints that the educated eye can pick up to suggest that Bowie's health was not very good (one hint: look at his legs, particularly knees and ankles), those signs were fairly subtle, particularly for one with advanced cancer, and fairly easily missed. Overall Bowie still looked amazingly good for someone with terminal cancer. No wonder Adams chose an old picture of him.

Yes, predictably, Mike Adams let his ghoul flag fly, as he does the despicable thing he does best, gloat over dead celebrities. In this case, he includes Actor Alan Rickman in his gloating in an article entitled Alan Rickman, David Bowie both victims of a for-profit cancer industry that exploits humans for money (while suppressing natural cures). Rickman, as you probably know, was a very popular and influential British actor, best known for playing Severus Snape in the Harry Potter movies, as well as terrorist Hans Gruber in Die Hard, the Sheriff of Nottingham in Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Harry in Love, Actually, and Colonel Brandon in Sense and Sensibility. Basically, Rickman was very good at playing villains, but he was an excellent all-around actor. Like David Bowie, he was 69 years old when he died of cancer a few days ago, and also like David Bowie he died of a cancer that he had kept private, so that the announcement of his death came as a huge unpleasant surprise. We didn't know what Rickman died of at the time, although after his death there were reports that he had died of pancreatic cancer after being diagnosed in August.

These days, Adams is including podcasts with his rants, and this makes his claims even more hard to take. There's just something about his smarmy, smug voice that makes you hate him even more:

Here's a taste:

The cancer industry is a for-profit industry that relies on repeat business to keep padding its bottom line. David Bowie and Alan Rickman are just two of the industry's latest victims, but there will sadly be millions more.

Chemotherapy alone kills an estimated one million people a year. See PharmaDeathClock.com for a running tally...

Anyone who thinks the cancer industry would ever research and release an actual cancer "cure" is delusional... there's no chance that a multi-billion-dollar industry will deliberately make itself obsolete and obliterate its entire business model.

I had never seen PharmaDeathClock.com; so I wandered over to the link and clicked. What I encountered is pure hilarity, a whole bunch of unsourced misinformation. I saved the site for future reference, as I think it might require a heaping helping of not-so-Respectful Insolence of its own one day. For example, it claims that over 16 million people have been killed by chemotherapy in the US since 2000. That's a million people a year. This number quite literally makes no sense, as the American Cancer Society tells us that around 589,430 Americans die of cancer every year. Even if you claim that every patient who dies of cancer after having been treated with chemotherapy died of the chemotherapy instead of the cancer, that still wouldn't be nearly enough deaths to produce 16 million deaths over 16 years. The other numbers are similarly inflated in ridiculously obvious ways easily identified with minimal checking.

Let's just put it this way. There are only around 2.5 million deaths a year in the US. That would be a little over 40 million over 16 years. I added up the number of deaths attributed to the first nine causes on that website. Guess what the total was? I added them up to 47,271,697. That doesn't even count the causes of death for which the PharmaDeathClock website lists less than a million deaths each. Basically, if you believe this profoundly silly website, medicine causes all the deaths suffered in the US since 2000 and then many more. (One wonders where these deaths went. Perhaps our lizard overlords are hiding them.) The person who put this idiotic site together should just look at some basic vital statistics to make sure his exaggerations aren't so implausible as to deserve nothing but laughter.

In any case, right at the beginning of his podcast, Adams pulls his usual schtick, opining about how there are "natural cures" out there that could have saved David Bowie and Alan Rickman, if only they had availed themselves of them. Never mind that, in the case of Alan Rickman at least, we don't even know whether he was treated with chemotherapy. In cases of advanced pancreatic cancer, not infrequently patients choose palliative care only. It's a reasonable choice, one that I would probably make if I were ever diagnosed with unresectable pancreatic cancer; that is, unless treatments were to improve markedly. The point is that, for all we know, Rickman very possibly never received chemotherapy. We just don't know one way or the other, and his family and publicist aren't saying.

Let's take a look at some of the other claims Adams makes:

The entire cancer industry is based on pure scientific fraud. Out of 53 "landmark" studies cited by the cancer industry to push chemotherapy and other toxic treatments, 88 percent were found to be completely fabricated.

Um, no. Not exactly. I explained what this study showed in my usual inimitable detail. There was no fabrication of results, only difficulty replicating the results. This is a very different thing. Difficulty replicating ≠ fabrication.

Next up:

Similarly, a recent study conducted at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, Washington found that tumors grow FASTER after chemotherapy treatments, meaning chemo accelerates tumor growth and spreads the cancer.

No, no, no, no. This study shows nothing of the sort, at least not in a generalizable fashion. It was a very specific model of prostate cancer. The finding didn't demonstrate anything we didn't already know, namely that damage caused by treatment to normal cells can stimulate the growth of tumor cells. It does not show that chemotherapy doesn't work or that it somehow always makes cancer more aggressive. It does not show that chemotherapy "backfires."

Another paragraph, another lie. Here's another:

Maybe that why 9 out of 10 oncologists would refuse chemotherapy themselves because they know how incredibly toxic it is.

Wow. The number keeps getting bigger and bigger, like any good myth. That's right. This is not true. The origin of this claim goes back nearly 30 years. It turns out that this survey is over 25 years old and was about a specific kind of chemotherapy, cisplatin for non-small cell lung cancer, which was a new therapy at the time and didn’t have a lot of evidence for it. Oncologists were surveyed whether they would take this particular regimen if diagnosed with lung cancer. Subsequent studies showed that, as the evidence for this regiment evolved, more physicians expressed a willingness to take this chemotherapy. Later, in 1991, there was a study entitled Oncologists vary in their willingness to undertake anti-cancer therapies. For highly treatable cancers, it showed percentages as high as 98% of doctors willing to undergo chemotherapy, while the remaining 2% were uncertain, and none answered “definitely no” or “probably no” to chemotherapy. For cancers with a bleak prognosis, such as brain cancer, the numbers were lower. In other words, what oncologists answer to the question of chemotherapy for themselves depends, as it should, on their assessment of how likely it is to benefit them.

Later, Adams rants:

When people like David Bowie and Alan Rickman die from cancer, it's because the cancer industry withheld livesaving information from them about cancer prevention, anti-cancer foods, vitamin D supplementation, avoidance of toxic chemicals and other crucial information that can save lives.

Not only is the cancer industry in the business of profiting from suffering and disease, it's also the key suppression authority of natural solutions against cancer such as anti-cancer medicinal mushrooms (reishi, shiitake, maitake, etc.), the anti-cancer potential of vitamin D and alternative cancer therapies that have been banned in the United States purely for political reasons (see the relentless attacks on Gerson Therapy or Dr. Burzynski to learn more).

In the podcast itself, Adams goes even further, claiming that cancer is "easy" to prevent and even cure. If that were the case, then Adams should demonstrate just how easy it is to prevent and cure cancer with "natural remedies." He doesn't. I wonder why.

In any case, this sort of vile gloating from this vulture is one reason why I so despise Mike Adams, and, in light of his ghoulish gloating over one of my all time favorite artists, I have just one thing to say to him:

Keep your damned dirty paws off Ziggy Stardust and Severus Snape! Let their fans grieve in peace.

oracknows Mon, 01/18/2016 - 21:31

Categories

Social Sciences

Do we know whether Alan Rickman had chemotherapy? I have read very little about his cancer. I know that my stepfather was not offered chemotherapy for his pancreatic cancer as his overall health was too poor and the cancer too advanced. He died within 6 months of being diagnosed.

Not that it would matter to Mike Adams mind.

My hot tip, don't listen to his podcasts or videos, it is better for the blood pressure.

"My hot tip, don’t listen to his podcasts or videos, it is better for the blood pressure."

It is also better if you want to keep some believe in human decency and intelligence.

@Chris Preston #1: No, I was not foolish enough to listen. Orac's excellent treatment of the matter helped me to keep my BP under control. In fact, I have come view his writings as downright preventative; a sentiment that I believe others share.

So, Mike has bought into the mushroom myth, again demonstrating his astounding proclivity for gullibility. Yes, there are high rates of tumor inhibition in laboratory rodents with xenografts of human tumors administered extracts and polysaccharides of fungi, but nothing like those rates have been found in humans. Rodents are apparently far more responsive to fungal extracts and polysaccharides derived from them than humans. The best anyone can say for any of the fungal polysaccharides is that they may prolong the life of a small percentage of cancer patients after chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery, but there is no conclusive clinical evidence that any one or more of them is effective alone in the treatment or prevention of cancer, and the same is true of crude mushroom extracts. Far from being suppressed by big pharma, it was large pharmaceutical companies that developed and studied the products.

Breaking news! Mike Adams still a scumbag.

When people like David Bowie and Alan Rickman die from cancer, it’s because the cancer industry withheld livesaving information from them about cancer prevention, anti-cancer foods, vitamin D supplementation, avoidance of toxic chemicals and other crucial information that can save lives.

And being the altruist he is, Mikey will sell you the supplements, the foods and the information. Don't forget for one second that Mikey exploits these deaths for profit. F*ck that guy. Seriously.

Lighthorse@3

So, Mike has bought into the mushroom myth, again demonstrating his astounding proclivity for gullibility.

I don't know if it's so much that he bought into it as he sells it. He's a vile profiteer through and through.

h[]p://store.naturalnews.com/search.asp?keyword=mushroom&search.x=0&search.y=0

@capnkrunch #5: Hey, thanks. I guessed as much, but didn't dare look. So, what's he got? Let's see. There are 2 products containing powdered, myceliated brown rice in capsules sold under the guise of containing "mushrooms", which is in violation of FDA laws for a product described as containing mushrooms. And a range of individual "mushroom" products in powder but not extract form, the majority of which suspiciously contain the same quantity of "15% Beta Glucan (polysaccharide)". Never mind that "chaga" is not a mushroom, he fails to state the species of "cordyceps" in another product and claims they were all produced in the US. Each one is powdered, myceliated brown rice and not mushrooms.

@capnkrunch #5: Upon closer inspection of the labels, he claims they contain "[trivial name of fungus] Mushroom powder, organic myceliated brown rice". However, the name of the products states "Mushroom", whereas they are not 100% mushroom by any legal meaning of the term in the US. Combined that with his statement "anti-cancer medicinal mushrooms (reishi, shiitake, maitake, etc.)", and you have a medical claim for the dietary supplements he sells.

Every day is a constant struggle to not spend all day sending nasty tweets to Mike. The horrid little tick.

Feel free to send that to info the FTC, Lighthorse.

@Bob #8: That privilege is reserved for citizens of the US.

FDA-regulated products sold online:

http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ConsumerUpdates/ucm095859.htm

It is amazing how many claims of the form "Y kills X people per year in the USA!" become absurd once you realize there are only 2.5 million deaths a year, nearly half of them in people over 80.

You seem to doubt that 11 out of 10 oncologists would rather have Guinea worms in their eyes than get chemotherapy, Orac.

Lighthorse...

On it. Thanks!

It is amazing how many claims of the form “Y kills X people per year in the USA!” become absurd once you realize there are only 2.5 million deaths a year, nearly half of them in people over 80.

Yep, and PharmaDeathClock.com's death counts are so ridiculous that I didn't even have to point out that half those deaths are in the elderly. :-)

Yep, and PharmaDeathClock.com’s death counts are so ridiculous that I didn’t even have to point out that half those deaths are in the elderly.

Yes, but if they had used Mickeys product, they would have lived forever and ever, not be killed by any illness, accidents or guns.

I suppose he should take a good look in the mirror and see someone who only is trying to make more profit from people who have, or are affraid to get cancer, with products that are onely usefull to make money. for mr. Adams.
He does what he accuses oncologists of.

Out of 53 “landmark” studies cited by the cancer industry to push chemotherapy and other toxic treatments, 88 percent were found to be completely fabricated.

As Mike Adams should know better than most, 43% of statistics are made up on the spot.

There is a moral test, IIRC originally due to C. S. Lewis, about accusations that certain people are monsters. I learned of it in a theology blog, but the test applies here too, since a doctor who really was poisoning his patients would be reasonably considered a monster. The test is that you should be relieved to find evidence that the accusations are false. If instead you double down on insisting the truth of those accusations, then according to Lewis, you're the monster. I'd say Adams comes out on the wrong side of that test.

Right, he's into mushrooms ( and not in a good way).
-btw- Bob, he's not a horrid *little* tick- he's 6'1".

At any rate, I put up warnings recently about Mike's latest
( the Death Clock, stories about the dearly departed above noted in advance) so that Orac wouldn't blow any circuits.

Mikey is involved in other despicable antics that mislead and frighten readers and promote his own products/ brand/ advice. Here are a few ideas:
- people should desert cities and live in the country before the ensuing Ragnarok that will destroy civilisation as we know it, leading to gang rule and starvation.
- sell traditional investments and stop using banks, instead buy gold and silver- you'll need precious metals - especially silver coins- when the collapse occurs.
- be self-sufficient and grow your own food and herbs
- learn traditional crafts and weaponry ( universities/ computer skills are useless) so that you will have important survival skills/ be "employable" when all fails. Carpentry, farming, herding, butchering, masonry, sewing, policing, building huts, you know.

Mikey is currently selling an image of himself as a self-sufficient farmer/ rancher home on the range, outside Austin.
He includes stories about his goats, chickens and donkeys and, like he did in Ecuador, he maintains a 'food forest' on his land which will feed him when disaster comes. ( fruit trees etc) and also sells hydroponics kits that work without electricity.

I imagine because many people are currently frightened about the economy and terrorism - as they have been since the early 'aughts'- he, like Null, uses that to fuel his spiel so that he can profit off of fear and worry, just like he does about serious illness. Like that other idiot, he has discovered that using audio may be a more efficacious and powerful means to enrapture his thralls.

I guess I am about the same age as you are,Orac.I have been a huge David Bowie fan since elementary school,when I first heard "Space Oddity" on the radio.It was the pop stuff from the 80s that drove me away for a while,but Bowie made some amazing records in the 90s."Earthling" is a stone cold classic,IMO,up there with Bowie's best records from the Golden Years of the 70s.Drum machines or no drum machines.

There has been some interesting stuff show up on the web since David's death.Check out the BBC Radio2 video on YouTube,with Rick Wakeman's lovely classical piano transcription of "Life On Mars".But I thought I'd share two articles specifically about Bowie and his cancer.There was this piece on the the right wing NewsMax site of all places,written by a woman who clearly has some medical knowledge of cancer.She speculates Bowie may have either had lung cancer that spread to his liver,or even that past drug use may have been a factor.

Then there was this posting open letter from a pallative care doctor at the BMJ blogs that is well worth taking a look at.

Adams is a vulture as far as high profile cancer deaths are concerned.We have known this for years.He is a disgusting little troll,who will try to use any any opportunity to push his worthless quackery.Treat cancer with mushrooms and green leafy vegetables!Just be to use the kelp and mushroom powders I sell in my online store,nothing else will do.

Mikey is no different than the greed trolls who came out of the woodwork to sell old David Bowie on ebay for thousands of dollars.

Orac says " Adams should demonstrate just how easy it is to prevent and cure cancer with 'natural remedies'"

Both of these ghouls continuously recite tales about how many people die horribly FROM SBM and how THEY themselves and their followers THRIVE on natural diets, eschewing SBM. That's their idea of *demonstrating* how their woo works.

I hear long-winded recitativs about how the other monster 'counsels' the seriously ill and how many have been 'cured'. Vitamin C drips "reverse' hiv/ aids and have for over 30 years- works for terminal cancer too.. Health support groups teaching veganism and supplement-mania reverse menopause, MS, AD, ASDs and whatever ails ye. He often tells stories about how many famous people ( named) have refused his advice and guess what? Now, they're dead.

Lighthorse@6

I guessed as much, but didn’t dare look.

No need to look really. The NaturalNews blog exists solely to drive Mikey's profits. If he speaks highly of something it is a safe bet he either sells it, has an affiliate that sells it or sells information (books, CDs, etc) about it. If he says something is bad he stands to profit by hawking an alternative. Even his 'end if times' posts serve to promote his survival gear.

I don't have the words to adequately describe how much I despise him nor the disdain I feel for the idiots who buy his bullsh!t wholesale.

Altho' I'm on my way out the door and can't spend much time..

I looked over the first comments on Mikey's article and HEY WOW- they are largely dissenting !

Orac:

In cases of advanced pancreatic cancer, not infrequently patients choose palliative care only.

I can't help but remember my paternal grandfather. We'll never know if he really had pancreatic cancer, since he refused biopsy. But he felt it was a pretty strong possibility. His doctor had recommended a biopsy to find out for sure. But grandpa was a general surgeon, and at 91, was basically ready to move on to whatever lies after death. He didn't feel there was any real value to even the biopsy. What would be the point? It wouldn't change the course of treatment, not as far as he was concerned. The only medicine he took for it was morphine. He approved of assisted suicide, but as that was not legal, had no intention of making things difficult for his physician, so went with palliative care and lots of long conversations with friends and family, enjoying his high balls and Dos Equis, until he peacefully passed away in his home. Took longer than he had expected; he was in extraordinarily good health for his age prior to the illness. (At 85, his doctor had to convince him to stop his daily five-mile constitutionals following some angina, but he kept up his daily calisthenics until he had decided to go for hospice care.)

So yeah. There was a doctor who decided against chemo. But for totally rational reasons, and not because of "herbs". (Grandpa was in favor of legalizing marijuana, but really only for recreational use. He had very little tolerance for woo.) I suspect Adams would find a way to both celebrate his resistance to chemo and condemn his acquiescence to death.

Mikey reminds me of Gilderoy Lockhart, making the claim that it was such a pity because if only he had been there he had just the spell.

Clearly the pharma clock is showing what is really happening, not the fictitious lower death rate that the depopulating new world order gang would like us to believe.

I generally avoid reading anything on Mike Adams's site. It makes me unhappy. However, I read this one. And, I read the comments. There's some sensible person, James Peters, calmly explaining cancer. I'm impressed with his attempts to do so without engaging the crazy. They keep calling him a BigPharma Shill. It's practically reflexive.

What I find amusing is that there are several different "cures" for cancer. None of the commenters seem to find it disturbing that they can't possibly all be right.

And someone mentioned chemtrails. I'm practically speechless.

The statistics on his PharmaDeathClock page are a hot mess. If you view his sources, it looks as if he just took numbers from them without much thought of what they represent. Not that his source's numbers are correct but I'll give Gary Null credit for at least having some reliable references for his numbers in his paper.

As is the nature of the Web, I ended up on his Profile and History page. It looks like something someone in high school would write when they were still under the false impression that copious, tedious detail of insignificant points makes up for lack of substance in their essays.

Why do I care how he did on his college entrance exams? Or that he turned down scholarships. Does it mean that he was smart enough to figure out that fleecing people brought in more of an income than writing email programs? Or that he was dropped on his head after college and lost whatever innate abilities he had?

It was all very odd. Almost like saying "Hey, I'm really smart based on all the ratings intellectuals use but I'm not one of them". Meh.

Steve Jobs is a high profile example of the deaths caused by 'alternative medicine'. His cancer had close to 100% survival rate over ten years with prompt medical treatment, but he close q quack remedies instead. http://gawker.com/5849543/harvard-cancer-expert-steve-jobs-probably-doo…

@ Lighthorse #3

Studies of human tumor xenografts on rodents give a start, but not much more. These rodents are immuno-deficient, otherwise they would reject the tumor as a foreign body on their own without treatment. In a word, these tumors are easy to kill, and rarely start in an actual organ (though they may metastase there). Studies on rodent tumors are more powerful, but they are still rodent tumors, not human, are not as easy to produce reliably. You need a combination of the two models to begin to determine true anti-neoplasic potential.

@Meg #23:

And someone mentioned chemtrails. I’m practically speechless.

Chemtrails have that effect on people, even in homeopathic doses...

@Kimbeaux:

It's actually very simplistic to blame Jobs' death on alternative medicine. I've analyzed his case very extensively and concluded that the delay in treatment probably didn't make a difference because Jobs' tumor had almost certainly already metastasized to his liver by the time of his diagnosis:

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/10/31/just-one-more-thing/

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/10/21/did-steve-jobs-flirtation-…

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/10/07/steve-jobs-neuroendocrine-…

That's not to say Jobs did himself any favors by delay. He probably decreased his odds of survival somewhat. However, based on what I've learned from his biography and other sources, I conclude that he probably would have died of his cancer even if he had undergone surgery expeditiously. Articles like the one you cite are simplistic in the extreme and probably incorrect to conclude that if only Jobs had gone to surgery right away he'd still be alive. By delaying, he probably only negatively altered the odds of his eventual death by a few percent at most. The overwhelmingly more likely scenario is that the cat was already out of the bag when Jobs was diagnosed, Jobs already had micrometastases in the liver, and he would have died anyway, just later.

We skeptics do our arguments no favors by presenting Steve Jobs as a case of alternative medicine use killing a cancer patient who might have been saved.

Rich, interesting you should mention chemtrials and homeopathy in the the same sentence. There is a video on youtube of a woman spritzing vinegar at the sky to make chemtrails go away.
Warning! It's a "no food or drink while watching" production.

"There is a video on youtube of a woman spritzing vinegar at the sky to make chemtrails go away."

There are no chemtrails, so it must have worked. But was it white or balsamic vinegar?

If the Health Deranger does end up getting some form of cancer (and the odds increase every year he ages), I bet he'll go running to M D Anderson whimpering "Help me! Help me!"
And of course, they will help him, as they would despite his vile opinions. This won't change his mind one bit. Why derail the gravy train?

If the Health Deranger does end up getting some form of cancer (and the odds increase every year he ages), I bet he’ll go running to M D Anderson whimpering “Help me! Help me!”

Hmm, I don't know; I'm more inclined to think he would seek SBM from an EU clinic to avoid any embarrassing exposure to the fact* that he had cancer in spite of his lifelong claims that his woo works best.

*It is not a fact that the Health Deranger has cancer, this is merely hypothetically-speaking.

There is a video on youtube of a woman spritzing vinegar at the sky to make chemtrails go away.

I find videos about apparent mental derangement disturbing.

I don't know what is more depressing, that people like Mike Adams exist, or that other people exist who hear his crap and swallow it hook, line, and sinker. It's not just the stupidity, it is the willful ignorance that gets to me. So many people don't want the truth, they want the comforting lies that support their view of the world, and in a highly ironic twist, they call everyone else "sheeple" when they are actually the ones blindly accepting everything they are told.

I seriously despair sometimes when I contemplate this.

I try so hard to be the better person around messages like Adams', but some days - today being one of them - i get rationally incredibly angry. I work my TAIL off at my job, and have done so for almost 20 years now. I care DEEPLY about the outcome of every drug candidate i have worked on, especially the oncology targets. Even the "lesser" diseases i have contributed to - Graft versus Host Disease, Autoimmune, antivirals, obesity and cacexia, HCV, etc etc - still get every ounce of energy i have to give. I get nightmares about small mistakes i make, and i stress for days when i misinterpret data or make a minor math error that costs the project time or money.

It just breaks my heart that there are (allegedly) intelligent, rational humans who devalue my and my coworkers' efforts so thoroughly. He is calling ME a liar, in addition to the thousands of other R&D employees he is insulting.

Some days i just let it roll off of me and shrug and am secure in the knowledge that he is insane. But today, for some reason, i am furious.

(I know it's not about me, btw. But on behalf of every coworker and colleague i've ever had who cares deeply about the work we do, i just can't stay silent today. I'm pissed.)

Apparently Val Kilmer is dying of throat cancer. Thanks to his Christian Science beliefs.

@Bob #12: If Mike owns HealthRanger, he has made a medical claim. If he does not, the company who does is legally jeopardized by his claim by direct affiliation. Moreover, on the back of the package of the "mushroom" powders, readers are directed to "store.natural.news.com", which leads to medical claims.

Because you guys ( esp Dan W and Double S) inspire me...

I know about Mike since 2007 ( and I am probably the first person to ever publicly refer to him as 'Mikey')

I sense a certain pattern in his material which echoes Null's and reeks to high heaven of self-instruction** in that it is naïve, self-serving and very selective in its scope of study.
He picks and chooses items to discuss based upon his poor knowledge and is also limited by what sells. Thus, what he
( they) knows about memory or cancer or mental health has to fit what worries people most and cuts out relevant material in the disciplines of cognitive psychology or oncology or psychiatry.

But their fans don't know this.
Their appeal cuts two ways which might seem contradictory but really are not:
- they are naïve and simplistic enough for their thralls to understand
( AND followers can identify with these 'regular guys' telling the experts how to correct their errant ways)
- they portray themselves as self-made men at the zenith of intellectual ability HOWEVER followers are led to believe that they themselves can do the same - become an intellectual force and critic of science, politics or whatever else they fancy themselves to be ( Null studies art as well)
without doing the relevant work or acquiring a meaningful education in the field.

I think that people identifying with these loons -or aspiring to mimic them- insulates the latter from criticism quite a bit. Followers have a emotional investment in their success and perhaps live vicariously through these so-called heroes of alt med and new media. They continuously tell their audiences about how altruistic they are, how they are just plain folks not fancy university elitists, how they care about people unlike anyone of their enemies list.

** another hint- if someone is an expert they don't constantly mispronounce important words or names in their area of expertise.

Not referring to any specific supplement dealer here with the following question (apologies if I've asked this before):

Has the FDA ever weighed in on the legality of 1) on the one hand, following DSHEA in making suitably vague general health claims for one's product on the product label or company website, but additionally 2) making claims in "news" articles and in online forum postings that the product treats specific medical conditions?

For example, what if you sell a supplement whose label reads "helps support heart health", while you go online to proclaim that the supplement prevents heart attacks or treats heart failure?

@ Dangerous Bacon:

I'm not sure about the FDA but here's how Null skirts legal issues ( he has a stable full of lawyers):
he says that he " can't tell you anything about what this product does BUT if you look it up, you'll see" ( paraphrase)

Then he endlessly details what 'research' shows about gingko or vitamin C or resveratrol- discussing in vitro studies, altie fol de rol and his own "clinical" research/ health support groups peppered with anecdotes aplenty.
Supposedly he cured many people with aids or cancer with vitamin C drips and ozone.

Interestingly, his health resort in Texas was supposed to work with alt practitioners in integrative therapies but I can no longer access his resort's web page.

I'd like to invite Mike Adams into my home for a nice pot of really hot coffee...Gerson blend, of course.

Hello dear minions,

I had a little hunch (lambast about big pharma minions' COI in order to hide our own...) and while the whois query was inconclusive, the dns one look to me very suspicious :)

dig:

localhost ~ # dig pharmadeathclock.com

; <> DiG 9.10.3-P2 <> pharmadeathclock.com
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 27437
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 512
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;pharmadeathclock.com.INA

;; ANSWER SECTION:
pharmadeathclock.com.599INA162.244.66.144

;; Query time: 97 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)
;; WHEN: Tue Jan 19 18:51:31 2016
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 65

localhost ~ # dig naturalnews.com

; <> DiG 9.10.3-P2 <> naturalnews.com
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<>> Last update of WHOIS database: 2016-01-19T23:00:00Z <<<

Alain < Domina Walters trusty evil minion :)

oups, truncated post...

here's the dig output:

localhost ~ # dig pharmadeathclock.com

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 512
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;pharmadeathclock.com.INA

;; ANSWER SECTION:
pharmadeathclock.com.599INA162.244.66.144

;; Query time: 97 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)
;; WHEN: Tue Jan 19 18:51:31 2016
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 65

localhost ~ # dig naturalnews.com

; <> DiG 9.10.3-P2 <> naturalnews.com
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NOERROR, id: 12087
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 1, AUTHORITY: 0, ADDITIONAL: 1

;; OPT PSEUDOSECTION:
; EDNS: version: 0, flags:; udp: 512
;; QUESTION SECTION:
;naturalnews.com.INA

;; ANSWER SECTION:
naturalnews.com.162INA162.244.66.146

;; Query time: 39 msec
;; SERVER: 8.8.8.8#53(8.8.8.8)
;; WHEN: Tue Jan 19 18:51:51 2016
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 60

Better I hope?

Alain

#23 meg

None of the commenters seem to find it disturbing that they can’t possibly all be right.

Most nutters (see climate denialists ?) usually have no problem believing several mutually impossible things. Crank magnetism seems a normal state of mind for them.

When people like David Bowie and Alan Rickman die from cancer, it’s because the cancer industry withheld livesaving information from them about cancer prevention, anti-cancer foods, vitamin D supplementation, avoidance of toxic chemicals and other crucial information that can save lives.

And yet the 'cancer industry' is doing such a terrible job of silencing Mikey. Somehow his stuff is all over the place for folks to see...

Mon cher Alain-

Calling me 'Domina" makes us minions sound a tad ... er...
risqué, *n'est-ce pas?*

when we're REALLY so nice and as pure as the driven snow.

That's right dear Denice but I'm a romantic :)

That said, I will leave it up to our overlord ;)

Alain

Calling me ‘Domina” makes us minions sound a tad … er…
risqué, *n’est-ce pas?*

"Evidence-based" is my safeword.

“Evidence-based” is my safeword.

That is really good.

It slays me that some of the best humor on the web is found on a science board.

@ herr doktor bimler:

Oh come on now! You know that I'm not involved with any of that tiresome sub-dom, tie-me-up-tie-me-down, top-bottom stuff.

Liberte, egalite, etc

Risqué shouldn't necessarily be too risky.

Speaking of overlords, what has become of ours? I miss the reassuring messages from the nether regions of space. He didn't get made redundant, as they say across the water, in some merger, did he?

@ doug:

He isn't in the 'nether regions of space'
more like Santa Rosa-
altho' there probably are parallels between those 2 places.

Last time seen: Comment 49 on His Royal Quackiness (Prince Charles' visit to US of A).

Dear overlord, your presence would be desired here someday :)

Alain

@Dangerous Bacon #29: The short answer is yes. The FDA considers website content to be an extension of product labeling. Industry-related article titles on the subject of online claims over the past few years include:

FDA warning letters: Social media, website claims & GMP violations

Website content an extension of labeling: FDA warning letter shows companies need to 'think about their real estate space'

Be careful what you 'like' . . . The FDA is looking at your Facebook page

Facebook and Twitter: FDA continues to monitor tweets and 'likes'

Warning Letters database:

http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/default.htm

Here's a recent example:

http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2015/ucm4811…

More resources:

FDA:

http://www.fda.gov/ForConsumers/ProtectYourself/HealthFraud/ucm255474.h…

FTC:

https://www.ftc.gov/tips-advice/business-center/guidance/dietary-supple…

Sorry. My last post should have been @Dangerous Bacon #39.

@ Alain #42 - 43: Could you explain the significance for those of us who don't speak computer? Thanks :)

PharmaDeathCount.com and NaturalNews.com appear to use domain name servers in the same block. While that doesn't necessarily mean they are the same, it does raise that suspicion.

PharmaDeathCount.com and NaturalNews.com appear to use domain name servers in the same block.

At the moment, the former doesn't even have DNS from where I sit:

; <> DiG 9 <> @localhost PharmaDeathCount.com A
; (1 server found)
;; global options: +cmd
;; Got answer:
;; ->>HEADER<<- opcode: QUERY, status: NXDOMAIN, id: 25904
;; flags: qr rd ra; QUERY: 1, ANSWER: 0, AUTHORITY: 1, ADDITIONAL: 0

;; QUESTION SECTION:
;PharmaDeathCount.com.INA

;; AUTHORITY SECTION:
com.864INSOAa.gtld-servers.net. nstld.verisign-grs.com. 1453256554 1800 900 604800 86400

;; Query time: 0 msec
;; SERVER: 127.0.0.1#53(127.0.0.1)
;; WHEN: Wed Jan 20 03:23:39 2016
;; MSG SIZE rcvd: 111

Am I missing something here? One of his weirdo friends says the Pharma Death Clock is Mike Adam's page.

And why the heck is it called a clock? Isn't it a counter or something?

If I'm totally off base, please let me know. I'm extremely sleep deprived and have been in a rare mood all day.

^ Sorry. Here's the link

http://www.treason.news/2015-12-03-pharmadeathclock-like-lambs-to-the-s…

Past time for bed...

FWIW, the Bowie picture shows good archery form.

On the must-suppress-treatments-that-can't-be-patented front, which I suppose isn't too off-topic when Adams is, HSCT for multiple sclerosis has been making the news rounds lately, but this BBC item has some ironic bits:

Because the procedure involves no new drugs and instead re-purposes an existing therapy using the patient's own cells, there is little profit incentive for drug companies to get involved.

Prof Richard Burt, Northwestern University, Chicago carried out the first HSCT for MS as long ago as 1995 and is coordinating the international trial which began in 2006.

He said: "There has been resistance to this in the pharma and academic world. This is not a technology you can patent and we have achieved this without industry backing."

* No, I didn't bother looking for overlaps from other outlets.

^ "when Adams is on-topic"

@Denice Walter #38: Your characterization of Null and Mikey captures their true nature very well and could equally apply to others of their kind (e.g., David Wolfe): ignorant, unethical preachers supported by adoring fools and product line.

In the unlikely event of Orac running out of material, I am delighted to report that Dr Sin Hang Lee is back with more half-arsed semi-litigation! This time petitioning Dr. Margaret Chan of WHO with a "open letter" -- shared only with
Catherine Frompovich:

http://www.sott.net/article/310454-High-profile-global-vaccine-conspira…

Given Lee's oeuvre, the full 16-page letter was probably not particularly comprehensible, but Frompovich puts it through her personal Decoherence processor and picks out paragraphs at random. So it is difficult to determine precisely what Lee is alleging, or what has inspired his innuendos. But there is spooky Theremin music playing in the background.

hdb@#65:
Frompovich herself is very thpethial:
Catherine J Frompovich (website) is a retired natural nutritionist who earned advanced degrees in Nutrition and Holistic Health Sciences, Certification in Orthomolecular Theory and Practice plus Paralegal Studies. Her work has been published in national and airline magazines since the early 1980s. Catherine authored numerous books on health issues along with co-authoring papers and monographs with physicians, nurses, and holistic healthcare professionals. She has been a consumer healthcare researcher 35 years and counting.

Airline magazines! No wonder the Illuminati hate her.

@Lighthorse #3:

I'm weary of results from human tumor xenografts.

For all sorts of reasons, foreign tumor xenografts tend to be far more responsive to everything when compared naturally grown tumors. First as opposed to naturally grown tumors, they are foreign, and will elicit a host vs graft response. Second, since they are not grown on site, vascularisation is much more critical for them as compared to natural tumors. Also, they are less likely to be able, like naturally grown tumors, of using the host's body to their own ends, ie metastasis. Cancer is a war of attrition. Combine those factors and it makes all the difference between a drug that is spectacular in in vivo tests and disappointing in real life.

Yes, I know it's probably the most used in vivo model out there, because it's easier to use and interpret. But one has to be very weary of what they mean for cancer patients.

@ Lighthorse:

Thanks.
What really gets me upset is the amount of power these charlatans exercise over others' lives-
telling them what to eat, what to buy, how to invest, where to live, what medical treatments to take or to abandon, what entertainment to follow, how to educate themselves and their children, how to vote
WHEN they are abysmally incompetent at everything themselves except inveigling money from trusting people.

Orac,

The 8.8.8.8 domain name server is what I have configured in my router (8.8.8.8 and 4.4.4.4 are google.com's dns server).

Sarah and Orac,

I wanted to point out that the ip addresses of both server are nearly the same (162.244.66.144 for pharmadeathclock.com and 162.244.66.146 for NN). IP addresses are attributed in block which in this case, a query I just did resulted in this information:

NetRange: 162.244.64.0 - 162.244.67.255
CIDR: 162.244.64.0/22
NetName: CODERO-DFW-1
NetHandle: NET-162-244-64-0-1
Parent: NET162 (NET-162-0-0-0-0)
NetType: Direct Allocation
OriginAS: AS18501
Organization: Codero (APHIN)
RegDate: 2014-03-07
Updated: 2014-03-07
Ref: http://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-162-244-64-0-1

Look at the NetRange and the hosting company (which I infer is CODERO), host both NN and the pharmadeathclock.com and very highly likely, in the same server bay. It would be reasonable to infer that they are both owned (or rented) by Mike Adam.

Alain

Yup. I misread those IP addresses as DNS servers. Oh, well...

I'd say it's a near 100% likelihood that PharmaDeathClock.com is owned by Mike Adams, based on the server information.

Don't want to pollute the comment section as this data is rather painful to read but here's the registrar data for NN:

The Registry database contains ONLY .COM, .NET, .EDU domains and
Registrars.
Domain Name: NATURALNEWS.COM
Registry Domain ID: 143100756_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.godaddy.com
Registrar URL: http://www.godaddy.com
Update Date: 2015-04-29T05:20:38Z
Creation Date: 2005-02-19T19:06:39Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2017-02-19T19:06:39Z
Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC
Registrar IANA ID: 146
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse@godaddy.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.4806242505
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited
Domain Status: clientRenewProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientRenewProhibited
Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited
Registry Registrant ID: Not Available From Registry
Registrant Name: Registration Private
Registrant Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
Registrant Street: DomainsByProxy.com
Registrant Street: 14747 N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Registrant City: Scottsdale
Registrant State/Province: Arizona
Registrant Postal Code: 85260
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.4806242599
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax: +1.4806242598
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email: NATURALNEWS.COM@domainsbyproxy.com
Registry Admin ID: Not Available From Registry
Admin Name: Registration Private
Admin Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
Admin Street: DomainsByProxy.com
Admin Street: 14747 N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Admin City: Scottsdale
Admin State/Province: Arizona
Admin Postal Code: 85260
Admin Country: US
Admin Phone: +1.4806242599
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax: +1.4806242598
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email: NATURALNEWS.COM@domainsbyproxy.com
Registry Tech ID: Not Available From Registry
Tech Name: Registration Private
Tech Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
Tech Street: DomainsByProxy.com
Tech Street: 14747 N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Tech City: Scottsdale
Tech State/Province: Arizona
Tech Postal Code: 85260
Tech Country: US
Tech Phone: +1.4806242599
Tech Phone Ext:
Tech Fax: +1.4806242598
Tech Fax Ext:
Tech Email: NATURALNEWS.COM@domainsbyproxy.com
Name Server: NS1.CODERO.COM
Name Server: NS2.CODERO.COM
Name Server: DNS1.EASYDNS.COM
DNSSEC: unsigned

here it is for pharmadeathclock.com:

The Registry database contains ONLY .COM, .NET, .EDU domains and
Registrars.
Domain Name: pharmadeathclock.com
Registry Domain ID: 1944688262_DOMAIN_COM-VRSN
Registrar WHOIS Server: whois.godaddy.com
Registrar URL: http://www.godaddy.com
Update Date: 2015-07-04T18:57:55Z
Creation Date: 2015-07-04T18:57:55Z
Registrar Registration Expiration Date: 2016-07-04T18:57:55Z
Registrar: GoDaddy.com, LLC
Registrar IANA ID: 146
Registrar Abuse Contact Email: abuse@godaddy.com
Registrar Abuse Contact Phone: +1.4806242505
Domain Status: clientTransferProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientTransferProhibited
Domain Status: clientUpdateProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientUpdateProhibited
Domain Status: clientRenewProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientRenewProhibited
Domain Status: clientDeleteProhibited http://www.icann.org/epp#clientDeleteProhibited
Registry Registrant ID: Not Available From Registry
Registrant Name: Registration Private
Registrant Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
Registrant Street: DomainsByProxy.com
Registrant Street: 14747 N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Registrant City: Scottsdale
Registrant State/Province: Arizona
Registrant Postal Code: 85260
Registrant Country: US
Registrant Phone: +1.4806242599
Registrant Phone Ext:
Registrant Fax: +1.4806242598
Registrant Fax Ext:
Registrant Email: pharmadeathclock.com@domainsbyproxy.com
Registry Admin ID: Not Available From Registry
Admin Name: Registration Private
Admin Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
Admin Street: DomainsByProxy.com
Admin Street: 14747 N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Admin City: Scottsdale
Admin State/Province: Arizona
Admin Postal Code: 85260
Admin Country: US
Admin Phone: +1.4806242599
Admin Phone Ext:
Admin Fax: +1.4806242598
Admin Fax Ext:
Admin Email: pharmadeathclock.com@domainsbyproxy.com
Registry Tech ID: Not Available From Registry
Tech Name: Registration Private
Tech Organization: Domains By Proxy, LLC
Tech Street: DomainsByProxy.com
Tech Street: 14747 N Northsight Blvd Suite 111, PMB 309
Tech City: Scottsdale
Tech State/Province: Arizona
Tech Postal Code: 85260
Tech Country: US
Tech Phone: +1.4806242599
Tech Phone Ext:
Tech Fax: +1.4806242598
Tech Fax Ext:
Tech Email: pharmadeathclock.com@domainsbyproxy.com
Name Server: NS17.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
Name Server: NS18.DOMAINCONTROL.COM
DNSSEC: unsigned

Same outfit :)

Alain

Alain,

I commend you on your sleuthing!

Originally what was going over my head was that Adam's owning this was even a question. However, the way Mike Adam's introduced the site, the commonality of web design and heresy is not evidence. You're the one you found it.

I looked at his introduction of the site again and now wonder why he is omitting any reference that he created it. Embarrassed by his own numbers?

Don't worry. I am sure this is not the case.

^ Sigh. I meant to type hearsay.

Funny but he usually brags about his 'accomplishments'- he has a crapload of websites already.

-btw- He's discussing the markets today at NN/Health Ranger Report.

He's resurrected the old News Target site.
He also has a home farm site, a spirituality site, natural encyclopaedia, etc etc etc/

Favorite Rickman role wasn't mentioned by Orac, one of him as a good guy. Metaron in Dogma. Great movie and Rickman does a fantastic job as the stuck-up and prissy, but ultimately very good and decent Voice of God.

P.S. Mike Adam's is awful.

I wanted to point out that the ip addresses of both server are nearly the same (162.244.66.144 for pharmadeathclock.com and 162.244.66.146 for NN).

There's always a reverse lookup. Vaccinezombie.com, for instance, redirects to NN.

This is a very popular Russian crime writer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Darya_Dontsova. She was diagnosed with very advanced breast cancer in 1998 (as she explained in her memoirs, it happened during vacations when she discovered that her very small breasts had started growing, and first she did not want to interrupt vacation, then she came across very rude oncologist....) Anyway she discovered her chemotherapy agent (the same active substance) in a gardening shop where it was sold as rodenticide. I guess it is poisonous. But she recovered and regularly speaks against all kinds of " natural remedies", wise women, psychics etc.

Anyway she discovered her chemotherapy agent (the same active substance) in a gardening shop where it was sold as rodenticide. I guess it is poisonous.

Yeah, chemotherapy agents are poisonous: that's rather the point. The idea is that they should be more poisonous to the cancer than the rest of the body.

As for rodenticides, I know a few people who will quite happily explain that they are being actively medicated with 'rat poison', a.k.a. Warfarin, which is prescribed as an anticoagulant.

I was introduced to Alan Rickman through an ideologically dark social commentary kind of movie.

Closet Land:

Set in an unspecified country, Stowe's character is taken from her home in the middle of the night, accused of embedding anarchistic messages into her book, entitled Closet Land. The book is a story about a child who, as a result of bad behaviour, has been locked in a closet as punishment.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closet_Land

^^ *Unspecified* probably meant Argentina, at the time -- 'dirty war' and whatnot. Nevertheless, I felt the performance prescient, poignant, and powerful.

Ohh, damn; spoilers:
The guy using the inhanced interrogation techniques torture is the very same secret policeman who raped her mom while the then little girl hid in the closet.

Because you have
power and grace ...
to look through and behind
my mask.
On that wet years
have lashed ...
and see the real face
of my soul.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XOxJnMWlIAQ

Gaa. The above misquoted line should have read:

Because thou hast the power and own'st the grace to look through and behind this mask of me, against which, years have beat thus blanchingly, with their rains, and behold my soul's true face.

He isn’t in the ‘nether regions of space’
more like Santa Rosa-

Santa Rosa? Santa Rosa?! I must learn to keep up. No wonder my prayers have gone unanswered, what with me facing north east toward the pole.
I do hope the reason we haven't heard anything isn't due to the drought and desiccation.

@ doug:

It is quite hilarious to think that the Great Reptilian Master of the Galaxy (tm) is at home in Northern Californian suburban semi-luxury .. ah yes, the town has a few wine bars, brew pubs and shopping malls as well as a creepy 19th century cemetery.
AND Luther Burbank's home and gardens.

I'm sure he blends right in.

Not a troll

I looked at his introduction of the site again and now wonder why he is omitting any reference that he created it

To make it look independent :) but hey, imitation is the best flattery: http://www.jennymccarthybodycount.com/Anti-Vaccine_Body_Count/Home.html

Alain

-btw- He’s discussing the markets today at NN/Health Ranger Report.

At least he's probably not recommending Treasuries. If there weren't the issue of hoping to keep a roof over my head, I'd be throwing money at Buzz Zaino.

Narad,

Still looking for a roof? ping me (email).

Might have a job for you too in the beer brewing industry.

Alain

So. . . Mike "buy my snakeoil" Adams thinks that David Bowie and Alan Rickman would still be with us had they taken his malignant goop. No profit motive there, eh Mikey ?
Sod off, you evil little wanker.

@JoeB #76
I saw a joke about this on FB :
Death (as in Pratchett's Death) decides to start a rock band (with Lemmy and Bowie). Metatron tries to explain to him this is not a good idea.

Death (as in Pratchett’s Death) decides to start a rock band (with Lemmy and Bowie).

Yep, they're going to work so well with Glenn Frey.

@ LouV

Re: DEATH hiring for a rock band

PTerry actually wrote a short story on these lines, "Turntables of the Night".
It's a non-Discworld story, although it features one 7-foot tall man in a black robe and a skull mask (it has to be a mask, right?).
The story is about two avid collectors of good music. I won't say more.
The full text seems available on-line.

I see AoA is now trying to pin Glenn Frey's illnesses / death on vaccines.

Ghouls.

@ Narad:

Both Mike and the other idiot give financial advice that basically reflects their own highly unrealistic world view and simultaneously brings them prestige in the form of avid followers while it pads their wallets. They also both believe in gold and silver as insurance against hard times.

First, they frighten people away from traditional instruments like stocks, bonds and banking instead focusing upon arable land and personal health.
Then, they sell instruction in all aspects of their plans as well as products that implement nutrition and survivalism. Both maintain websites and internet radio in order to maintain a strong hold upon their enthralled listeners.

On the investment side, I remember that Null advised during the lows of March 2009 to sell everything- if people had done so, they would have lost out.

Anyone interested in hearing Mikey's methods should listen to the 12 minute recording that accompanies his latest screed at Natural News.

He opines that the market is dependent upon psychological factors and that FEAR can disrupt it-
suppose ISIS terrorists bomb a bank on Wall St or Russians set off a nuclear weapon offshore or there could be a tidal wave! ( he actually says this!)I guess he doesn't like NY!**
the market will collapse, banks will fail. You need tangible resources like gold or land.

Right, he discusses how fear can f@ck things up as he uses it to control listeners.

** interestingly he's instructed people to move to Texas where life will be excellent.

I see I blew the plot spoiler to just the slandered extent I blew the Elizabeth Barrett Browning quote -- I may have had a memory-sapping stroke or CJD.

I find it sad that the only remaining traces of this movie seem to be a vhs rip and a spanish cam of Tierra de Armarios.

Rickman once again mentioned the film briefly in an April 2015 interview with Empire magazine when discussing his early career, noting the lack of an audience the film had: "Somewhere in there I made—and have continued to do—films that disappear without a trace. You still care about them. So there's the public agenda and there's the private one. And the private one is certainly more important in a way because that's what my life is made up of. So while I was doing that [bigger budget films], I'd also done Closet Land, which I should think almost nobody saw."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Closet_Land#Reception

All the movies that really stuck with me seem to have been relegated to vhs rips -- Too much recording media surface is taken up with productions that tell one what to think instead of having something to say.

For instance, what ever happened to Pondo Sinatra (who is depicted as falling off the back of a turnip truck his first day of higher education)??

The Party Animal {video/sex shop, nuclear proliferation discussion}:

Damn -- That's what I'm talking about. The most bestest scene ever has been scrubbed from YouRube and the resulting vacuume thereof populated with all the puerile fart and drug scenes minus the Buzzcocks one would never need to show their reminiscing friends.

R.I.P, Alan Rickman. You to Bowie.

and ending with his appearance at Madison Square Garden during his Reality Tour in December 2003.

I was at that show!

Mike Adams adds religious nuttery to his armamentarium as he slimes Patrick Swayze posthumously

oracknows — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 08:00:00 +0000

Mike Adams adds religious nuttery to his armamentarium as he slimes Patrick Swayze posthumously

It looks like my prediction about Patrick Swayze came true. Not that it was a stretch to foresee that the Woo-meister Supreme Mike Adams of NaturalNews.com would waste no time in violating the corpse of Patrick Swayze before he was even cold by using Swayze's death as an excuse to repeat once again his oft-repeated misinformation and lies about chemotherapy and "natural" therapies. After all, he did it before for Tony Snow, so why not Patrick Swayze? In fact, I strongly suspect that Adams had this rant written months ago, ready and waiting for Patrick Swayze's death. All he had to do then was to hit "post." So that's what he did yesterday, and what spewed forth from Adams' servers was a nauseating series of lies entitled Patrick Swayze dead at 57 after chemotherapy for pancreatic cancer.

I didn't originally want to spend a lot of time on this idiocy, but then it irritated me enough that I had to respond. What irritated me first was the title. Here's a hint, Mike: Patrick Swayze died of stage IV pancreatic cancer. Got that? It wasn't the chemotherapy that killed him. It was the cancer. Like a good alt-med maven, Adams confuses correlation with causation. Most, if not all, cancer patients have chemotherapy before the end. That does not mean the chemotherapy is what killed them. (There is the occasional exception--chemotherapy is not without risk, of course--but in general this is true.) There is a correlation, but not a causation. As usual, what Adams fails to note is that Swayze lived far longer than the average patient with stage IV pancreatic cancer, nearly 20 months versus a median survival of less than six months. True, given how horrific pancreatic cancer is, the chemotherapy that Swayze underwent probably only modestly prolonged his life, but for Adams to acknowledge that Swayze actually did quite well, at least as well as one can expect from a patient with the disease that he had, would undermine his belief that all chemotherapy is evil poison that does no good. If you want to get an idea to what ridiculous extreme Adams takes confusing correlation with causation, look at the pictures and the captions that he displays:

Truly, the despicable, willful stupid. It burns. In fact, there's so much stupid there that I can only cherry pick some of the most egregiously nasty misinformation and lies. To do more would risk the proverbial massive wave of neuronal apoptosis from the anti-reason waves emanating from my computer screen every time I look at Mike Adams' website.

After a string of paragraphs claiming that "the cancer industry" has killed untold celebrities and lamenting how Swayze chose chemotherapy over "natural" cures, Adams gets to the meat of his claims:

Of course, the cancer industry takes no responsibility for his death. Drug companies and cancer docs never accept responsibility for the way their poisonous treatments harm (and often kill) many fine people.

Had Patrick Swayze's pancreatic cancer gone away, doctors would have hailed chemotherapy as the genius treatment that saved Swayze's life. But chemotherapy has never healed anyone of cancer. Not once in the history of medicine. And when people die after being poisoned by chemotherapy, the oncologists and conventional medical doctors just shrug and say ridiculous things like, "The cancer was too far along" or "He didn't fight it hard enough."

Actually, it's the quacks that Adams loves so much who usually blame the patient. Either the patient brought the disease on himself by engaging in a poor lifestyle, or the reason the "cure" didn't work is because the patient either didn't follow the protocol to the letter or didn't believe in it strongly enough. Personally, I've never seen an oncologist blame a patient's death on that patient's not having fought it hard enough. Oncologists just don't talk that way.

More interesting to me is Adams' claim that chemotherapy has never--never, he says--healed anyone of cancer, "not once in the history of medicine."

Uh, Mike, ever hear of Lance Armstrong? He had testicular cancer. Not only that, but it was stage IV disease, with metastases to lung and brain. Guess what? Chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation cured him of his cancer, and he's been cancer-free for 13 years. (Never deal in absolutes; you'll end up looking the fool.) How about Daniel Hauser? His chemotherapy has rapidly eliminated his Hodgkin's lymphoma, and he's on track to survive his cancer and live a relatively normal life. Adams is, of course, too deluded ever to accept it, but in fact chemotherapy "cures" thousands upon thousands of patients with cancer each and every year. True, against metastatic solid tumors like pancreatic cancer, chemotherapy all too often doesn't do much good in terms of prolonging survival (testicular cancer is an exception to that rule of thumb), but it can do quite a bit of good in terms of palliation, depending on the specific cancer.

Of course, the reason that chemotherapy doesn't cure is obvious--if you're an utter loon like Adams:

"I want to last until they find a cure, which means I'd better get a fire under it," Swayze said in a highly-publicized interview with ABC's Barbara Walters. No one apparently told Swayze the cancer industry isn't looking for a cure. They're looking for more business from more patients, and a genuine "cure" for cancer is flatly incompatible with the industry's business interests.

Actually, logic, reason, and science are flatly incompatible with Mike Adams' brain. For one thing, there are already "cures" for a number of cancers in the form of chemotherapy regimens. Adams falls for the same simplification that all too many people believe, namely that cancer is a single disease with a single cure. There is no "cure for cancer." There likely will never be a "cure for cancer." There are, however, cures for cancers, and there likely will be more cures for cancers. For another thing, Adams assumes that since scientific medicine can't cure cancer 100% of the time, it never does. To him, it's black or white, all or nothing thinking. Finally, his conspiratorial mindset prevents him from realizing that any scientist who found the cure for a killer cancer like pancreatic cancer would be instantly famous--and possibly even instantly rich. Certainly such a person could be on the track for a Nobel Prize.

Adams owes me a new irony meter for this next passage. It fried that sucker into a molten pile of quivering, sparking, sizzling goo:

Could Patrick Swayze have saved his own life with natural medicine? Absolutely. Without question. Even late-stage pancreatic cancer can be reversed (yes, reversed) with full-on naturopathic treatments involving Chinese herbal medicine, deep body detoxification that includes sweat saunas and colon cleansing, radical changes in diet from "dead" foods to "live" foods, a healthy dose of vitamin D and the daily consumption of raw anti-cancer living juices made from fresh, organic produce like cabbage, broccoli and garlic.

Many people, of course, aren't willing to engage in these lifestyle changes in order to save their own lives, but for those who are, the results are astounding. I've personally met numerous people who told me their personal stories of reversing cancer (even late-stage liver cancer) by turning to natural medicine. I've met all kinds of people who once had cancer and are now completely cured of cancer after making the very simple lifestyle changes espoused here on NaturalNews.com. And yet, at the same time, I've never met a person who was cured by cancer with chemotherapy. Not a single one. Never even heard of such a person. They don't exist. Even the cancer industry will tell you their "cure rate" is zero (because they don't believe cancer can ever be cured).

Note how early in the article, Adams chastises oncologists for blaming the patient for "not fighting hard enough" and using that as an excuse for failure. So what does Adams do? In essence he blames patients for not being "willing to engage in these lifestyle changes in order to save their own lives." Moreover, he clearly views those who do as the "chosen few," who are in marked contrast with the sheeple who choose chemotherapy, whom Adams describes thusly:

The advantage with choosing chemotherapy, however, is that you don't have to change your eating habits or think outside the box. Your doctor will tell you what to do, what pills to take, what questions to stop asking, etc., and he won't even request that you stop eating those cancer-causing hot dogs and breakfast sausages which have been shown to significantly increase your risk of pancreatic cancer.

In other words, the "chosen few" have the will to do what needs to be done, and everyone else is too lazy or stupid to do so. To Adams, they prefer to be told what to do and are too weak to change their ways. The rest of Adams' article follows the standard litany of ranting against big pharma and the "cancer industry" and touting "natural cures." Adams' favorites include the Gerson therapy, traditional Chinese medicine, "live foods," "detoxing" and colon cleansing, and a veritable panoply of woo. That I expected. It's standard issue Mike Adams. What I didn't expect was this:

By the way, I don't usually do this, but I'd like to make a comment here related to those who follow a religious practice. In almost every major world religion, it is considered a sin to desecrate your own body. Many religions consider it sinful to commit suicide, for example. In Judaism, people who mark their bodies with tattoos are considered to be in violation of the Torah ("You shall not make gashes in your flesh for the dead, or incise any marks on yourselves: I am the Lord" - Leviticus 19:28), and those who commit suicide may be denied burial in a Jewish cemetery.

Under Islamic law, self-mutilation of any kind is also forbidden, including tattoos (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_tattooing). Under Christian principles, the body is considered a "temple" (a church) which must be honored as a reflection of God (http://www.mybodyhistemple.com).

My question to those who follow any major religion -- and who may also be considering chemotherapy -- is simply this: What would God think about you poisoning your God-given body with deadly chemicals?

He even threatens you with hellfire:

That's why chemotherapy isn't just bad for your immune system and bad for your body; it's also bad for your soul. Whether you believe in the Pearly Gates or some other version of an afterlife, there's no question that showing up on Judgment Day after having died from chemotherapy is not a comfortable episode of spiritual scrutiny. If God, in a booming voice, asks, "I gave you a perfect body, in my own image. What did you choose to do with it?" And if you answer, "Well, I smoked two packs of cigarettes a day, I swore off all the natural medicine that you provided us, and I allowed my body temple to be injected and destroyed with man-made toxic chemicals that killed me and brought me here," chances are you're not going to find yourself in God's favor.

Wow. Just wow. If you don't follow Adams' advice, God is going to send you straight to hell when you die. Why? Because you contaminated the purity of your precious bodily fluids, that's why! I always thought that Poe's law meant that it's difficult to tell the difference between fundamentalism and a parody of fundamentalism, but maybe that's wrong. Maybe POE stands for purity of essence. (The movie allusion will come to you eventually.) How loony is that? Well, it is Mike Adams we're talking about here. Indeed, he even invokes the specter of atheistic doctors:

Then again, most conventional cancer doctors don't believe in God anyway. They believe in chemicals. At least, they believe in them for YOU, but not necessarily for themselves. Most oncologist, it turns out, would never subject themselves to chemotherapy.

Holy crap! It's those evil atheistic doctors pushing chemotherapy that are at the root of all medical evil, don'tcha know? Of course, Adams is utterly ignorant. In fact, there's good evidence that physicians are at least as religious as a group as the general population and, in fact, may even be more religious. That's part of the reason why they seem to be so easily duped by religious pseudoscience like "intelligent design creationism." Everybody's favorite creationist neurosurgeon comes to mind as a sterling example.

Also, the oft-parroted claim that the vast majority of oncologists would never subject themselves to chemotherapy is, of course, one of those "unsinkable rubber duck" myths of the alt-med movement (apologies to the great James Randi). It's utter nonsense, an urban myth based on a small study that was presented over 20 years ago at a meeting and never published in a peer reviewed journal--and that only dealt with one chemtherapy agent for one disease. Yet Adams repeats the lie yet again, and the legend lives on, to be repeated on alt-med site after alt-med site, immune to evidence and oblivious to its rather inauspicious origin. Not that he cares. It fits his world view; so it must be true.

I have a different take on the matter of whether God, if he exists, would want you to let doctors treat you with chemotherapy if you were ever unfortunate enough to develop cancer. If you believe in God, ask yourself: Why would God give humans this amazing ability to reason and investigate the world through science, an ability that has lead to remarkable treatments for once incurable diseases if he didn't want you to use them? That's what wouldn't make sense.

In a way, although it was one of the most unethical clinical trials of the last 50 years, easily as unethical as the Tuskegee syphilis study, I am glad that the results of the study of the Gonzalez protocol for pancreatic cancer were revealed recently. That is exactly the sort of quackery that Mike Adams pushes, driven by the same pseudoscience that he repeats over and over. Now that Gonzalez has responded, I might have to take a look into the mind of a different woo lover than Adams, one who is considered almost respectable.

Yes, I think I may do that tomorrow.

oracknows Wed, 09/16/2009 - 04:00

Categories

Medicine

Mike Adams is one of the more despicable creatures to slither through the cesspool of snake oil salesmen.

I'm trying very hard not to hope he someday develops stage IV pancreatic cancer, or something equally horrible.

Your doctor will tell you what to do, what pills to take, what questions to stop asking, etc., and he won't even request that you stop eating those cancer-causing hot dogs and breakfast sausages

My doctor constantly harps on me about eating a healthy diet. I commented yesterday in another post about how I get tired of hearing the doctors on Dr Radio constantly go on and on about eating healthily. Where in the world does he get this stupid strawman that dcotrs won't "request" that you stop eating hot dogs and breakfast sausages?

Granted, they aren't doing it because such things are linked to pancreatic cancer (really? I'd like to see that link...), but that doesn't mean they aren't doing it.

Adams is clearly talking to the alt-med crowd, who would be willing to believe this. OTOH, anyone who has actually been to a doctor knows it's bullshit.

Speaking of religion, how did that one commandment about lying go again?

in a sane, moderate world, rants like Adams' one here would only serve to instantly discredit anything else the ranter might ever say.

in a sane world. i'm more pessimistic about this one.

My mother-in-law died in July of cancer of the bile ducts. She refused chemotherapy. By Adams's argument she should still be alive. Why isn't she?

I was cured of Hodgkin's Lymphoma by chemotherapy.

Healthy living would not have avoided it or made it go away, as it was almost certainly caused by the Epstein Barr virus.

I would, however, recommend anyone undergoing chemotherapy to make sure their vitamin d levels are at an optimum level. There is strong evidence, in the medical literature, that vitamin d is used by the innate immune system. During chemotherapy the active immune system takes a hammering (Hodgkin's is a cancer of the B immune cells), and you need any extra immunity you can get.

Mike Adams would be ever so much more convincing if he'd just name all those scads of people who come up to him with news of their cures of incurable cancer with natural/alternative remedies.

And since he loves glomming onto celebrity cancer cases so much, who are all those celebrities who've beaten cancer with diet and magical supplements? Well, let's see - Steve McQueen, with laetrile! Oops, bad example. How about...Coretta Scott King! She went to a Tijuana clinic too, and was cured, and...uh-oh, better forget that one too.

C'mon Mike, give us that list of celebrity cures.

It's people like this spreading such blatant misinformation that drive me towards a degree in public health education. I'm only sorry that I can't finish it faster.

For once, David, I have to agree with you on this. I have no words to describe how appalled I am at Mike Adam's actions. None.

Allow me a moment to be just as disgusted as you are about this.

I am Jewish. Several of my relatives have suffered from cancer. Not one of them refused conventional treatment. Their religion made them choose the most effective treatments; it is written in Deuteromy 30:19: 'So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants.'

We may be Jews Mr Adams, but we're by no means idiots.

My husband died within 2mos with chemo, my cousin died in 5 mos with chemo, and several other pancreatic patients we have met and come to love over the years have died with chemo or without any treatment at all within 2-25 mos. Chemo didnt kill Patrick, and it probably didnt help him either. His body probably would have lasted 20mos even if he did nothing. I will say, my loved ones went through excruciating pain which was made much worse with chemo. Pain management alone proved to be the best treatment for most. I would not call a few added months a 'major accomplishment' for chemo as someone posted on the blog about the Gonzalez treatment. They are definitely both failures for this type of cancer.

Well, it didn't take very long at all did it?

Has he no sense of decency? Does he actually believe his BS? Oh, hang on, I forgot the atheist jibe, so yes, he probably thinks he's right.

Well, it didn't take very long at all did it?

Just visited the hideous site, and read some of the most deluded rubbish ever. And that was the comments. They really are out there. Blaming Patrick's past drinking, smoking, diet. "Cancer is not a disease, it's the body's last resort", caught my attention. Strange folks indeed.

I think I heard President Obama call Mike Adams a "jackass" yesterday.

didn't believe in it strongly enough

I hate faith healers of all persuasions.

I will join in with Pete @ #6. Hello Mr. Adams, my name is Tim and chemotherapy cured me of my Stage III Hodgkin's Lymphoma. Cured. A PET scan after 12 courses of chemotherapy showed no evidence of disease and follow-on CT scans have confirmed that I am still disease free. Asshole.

I'm pretty certain chemo and radiotherapy can be beneficial to a degree with certain kinds of cancer. This would vary from highly effective in promoting a complete cure, through prolonging life by months or years, through pretty ineffectual. They may also cause a lot of pain and damage, undermining quality of life, or they may not. There are statistics. So before accepting the offer of chemo or radiotherapy, I'd sure want to have a close look at the statistics for my cancer and condition. And I'd want to do my own instinctive cost-benefit analysis. The problem is that oncologists have got to do what oncologists do. You may well be offered these forms of treatment when the benefit is dubious.

consumption of raw anti-cancer living juices made from fresh, organic produce

Am I the only one who thought that sounded kind of ... disgusting?

My stepfather came down with testicular cancer, which is imminently curable with chemo. In his case, the chemo did, in fact, kill him. It depressed his immune system so much that an opportunistic infection set in and killed him pretty quickly. We were all shocked, and the look on the oncologist's face was that of utter despondency. He should have lived.

Knowing that, what would I do if I came down with the same cancer? I'd go for chemo, of course -- the same regimen of the same chemo that he took, if that's what the doctor suggested. Medicine is math -- you're fighting probabilities, rolling the dice. Though I morn for him every day, my stepfather knew what he was doing when he rolled the dice. When they came up snake-eyes it sucked, but that doesn't mean the treatment isn't much better overall than the alternatives.

And if some asshole had talked him into the Gonzales "treatment", giving him several months of agony and poor quality of life (and a painful death), I'd be in prison right now.

Well-done, Orac!

I will say, my loved ones went through excruciating pain which was made much worse with chemo. Pain management alone proved to be the best treatment for most. I would not call a few added months a 'major accomplishment' for chemo as someone posted on the blog about the Gonzalez treatment.

It depends. When my grandfather believed he probably had pancreatic cancer (due to the symptoms, which he knew through his years of medical practice which included general surgery in a remote area where oncologists were hard to come by), he decided not to even bother getting a biopsy to confirm his suspicions. He was over 90, and felt that he had lived a good life, and passionately hated the idea of being dependent on other people. So he made arrangements for hospice care, finalized his will, and prepared for the end.

For him, that was definitely the right choice. But I think I, personally, at my current age (34) would choose chemo. This is because I have two small children, and even one more *day* with them would be precious, even if I had to buy it through pain. As long as I was conscious enough to appreciate their presence, I would be willing to suffer the pain.

But that's just it -- it's very personal. I think pancreatic cancer is one of those cancers where, if it's already advanced (and it usually is), it's perfectly valid to prefer palliative care.

Note: surgery and chemo can both be part of palliative care. In that case, the idea is not to completely kill all the cancer cells (because that's hopeless anyway) but just to beat them back a bit so they're not causing so many problems. I remember when my grandmother-in-law was dying, the doctors treated her pneumonia. Why? It would've hastened her death, and thus could be a mercy! Well, no, actually. She was dependent on a respirator, so letting her go would be easy and could happen anytime. The only reason they were treating her pneumonia with antibiotics was to make her more comfortable while she and the family came to grips with the situation and decided what to do.

While oncologists don't directly blame the patient for insufficient response to therapy, as a senior editor on a cancer journal I often had to change a phrase in manuscripts that implied the same thing: "... n percent of the patients failed treatment ..." I would always revise it to "... the treatment was not successful in n percent of the patients ..." In general, I think this was habit, learned from the author(s)' mentors and from reading older papers.

I wonder if Mike Adams would let you amputate a limb in the event of gangrene or diabetes complications?

"consumption of raw anti-cancer living juices made from fresh, organic produce

Am I the only one who thought that sounded kind of ... disgusting?"

I wasn't sure if he was talking about V-8 Juice or making up something in a Bass-O-Matic, either.

As with other quackoid annoyances (like the explosive diarrhea of misinformation sprayed by certain antivaxers), it helps if you can see the humor in their blatherings.

For instance, in Mike Adams' latest screed (on swine flu vaccine approval by the FDA), he suggests that the disease is nothing to be concerned about:

"Even for those who got sick, virtually everyone survived the sickness. After a few days of extra rest in bed (and hopefully some nutritional supplementation), they were able to kick the virus and return to normal life. This is all a normal part of beating any flu."

See, no big deal - just another case of Big Pharma scaremongering to make lots of money.

Except right on the same page Mike Adams is advertising his "Swine Flu Advanced Preparedness Course", consisting of four audio CDs for the low low price of $29 (shipping extra?). I'm a little confused why I need to shell out $29 to protect myself from a little ol' flu bug that's part of normal living, but I'm sure Mikey's devotees just lap this stuff up.

The hypocrisy does indeed burn - but a little bloodroot salve or maybe a cup of oleander tea should fix that pronto.

Every individual who was breast fed during the 19th century is dead. Armed with this shocking bit of information, I think it only appropriate that Adams undertake an aggressive crusade to discourage mothers from breast-feeding - and thus, killing - their babies. Get right on it, Mike!

One caveat: Nobody gets out alive. Life is terminal. Spread the word. :-)

Doesn't Adams know that juicing live vegetables is MURDER?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ov5Jgw_Nwx4

The Gonzalez study is, of course, irrelevant. It violated the key tenet of all alt-reality doctrines: Like the Invisible Boy [1], it only works if you don't look (or at least keep records.)

What we have here is Schroedinger's Protocol: the patients all live until you look in the box -- then they die.

And, yes, you're welcome to use "Schroedinger's Protocolâ¢" in the future.

[1] Movie reference back atcha

I've never understood this thing about "live" vegetables. I had a nephew who thought he only ate "live," until I pointed out to him that the second his food was pulled from its stem it was dead. Even if someone ate it straight from the vine -- it would be dead upon entering the mouth. Is there something I'm not seeing here?

Actually, logic, reason, and science are flatly incompatible with Mike Adams' brain.

Mike Adams has a brain? Who would have guessed?

Perhaps Mike Adams should ponder on this one:

http://bible.oremus.org/?version=nrsv&passage=Mark+7:1-8,14-15,21-23

Mr. Adams points out, and quite correctly, that if you only use Western Medicine you will die. Perhaps it will take longer than if you use natural and eastern medicine, but you will die.

Here's the thing I don't get about the "doctors don't do chemo" meme. Chemo isn't exactly recreational. People don't do chemo the way they might say do lines of cocaine. Most doctors aren't doing chemo because they don't need it. (I know that's not exactly what Adams is saying, but if they can distort, so can I, right?)

ntsc:

Mr. Adams points out, and quite correctly, that if you only use Western Medicine you will die. Perhaps it will take longer than if you use natural and eastern medicine, but you will die.

So you will die quicker if you use "Western" stuff like homeopathy (Germany) and get enough vitamin C (England)... but live longer if you use statins, get the DTaP and chicken pox vaccines (all developed in Japan).

Do I have that right?

Could you also explain how colon cleansings are both "eastern" and "natural"? That is one thing I just don't get.

"I've never understood this thing about "live" vegetables. I had a nephew who thought he only ate "live," until I pointed out to him that the second his food was pulled from its stem it was dead. Even if someone ate it straight from the vine -- it would be dead upon entering the mouth. Is there something I'm not seeing here?"

Depends on what you mean by 'dead'. They'd still be plenty of cells alive if it came straight off the vine and for a good while afterwards.

I'm going to pile on and call Adams a despicable asshole and give him a nice big conundrum to explain: Bill Hicks.

Yeah, I know, Mike will just trot out the blame-the-victim crap and cite Hicks' previous smoking & drinking and completely ignore that, once diagnosed, Hicks did essentially everything Adams suggests and still died.

Pancreatic cancer is an evil, miserable bitch. I've lost one friend to it already and I'm in no mood to coddle the likes of Adams. Asshole.

WTF are "raw anti-cancer living juices" - living juices? Bacterial mats? Do I need to drink the juice, or will it flow down my throat on it's own, and can I feel it moving? Will it make it's own way back up? Will it breed in my stomach, or will I hear it's death scream as my digestive secrections kill it slowly?

Hmm, actually, that does give some ideas for a sci-fi/horror story, along the lines of "The Stuff"

Chris - "colon cleansing" seems to have originated in Egypt approx 1500 BCE, from what I have been able to read. So, I think mid-eastern might be more correct, but then it won't have the cachet of mysticism and exoticism that the East has for these people. Anything magical has to come from some other culture, or else it isn't worth much (except for a few of those "ancient, natural" cures. It's a new age/woo thing.

Mr. Adams doesn't get out much, does he?

I worked at a cancer center with two very caring and bright oncologists. Then one of them was diagnosed with cancer.

He not only had chemo, he participated in a study on new treatments for this particular cancer, which involved a novel way of irradiating the tumor in addition to chemotherapy.

This doctor not only used radiation and chemo, he sought it out. I think this is how most (if not nearly 100%) oncology docs would act.

He was already loved by his patients, but I think his experience also gave him a more intimate rapport with his patients.

So, Mike Adams...he needs to expand his social circle or something. Holy moly, how can he live in the world, and ignore what's happening every day around him? I know, I know...but still, people can be so nuts...

Thanks, Badger3k, for telling me where colon cleansing comes from. Though I still can't figure out why squirting fluid up the wrong way to force stuff out of the colon is "natural".

You will note that I don't care much for the "this is western" and "that is eastern" mindset. It is goofy to think that there is no actual modern medical research going on outside Europe and North America (these folks also have trouble remembering there are people living south of the Equator).

It just comes down to this: If they don't tell the lies, then they can't sell their stuff. They're just trying to help the economy (and themselves).

So, I think mid-eastern might be more correct, but then it won't have the cachet of mysticism and exoticism that the East has for these people.

Otherwise known as orientalism.

Dangerous Bacon @25...

The hypocrisy does indeed burn - but a little bloodroot salve or maybe a cup of oleander tea should fix that pronto.

As luck would have it, I just whipped up some iced oleander tea, it's not really bad...just a bit of su

Elderly people seem to become more frail, as more grandchildren, and especially great-grandchildren, come along. This clearly shows, according to Mike Adams' logic, that grandchildren are the cause of their grandparents' death.

Lessee, my father was a cancer researcher. A loved one developed cancer. Did he send the loved one to an alt-med practitioner? No, he helped her through surgery and chemo. She died anyway, but it seems likely that the surgery and early chemo prolonged her life for at least a year.

Of course, I've told this story before.

@ 29 Trishy

I've never understood this thing about "live" vegetables. I had a nephew who thought he only ate "live," until I pointed out to him that the second his food was pulled from its stem it was dead. Even if someone ate it straight from the vine -- it would be dead upon entering the mouth. Is there something I'm not seeing here?

Most of them are not dead. You can take small slices and see many processes that go on in the cells with a microscope. And you can take cells from an uprooted plant or clippings, slice them up, put them into the proper tissue culture [with the right hormones] and you will generate clones of the original plant.

And Newsweek on the expense of end-of-life-care

Purity of essence FTW! Now I can just re-read all Mike Adams' tripe you quoted, imagining it as a Dr Strangelove monologue. Beautiful. 8)

And as for Mike Adams... Dick. >_<

Yeah, the cells will keep going for quite some time after the part of the plant is cut. It's really pretty cool to see under a microscope. It's also what helps keep fruits and veggies fresh after picking, if the cells all died immediately they would rot very fast.

Of course that tiny fact doesn't make the "live" foods any better for you. The human stomach is not a pleasant environment for cells and if they are alive when they reach there they won't be for long.

This guy Adams would be a harmless crank if it were not for the fact his quackery has the potential to get people killed.
As it can get people killed, it makes Adams dangerous.
A fool with a gun not only doesn't hit the target he can be a hazard to innocent people.

Olivia Newton~John had breast cancer. Now cancer free for 15 years thanks to chemo!
Mike Adams is a criminal. He is just like the AIDS Denialists that not only scream that ARV's kill, but they also CAUSE the disease!
May I wish a "pox" on them all?
JTD

So is the alt-med arguement that their mumbo-jumbo was curing cancer before chemo & real medicine were developed?

And if so, why did medicine ever need to search for a cure?

Chris @ 40 - I have no idea either how water up the butt is "natural" either. Maybe he uses his "living juice"...ok, I'll stop there. Too much information, I think.

I have a friend whose relatives do the cleansing thing every few months. He did it once. That was enough.

If this quack ever develops cancer, I wonder if he would choose his own death sentence by taking the snake oil...

Probably not... he would accept chemo/rad plus a miracle enema that might disempact all the BS in his head.

Hmm... He makes extraordinary claims yet offers no evidence. He requires your email to read about the "important" information he writes about. He talks about the how western medicine "covers up" real secrets because of money, yet he has a lot of stuff for you to buy. From what I gathered, he is or was involved in some sort of MLM program.

It seems he has an interest in money also.

J Todd DeShong @ 50: Mike Adams IS one of those AIDS denialists, so far as I know; at the very least, he is sympathetic to the AIDS-denialist cause, given that he has supported plenty of virus-denialist articles and posts at his site.

He's a young-earth creationist as well, so I can't say that I found it *that* shocking for the God-will-condemn-you rubbish to creep in.

FITW

It's only an anecdote, but my dad was diagnosed with colon cancer about five years ago. He got an operation followed by both chemotherapy and radiation treatment. He is still alive and just celebrated his 83rd birthday.

The post-operation biopsy showed two types of cancer (I think there was only one cell of the second type), but the last follow-up test I heard about found no cancer.

I have gotten two colonoscopies in the last 17 years and plan to get another one in a few years. (They're no fun, but not as bad as my first spinal tap.)

The stats has been out for a while that you will live a lot longer without chemo.

Unless you must or choose to belong to the tribe of the high priests of medicine giving all your powers away to allopathic medicine.

Come on intelligent and not so intelligence, the medical model has been doing chemo for almost a century and continue to willfully or unwittingly suppress real cures for treatments, cause treatments are worth billions but hey you have to pollute the people, get them sick by vaccinating them first. Wake up and stay healthy.

Oh, really? Can you provide the citations that show you will live a lot longer without chemotherapy?

I didn't think so.

WH Lindemann @57
I suppose if I don't have cancer I will live longer without chemo. You have no stats on the other scenario.

Almost everyone who refers to science based medicine as allopathic has put their 'tribal faith' in homeopathic nonsense. Talk about scams.

If you have a non-chemo cure for cancer, prove it. As for your anti-vax reference, you are now officially part of a group so stupid, that the future survival of the human race may be in doubt. In the short term, I hope it's your kids who get polio, mumps, measles and whooping cough, not others affected by the loss of herd immunity. I hope it's your family that suffers through this and every other flu and sickness science has worked to protect you from. Keep taking your vitamins and making the richest urine on the planet.

You and your kind should be held up as a warning to others: "This is what happens when history and science education fails."

"Adams falls for the same simplification that all too many people believe, namely that cancer is a single disease with a single cure."

Time was, "fever" was an illness in its own right.

So, if doctors want to cure you, they offer you all these drugs and things. If you refuse, they may not agree, but they shrug their shoulders and mutter something about free will, right?
If alties want to cure you, they offer to shove coffee up your ass, brush your skin, and have you swallow 150 pills a day. If you refuse, they will get angry, throw a strompy fit, call you all manner of names, curse you, and defamatory articles will be written about you.

Do I have this right so far?

Alt-med people like to enjoy the collective delusion that they are the only ones in the entire world who are exercising, modifying their diets, and choosing nutritious foods over junk food. They also believe that their "doctors" (ok, quacks) are the only "doctors" in the world who recommend such changes and actively work to prevent disease.

I just had my yearly physical two days ago. My doctor lectured me for ten minutes about getting more exercise and eating well. On the plus side, I had lost fifteen pounds in the last year. On the minus side, my inactivity was driving my triglycerides up. He gave me a flu shot (disease prevention!) and drew some blood to monitor my cholesterol and other potential trouble spots.

Why do alt-med folks think the MDs aren't doing this kind of stuff? Why do they think people like me aren't losing weight and slowly changing our habits? Is it because we're being moderate about it instead of going off the colonic irrigation and total diet modification deep end?

Rebecca
As someone said earlier, it is a genetic crap shoot. You roll the dice and play the odds. Those odds are in favor of science but either way the house always wins in the end.

If you choose not to take a doctor's advice, then you reduce the odds of a successful outcome. When you choose to take a woo peddler's advice, you may reduce your odds still further and you will certainly ante up more for the pleasure.

The anti-vax crowd takes this gambling analogy even farther by reducing everyone's odds (herd immunity). No choice is a lock. Fully vaccinated people sometime get sick. Some un-vaccinated people remain disease free. I'd still play the much better odds and vaccinate.

Chemo has cured (OK, stopped from killing) my Father-in-law TWICE. Once testicular, once colon.

I'm prepared to bet there are people out there who have had three different cancers stopped by chemo.

And, of course, his doctors lecture him mercilessly on diet and exercise.

I am a Hodkings Lymphoma survivor.I was diagnosted with stage IIA Hodking lymphoma age 22.I took 6 cycles of chemo (one regiment of AVDB chemo) every 15 days for 6 months.I am cancer free since then.I am 31 now.If I didnt take the chemo and bought the crap of the quacks instead I wouldnt be alive today.

So is the alt-med arguement that their mumbo-jumbo was curing cancer before chemo & real medicine were developed?

And if so, why did medicine ever need to search for a cure?
I keep asking much the same thing of anti-vaxers. If measles, mumps etc are just harmless infections that don't do any lasting damage - why was there any need to develop vaccines in the first place?
When I get an answer, I'll send up my herd of flying pigs to let everybody know....

Expect more evil-minded nonsense about Mary Travers.

Also, as a fellow Michigander, I'd be interested in Orac's views of Ernie Harwell's very dignified approach to his cancer.

My father in law has significantly prolonged his life with chemo, thank you very much.

Adams' religious rantings about not using modern medicine to "sully" one's body remind me of the parable of the man in the flood who sat on his roof, refusing all help from people with cars (before the flood started), boats, and helicopters, saying "God will take care of me". When he inevitably drowns, he asks God, "why didn't you take care of me?" and God replies "I sent you a car, a boat, and a helicopter. What more do you want?!".

When Adams comes before his God, I imagine he'll have a slightly different reception than the one he was expecting.

Despite the breast cancer having metastesized to the lymph nodes, radiation treatment and a mastectomy as soon as the cancer was discovered, and chemo follow-up kept my mother alive for over 20 years with no return of the cancer.

That and the fact she was one tough old bat :-)

If I ever (God forbid) develop cancer, I'll go for chemo like a shot, if that's what the oncologist recommends.

I keep asking much the same thing of anti-vaxers. If measles, mumps etc are just harmless infections that don't do any lasting damage - why was there any need to develop vaccines in the first place?

because Big Pharma(tm) is full of evil, evil people who want to hurt kids and make big profits off the process.

keep asking that question, but run a betting pool on how long it'll be before you get that answer on the side. bet on low estimates.

Trishy, when I grew vegetables, I would invite people to have the freshest vegetables in the world. The way to do that is to take a bite out of the vegetable while it is still on the vine. You can't get fresher than that, unless you swallow a watermelon seed and it grows a watermelon in your stomach ;).

I think the use of water or coffee for colon flushes is a vain attempt to quench the burning stupidity. Even that they are doing wrong.

I may be giving too much credit to Mike and his fellow alties -- but could part of the confusion come from a historical relcutance on the part of doctors to say "cancer is cured"? I seem to hear far more "It's in remission" than "it is cured".
Could this feed the "chemo doesn't cure cancer" canard?

Wow, talking about harsh. Patrick Swayze is loved by many & always will be. He is a legend and always will be. This "Mike Adam" or whatever, I didn't even know he existed until I read this. He is pretty much a sorry excuse for a human being with no compassion whatsoever.
Patrick was amazing & did a GREAT job during his treatment. The average that a person stays alive in the last stage is 4-6 month's. Patrick made it 20 months, he is amazing.
Some people just give up, Patrick didn't. He wasn't in denial about it, he faced reality. But, he didn't let it knock him down. He didn't stop living.
He and Lisa (his wife) and family...his friends, they were all amazing through this.
"Mike": or whatever your name is, maybe you should think about what people are going through truly, before you judge & attack so harshly. God is not smiling down on your behavior or attitude but I'm sure he was with Patrick. Also, "Mike" sometimes as human beings when we ourselves are in the wrong or are attacking others, God will teach us "lessons" by putting us through challenges and trials. Be careful how you treat others, God may give you a test to try to pass. And....to be honest...I'm not so sure you would be as strong as Patrick was.
Mike, people like you are also in my prayers. Its sad really your attitude, I feel bad for you.
PATRICK SWAYZE A LEGEND & LOVED ALWAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

*raises hand*
Hi, my name is Kristin, and I'm too am Hodgkins lymphoma survivor, stage IIIa. I went through eight months of ABVD treatment, and so far have been in remission for over 18 months. Colour me surprised to hear I don't exist!

But maybe I shouldn't be so surprised, as apparently my mother doesn't exist either. She underwent surgery, radiation, chemo and anti-estrogen treatment for her breast cancer (metastasised to 18 out of 20 lymph nodes) and is still very much alive and kicking 13 years later.

It never ceases to amaze me the sheer and utter idiocy these crank magnets utter with straight faces, and the abominable hypocrisy they spout. Have they no shame? Oh, wait, we know the answer to that one. To go through life so completely removed from all empathy and rationality... I can't imagine it. It is, for lack of a better term, manifestation of evil.

Kristin,
congrats to you and your "invisible, non-existant" mom. Evidently Barbara, the America's Got Talent finalist who is also a Hodkins lymphoma survivor, is also a mirage :P Oh, and other cancer survivors I know also don't exist.

The question that plagues me about people who lie about facts and reality is -- are they that divorced from reality, or do they *know* they are lying? In other words, have they fooled themselves as well? Part of me hopes thay are just delusional, because otherwise to call them evil is not a hyperbole :(

At first I was surprised at how quickly Adams jumped on Swayze's death.

Then I remembered that carrion flies will start landing on a corpse within minutes of death.

@MikeMa. Yeah, I agree. I was juxtaposing the two sides, basically asserting that doctors offer the meds because, well, because they work. If a patient refuses then whatcanyado -- it is presumed there is informed consent/nonconsent. But when someone refuses altmed, they get berated to no end and called a hoodwinked idiot and the subculture "leaders" and "rangers" issue a call to arms.

And yeah, I have also had to defend myself against this notion the alties hold that mainstream folks don't know that exercise and eating real food is a good thing. And btw, that includes milk and wheat (and murdered veggies!)for the majority of people. In fact, I will even go one step further and say that the reason I am not popping dozens of vitamins a day is because I get what I need from, uh -- what's it called -- oh yeah, FOOD.

This just in: "Even stage 4 pancreatic cancer can be reversed with diet changes, taking targeted supplements and detoxing."

http://twitter.com/nerissaoden/status/4013653697

So sayeth one Nerissa Oden, who oughta know, because she's married to "Dr." Joe Vitale. Read it & weep, naysayers!

Re RevRon's comment above: We need to give credit where it is due. Nerissa O. apparently gets a lot of *her* cutting-edge health information from noted health expert Kevin Trudeau. As she recently wrote on Twitter:

"You must visit www.NaturalCures.com Kevin Trudeau is a major health and wellness advocate."
http://twitter.com/nerissaoden/status/3863582527

Sadly, it's people such as Trudeau who are making the really big bucks from the eternally hopeful. He's even been to prison for fraud, but that hasn't discouraged him one little bit.

My brother had bowel cancer and his little boy had leukaemia. They used to sit together at the chemo unit having their treatments and it was arduous, sometimes painful and exhausting, but it was worth it. Fast forward 5 years and you'd never guess either had ever been sick. They're both cancer-free and living life to its fullest. Thank you to all those who work in the area of cures for cancers! PS: My brother refused to speak to anybody touting 'natural cures'. He knew enough about science to know they couldn't possibly work!

Suzanne Sommers has now jumped into the holistic bandwagon and said that Patrick Swayze would have lived longer if he refused chemotherapy and did the alt-med thing...

Jeez! How can people be - and why are most celebrities - so fucking clueless? I wonder, is there a high concentration of such idiots in the US, or they are equally prevalent in the rest of the world? (Perhaps 'yes' to the latter... I am thinking of the popularity of homeopathy in several European and Asian countries...)

The comments in that articles I linked to are interesting, though!

"Suzanne Sommers has now jumped into the holistic bandwagon and said that Patrick Swayze would have lived longer if he refused chemotherapy and did the alt-med thing...

Jeez! How can people be - and why are most celebrities - so fucking clueless?"

Clueless! Jenny McCarthy tells us that vaccines are poison, and Suzanne Sommers tells us that chemo is poison. Who would you rather pay attention to -- blondes with big boobs, or biologists with big brains?

@wfjag: heh, I'd rather pay serious attention to the boobies themselves... at least that would be more interesting and sense-making than listening to the ignorant and deceitful bilge that the bodily hosts of those boobies spew incessantly...

Poor biologists with big brains stand no chance!

Who would you rather pay attention to -- blondes with big boobs, or biologists with big brains?

I'd like both. Just sayin.

As a follow up to the Suzanne Somers comments above - here is the brief news item that I saw. Patrick Swayze would be turning in his grave if he wasn't already cremated. Epidemic indeed.

Actress Suzanne Somers claims chemotherapy killed actor Patrick Swayze.

In a new interview with Torontoâs National Post, Somers â a former cancer survivor â reportedly blames Swayzeâs course of treatment â and not his disease â for taking the âDirty Dancingâ starâs life.

âThey took this beautiful man and they basically put poison in him,â Somers told National Post columnist Shinan Govani. âWhy couldnât they have built him up nutritionally and gotten rid of the toxins in his body?â

In 2001, the former âThreeâs Companyâ actress revealed she was battling breast cancer. However, after having surgery to remove the lump followed by radiation treatment, she refused chemotherapy against the advice of her doctors in favor of alternative treatment.

âI hate to be this controversial,â Somers continued. âIâm a singer-dancer-comedienne. But we have an epidemic going on, and I have to say it.â

While I would admit that knocking someone's choice of treatment especially so close to their death is pretty low, some of you are some self-righteous, arrogant SOB's and have no room to even judge this guy. The majority of these posts read as though treatments outside of chemo and surgery (read "alternative") are completely devoid of science and clinical evidence. Many forms of therapy have worked for MANY people too. There is a difference in what can be openly broadcast as treatments outside of the medical model and unless you work in the field that attempts to publicize this information you don't know the full story of the asinine work of the FTC and FDA. As if any form of treatment that you may not have personal experience with or know people that have done it = total lack of science and quackery.

When a post says well my Mom had (insert cancer) and is alive today thanks to chemo and I will rush out and do the same, I say great, I am glad that your Mom's condition is in remission. Still doesn't mean that it is gone and you should really look into the reoccurrence of other forms. Like the guy saying first the testicles, then the colon, then what? Once you have poisoned the tissue and cut out what you can and the cancer keeps on coming----happens ALL the time....at what point do you say hmmm....maybe this is pretty barbaric and not getting to the root of the issue.

To the guy that wanted to compare mean survival time of the chemo vs no chemo, check out Ralph Moss' bookhttp://www.amazon.com/Questioning-Chemotherapy-Ralph-W-Moss/dp/18810252…
I'm not saying it is gospel but it should at least activate that grey matter between your ears.

Oh....and to this guy"I hope it's your kids who get polio, mumps, measles and whooping cough, not others affected by the loss of herd immunity."----you are a straight up scumbag and the only appropriate response for you is that one of your immune family members (you know cause vaccines are totally proven in double-blind, placebo-controlled, crossover studies...long term ones too) suffers at the hand of your arrogance.

There is a difference in what can be openly broadcast as treatments outside of the medical model and unless you work in the field that attempts to publicize this information you don't know the full story of the asinine work of the FTC and FDA.

That's generally because peddling an unproven treatment as a proven one is considered "fraud". Might want to look that word up in your dictionary.

"Uh, Mike, ever hear of Lance Armstrong? He had testicular cancer. Not only that, but it was stage IV disease, with metastases to lung and brain. Guess what? Chemotherapy, surgery, and radiation cured him of his cancer, and he's been cancer-free for 13 years."

According to Mike Adams, what saved Lance Amrstrong were exercise and sunlight and certainly not the treatments he received. Really:
"Unfortunately, [Sheryl Crow's] hubby Lance Armstrong is more into the conventional drugs-and-chemo approach, and most people probably don't realize the two things that saved Armstrong's life were intense exercise and regular exposure to sunshine during his cycling training (creating vitamin D, a powerful anti-cancer nutrient)."

"That's generally because peddling an unproven treatment as a proven one is considered "fraud". Might want to look that word up in your dictionary."

That was a brilliant reply,hmmm...yes adding that foreign word to my vocabulary will surely make your stupid ass assumption be correct. Really?? You actually believe that because a treatment is "unproven" that it is a fraud? Then you do understand that all treatments start as unproven and are put into clinical trials, right?

No actually I know exactly what you mean. Experimental UNPROVEN new chemo drug that may give your dying loved one just the chance they need---awesome, thank you Doc!
Experimental "alternative" treatment proven (anecdotally or not) FRAUD!!!!

So much easier when you don't have to think about these things!

Matt S:

... Many forms of therapy have worked for MANY people too.

What are these therapies and what evidence do you have that they have actually worked?

Joseph C:

...peddling an unproven treatment as a proven one is considered "fraud"

Matt S:

You actually believe that because a treatment is "unproven" that it is a fraud? Then you do understand that all treatments start as unproven and are put into clinical trials, right?< ?blockquote>

Reading comprehension FAIL.

BTW, Matt S, you do know that Dr. Ralph Moss's doctorate is in Classical Studies, don't you?

Comment 92, part 2:

Reading comprension FAIL.

(please excuse comment posting FAIL)

To the guy that wanted to compare mean survival time of the chemo vs no chemo, check out Ralph Moss' book...

Raph Moss? Are you farking kidding?
http://www.quackwatch.org/04ConsumerEducation/Reviews/moss.html

You actually believe that because a treatment is "unproven" that it is a fraud?

Learn how to read, Matt. It's all up there for you to digest.

My father was diagnosed with stage IV lung cancer almost 3 months ago. It is also in one of his adrenal glands and in his lower lumbar spine.

He has not smoked in over 25 years. He is 6'2", 190 lbs., has kept up his physicals every year, and according to his GP, he is the model of health for a 53-year-old man. His blood pressure rivals mine (I'm an extremely health-conscious 28-year-old woman). By all accounts, he was in great shape. In fact, when his GP came to visit him in the hospital after the bone cancer laid him out (that's how we found out--excruciating pain from the cancer in his spine), the poor doc looked like he'd been hit with a brick, he was so shocked. Dad had no symptoms until the spinal lesions acted up.

My father is undergoing palliative chemotherapy. His life expectancy without it would be 6 months; with it, it's about a year. He, like Swayze, is hopeful he will beat it, but chances are he won't.

When I saw him in the hospital when he was first diagnosed, he was on morphine every 2 hours. This is a man who'd been hospitalized twice: once for a broken neck (he later broke his body cast playing football) and once for appendicitis. He nearly burned off 3 fingers on a 440 volt shock, and even then he did not go to the emergency room. The pain from the cancer was unbearable, and he called the ambulance himself (something he'd never done).

Since chemo started, he has only missed work on the days of treatment, and that is only because treatment takes 6 hours. He's still on pain medication, but he basically has his normal life. He generally has 2-3 rough days shortly after chemo, and he generally has 2-3 rough days just before it starts back. But chemo is making his life possible right now. Chemo is alleviating his pain.

I truly wish there were a cure for what he has, but we just aren't there yet. Mike Adams is a jerk for claiming otherwise, especially considering that he's doing so with NO evidence.

I'm a gentle person, a preschool teacher, but I would love to punch Mike Adams in the face. Perhaps that's because I have to sit by and watch the most important person in the world to me die while Mike Adams fleeces the vulnerable for his own gain. Jerk.

The majority of these posts read as though treatments outside of chemo and surgery (read "alternative") are completely devoid of science and clinical evidence.

That's because they are. Anything well-supported by science and evidence is very quickly adopted by mainstream oncologists.

Many forms of therapy have worked for MANY people too.

As did bloodletting. The plural of anecdote is not data.

There is a difference in what can be openly broadcast as treatments outside of the medical model and unless you work in the field that attempts to publicize this information you don't know the full story of the asinine work of the FTC and FDA.

Indeed, doctors are held to actual ethical and legal standards which do not allow them to defraud patients by lying and selling treatments that are not proven to work.

As if any form of treatment that you may not have personal experience with or know people that have done it = total lack of science and quackery.

Actually, people here disregard personal experience with treatments almost entirely, because we understand that it's entirely unreliable. Relying on personal experience instead of careful trials to judge a treatment is, indeed, total lack of science and quackery.

Ur a bunch of fooktards. I rest my case. There's a much higher chance curing naturally. Duh. fookers.

[sarcasm]Wow, that is just brilliant! We are all devastated by your quick grasp of logic and overwhelming amount of evidence.[/sarcasm]

I don't know who nauseates me more, Mike Adams or Orac... I can't believe I read all of this. I want those minutes back so I can do something more productive, like sleep.

I was recently in a tuss-up with Adams about his âfacts.â All I have to say is, if you follow this guy beware, and if you disagree with him watch out. I received threats and obscene emails from his followers. Firstâ¦whether you are for or against natural medicine is irrelevant in my eyes, I happen to believe in some natural therapies.

What I do find most disturbing is how any comment that disagrees with articles on the NaturalNews.com site is almost immediately removed. Where is the free thinking in that? Where is the debate? How is one to make up their mind if one side of the story is being suppressed? And, worse yet, do we know the motives behind the suppression, are we being sold something more than just a news item from this site? If you donât believe me, try it. Post a polite but opposing view under the comment section and see how long it stays on the website.

http://www.themiraclemineralsupplement.com/
Anyone who doesn't read that webpage and try to understand how chlorine dioxide works, cannot legitimately argue that its a hoax! Unless you can go through the information and explain scientifically and logically how and why you think it doesn't work, then your a moron for posting anything opposing it.

I know people who have cured themselves naturally, I am a huge advocate of natural remedies and Mikes tips are very helpful and important to me. I personally am in great health, I stopped getting vaccinated in the 8th grade and I also stopped getting sick twice a year after 8th grade.

Chlorine Dioxide has been proven to CURE malaria, aids, tuberculosis, hepatitis, and many other diseases, theres a glitch though, IT ONLY COSTS $40 pharmaceutical companies and doctors can't drive around mercedes and live in beverly hills mansions on $40 per customer. DOCTORS DON"T GET RICH OFF HEALTHY PEOPLE. How come there was virtually no cancer prior to the 1900's? Why is it that in China and Mexico natural remedies are widespread and there is a fraction of the amount of cancer in those countries as opposed to Canada and the US? The author of this article obviously passionately hates Mr. Adams and his only goal is to personally attack and insult him, so I don't expect any type of positive feedback to this comment, I only wish the majority of people were capable of thinking for themselves and researching ways to improve their own health. It amazes me how ignorant people are about an issue so important as their health, you wait until something goes devastatingly wrong! GET INFORMED!

wankoooo , lol. you are a disgrace, dear author, to the human race. and that's just my opinion.

rapolas

[sarcasm]Wow, that is just brilliant! We are all devastated by your quick grasp of logic and overwhelming amount of evidence.[/sarcasm]

(this is another old comment where the comments should be closed)

I personally am grateful to Mike Adams for the information he spreads FOR FREE. My interest in natural and nutritional cures was sparkled by my then hopeless fight with obesity. Many of Mike Adams' articles are backed by studies. I do not use all of the information, but take selectively whatever makes sense to me personally. I am grateful to him and others who post on the web natural cures. Thanks to the free subscription to news from his site I have learned about many useful books and cures. What I've learned from him and others has helped cure different health problems of mine, of my friends and family. I believe that academic medicine is good for diagnosis. Once there is a diagnosis I search information about the true cause and how to cure it. Whenever there is a health problem I do Google search for 'health-problem-name natural cure' and use the information. It has worked well so far. This has helped me cure my sciatica, obesity, my mother's rotting thumb, colitis and gastritis, a friends obesity and sluggishness, someone's schizophrenia, someone's heart problems, etc. However, as a rule, I avoid as much as possible vitamin supplementation and herbs (which have to be processed by the liver), but instead am interested in biochemistry, nourishing the body and getting nutrients from food, as well as in cleansing and a healthy lifestyle.
I believe that we are part of nature and should respect her as well as our bodies if we wish to live healthy happy lives.

The Health Ranger rules!

Only if it were a contest of abject stupidity!

well obviously this is a pharmaceutical rep's discussion site!!To me Mike Adams is the bible of natural health!!!And I read his articles faithfully!!Pharmaceuticals killed my entire family with chemo killing my mother without a doubt.I've been taking supplements for 30 years and got rid of hepatitis entirely and do one armed pushups at 61 and that would not be possible if I was on pharmaceuticals!!!

Ah, yes, the totally unoriginal Pharma Shill Gambit.

Oh, and Curtis: supplements are made by the pharmaceutical companies!

I prefer cthonic, non-euclidean cyclopian dread unnatural health myself. I hope to be eaten first!

IÃ¤! IÃ¤! Cthulhu Fhtagn! Phânglui mglwânafh Cthulhu Râlyeh wgahânagl fhtagn!

great discussion everyone. I'd like to add to the cancer-curing stories. When my grandpa was diagnosed with skin cancer he immediately swore off conventional doctors. The doctors told him that they would have to surgically remove the cancerous cells and his life would be prolonged. He told our family that the doctors were trying to make money off him while they watched him die. I was 15 years old at the time and thought he was insane. I went around school telling my friends how insane my grandpa was and we all had a good laugh. (This was very cruel I know, I was young, forgive me) I was over at my grandpa's house a few weeks after he swore off the doctors and he showed the family a machine he was using to "zap" away the cancer cells. I still thought he was crazy. This was 8 years ago. My grandpa is now 93 and still very active. His once cancerous skin on his back looks like the skin of a healthy adult. (minus the wrinkles) I learned a few years ago that he was taking supplements containing high amount of vitamins and minerals during this time he was "zapping" away the cancer. I don't know much about medicine, but I do know that my grandpa cured his skin cancer with alternative therapies.

Greg the Necromancer:

There are a few things missing from your story:

Was a biopsy taken?

If so, what kind of skin cancer was it? There's a big difference between actinic keratosis, basal cell carcinoma, and malignant melanoma.

If not, your story is meaningless.

You also might want to look at this non-necrotic post and the comments: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2010/11/holiday_weekend_reader_mailba…

Another thought comes to mind -- I wonder if he was essentially using a cautery. That might possibly work, though it seems a rather painful alternative to a quick excision of the melanoma under local anesthesia. Of course, if the melanoma was never excised, then it was never sent to pathology, and nobody really knows if it was even malignant, as Mr McNeely has already so well pointed out.

I've had two suspicious moles removed. My eldest daughter has had one removed as well. (It was in a spot that doesn't get sun exposure, and it grew rapidly, causing alarm.) All were sent to pathology, all proved benign. My grandparents, on the other hand, have both had malignant moles removed. It appears the surgeons got it all in each case, though, so all is well. (It took a couple of tries on my grandma; the tumor was deeper than expected. But there were clean margins the second time.)

Greg, because you are posting on a article that is over a year old, which makes you a necromancer, here are some basic rules before commenting on a blog or forum:

1) If you find an article through Google, before commenting go to the first page and see what is under discussion.

2) Get to know the place, lurk for a while.

3) Become familiar with the writing style, especially in how issues are discussed. Remember that argument by assertion will not go far on this blog, and neither with anecdotes (the plural of anecdote is not data).

4) Actually read the article and comments before commenting.

5) Try to proof read your comments (okay, we don't all do that).

6) If you think you want to bring a subject up to the participants' attention, please use the search box on the upper left side of this page to see if it has been discussed before (you might want to search for the terms "hulda clark zapper").

7) If you get an error when posting a comment, before posting again... open another window to see if it was actually posted.

As for Mike Adams and his comments, i feel he should learn to be more sympathetic to tragedy when it happens. no one chooses cancer or deserves it. even very healthy people can get it too.
i must say however, most of the abovce comments seem completely silly(other than having a go at mike).
For people to say a food is no longer alive once it is picked and imply that it is not as healthy as dead food is stupid in the extreme. thats like saying seeds dont contain life? live food is extremely and most definitely the healthiest form of food in this world of ours.
i doubt if any of the above replies are from people who consciously try their best to eat healthy foods. fresh fruit and vegetables.... not toxic diary products and decaying dead flesh, kept looking good way past spoiled dates by carbon monoxide gas. not sugar laiden foodstuff bastardized by man. no smoking, no drinking alcohol etc etc... no burgers, deep fried junk etc etc...
i just wonder how many fewer people would actually develop cancer if we all actually lived a healthy diet...
my apologies to the Swayze family and all who have been affected by cancer.

For people to say a food is no longer alive once it is picked and imply that it is not as healthy as dead food is stupid in the extreme. thats like saying seeds dont contain life? live food is extremely and most definitely the healthiest form of food in this world of ours.

Vaughn, what's your evidence that foodstuff which is still constituted to perpetuate its own life processes is optimal for the life processes of other organisms which consume it? There seems to be little logical basis for such a speculation, much less any basis for calling any question of that speculation "stupid"; it would be like saying "the best paper to recycle is unquestionably the paper that has important information that someone still needs written on it."

From your reference to seeds containing "life", it sounds like you subscribe to the idea of vitalism: that "life" is something like a special energy force, which is sometimes contained by organisms but is lost when the organism dies even if the organism's physical form remains unaltered in its makeup. This is a popular idea among pre-scientific peoples but the problem is, there is absolutely no scientific evidence to support the idea.

Food is generally healthier to eat when it's fresh, and a living organism generally keeps itself fresh, but the freshness is the key quality, not the living.

I remember a chapter of the cooking manga "Oishinbo" where two fish were compared for freshness, one alive, one dead. The dead fish was actually fresher and better quality than the live one, due to the fact the dead one was drained of blood and kept on ice, while the live fish had spent several days in a small tank without being fed.

Short version: Freshness is not simply about how "live" something is.

Vaughn,
Do you have any evidence to back up these comments?
"live food is extremely and most definitely the healthiest form of food in this world of ours." Source?
"toxic diary products" Are all dairy products toxic? If so, please cite a source. Or are you speaking of particular dairy products that are toxic? If so, please name them and cite a source.
"decaying dead flesh" Same basic questions apply as for dairy. Is a dry aged steak "decaying dead flesh" and is this bad for you? How do you know?

Vaughn:

For people to say a food is no longer alive once it is picked and imply that it is not as healthy as dead food is stupid in the extreme. thats like saying seeds dont contain life? live food is extremely and most definitely the healthiest form of food in this world of ours.

So you don't actually chew your food? And your digestive system does not kill and break down the plant cells?

Biology fail.

Hello all. I googled 'Mike Adams', while doing some research in order to become a writer for the site. I got lured in by the prospect of a little money and some writing practice. Being from a scientific background, the sound of bells ringing grew louder the more I read about all these magical wonderful mystery toxins, and 'dangerous foods'.

So no one has ever been cured of cancer with chemotherapy? Funny that. I was repeating this story to my friend on facebook who informed me that he had lymphoma a few years back, and guess what? Cured, by chemotherapy. Safe to say I wont be perusing my application. Suddenly feel the need to cleanse, flush out those toxic notions. Pass me a Richard Dawkins book, quickly!

Why aren't doctors telling patients of the importance of vitamin D3?

re doctors and vitamin D3: Who says they're not? My internist advised me to take it.

i doubt if any of the above replies are from people who consciously try their best to eat healthy foods. fresh fruit and vegetables.... not toxic diary products and decaying dead flesh, kept looking good way past spoiled dates by carbon monoxide gas. not sugar laiden foodstuff bastardized by man.

HTML fail!!! That should be:

i doubt if any of the above replies are from people who consciously try their best to eat healthy foods. fresh fruit and vegetables.... not toxic diary products and decaying dead flesh, kept looking good way past spoiled dates by carbon monoxide gas. not sugar laiden foodstuff bastardized by man.

Yeah, live flesh is so much better. So, you up for oysters tonight?

Oh, and you're right -- you should NEVER eat a toxic diary product. There is such a thing as having *too much* fiber in your diet, after all.

Yeah, live flesh is so much better.

I disagree... I find that it wriggles around so much that I burn more calories holding it down on the plate than I get from eating it in the first place. Thanks, I'll stick with medium-rare.

-- Steve

PS: I'd argue that strong cheese is more like "living food" than any silly vegetable, with the bacterial cultures and all.

Are all dairy products toxic? If so, please cite a source.

Here's your "source," buster: MUCUS.

It's a fairly common theme in the leftovers of imported Lebensreform; Wikipedia suggests that there was some dispute between Herbert Shelton and Arnold Ehret over natural versus unnatural mucus or something. (I'm not going after it.) Shelton apparently never actually gave up dairy, but combined with the rotting-meat routine, I think this is the general post-Victorian cloud that Vaughn is coming from, rather like Emily.