Has anyone heard of Dichloracetic acid?
And I would like to know your thoughts on this website:
Would be grateful to get links to information / evidence regarding the claims of the website to either validate or discredit.
It sounds interesting enough for me to look into it, when I get an opportunity. You can look into it yourself by going to PubMed online and doing a search. You may only be able to read the journal article abstracts, but that should be enough to tell you whether there is something to it or not.
As always, I start with Wikipedia, which for non-controversial subjects at least, has a pretty good track record. It is a very good and informative article:
Regarding the site you referenced, I am not impressed. It is obviously very biased information and therefore not what I would be inclined to make treatment decisions on. As poor an option as allopathic medicine is, it is still the only evidence-based medicine system around, and for that reason, would exhaust its possibilities before I start "alternative" treatments that have not been adequately tested in scientifically valid studies.
Alternative medicine is medicine that has either not been demonstrated to work or has been proven not to work. We have a word for alternative medicine that has been demonstrated to work: MEDICINE.
- Tim Minchin
How'd that alternative medicine deal work out for Steve Jobs?
sure - and Hitchens when all main stream and died too..... I actually spoke to a surgen from sydney who had a brain tumour - they told him to enjoy the last 3 months and not to bother with operating - that was 20 years ago - I'm sure that individual cases can be given the best shot - depending on what sort of care you have - and if you even have a chance in hell of recovering... some I think are just going to die, because it's just too bad and nothing is going to save them.... but evidence based - is the best... :)
LOL - sure - but there are also things that have not been taken up be those with money as yet to be tested..... for whatever reason.... there was a funny skit about that when the doctors treated a car accident guy with homeopathy - and gave him a bit of car mixed in water and then diluted..... they were sure it would work.... he died.
Speaking as someone who works for a nonprofit cancer research and treatment hospital, I can tell you that if it were that easy, we would do that rather than spend hundreds of millions of dollars every year to treat our patients at no cost.
Chemotherapy is not the ONLY way to treat cancer, though it arguably is the most recognized. Not every cancer responds to every treatment the same way. Not every PERSON responds to every cancer treatment the same way. That is why advancements in fields like pharmacogenomics are vitally important. You can't just hold something up and go "This cures cancer!" without scores of testing and trials and (eventually) patient studies.
Personally, I look forward to the day when I'm out of a job because cancer is cured. It's very easy to say "We haven't cured cancer because it's so profitable." but that ignores the scores of hospitals, researchers, doctors, and scientists who are trying to cure cancer without a profit motive.
Tables like http://americaisretarded.com/chemo.jpg are pointless because there is no date listed. There are places where citations should be in that chart that are conveniently missing. You also need to look at what types of cancers. There are still, even today, cancers with a very low survival rate (neuroblastoma comes to mind). However, there are others with survival rates of over 90%.
I wish I could take my science from a site called "America is retarded" seriously, but honestly? I can't.
Thanks Kyu. Very well said. I've been looking for a way to explain that the medical community is not entirely profit driven.
Hi Kyu and Alice,
If this is the case, what kind of cancer would you like to treat Alice?
a friend of a friend has esophageal cancer - she has had it cut out and treated and is so far still alive and working again.....