Then the scientists who proved the effectiveness of those treatments would be scientific celebrities mentioned in the same breath as Pasteur, Curie, Watson and Crick, and Salk.
This is where dipshits reveal their fundamental misunderstanding of how science functions. The biggest and most profitable scientific events are the ones that challenge and upend accepted norms. Researchers are constantly testing and searching for evidence of the weird and wild new theory.
No, no! Every single scientific claim by scientists exists to prop up the medical field and their massive profits!
That is why I only buy treatments like homeopathic remedies and have my joints strained by chiropractors who are in it to help people like the honorable snake oil salesmen of the past.
Excuse me while I cure my dog's heart worms with essential oils, which are produced by people who have only my best interests in mind!
Watson and Crick
I think you mean Rosalind Franklin
Boom shakkalakka!
As if any scientist would want their names attached to one of the most important advancements in medical history!
So let's see:
Ivermectin: Relatively low toxicity de-wormer
Fenbendazole: Relatively low toxicity de-wormer. However, it was actually investigated as a possible chemotherapy drug... but didn't produce notable results.
Aprocot seeds: Contain cyanogenic glycosides
Soursop tea: Contains annonacin, a neurotoxin linked to Parkison's disease.
Chlorine dioxide: Fuck no. Bleach/sterilizing chemical.
Dandelion root tea: Not gonna cure your cancer, but apparently fine?
Frequency therapy: Run of the mill "healing with tones" quackery
Antineoplastons: Never heard of this one. Apparently a term made up by a quack cancer center for some chemicals he found in urine.
I also find it amusing that they're railing against chemotherapy drugs... while pushing a drug investigated as a chemotherapy drug as well as some quack compounds pushed as chemotherapy drugs. I guess it's only bad when they're mainstream, hipster "You wouldn't have heard of them they're too underground" chemotherapy drugs get a pass.
Ivermectin for these people is basically like Windex in Big Fat Greek Wedding.
Was just about to say - you can probably find some literature on most of those that COULD sway someone who doesn't understand statitics or peer reviewed scientific papers, but fuck me... Chlorine Dioxide? It's fucking Bleach!
This is on the level of Trump's "inject some bleach in me to kill all the bugs" (paraphrasing) I suppose technically that would kill the pathogens, but most of them would outlive the host it killed first.
You can always find a study that "proves" your point, but that doesn't mean that the study was done right.
Frequency therapy
So now they think RF has health benefits, maybe they will stop spreading the cell phone cancer/covid/mind control/death ray nonsense.
As someone who works with RF for work I apparently never have to worry about cancer. So that's a plus I guess.
Dandelion tea... I guess it can be considered healthy alongside other vegetable soups.
Sounds like we should just leave these people to their own devices and let Darwinism take its course.
While i agree, there's a couple problems with that idea, imo. First--they insist on shoving their position on this down everyone else's throat. For the most part, we're talking about people who's central goal in life is to interfere with other people's liberties, choices, preferences. They aren't content to just take their ridiculous miracle cures--they insist everything mainstream (proven treatments used commonly everywhere) are actually poison or nonsense/fake/placebos etc. Covid made it clear what type of people we're dealing with.
The other problem is when this shit ultimately doesn't work, they still come to the hospital demanding treatment anyway. Often treating the staff like shit because they don't trust them plus they're eating crow over being wrong about their conspiracy-cures. Just lovely people lol
I do agree though--they should put their money where their mouth is and pioneer a whole new field of medicine since they all know so much better than the rest of us.
Chemotherapy and (some) radiation treatments are actually designed to kill patients, it's just that they are designed to kill the cancer first/more. Side effects from most of those treatments is cancer, but since you already have cancer, it's worth the risk.
The hard part about treating cancer, besides from that it's a family/kind of disease and not a single thing, is killing it without killing the patient as well. Everyone has heard about a new cure that kills cancer in a Petri dish, but remember so does a gun. Getting better at targeting the treatment is what has really advanced the field in the past 20 years.
One example is rotating radiation sources which intersect in a 3D point in space. That way the total dose can be high, but the dose received by the healthy parts is low. Only at the focal point the full blast is applied, which is hopefully directly where the cancer is.
Prevention really is the way to go with cancer, by living healthier lives, eating healthier foods and getting vaccines where possible. For example the HPV vaccine is super effective at preventing a specific kind of cancer in women (and for a smaller part men). But getting girls (ages 8-14) to take the vaccine can be hard and the past couple of years have made it harder. Living healthier lives is also easier said than done, with the troubles most people are facing these days it's more of a pie in the sky kinda thing rather than a real option.
Everyone has heard about a new cure that kills cancer in a Petri dish, but remember so does a gun.
Hey you're not even gonna credit Randall?
Sorry, totally right to include the relevant XKCD in every post.
I wonder if Randall came up with that, or if he is quoting the well known quote.
I love rotating radiation sources that only target a tiny, precise point in 3D space. Saved my life one time, true story. The bleach and apricot tea didn't do shit.
Chlorine dioxide is used in bleach and is both toxic and corrosive. People like these are not just stupid, but dangerous.
And ivermectin has never been anywhere close to being a cancer anything, so it's anyone's guess as to why those would be included here. I for one have no idea why those two specific things would be listed in this unhinged nonsense, though 🙄
But what if the cancer was made of worms?! What then, science?
What if...?
Well, for start, people would start publishing papers in peer-reviewed journals presenting their findings. Then other scientists would propose studies to the FDA, get their studies approved, and eventually publish their findings. And eventually everyone would say, huh, it looks like our original methodology was wrong, and this other stuff is actually what 'cures' cancer.
Because that's what happens when science fucks up. Eventually someone figures it out, runs an experiment, proves it, other people check their results, and then the collective knowledge adjusts to incorporate the new information.
Unlike, say, religion, and conspiracies, Karen.
If the world found that out, those things would be called medicine and doctors would prescribe them.
STORM!
People convinced that the expensive treatment is a scam and there's a cheap cure never seem to realize that if the cheap cure actually worked it would quickly become a very expensive cure.
No it wouldn't since most of the things they are usually talking about are shit you can get everywhere, even cultivate yourself.
"Uh huh," he says, sipping from his $3 bottled water. It's a cheap brand. He lives in a watershed region.
We could prove it by my doing a study on all the people that rejected medicine in fav our of alternatives. Hkwever, we might find it hard. They are dead.
Dara O'Brian has a great but about what you call alternative medicine that is proven to work. We just call it medicine.
...what you call alternative medicine that is proven to work. We just call it medicine.
In fairness, that's only if there is an existing incentive to put forward the time and the funds for multiple controlled and peer-reviewed studies.
I think almost all alternative medicine is bollocks, but alternative medicine is drawn from historical records and/or anecdotal experience. This is flawed but is also how we obtained many of the medicines we use today. Controlled and peer-reviewed studies now allow them to be called 'medicine' instead of 'alternative medicine'.
I used to be completely against alternative medicine, but after a particularly awful toothache while my wisdom teeth were erupting, the established medicine salicylic acid (which itself originates from willow) was utterly ineffective, I tried the alternative medicine clove oil out of desperation. It is now the only alternative medicine I recommend. There have been studies showing it's effectiveness, but nothing particularly notable, and why would there be? Who would be able to patent it? It is already very cheap and readily available. I wonder how many other effective treatments are underutilised because there has been inadequate research.
That being said... I won't be drinking bleach any time soon, and as a major contributor to death globally there is a very strong incentive to research cancer treatments. Any alternative medicine claiming to treat cancer is highly dubious IMO.
Edit: In hindsight, it's a legitimate concern that some people may read my post and take it as an excuse not to take advantage of existing treatments. I only want to acknowledge that there is sometimes a market disincentive to research existing but unapproved treatments, I don't want people to think it's okay to kill their child.
Clove oil is used by dentists. It's in alvogyl, which is used as an ointment for wisdom tooth probkems. That's the point, if there is evidence it works, it becomes actual medicine, not alternstive medicine.
Yee, research is costly, yet we managed to create an entire medical industry with peer reviewed research before the rise of big pharma. Alternative medicine has lots of practitioners selling a product. Not so much research. It's a multi billion industry. If consumers demanded it, or regulators for that matter, you can bet they'd do rrsearch. Some would probably survive (see acupuncture for back problems) however most would be proven ineffective.
The essential oils industry is rife with scams and "alternative science" but some of them do actually have some (usually not as miraculous as their sellers want you to believe) actual effects.
Wait, I'm going to call a very famous person that loves alternative medicine, Steve Jobs. Whoops, no he's dead because he refused to get his totally treatable cancer cured by science and chose quackery instead.
What if the moon were made of spare ribs?
Would ya eat it?
I know I would!
If you were a hot dog, and you were starving, would you eat yourself?
I know I would! I’d smother myself with brown mustard and relish. I’d be so delicious!
What if dog was spelled cat.
Any sentence beginning with "what if the world found out" is false
What if the world found out this lady is an idiot?
That's just it - several billion people will never be on the same page about anything. The world never finds anything out.
The fact that she is an idiot does not imply that the world will find out
What if the world found out that your head is empty?
Something something... "and you just KNOW who is keeping this hidden knowledge away from the populace"
Also, if drinking bleach is really the cure they think it is I say let em try it. This level of misinfo is really starting to feel like a darwinian mechanism.
Something tells me that if these things were actually good at mitigating cancer, this poster would question why they are allowed to purchase them, and therefore not use them as a result.
If that were true Steve Jobs would still be alive I guess?
Nice hypothesis. Now try to verify it on you and your cronies so that the average intelligence in the population rises.
Social media has certainly accelerated evolution, and not in a good way for dumbshits.
Do a study comparing them. With a suitable sample size of cancer patients, it would be really easy to demonstrate that modern treatments led to more deaths more quickly than those untreated, and that your bullshit treatment leads to fewer deaths or outright "cures".
Put your money where your mouth is. Do the meticulous, rigorous science and prove your claim beyond reasonable doubt. It would literally be a paradigm shift in modern medicine. Nobel worthy for sure. Do it. Why aren't you? Just being smug and self-righteous in your ignorance and misinforming vulnerable sick people on the internet instead is not compelling. Show me the data.
If the study was done by anyone but an approved right wing grifter it would be dismissed as part of the conspiracy. Any data that doesn't prove their point is wrong.
What if you found out you were fucking nuts and everyone was just acting pleasant with you in hope you don't go rabid and fucking bite them ???
What if, indeed.
Y'see, that's what we call "a hypothesis".
Why is cancer capitalized when patients are the emphasis. Capitalizing random words. Trump is that you?
I'm pretty sure that if those things actually cured cancer they would be much more expensive.
It would mean that the scientific method is no longer a viable way to make discoveries.
