Skin Cancer

[Shedhand]

There are some natural remidies that do work better than prescribed medicine
For instance huon pine , if you take a piece to the shed and just touch , smell , or shape it, make something from it then it is more calming than taking any amount of valium

Same goes for rosewood , silver oak, cedar, king billy ........

A greenie for you mate.

[redwood]

Hello guys
I had a mole growing on my face since i was a teenager and i never worried about it .

greg

Greg great to hear your ok personaly iv never been to fussed when iv had a mole on my face

You must be kidding???
All the money spent on research by dozens of multi million dollar companys, and all I need are some herbs.

Get real, Wanker.

Al :mad:

Al give me the herb anyday over other stuff

[Iain]

I had a melanoma on my arm 20 years ago, it was only small but had it hacked out, it was massive underneath but benign.
As for cancer cures, I think the only one that has been overlooked was the now retired Dr John Holt with his contraversial methods which seem to have worked.
He made no secret of it and appeared to be a credible gentleman who abided by the Hippocratic Oath.

[ozwinner]

My advice - take caution!

3 times a day before a meal.

Al

[Termite]

3 times a day before a meal.

Al

Just finished my first stubby of "Caution", I only drink it for the vitamin B in the brewers yeast.

[dan_tom]

http://www.prostatehealth.org.au/v3/index.htm

This website will give you all the best prostate advice and more! Depending on a number of factors, (age, family history, previous PSA results etc) depends on whether you personally need a PSA and a DRE.

PS Dr John Holt, whilst a gentleman with the very best of intentions, has undergone a clinical trial to prove his treatment of microwave therapy for cancer and unfortunately, it has been disproven.

In September 2004, the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) commenced a review of the therapeutic effectiveness and safety of microwave therapy. This investigation, lasting almost a year, was an extensive study of microwave therapy by leading Australian cancer experts.
The investigation comprised four parts:

- A systematic review of scientific literature;
- A national public consultation involving patients, clinicians and other interested parties;
- An audit of Dr Holt’s patient records between 1973 and 2003; and
- A study comparing Dr Holt’s patients with other similar patients treated with conventional therapies.

The results of this investigation have now been released. In brief, the investigation has found there is no evidence Dr Holt’s treatment is superior to conventional cancer treatment. There was also evidence that for many patients, Dr Holt’s treatment was inferior.
Specifically, the report found:
- There is no high-quality published scientific evidence showing therapeutic benefits of Dr Holt’s type of therapy;
- The treatment made no difference to the survival, disease control or quality of life for patients with head and neck, colorectal and bladder cancer;
- The treatment was inferior in disease control and survival for patients with breast cancer, lung cancer, lymphoma and prostate cancer; and
- There was insufficient information to make a reliable assessment of the safety of Dr Holt’s therapy.

If you are interested in more information about the investigation, a detailed report is available at the NHMRC’s website http://nhmrc.gov.au/advice/consumers/microwave.htm


Cheers
Dan

[AlexS]

Thanks Dan & Gregoryq for some sane advice. There are always quacks pushing their natural, herbal, traditional, alternative, whatever remedies to people who are desparate. Why wouldn't these things be put up to be tested rigourously if the makers/sellers have any confidence in them?

If it makes you happy, go and have your placebo, and if it makes you feel better, good for you. But it's irresponsible to rubbish things that have been tested and push something that hasn't.

BTW- you don't need a DRE (digital rectal examination) any more to detect an enlarged prostate! Get a blood test, which checks for PSA (prostate specific antigen) - unless you prefer the latter....

Cheers
Dan

Thanks for that update, Dan

[glenmackinnon]

Isn't it amazing that so many people make judicious comments on something they know nothing about and have not personally tried. We can all quote from the internet to back our point of view.
"... it is irresponsible to rubbish things that have been tested and push something that hasn't" . AlexS
It is equally irresponsible to rubbish something that numerous testimonials and statements on websites support. These catagorically state that these products ( andrographis and graviola ) are effective in the treatment of various cancers. I would suggest that people in the research field should take notice of this and conduct some tests instead of dismissing it out of hand. Many things that have been tested and promoted have subsequently been proven to be quite ineffectual and /or sometimes harmful. eg Thalidamide.
Alex, I am not some quack 'pushing' anything. I am simply supporting nomoe's statement that Cansema works. It has for us too. Nor am I trying to convince anyone to abandon standard medical procedures. I am simply saying that if conventional methods do not work, here is something that worked for us and has for many others. I strongly recommend that use of this product be followed up by a checkup by your medical specialist or even with the assistance of your medical specialist if he/she is open minded.
Gregoryq can talk nonsense all he wants about the placebo effect. After all, it is a free country. I assume that I also have the freedom to express an opinion and make a statement that is positive about the effects of this product.
By the way Greg, the North American Indians got this product (graviola -a component of Cansema) the same way they got potatoes, tomatoes, corn (maize), peppers, etc. which all originated in Central and South America - through trade. They were not ignorant savages and they had well established trade routes. Also, the average life span of the Great Lakes(Woodland) Native Americans was 36 to 40.This average includes their high infant mortality rate. How does that compare to Europeans of the day? But what bearing has this in getting "stuff from the Amazon" ?
If you want proof of the effectiveness of Cansema then 1) try it yourself and/or 2) encourage Dan and his mates to research and test it as a possible treatment so that it can be proven or disproven as an effective treatment for some cancers.
What's this bit about sarcasm, Greg! You expect me to give you access
to my personal medical files. Ya, sure mate!
Try reading some of the testimonials, some with actual photos of the process, made by doctors, chiropractors and the general public, that are
available on the web.
You ask if Cansema is free, Greg. No it is not free and not covered my Medicare or any health scheme. It is just a very small fraction of the cost of other options.
The petrie dish analogy? Yes the same can be said about this stuff. Try it on a skin cancer and observe. It will certainly do you no harm and will not effect healthy tissue. It you can surgically remove some cancer cells
from a skin cancer and keep them alive, by all means put them in a petrie dish and try it.
Actually pharmaceutical companies do spend millions on cancer research. Imagine the profits if they could patent and market an effective treatment. There's no great profit in Cansema however. It uses natural ingredients which cannot be patented.
Hope you find this information useful and remember Don't Put It Off!
Get to a medical specialist immediately if there's any change in your skin.
That especially applies to men who are reluctant to go to a doctor until it's too late.

[Greg Q]

You know bud, I was going to give you a long winded reply, and compare your statements to my answers, then compare my degrees in Biology and Chemistry to yours, then ask if you think the Oncology researcher who
replied was also wrong. Oh yeah, I was going to point out that your romantic
ideas of NA native tribal life were a little out of touch with reality. (My wife was an Anthropologist with a background in all of this).

I asked about your medical records in reply to your offering your medical story about your wonderful cure. No, huh? I was being rhetorical.

On the other hand....this is a Sisyphean task, and I don't care anymore.

[dan_tom]

You're making me rather cross with your responses there GlenMackinnon. Yes, Penicillin underwent extensive trials and evaluation - I would advise the same with this "cure". We have many drugs that have been derived from nature, there is no doubt of that, but my point is that they need to prove they work without ripping people off or worse, harming them further. Haven't patients and their families been through enough psychosocial trauma without pinning their hopes on another "cure"?

"It is equally irresponsible to rubbish something that numerous testimonials and statements on websites support." I personally think it is irresponsible to advocate for the use of a product that has not passed stringent clinical tests and evaluation! Put your money where your mouth is and commence a trial of the product's effectiveness. How do you know whether you're advocating for a product that does more harm than good? Will you ever post to this bulletin board apologising for those that you have harmed as well as the testimonials of the cured?

Oncology researchers, like myself, don't go wandering around bumping into the furniture looking for cures - you need to put up a proposal and fund it's evaluation! If you're so confident of it's efficacy, this is the BEST evidence you will get in terms of marketing and "feeling good" that you are curing skin cancers.

"In the orthodox community this question refers to a "longitudinal, peer-reviewed, double-blind study with carefully monitored control groups, using strict statistics measures..." bla, bla, bla, bla. How many have we done? Not a damn one. And we proudly never intend to" - I think you have just shot yourself in the foot with this one!

Your website has a handful of testimonials... your sample size needs to be larger than double figures, needs to include a cross section of society (randomised) and various types of skin cancer. Get real mate! I checked out the website and where are the links to trials and real data? Out of the thousands that have bought and tried your product, how many were cured out of those? I would love to see a cure, but a website that peddles paranoia with quotes from the 50s, 60s and 70s needs to get on with itself..."suppression pages"! Sheesh!

Can I remind you of how much anguish was caused by thalidomide before it the isomer that is beneficial was discovered?

"Pity... On New Year's Day, 2,100 A.D. this product will still not be approved by the FDA." - you said it!!!!

I am referring to "you" in thsi post, I am assuming that you are part of this consortium as well. Apologies if you are not part of the sale or promotion of this product, I just picked up on the personal pronouns you used in reference to the product.

BTW - it's Dan and HER mates.

Maybe just stick to woodworking questions and answers - tell us about how great the Ubeaut products are and which timbers you have been playing with lately.

Cheers
Dan

[dan_tom]

"The following information is based upon the research and opinions of the Dan Raber and others who have worked countless hours researching, experimenting and validating their collective works. (WHERE IS IT PUBLISHED OR BETTER STILL WHY WAS IT NOT ACCEPTED TO BE PUBLISHED?) Dan's knowledge is based on prayer, intuitive genius, hard work, speaking with dedicated researchers, reading successful cancer treatises (i.e. Dr. Beard, and others dedicated researchers in the medical field who have written books and collaborated with dedicated researchers like Dr. William Donald Kelley), and interviewing 1000's of cancer survivors and people who have unsuccessfully treated themselves for cancer with various cancer protocols." (http://www.skincanceranswer.com/)

Dan Raber is the guy that peddles this cure - I think I found the reason for his paranoia- he got busted for practising medicine without a license!

Cheers
Dan

[ozwinner]

I think this speaks for itself, this is from the front page of the website.

These statements have not been evaluated by the FDA. The products or information contained on this web site are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease.


Al

[Ashore]

It is equally irresponsible to rubbish something that numerous testimonials and statements on websites support.

Try reading some of the testimonials, some with actual photos of the process, made by doctors, chiropractors and the general public, that are
available on the web.

Anyone that tries to push a product by beliving & Quoting "Testermonials" that approve the product is in my opinion either an extreemely gullible person or some one who has something to gain from the sale of the product.

Often these "Testermonials" only ever are pro the product, can be written by anyone who has used the product or not & cannot easily be substanciated by the general public.

This forum for instance shows both sides of the arguement , if you look you will see for and against "Testermonials" for just about every brand of woodworking tool and product. Which is what I believe was the original intent of the forum.

Greg's original post was to warn and remind people of the dangers of un-checked skin cancers, and as most of the members are Australian Males in the skin cancer danger age and it being easier for the aussie male to die than admit something's wrong and go to a doctor or put it off until its too late, the post in promoting awareness of a problem we all know about , ( and if one person went and got tested because of it then it achieved a good result) but glenmackinnon I feer that your posts pushing a product , and the responses they generate will get this thread the SWISH which would be a shame.

[channa]

I was going to just agree with gregoryq, but then I thought you might think we are ganging up on you because of the strong ties between us. Really, we are ganging up on you because we feel a deep distrust of someone who makes statements like:

"It is equally irresponsible to rubbish something that numerous testimonials and statements on websites support" as to "rubbish things that have been tested and push something that hasn't." How can you equate rubbishing information presented on a web page as part of an advertising programme that is only going to publish success stories, with carefully gathered, balanced and tested information that considers both the successes and the failures of a treatment?

And how about the next line:

"...websites support. These catagorically state that these products ( andrographis and graviola ) are effective in the treatment of various cancers. I would suggest that people in the research field should take notice of this and conduct some tests..."

So... the webistes "categorically state" that these treatments are effective... but there isn't any proof. Hence "people in the research field should take notice"? Oh, OK, I can see your logic now . (Sorry, that was sarcastic).

Gregoryq can talk nonsense all he wants about the placebo effect.

The placebo effect is a real measurable effect. It can be responsible for up to 30% of the positive outcomes of a drug trial. So let's say you are testing a drug on 10 people, maybe 30% of them will have a good result due entirely to placebo, maybe another 30% will have no change and maybe 40% will die. If you were organising a website to promote the product, you wouldn't get a testimonial out of the dead people, and you would likely only publish the testimonials of the people who benefitted from the placebo effect. Proper research would look at the data and would work out whether the overall effect was beneficial or harmful - maybe 40% would have died anyway, so the drug isn't actually harmful, but the only way to know is to look at all of the data, not just the success stories. This is the problem with testimonials on websites, and anecdotal evidence, such as yours.

Actually pharmaceutical companies do spend millions on cancer research. Imagine the profits if they could patent and market an effective treatment. There's no great profit in Cansema however. It uses natural ingredients which cannot be patented.

This is a fatuous statement IMHO, examples of natural remedies that have been used as the basis for current treatments have already been given in this thread. Even if the natural product cannot be patented, the process can be - I'm sure Cansema is patented and trademarked, and I'm equally sure someone is turning a profit from pedalling it. If some of that product was put into reputable research, and it was found to be a useful treatment, there is no reason for it not to be approved by the FDA by the beginning of 2100.

Thanks for the input Dan. I didn't realise this thread had carried on until I connected today.

[glenmackinnon]

I give up! - I begin to see the folly of battling against closed minds.
My only purpose for joining this thread was to defend nomoe and his statement about the positive results he got from using Cansema, and support him in that area since the product has also worked for us.
I gain nothing from supporting the use of Cansema, other than getting rid of our skin cancers (and being ridiculed by other members). I am not a member of any organization or consortium. I do not promote or sell any products. But, I will not apologize to anyone for supporting the use of Cansema. The more observant among you will note that I have continually advocated consultation with medical specialists.
A point I would like to make: both my wife and I grew up and spent more than thirty years of our lives in southern Ontario, near Indian reservations, and gained local knowledge of their ways. Early on we heard of salves and ointments they used to treat cancers, but thankfully we never had to use them until recently (that Aussie sun!)
At the time, being young and indestructable, we paid little attention.
However, we have also been devasted since by the loss of dearly loved ones to this dread disease.
I was preparing numerous responses to this avalanche of negativism
(especially that from self styled experts who spout their own credentials)
when I realized how pointless it was, that I was beating my head against a brick wall.
The term "ganging up" as used by Channa is an appropriate one. It is a technique used by schoolyard bullies who attempt to intimidate others whose opinions and views differ from theirs.
I did not start this slanging match by calling others names, using vulgar terms like "wanker", and making false accusations against others.
I also like Channa"s quote - "Judge not lest ye be judged" though have issues with the rest of the comments.
I am not that insecure that I need to list my university degrees and qualifications to try to impress others or make them feel inferior, and despite the vilification that I am sure will be coming my way, I will not respond to anything more in this thread in the future.
One last website that I am certain many of you will denigrate (I keep hoping there are some open minds out there somewhere):
http://www.newstarget.com/001590.html

A world of caution - Slander is an offense in the eyes of the law. This includes name calling, false accusations and impinging on an individual's character in public. This is a public forum and I agree with Ashore. I would not like to see this thread shut down. Perhaps the rules of the forum should be tightened.