|
Re: The Efficacy of Radiotherapy By Don Benjamin
From: hubbca2003@yahoo.com.au (carole)
"Peter B" <.@.> wrote in message news:4c75e290$1@news.x-privat.org...
"carole" <hubbca2003@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:pxkdo.4609$FH2.3472@viwinnwfe02.internal.bigpond.com...
"Peter B" <.@.> wrote in message news:4c75ad9e@news.x-privat.org...
"carole" <hubbca2003@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:0Rhdo.4518$Yv.1969@viwinnwfe01.internal.bigpond.com...
"Peter B" <.@.> wrote in message news:4c757669$1@news.x-privat.org...
"john" <nospam@bt.com> wrote in message
news:mo6dnasSWe069-jRnZ2dnUVZ8hKdnZ2d@bt.com...
The Efficacy of Radiotherapy By Don Benjamin There has never been a
properly run randomised trial that showed that radiotherapy saved any
lives or even produced a significant increase in survival for any
type of cancer.
As usual he does not read any better than Janet Drew. That is what the
problem is when you live by agenda, you see what you want and ignore
the rest. Including truth.
But yet it does say -
"For example a 1993 US study of the deaths of 470,000 cancer patients
found that about 27% of those who didn't die from their cancer had died
from their conventional cancer treatment that had mainly damaged the
heart and respiratory system (mainly radiotherapy and chemotherapy)1.
The authors of this study attributed the deaths to treatment because
most of the extra deaths occurred in the year just after diagnosis."
You did notice that it stated ?1993"? Old stats, very old. Old
technologies. See my note.
Yes, but cancer treatments haven't really progressed very far for a long
time despite all the money that goes into research.
Now Pan Pharmaceuticals never had one death from their products, yet
they were made bankrupt by Australia's TGA.
What's wrong with that picture?
What does that have to do with the price of tea in China?
Double standards.
Really? Like you are never going to speak to me again? Never?
With alternative medicine if one Pictures of People">person gets sick or dies then it makes the
news and a million dollar business is closed down.
Then another standard for conventional medicine where people routinely die
from the SIDE EFFECTS of the treatment, never mind the fact that the modern
treatment can only save about 60% of those it treats.
Why don't the failures make the news, and the pharmaceutical companies sued
relentnessly?
Or why is pharmaceutical medicine held up as the standard when it is so
inefficient?
There is clearly a double standard.
carole
|
