|
Re: The Efficacy of Radiotherapy By Don Benjamin
From: bobofficers@127.0.0.7 (Bob Officer)
On Fri, 27 Aug 2010 11:02:08 +1000, in misc.health.alternative,
"carole" <hubbca2003@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
"Bob Officer" <bobofficers@127.0.0.7> wrote in message
news:0usd765us3ri0881vk1k1japhptepeh7ub@4ax.com...
On Thu, 26 Aug 2010 13:50:29 -0700 (PDT), in misc.health.alternative,
Mark STANLEY Probert <mark.probert@gmail.com> wrote:
On Aug 25, 7:39 pm, "carole" <hubbca2...@yahoo.com.au> wrote:
"Peter B" <.@.> wrote in messagenews:4c757669$1@news.x-privat.org...
"john" <nos...@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."
The key word, for the functional illiterates, is *attributed*. This
"study" found a temporal connection, not one of causality. The writer
of the article is full of crap.
Here is the study:
I wonder why they would excluded cancers found by autopsies, when
that was determine to COD?
and I do not agree which the conclusion, it is not a mathematical
certainty by any means and appears to be based upon a fallacy of a
preconceived Conclusion.
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?
The TGA uses Singles Chat">single standard of cleanliness, cross contamination
prevention, and produce certification and compliance with
documentation of production for any drug or supplement preparation,
doesn't it Carole?
The shoddy work by any company should be grounds to shut it down.
The TGA should have been brought up on charges of some sort and made
accountable for the what they did to Pan Pharmaceuticals.
Yes, They waited too long to shut them done, given the type of
criminal activities which Pan Pharmaceutics was committing. The
endangering of the public continued way to long of a time.
I used to buy some of their products which were fine and good quality.
How do you know. One of the crimes pan pharmaceuticals did was
distribute adulterated products and mislabeled produces. Did you test
them in a lab?
--
Bob Officer
Posting the truth
|
