Healing Cancer From the Inside Out
Report Abuse/Infringement 0 Seeds 0 Leechers698.54 MB
Healing Cancer from Inside Out
"message is dynamite!" T. Colin Campbell, Ph.D. The China Study --author.
This is an update to the 1st Edition which includes subtitles in Spanish, German, French, Portuguese and English (for the deaf). The DVD is divided into two parts.
Part 1, Curing Cancer, deals with the failings of conventional cancer treatments and shows how conventional medicine wildly - and deceptively - exaggerates the benefits of treatments, while minimizing the risks. It will provide you with the information you need to accurately assess the risks and benefits of any treatment and speak intelligently to your doctor about such treatments. There is also a section on the 'Cancer Industry' which explains the history behind cancer treatments, the suppression of alternative treatments and why chemotherapy, radiation and surgery are the only treatments available to mainstream medicine.
Part 2, Healing Cancer, shows how cancer can be successfully healed with dietary treatments and natural supplementation. It explains common misconceptions about cancer, shows how diets designed to fight cancer are more successful than conventional treatments, discusses startling cancer research findings with T. Colin Campbell (The China Study) and has interviews with people who have reversed cancers using diet. It also discusses supplementation and why attitude is important in reversing not only cancer, but any disease.
Files: .avi, Xvid (Perian), 512 x 384, Millions, MPEG Layer 3, Stereo, 48.000 kHz, 790.13 kbits/s, 02:07:30.12
Dietary supplements for treating cancer? Sure. If you're faced with a life-threatening illness, why not trust the hard science of "some guy on a DVD said it". What a load of crap.
Oct 03 2011, 13:25 CEST
dietary treatments and natural supplementation
Oct 03 2011, 22:50 CEST
Good to have an open mind about stuff, lodp12. Believe what yer doctor tells you then, they come from a long line of dogma & rhetoric. Besides it's always prudent to support big pharma, not all drug dealers have imported europeon autos, yet. You really can survive without one lung and yer liver, at least long enuf to say "bye" to your loved ones.That living food research is marginalized is the work of the AMA and the allopathic mindset.
Oct 04 2011, 16:57 CEST
As Richard Dawkins once said, we should keep an open mind, but not so open that our brains fall out.
Medical research is an enormously intricate enterprise, if done properly. In order to isolate a single factor in the treatment and plausibly tie it to the outcome in a disease, you often need hundreds of patients, a control group of the same size, you need to set parameters, do the blinding properly, finally get the statistics right.. and even if you get all that right, what you end up with is mostly just one piece of the puzzle. That's how all science works.
"ALternative" Medicine, for the most part, can't be bothered with that. And it's the same here. Interviews with a couple of dudes who supposedly did this and that and supposedly they had this and that outcome. Scientists 200 years ago knew that's no way to approach a complex issue such as human health.
Also it's very misleading that the legitimate scientific findings of the China-Cornell-Oxford Project - which point to the fact that diet heavily influences the likelihood of somebody GETTING cancer with laughably unscientific claims about diets HEALING cancer.
Oct 04 2011, 20:42 CEST
Oct 05 2011, 00:42 CEST
notice how this user has no ups or down to their ratio (so hasn't seen the science) , they came here specifically to say these 2 comments.
Oct 05 2011, 00:47 CEST
This is crap. Alternative medicines like, say, homeopathy are not only intellectually absurd, but they become immoral to promote when you consider that people will put their trust in them instead seeking out much needed assessments and treatments, as imperfect and at times corrupted as that process may be.
Misleading medical information should be kept to misleading medical forums. I see no link to leftist politics in this (and in fact anti-leftist values). Why is this hosted here?
Oct 05 2011, 03:06 CEST
supercat, I couldn't agree more. There's nothing leftist about favoring bogus medical treatments about evidence-based ones.
Antisthenes: that's right, I haven't seen the science ... because there is no science in this. And my beef is not with the China Study, which does have its merits. It's with people distorting those findings and drawing unwarranted conclusions from them. There's evidence that plant-based diets PREVENT some types of cancer, but no evidence that they CURE cancer. That's a big difference.
Oct 05 2011, 04:53 CEST
"I haven't seen the science ... because there is no science in this."
And that is because big pharma doesn't fund research on how to cure yourself. They want you to believe that their ineffective pills and surgery are the ONLY way to treat (not cure) dis ease and in so getting a patient on a maintenance regime, the medical "profession" elevates themselves to the realm of cable television provider with a pipeline to your wallet.Don't fool yourselves by thinking health care means YOUR health care, it's all about the AMA's 'financial health' care. The fact that 'researchers' are bought and sold depending on their favourable findings is a given to all who don't have a vested interest in supporting the allopathic 'magic bullet' approach to wellness.
The fact that a modern day general practitioner couldn't diagnose a wart, without sending you to three of his buddy 'specialists' and a catscan or MRI would have some of the less bovine among us questioning the findings used to promote their main product = drugs. Yes, there should be a war on drugs with Big Pharma the target. You should sit back and reflect on how pervasive, insidious and interconnected these pushers are before dissing 'alternative' anything.
I'll now let you get back to your own self-induced programming.
Oct 05 2011, 11:50 CEST
Actually, Big Pharma isn't that big. For example, the Toyota car company has more annual revenue than the top 4 (almost the top 5) pharma companies combined. And yet somehow they're supposed to run a fantastically successful decades-long universal conspiracy, selling us useless drugs, worldwide? I remind you that most of us are living in countries with national health care, where a useless treatment wouldn't turn a profit for anybody - we're being fooled too?
Oct 05 2011, 13:18 CEST
homeopathy was never talked about .
nobody said "CURE", reverse was the word. you distort and there is science done and verified by 1000's of studies whose results are similar.
Oct 05 2011, 23:35 CEST
Forget about 1000s of studies. Cite me ONE serious (i.e. randomized, placebo-controlled, low-drop-out, peer-reviewed) scientific trial that finds "natural supplementation" to reverse any kind of cancer. You won't find one, and that's why the "believers" in this dangerous nonsense necessarily resort to conspiracy theories when asked to explain why those outlandish claims remain unconfirmed - as is the case on this DVD.
Oct 06 2011, 00:21 CEST
"(i.e. randomized, placebo-controlled, low-drop-out, peer-reviewed) Whose third aunt has four gold teeth and her name starts with "Helen". Oh, heck I could get you a study like that fer 50 grand, no prob. What, you want my findings to recommend your product? For another 200 grand, I could do just that, matey.
Hey, didn't we take that gynecological semenester at ButtFuc Medical School and Dental Collegiate together? I understand none of us got diplomas from there, but a coupla of us got the clap/applause.Wow, what a small nepotistic world us docs live in, hey? You know, I was able to get a diploma for that course off the internet anyway, Ha ha, Hahahahah
Oct 06 2011, 03:28 CEST
sure, nothing's easier than faking a randomized controlled trial from start to finish, and getting it published in a respectable peer-reviewed journal. every drop-out can do that.
as I said, when you can't back this bullshit up with serious scientific work, often the only choice left is poorly designed conspiracy theories.
Oct 06 2011, 04:04 CEST
Whatever, guy. I see you're not 'getting' IT, So you can continue to write around and around with your "serious scientific work". You're only kidding yourself
Oct 06 2011, 14:33 CEST
Some good arguments from all sides. I have no personal expertise however speaking to a close friend involved in medicine he assures me that it is cast iron fact now that certain diets make you more susceptible to certain cancers. He also tells me that in many main stream western cancer treatment programs certain diets are advised. As to diet alone being a cancer cure he says that there is no consistent evidence for this. I think that is pretty much what lodp12 is saying.
What I think is topical and is worth noting is that it was widely reported that Steve Jobs was employing some kind of specialist diet with his ongoing battle against whatever cancer he had (I think it was his liver, not sure). I have no doubt he had access to the very best cancer treatment methods and he was employing a specialised diet as part of his treatment.
Oct 07 2011, 13:25 CEST
Thanks for bringing up Steve Jobs. I'm only reading up on this now, but his case is actually a fine example of how dangerous these dietary "treatments" can be.
In 2004, Jobs was diagnosed with a type of pancreatic cancer that was easily operable and has an excellent prognosis if caught early and removed surgically right away. However, he went on to "treat" his cancer with a diet for 9 months, after which (big surprise) it turned out the tumor had grown. Only then did he have it removed. Steve Jobs (who was a vegetarian, a buddhist, and a child of 60ies counter culture) could well be alive today exploiting taiwanese workers, if he had relied on proven ways of treatment from the start.
Again, as Gearage said, it's established fact that certain diets are strongly associated with cancer. High-fat diets raise the likelihood of colorectal cancers for example. Also it's mainstream practice for cancer patients to have diets that help them deal with the severe side-effects of cancer treatments like chemotherapy. But using diets as a cancer TREATMENT, in the narrow sense, is not based on anything that deserves the name "evidence".
Oct 07 2011, 14:12 CEST
Thanks for that lodp12. You are right Jobs did apparently have cancer of the pancreas. I did not realise he had delayed the standard medical treatment in favour of some kind of alternative process only to later have the standard medical procedure carried out.
I have done a quick web search on Jobs' illness and as you can imagine there is tons of information. However I can't find anything really solid and I think in fact he (probably for corporate reasons) kept his condition largely secret. There are all sorts of speculations as to what his actual illness was. That being said there is a hell of a lot written about his special diet which I think was some kind of gluten free veggie thing where you could also eat fish. My point was that if this guy with access to the very best medical experts is trying the diet cure then at the very least there must be a lot of people on this bandwagon whether it be valid or not.
As an aside I thought all the Apple things where made in China now? I'm probably misinformed again.
Oct 07 2011, 17:09 CEST
And I'm sorry, did Jobs die while on the high octane standard 'medikal' treatment or on the 'voodoo' diet ?
Or are you trying to say the 'voodoo' diet was THE contributing factor in the inefficacy of the allopathic treatment(not cure) ? Or is this death attributable to karma ? I await your diagnoses and feel free to waste more of our time while you discuss/confer with your specialist buddies.
Oct 07 2011, 17:56 CEST
I am glad to see more people stand up to the new age,conspiratorial or scare-mongering material that invades this supposed leftist site. I also can't believe there's pornography hosted here. Actually, one of the participants in this conversation, Antisthenes, also supports pornography that's being posted on this site (and is still not deleted after several months have passed).
Oct 07 2011, 23:55 CEST
what do you mean pornography?
Oct 08 2011, 00:18 CEST
Oct 08 2011, 00:21 CEST
Mister Holeyier than Thou got it deleted. Now your only copy will have to come from Him.
Oct 08 2011, 00:54 CEST
hughmunbeane, I think you have misunderstood my stance. I did not consult any kind of cancer specialist only a friend who is an occupational therapist. I actually think it is plausible that an individuals diet must have a large effect on a cancer within them in fact it strikes me as strange, the notion, that it would not effect it. It does appear though that the whole process is at best poorly understood and this kind of treatment is at best in it's infancy and non-consistent.
You are also correct when you say that Steve Jobs died whilst undergoing the standard "high octane" treatment.
Anyway not wishing to fuel this with any more of my poorly understood positions. I think we can all accept that cancer is far from being well understood from any treatment angle and it should surely be something that a lot more funding goes in to. I would also say that it is better that this funding is non-partisan than tied to corporate greed however in this current climate that is unlikely to happen in a big way.
Also I don't think actual pornography brings anything thing to this site. More over I don't see how this site could do anything for the cause of pornography that hasn't no doubt been covered on thousands of other sites that make up a large part of the internet.
Oct 08 2011, 05:42 CEST
You're right Gearage. I, as well, don't believe any more funding should be allocated to a search for the 'magic bullet' approach to finding a 'new & improved' maintenance treatment for dying of cancer. The will of the medikal industry to find a cause and cure for cancer is not there considering the profits to be made selling expensive diagnostic machines across the globe, chemo drugs at inflated prices, hospital bed time, and the list goes on of the many opportunities to profit by another's misfortune. Refer to the Hippocrates Health Institute for clues on how to beat this dis ease.
Also, to think that lifestyle has nought to do with contracting this dis ease would be ignorant.
The nutritional or dietary approach to reversing a cancerous disease is being thwarted by the medikal industry, which would be horrified if all the patients were given enough knowledge to heal themselves at a cost of better groceries.
And unfortunately, the same sort of profit driven quest for a treatment has plagued AIDs research.
I don't understand why the medikal industry doesn't search for a cause and cure for these dis eases, instead of re-search, re-search and research. But I do know, profit, profit and profit.
Oct 08 2011, 12:50 CEST
loop is still trying to spread confusion and does not accept science and mixes words how they were not written he is just trolling us and likely will die of his disinformation campaign against whole plant based food diets .
Oct 09 2011, 02:59 CEST
and no i have never downloaded or put porn on this tracker but i have put 1/5th of the rest of stuff on here.
Longshotman , pathetic attempt at slander.
Oct 09 2011, 03:04 CEST
Martin, I thought you're a mod. Anyways, if you are, or whoever is, I don't see why this is here. Take a look at the list on Quackwatch:
Should we be hosting people who tell you to see gurus instead of doctors, or Vitamin C? Water? Just because they do it in the name of anti-capitalism?
Oct 09 2011, 07:49 CEST
I don't like seeing anti-enlightenment nonsense being posted here any more than you do. However, I'd hate to remove the discussion along with the torrent.
Oct 09 2011, 14:16 CEST
please this video contains nothing from that quack watch site. this is based on scientific research. a;so presented in other movies on this site. Processed People. A Delicate Balance and China Study. all i can imagine is you are not open to whole fresh organic food supercat
Oct 09 2011, 17:37 CEST
Antisthenes, this is not scientific. You haven't responded to any of Lodp12's important points on this regard. I'm not opposed to organic food. I'm also not opposed to clean drinking water, but when my relative tells me people get sick (including cancer) b/c they don't drink enough water, based on a "scientific" book (called "You're Not Sick, You're Thirsty!"), the buck stops there.
Again, what is the link to leftist politics? It's quack science. If you want to break this down into capitalism, there's a whole spectrum of "anti-profit" people being conned by "anti-profit" retailers and cults - eg, homeopathic medicine. Telling people with cancer not to seek out professional help but to drink magic water instead (homeopathy) is bogus and categorically harmful. The same for "organic food". It's anti-health propaganda.
Oct 09 2011, 20:42 CEST
@ Antisthenes: I didn't say it was your upload, just that you spoke in favour of it on its thread.
Oct 09 2011, 21:50 CEST
Supercat : I can see that the documentary might not be entirely relevant from a anti-enlightenment, mumbo jumbo, homeopathy stance. However I think the fact that so much medical research of all types is profit driven is a relevant subject for this site. Zizek regularly speaks of the 4 main antagonisms inherent in global capitalism. One of these is the concept of private property in relation to "intellectual property" such as advances in medical research. How sad is it that we live in a society where advances in medical science are profit driven.
Oct 10 2011, 08:53 CEST
again it is not about homeopathy. not about drinking water it is based on the science in the other 3 movies i mentioned in the largest study ever done on diet and also uploaded. .
Oct 10 2011, 18:35 CEST
You guys are missing the point. Using data from a massive survey is different than adhering to the principles of science. You haven't answered ANY of the serious questions Lodp12 raised, and I take that as an inability to respond.
It is one thing to question the medical industry from a critical, scientific perspective, it is another to abandon or alleviate yourself from basing claims on the proper standards of scientific protocol.
Oct 13 2011, 06:03 CEST
You've missed the point in your closed minded approach.
Science is bought and sold like any commodity. Its foundations are built on dogma and rhetoric that have been proven false time and time again. To rely on the "findings" of a scientific anything is foolhardy and may put your life in peril or it already has.
You're beating a dead horse. Stop it !
Oct 13 2011, 12:42 CEST
It seems to that there is a huge amount of uncertainty and neither side of the argument is firm. Surely the food that you eat must effect the development of cancer inside you in some way. However it seems to me that if any particular diet can cure certain types of cancer this has not been proved in a way that survives scientific scrutiny.
As to science being largely funded by the corporate world or other vested interests this is a fact. Also there are numerous cases of scientific research being subverted by corporations etc. The classic case is obviously all the tobacco industry "research" but more recently there has been the attempt by BP to buy up marine research operations in the Mexican Gulf. This though does not mean we should turn our back on science we just need to get the impartiality back.
Oct 13 2011, 14:52 CEST
Good luck on getting objectivity or impartiality back into 'scientific re-search' ! Check out the Hippocrates Health Institute and/or Dr. Gabriel Cousens for methods of reversing cancer thru diet and lifestyle change, or not. The information is out there, whether you choose to use it thru your 'scientific' bias is a question you have to answer for yourself.
Oct 14 2011, 13:05 CEST
loop raised no points he made defensive accusations that were unfunded and not found in the film (like he didn't watch it)
how about this science from the 12th
also verifying the science from these movies
if you know science you know it takes you doing your own study with the same factors and checking results..
"Researchers have discovered the gene that is the strongest marker for heart disease can actually be modified by generous amounts of fruit and raw vegetables. "
there is NO uncertainly at all there are documented cases there are studies (all pointing the the SAME conclusion) .
if you want to keep killing and in turn hurting your health that is on you a personal choice in in no way invalidate science with your enlarged amygdala being hijacked and or denial or obfuscation. .
Oct 15 2011, 01:06 CEST
And once again you're confusing disease prevention with the treatment of disease. The article you're citing is about diets that prevent disease (not cancer, by the way), not about treatment.
So the challenge still stands: if in fact there are documented cases and studies about dietary cancer treatment, show us just a single one that's published in a respectable journal.
Oct 15 2011, 11:31 CEST
Whatever, lodp. Once again you're confusing 'respectable' with some rags bought & paid for by the medikal industry. Now you r us lol. Closed minds, like yours, leads to dis ease, as is obvious in your case.
Oct 15 2011, 15:22 CEST
OK, forget the "respectable" then. Are there ANY published case studies or clinical trials that support this outlandish idea?
By the way, you might want to spell the word "medical" right if you'd like to be taken seriously in a discussion like this.
Oct 15 2011, 21:05 CEST
Right on, lodp12. And among the bad profit-warped research out there, in nutrition, in psychiatry, etc., there is also very good research and researchers.
Take one example: Dr. Walter Willett, the head of the Nurse's Health Study and of Chair of Nutrition at Harvard. Willett begins his book "Eat, Drink, and Be Healthy" stating that the food industries have warped USDA recommendations. He has been challenged by Michael Pollan for sampling Western diets (US & Canada), and in response, Willett ceded the point and acknowledged the need to broaden research. But nobody, not even the food critics, dismiss his research as invaluable, chalk it up to profit-driven propaganda, or suggest that case studies and clinical trials are not necessary for adequate nutritional understanding.
Oct 18 2011, 16:27 CEST
yes many watch the movie Dying to Have Know , do your own research, direct experience is sometimes the only way for a person with an enlarged amygdala to accept scientific information. .
to me Pollan is one of the worst propagandists there is in bed with wal mart and mc donalds. pro capitalist anti vegetarian. Forks over Knives this movie processed People a Delicate Balance .
but again i will say it based on what you write to me it is also clear you didn't watch the movie
Nov 01 2011, 19:14 CET
500+ seeds 20,000 downloads in 1 month : http://onebigtorrent.org/torrents/12214/Forks-Over-Knives--2011
Nov 01 2011, 19:21 CET
may as well get this one too and maybe you can point this community who seeks vitality and health to engage in social and political struggle some movies books information on where you think counters this weight of evidence, (not westing price please).
Nov 01 2011, 19:53 CET
It's a symptom of the decline of the left that people vaguely interested in bringing about social justice would even begin to take this shit seriously. And it's a symptom of our general intellectual decline that people would even consider learning about things like these curled up on a couch watching some movie.
Idiocracy is nigh.
Nov 01 2011, 21:04 CET