or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › What do you consider to be good food?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What do you consider to be good food? - Page 19

post #271 of 561
Quote:
Quote:
Here is where marc's nonsense comes from: Wheatgrass Treatment
im not calling it nonsense necessarily, hell if i had cancer and was looking down the barrel, id guzzle anything anyone told me could help save my life....but i certainly wouldnt shun "real" medicine at the same time.
The very sad thing is that people who are terminal get desperate, and they are easy prey for quacks with their pseudoscience and false promises. This is heartbreaking and infuriating at the same time. I have had some people in stage 4 asking me about some 'medical' breakthrough they have found in the net... and most of the time it is a 'treatment' purporting to 'cure' cancer, and that the medical community at large are hiding this new discoverd because of vested interests. Many of these pseudocures are also incredibly expensive, and not only is the patient dying, he is also being fleeced. For example, this drug Ukrain .. a person had gone to this treatment which costs several thousand dollars... to no avail. That is why I hate such garbage.
post #272 of 561
Originally posted by marc37:
Quote:
One very interesting theory offered on the problem of cancer has come from Nobel prize winner (hear that t4phage) Dr Otto Warburg. He viewed cancer not as a virus, but as a process of cell mutation caused by oxygen deprivation on the cellular level. We now know that things like smoking, high protein intake, air pollution, shallow breathing, lack of excercise and high fat consumption can starve a body up to 25% of its available oxygen.
"Your red blood cells must carry sufficient oxygen through your arteries to all of your internal organs to keep you alive. Normally, when red blood cells pass through the lungs, 95%-100% of them are loaded, or "saturated," with oxygen to carry." (From: Harvard Oxygen Saturation Test)
post #273 of 561
Marc, the articles you posted: 1) many claim various degrees... for what subjects? Which institutions are they associated with? 2) your clippings are not from scientific journals, where articles are peer reviewed.
post #274 of 561
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by m@T,June 19 2005,17:18
Quote:
Here is where marc's nonsense comes from: Wheatgrass Treatment
im not calling it nonsense necessarily, hell if i had cancer and was looking down the barrel, id guzzle anything anyone told me could help save my life....but i certainly wouldnt shun "real" medicine at the same time.
The very sad thing is that people who are terminal get desperate, and they are easy prey for quacks with their pseudoscience  and false promises.  This is heartbreaking and infuriating at the same time.  I have had some people in stage 4 asking me about some 'medical' breakthrough they have found in the net... and most of the time it is a 'treatment' purporting to 'cure' cancer, and that the medical community at large are hiding this new discoverd because of vested interests.  Many of these pseudocures are also incredibly expensive, and not only is the patient dying, he is also being fleeced.  For example, this drug Ukrain .. a person had gone to this treatment which costs several thousand dollars... to no avail. That is why I hate such garbage.
Remember T4phage, growing wheatgrass juice costs about 50 cents a day to fund. lt is very very cheap. lt is only the bloody companies that process dried wheatgrass (as talked about in your references) that cost a fortune. l don't primarily teach people to use expensive suppliments. Alot of people don't have much money anyway. l alweays treat people with the cheapest suppliments (home grown wheatgrass juice) anyway. T4phage: you are wrong. Wheatgrass and sprouts are the cheapest foods there are. You obviously haven't read all the material l have provided. There is no reason to "hate such garbage". Anyway, have you ever tried wheatgrass juice over a period of 3 months? Probably not. You make all these scientific cliams yet you have never bothered to try these methods for yourself. T4phage, you may have a PhD but your health knowledge leaves alot to be desired. l suppose you are going to argue next that vegetables are bad for you because there is a lack of scientific proof to prove otherwise. Can you see what i'm getting at??? Your scientific knowlegde is defeating its purpose. lt is holding you back from spiritual growth. We can't really prove [very well] that vegies are good for you, yet we know they are. The same applies to sprouts, grasses and algae. l have read most of t4phages references that criticises green foods. They have some valid points but most are ignorant scientific views. l will repeat again; science is only in its infancy, it doesn't know how to explain basic things such as chlorophyll. What hope do we have. One of the reasons why l am posting research on chlorella is to add some credibilty to my arguments. lf you read read research by PhD researchers, then maybe you might start to take this topic seriously. As for all these smart arses in their early 20's, get a masters and afew years on your age and l might actually take you serioiusly. l hate uni students that have only a bachelors degree, they think they are so shit hot and know everything, yet they know nothing. Students in there 20's give me the shits.
post #275 of 561
American Cancer Society's Guide to Complementary Medicine states...."here is no scientific evidence that any of the following can cure or influence the course of any cancer:.....chlorella, colon therapy,....Livingston-Wheeler therapy (which use abscisic acid)....wheatgrass products.." ACS Book Review Italics are mine. National Counci Against Heath Fraud: Chorella
post #276 of 561
Thread Starter 
Quote:
American Cancer Society's Guide to Complementary Medicine states...."here is no scientific evidence that any of the following can cure or influence the course of any cancer:.....chlorella, colon therapy,....Livingston-Wheeler therapy (which use abscisic acid)....wheatgrass products.." ACS Book Review Italics are mine. National Counci Against Heath Fraud: Chorella
They sounded like great headings but the substance [in those articles] say very little. lt is just one scientists opinion. He doesn't even back up his arguments. He is arrogant and [as you do], he hides behind his qualifications. l bet he has never tried wheatgrass or other sprouts in his life. Remember: science is only in its infancy. When science comes across subjects they can't understand they dispute them. Science people are so narrow minded. (Science people may conclude at the moment that space travel is impossible yet we know that it is going to happen one day). Science understands nothing about the human body, it is way behind what people are discovering anyway.
post #277 of 561
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Quote:
(m@T @ June 19 2005,17:14) ok but that doesnt mean anyone was saying that cancer is a virus - a trigger, be it smoking, viral, whatever, isnt the same thing as the illness itself. anyhow, drifting into the semantics here, thanks t4 for answering
Oh Dear God no. CANCER IS NOT A VIRUS.  Marc's usage of such words is not to be trusted.
For the second time. l NEVER said that cancer was a virus. Read the material properly T4phage.
post #278 of 561
Quote:
Quote:
(T4phage @ June 19 2005,10:53) American Cancer Society's Guide to Complementary Medicine states...."here is no scientific evidence that any of the following can cure or influence the course of any cancer:.....chlorella, colon therapy,....Livingston-Wheeler therapy (which use abscisic acid)....wheatgrass products.." ACS Book Review Italics are mine. National Counci Against Heath Fraud: Chorella
They sounded like great headings but the substance [in those articles] say very little. lt is just one scientists opinion. He doesn't even back up his arguments. He is arrogant and [as you do], he hides behind his qualifications. l bet he has never tried wheatgrass or other sprouts in his life. Remember: science is only in its infancy. When science comes across subjects they can't understand they dispute them. Science people are so narrow minded. (Science people may conclude at the moment that space travel is impossible yet we know that it is going to happen one day). Science understands nothing about the human body, it is way behind what people are discovering anyway.
?? did i look at the same articles you did? the first link was to a book review - the reviewer's 'opinion' had little to do with the content, which was about the American Cancer Society's position on 'alternative' treatments. the second link was to an article about a lawsuit being brought by the FDA against some guy's website claiming that his products (including chlorella) produce certain results which have not been proven.
post #279 of 561
Quote:
Anyway, have you ever tried wheatgrass juice over a period of 3 months? Probably not. You make all these scientific cliams yet you have never bothered to try these methods for yourself.
There are a lot of things I haven't bothered to try myself, but take on authority. Unfortunately, marc, I remain wholly unconvinced by yours or by the studies you cite. That is really what it boils down to. And the FDA is not in cahoots with the pharmaceutical companies, although there have been isolated cases of misuse of authority. The FDA primarily exists to keep the public safe.
post #280 of 561
Marc, before you waste your time posting about chlorella, maybe you should read about how oral chelation is a complete waste of time, so I'll assume the article you're going to post refers to IV administration. I anxiously awate it.
post #281 of 561
Quote:
Marc, before you waste your time posting about chlorella, maybe you should read about how oral chelation is a complete waste of time, so I'll assume the article you're going to post refers to IV administration. I anxiously awate it.
Umm... knowing marc, there's an another route for delivery... a roundabout, back door route.
post #282 of 561
I'm surprised that there are folks here still wasting time with this quack.
post #283 of 561
wasting? this is primo entertainment.
post #284 of 561
Quote:
wasting? this is primo entertainment.
Heheheh. Yeah, I can understand that.
post #285 of 561
I'd like to try whatever it is that caused 30 pages of replies. Marc, if you can spell out what I need to do in a procedural manner, I'll be the forum's guinea pig for 2-4 weeks. I'm taking a physiology blow-off class right now, so I've got access to a trainer who can test VO2, body fat, etc. Tomorrow I'm having some data taken. In a month or so I'll do it again. I was planning on either doing a few weeks as a raw foodist or a few days on a liquid diet (just to see how my body reacts). But, like I said, if you can give me some easily understood directions, I'd be happy to try out your stuff.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Health & Body
Styleforum › Forums › Culture › Health & Body › What do you consider to be good food?