Hello Janic
Certainly. But after reading your long text, I did not understand what is your consciousness and your experience,
I repeat: during illness cataloged by allopathy (and therefore what it is school design and especially the ONLY means chosen to address it), it is a question of "patient awareness "to decide whether to follow the motorway well traced by the official medical system or pursue other avenues with its advantages and disadvantages too. This is where the choice of conscience and also and above all knowledge.
So we must not mix everything. I have distinguished between school medicine with its design on the disease in question, and in parallel with a naturopathic approach, and therefore the means of action, different. It's like comparing homeopathy and allopathy that even with a common objective in the concept of opposition and therefore means put into action.
except the extract of your previous intervention where you affirm that cancer is inevitably fatal.
Je did not say that cancer is inevitably fatal since as noted for prostate cancer and other cancer types, the "patient" can live all his life with it or without gene evolution. Moreover those who were cured (and not a mere remission) without allopathic treatment, but only natural, emphasize that there is no real inevitability.
Now between these two options is that the individual concerned to make his choice in awareness and knowledge (or mixture as Scheiber)
Could you briefly summarize your position for a simple guy like me can understand?
My position is that of Hippocrates "
that your food be your medicine and your medicine your food Clearly the mode of food can be a source of health as illness and learning to distinguish what is most favorable to health should be the rule that would prevent a major part of cancers to declare themselves. But culture, habits, taste, etc ... do not really stick to this goal in our "modern" society.
NB: If you have nothing better to offer me to save my life, I do not intend to do so difficult.
It's not really as well as the question must be asked, but rather, that you know of
other possible means to save your life? If you do not know, you have no choice and this is the case 99% and more of the population.
It remains to identify the many factors that make it ineffective immune system, and remedy.
Let's say that this is indeed what should be done, but it is still necessary even known there would be a desire to practice and there is not a foregone conclusion because it is a challenge in depth that few are willing to put into practice.
Raymon goodnight
Dr. André Gernez explains why cancer is difficult to cure: it says that on average a cancer begins to dévelloper 7-8 years before it is detected.
So ! Dr. Gernez is not a naturopath, but conventional allopathic, but emphasizes that every body makes daily abnormal cells that are normally eliminated. So he advocates a change in some behavior that food and the antimitotic low-dose to "eliminate" the first cells that appear (which suggests that the "immune system" would not do his job.)
Then Collins curve shows the development of the cancerous mass as time passes. Now the stadium, said irreversible, has reached the first billion cancer cells that is to say the size of a pinhead and becomes deadly stage trillion cells about one kilo 2 3 years later (hence the effectiveness of the surgery that removes the bulk of the mass and antimitotic to "eliminate" those not withdrawn; the major risk being inoperable metastases) and therefore mortal after 8 10 to years depending on the type of cancer, its location, the lifestyle of the individual, etc ...
