What is your opinion of a Homeopathic Doctor treating cancer?

Alternative methods of treating cancer can be far better than the conventional treatments that statistically show 2% to 3% 5 year survival rates. That is less than a placebo effect. Hodgkin's and testis cancer treatments show between 30% and 40% success using those techniques, but those only account for about 3% of all cancers.

Homeopathic medicine has many aspects to it that do not work, but you really have to define carefully what you mean by homeopathic treatments. Alternative treatments in many cases do not rely on the typical homeopathic type of treatments.

A very good example is the GERSON clinic in Mexico that has had tremendous successes with fighting cancer and other degenerative diseases. Dr. Gabriel Cousins has successfully treated and cured diabetes type 2 in 30 days using detoxing and diet. He is a medical doctor trained in America that has rejected many of the typical medical treatments that he has found to be very ineffective in treating many degenerative diseases. Here's a video of what he did and the video shows the actual patients and interviews with them: http://topdocumentaryfilms.com/simply-raw-reversin...

Researchers have been trying to solve the cancer issue for over 100 years and the results are abominable at best. The typical clinical trial will use placebos or sugar pills to do double blind studies. If the results are less than 30% in these trials, it is assumed the drug failed and is no better than the sugar pill. The success for cancer treatments are far less than the sugar pill, so any treatment whether homeopathic or chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery are NOT WORKING.

EDIT: Oh brother, Rhianna I see you are at it again, survival means surviving. Only 2% to 3% survive not die, the rest die. You are so busy defending the non-defensible you really need to get a life dear. The data is published everywhere how bad cancer treatments are doing, it's only new news to those that want to defend their profession at all costs. I see the usual suspects have shown up to put there typical skeptical remarks with no evidence to back up their claims. Where is the data that shows cancer treatments are better than the 2% to 3% other than a couple types of cancers. What about breast cancer? How is the medical "cures" doing on that one? If we were winning the war on cancer, why are the deaths overtaking heart disease as the number one killer.

If the skeptics were really skeptics and not just people with a critics agenda against alternative medicine, they would be very vocal on how bad cancer treatments are doing. It is obvious to most people here that they are not clever or educated as they purport, but just want-a-be intellectuals with an agenda trolling the answers.

EDIT: "lo-mcg" I like your answer, but you really need to talk to the Gerson people and go there to see the successes and talk to the patients in total remission. Dr. Gerson testified in the Congressional hearing in 1946 and showed case after case with a 50% cure rate for cancers and other degenerative diseases using his techniques. He was precluded from doing his research in the U.S. after that hearing where the FDA and two drug companies bought and paid for the Congressional results. Look where the drug treatments have gotten us. It's really disgusting the amount of money and time wasted on this BAD SCIENCE.

EDIT: Dave, you need to free yourself from the lies you believe. Anyone will get thrown in jail if you use anything to attempt treating cancer in the U.S. other than the abusive, totally ineffective chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery that are approved. It has nothing to do with the success of the treatments because if it did, those using that abusive chemotherapy & radiation would be put in jail. It is working no better than a sugar pill. Talk about the definition of a quack! These guys are right up there in that category. Would you take your car to a mechanic that could only fix 2% to 3% of the cars he worked on? How long do you think he would be in business? Now if it were the only way you could get your car fixed by law, what would you think about that? I think you would probably start looking for alternatives. lol.

good luck to you

1

Herbalists are the ones to see for your health! if they can't help then go to Wholistic doctors. What allapathy calls alternative should really be the standard of health treatment! Why cause so call conventional treatment only treats the symptoms not the cause! Herbalists, Naturopathy.. Dr. treat the cause not just the symptoms! Herbalists work on the opposite theory.. Homeopathics work on the like gets rid of like ( I really don't understand how that works)! Allapathy... is this trial and error... the guinea pig method!

you can find a free download of Letters from Nowhere 2 here: http://bitly.com/1pnRALW

Finally the full version is avaiable!

Hidden objects games are always fun to play. People forget the without these types of games, there won’t be any of the new generation games we see today.

For me, it's the best game ever.

I am open to natural treatments, so long as they are backed by peer-reviewed, evidence-based research by scientists and medical professionals.

The Society for Integrative Oncology is an organization committed to the study and application of complementary therapies and botanicals for cancer patients. It makes a clear distinction between "alternative" or unproven and "complementary" or tested useful therapies in cancer care.

A friend paid $9000 to study to be a homeopathic practitioner at a "College of Natural Medicine" here. Wasted money. The course material on "aura reading" gave us a good laugh - but not $9000 worth, however.

First off my homeopathic doctor is a licensed MD, which is different from what many of your responders are talking about, and I m not sure what that is exactly, they're all over the place.

Anyway I doubt she would recommend a homeopathic remedy for cancer. Pretty sure she would advise alternatives for the barbaric 'poison and burn' approach that is called allopathic oncology, though I don't speak for her.

First off about (PR hound) James Randi's challenge, they are either ignorant of the facts or disingenuous. The facts are:

" Homeopath George Vithoulkas, a renowned homeopath, began the application process in 2003 for James Randi challenge to prove anything that is paranormal. Homeopathy falls into this category since some of the medicines use extremely dilute substances well beyond that of Avogadro's number. Randi has a strict process that one has to follow to be eligible for the one million dollar prize.

Randi's team of 'skeptics' and George Vithoulkas team of homeopaths started a trial. In 2006, George and his team begin prescribing individualized homeopathic remedies in a double blind fashion to potential patients. James Randi and his team of 'skeptics' were satisfied with the experiment and waived the preliminary application process. However, Mr. Randi had gotten mysterious ill. The homeopaths asked to have them send a replacement for him. Randi refused to do so. Randi claimed to be ill for 6 months. Within that 6 month time period, Athens had a new scientific committee chairman and a new hospital administrator where the homeopathic experiment was to take place.

After 2 years of negotiating with the new authorities, George Vithoulkas was ready to begin the new experiment. However, Randi sent a letter saying the homeopaths have to start the process from the beginning with an application process. Randi also stated on his website that the homeopaths had backed out of this experiment." More dis-ingenuity.

I have seen homeopathy work wonders for many different conditions, yet cancer is more of an ecological issue than an infectious disease, which homeopathy does well with. So could homeopathic remedies control some of the symptoms? Possibly so , although I haven't seen that specifically. I would want to know that the doctor was aware of other possible treatments and what else they would advise. Also their experience in dealing with cancer patients.

As for why many people go to Mexico, it is due to extreme political pressure from AMA and other powerful and wealthy lobbies that have a virtual stranglehold on public opinion and treatment options in the USA. It in no way invalidates the treatments.

In short, homeopathy is not quackery, it is based on (empirical) science, which is scientific, although the shills here would undoubtedly argue against that because that's what they like to do.

In fact I thought Vithoulkas should have offered to treat Randi, then he wouldn't have been sick for 6 months, if indeed he was at all. The reason nobody takes the Randi challenge is that he doesn't ever actually intend to pay anyone, it's just free PR for him. I say SHOW ME THE MONEY, and place it in escrow with a neutral 3rd party. Let them run the trials. Then you can mention James Randi challenge.

Still I don't believe I would only pursue homeopathy as cancer requires a change in body chemistry to heal.

edit. on a personal note. I have often debated my cousin the MD oncologist in the past. When my aunt (his mother) was diagnosed, she chose a strictly allopathic approach although I tried to offer alternatives. She did tell me after beginning that regimen that she thought the treatment was worse than the cancer, but that she didn't have the energy at that point to try the things I had suggested. The allopathic course weakens the body so much that even had she tried, I don't know how she would have fared then if she had.

She died soon after that conversation, but to his credit and as a display of his integrity, my cousin quit as an oncologist and changed his specialty.

Know that allopathic medicine is now embracing 'alternative' methods because they are learning from the people who are having good results with cancer, at the same time they bash them, because what they had been doing WAS worse than doing nothing at all, and because the AMA is that powerful. They would be the only agency presiding over healthcare if they could, and they're mostly succeeding. It has everything to do with politics, money, and controlling the 'industry', and less to do with the health of the average American. Least of all the truth. Let's all be honest shall we, 'skeptics' or agenda pushing spammers? There's a difference.

I think homeopathic medicine is one big con. The American illusionist James Randi offered a million dollars to anyone able to prove that homeopathic remedies can really cure people. It makes you wonder why at least one practitioner hasn't taken up the challenge!

You will find the video interesting :

In my opinion they should be arrested for practicing medicine without a licence.

Self appointed and unregulated "healers", like homeopaths....are, to quote Douglas Adams "mostly harmless". The vast majority of their clients are people with minor or self limited or psychosomatic disorders who like the attention.

However, when they get involved with real diseases...they have crossed a line. There is not a single shred of credible evidence that homeopathy can be used to treat or "cure" cancer...and no reason to think that it would even be plausible in the absence of credible evidence. A good homeopath will at least admit they are totally out of their depth, and suggest you see a real doctor.

We are facing an epidemic of Alt Med, the consequences of which we will be paying for in the decades ahead.

==============

ONLY MATCH4U may well be a wonderful caring person...but his answers seem like they were written by a blithering idiot with no knowledge of science, anatomy or evidence, or the history of cancer care. That may just be my mistaken impression, and not meant as a slur.

Such practitioners either switch to conventional medicine when they get ill, or they die in confusion and denial.

With luck the NHS in Britain will soon wash its hands of anything to do with such quackery.

Do you realise that homeopathy is a TOTAL scam and it's absolutely impossible for it to work at all?

There's almost no alternative treatments that work. If they do work, then they become medicine, if they don't work, they end up being used by quacks to con the gullible.

The clinic in Mexico is a prime example of a situation where a quack doctor abuses lax medical laws in order to rip off those desperately looking for a cure. He doesn't operate in the US simply because he'd be thrown in prison.

Only 2-3 people survive cancer??? What? Where on god's green earth did you get that figure?

So long as we're making up statistics out of thin air here:

98% of datsun drivers are war criminals.

67% of all toddlers die before age 4.

51% of all human feet are left feet.