Subject: Re: Can You Trust Chemotherapy to Cure Your Cancer?
Author: Richard SchultzDate: 25 Jul
Ref:
In misc.health.alternative Carole <hubbca@iimetro.com.au> wrote:
: Richard, it is a well known fact that conventional science is based on use
: of pharmaceuticals.
Well known to people like you whose connection to what the rest of us
recognize as objective reality is weak. For the rest of us, simple chemistry
experiments are possible without the use of pharmaceuticals. Do you think
that the difference between hard water and soft water is a myth foisted on
an unwilling public by the pharmaceutical industry?
: Sorry, scientific research is corrupted and the research isn't worth much.
If 200 years of chemistry research is corrupted, then how do *you* explain
mass spectrometry or spectroscopy (the general subjects of my Ph.D. and
postdoctoral research, respectively)?
:> You don't know *anything* about science, by your own admission. You have
:> no way of knowing whether the science I have been taught is "corrupted"
:> or not.
: I have my own experience plus the cellsalt theory and homeopathy have been
: around for 150.
: There has been 150 years of suppression of the true causes of disease.
You mean that disease is caused by evil spirits? That explanation has
been around a lot longer than the cell salt theory.
:> Unlike you, I have actually gone into a lab and done experiments. If the
:> atomic theory is wrong, and if classical physics is not a reasonable
:> approximation for calculating the motions of bodies traveling at
:> velocities that are low relative to the speed of light, then none of
:> the results of the experiments that I did for my Ph. D. can be made to
:> make any sense. If quantum mechanics is wrong, then none of results of
:> the experiments I did for my postdoc (and in my lab at Bar-Ilan) make
:> any sense.
:> Unlike you, I know something about chemistry, and I can explain what
:> happens when something burns. I know the difference between "oxidation"
:> and "reduction" and that the oxidation states of elements as they are found
:> within the body is not necessarily the same as those of elements as they are
:> found in the remains of a body that has been burned. For example,
:> the mechanism by which hemoglobin works is fairly well understood, and
:> it depends on the iron atoms in the heme groups being in the reduced state.
:> "Methemoglobin," which contains iron in the ferric state, cannot
:> transport oxygen.
: Good for you Richard and no doubt your experiments work on a certain level.
You have no clue what I'm talking about, right?
: However, the pharmaceutical business has absolutely no interest in curing
: anybody of anything.
: They are focused on making money.
That may be (and to some extent almost certainly is) true, but that doesn't
mean that the cell salt theory, which is absurd on the face of it, is true.
:> How could they do that? How have they succeeded in suppressing, say, you?
:
: Let me count the ways the pharmaceutical industry suppress their opposition.
And yet, given how easy it would be for them to shut you up -- permanently,
if they are as omnipotent as you claim -- they haven't yet managed to be
able to suppress you and your wonderful theory.
-----
Richard Schultz schultr@mail.biu.ac.il
Department of Chemistry, Bar-Ilan University, Ramat-Gan, Israel
Opinions expressed are mine alone, and not those of Bar-Ilan University
-----
"You don't even have a clue about which clue you're missing."
