Sam Harris

Dear Rod,

Thank you, thank you, thank you. You got me addicted to this sidetracked discussion and you are better than what I would hoped for in my wildest dream. You are such a good sport and you asked for it.

Here is the long laundry list.

1. Linus Pauling not only was a genius but a solid scientist in every aspect and meaning of the word. “Scientists” bent on discrediting his papers on Vitamin C are not. (Ever since I visited the quackwatch website I use quotes the way Barrett taught me to discredit opponents) Here are some links on Vitamin C.
http://www.pnc.com.au/~cafmr/newsl/kalo.html
http://www.vitamincfoundation.org/
http://www.nutri.com/stone/
http://www.nutri.com/wn/klenner.html
If you read the recommended links (somehow I doubt it) tell me what you think about the removal from MEDLINE database all articles published in Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine. Conspiracy? I didn’t say that.

2. Regarding your credentials. Chemistry, medicine (another course in chemistry). Is that all? Then what is your basis for speaking with authority on nutrition or prevention?

3. Ionized water is not bullshit. How did you conclude that? The link between acid water and heart disease was first reported in Japan (their drinking water is mostly from the rivers and hence naturally acidic) in early seventies. Dr. Henry Schroeder reported it in the conference in Prague and soon after researchers from other countries confirmed the correlation. Schroeder speculated that it was probably the excess presence of certain heavy metals, most prominently cadmium, which was responsible for ill health effects and the acid water simply induced leaching the metals from the pipes. Ionized water, one may speculate, assures the protective presence of calcium and magnezium ions plus high pH environment. Anyway, the benefits of drinking alkaline ionized water were statistically confirmed in Japan. I use it regularly and found out that it helps me to keep weight under control and my immune system strong.

4. Why do you imply that I would not seek help of conventional medicine if I was in trouble? All I said was to recommend Ginkgo Biloba for allergies. I also lashed out at medicine for its allegiance to the big pharma. It is true, if I got cancer the radiation and chemotherapy would be the last on the list of my options but if I broke my leg I would rush to the hospital. Anyway, all this is rather abstract speculation. I am 61 now. I haven’t seen a doctor in the past 20 years (except for stiches when I cut my face rollerblading). I am in excellent health and shape (run 5k under 21 minuts). I have much more confidence in the proper nutrition and occasionally food supplements than I have in the pharma industry. I do what I preach, although I do not consider myself much of a preacher these days, not in the health area.

5. Here is the list of where Stephen Barrett is on various health issues. He is strongly for fluoridization of drinking water. He encourages mercury amalgams for filling the cavities. He condemns anybody who is anybody in the field of alternative medicine. He was fighting chiropractors until the judge warned him that they operate legally and are “off limits” now. Finally, here is one obviously false and ridiculous statement he makes. He stated that organically grown plants ar not more nutritious than the ones grown traditional way (albeit what passes as traditional today has a tradition of less than 100 years). In particular, he said that the mineral composition of the plant is mostly determined by their genetic makup and if there was not enough minerals in them they would not grow. A statement like that is a hallmark of arrogance and stupidity. Never heard of endemic diseases caused by inadequate mineral composition of soils? Isn’t it how the mineral deficiency diseases were discovered and understood? Rod, I don’t tell you to read books by people who decry the modern agriculture proposing organic farming instead. But do me a favor and read a short book by Dr. Henry Schroeder, “The trace elements and man”.
It is a good book, written in 1973 when science still meant something.

6. Regarding example of alternative cure better than placebo. Rod, forgive me that I have to speak from my memory. As I said I am not doing a lot of preaching theses days so I forgot few names. Well, if you are really interested (somehow I doubt it) here is one. Go ahead, have a ball. It will be about the cancer cure. The alternative cure I am talking about has a long history. It is a therapy of treating the cancer with pancreatic enzymes. First formulated by a German doctor/chemist? Gerz… (something like that). Rediscovered again by a dentist in Texas (forgot his name) who got sick with pancreatic cancer, very deadly as you well know. He read about the treatment in the library ... and cured himself. Was flooded by sick people and harassed by FDA. Set up a clinic in Mexico (why did he do it?). Got a very famous patient, actor Steve MacQuine. Cured him from the pancreatic cancer. Unfortunately MacQuine died during surgery to remove the tumor. However, he died cancer free from the heart complications. The tumor was dead. The dentist was grilled and ridiculed by media (I wondered why nobody ridiculed the death squad of chemo-radiation doctors who routinely kill cancer patience). Finally, the enzymatic cure is now practiced by dr. Gonzales. His method was selected as one of the alternative cures to be evaluated by the commission established during the Clinton administration. Of course Stephen Barrett was foaming from his mouth telling us how ridiculous it is to fund such a commission with taxpayers money. I don’t know how he reconciles this with his standard accusation that the alternative methods are dangerous because they are not properly studied. Anyway, the amount of money allocated to the commission was something like 2 or 3 million dollars. Tests required by FDA to approve any drug cost hundred times more. Go figure, dr. Rod.

7. Cholesterol itself doesn’t cause heart attacks. The blockage of artheris happens when lesions develop. Schroeder observed that lesions and heart disease are caused by chromium deficiency. Here is the link with sugar. Metabolizing carbohydrates requires extra amount of certain trace minerals, chromium among them. Refined sugar has 80-90% of the chromium removed. Here are some facts Schroeder provided. Internal organs of heart attack victims show drastic deficiency of chromium, most of them had so low levels of chromium that rendered them undetectable. On the other hand, the victims of car accidents had normal levels of chromium. Schroeder also was interested in comparing the level of trace minerals in people who were born in the US versus those who recently immigrated. He found stark differences. If I was you I would be extremely alarmed and run to the organic food store.

8. Sugar causes much more harm than weight gain. Rod, do you live on another planet? The obesity is a national crisis and direct cause of many ugly diseases and you said “only weight loss”? Shoud I understand that you actually don’t mind people getting obese so you can make money in your profession (and retire early and join Stephen Barrett)? Have you seen the movie “Supersize me”? If not, go to the Blockbuster and rent it now.

Rod, I threw a lot of accusations at the pharma and medicine but don’t tell me that I didn’t support them with facts. Now, before you answer my post think about returning the favor. If you choose to accuse me of anything let it be based on what I actually posted, and not what you fantasize a proponent of some balance in medicine might be thinking. Yeah, right, I forgot. You only read scientific papers published in distuinguished propaganda outlets of the big pharma. New England Journal of Medicine, regularly attacking vitamins is probably your favorite.

Warmest Regards,

Thomas Orr

Rod,

given the amount of insults we throw at each other I fear this debate will not last long. Therefore I am rushing to add what escaped my mind so far while I have a chance.

1. Big pharma falsifying science. Until early 20th century the standards in chemistry were very specific about distinguishing between the compunds of the very same molecular composition but different in their geometry (orientation if you will). As you know even the physical properties may be different. The difference is even more pronounced with the oganic compounds playing vital roles in our bodies. Take alpha-tocopherol for instance. d-alpha tocopherol is what we (and the body) know as vitamin E while l-alpha-tocopherol is something foreign to the body. The body doesn’t recognize it and doesn’t utilize it. Calling the mix a.k.a dl-alpha-tocopherol vitamin E as pharma does would be illegal where higher standards in chemistry where the norm. The eufemism for the fraud big pharma engages in in the name of profits (synthetic vitamins are so much cheaper to make and profits greater) is that synthetic vitamin E is only half as potent than natural one. But wait, what about the untested substance l-alpha tocopherol that comprises half of the synthetic vitamin E? You are very concerned about using untested Ginkgo Biloba, right? Do you have the same concerns regarding untested l-alpha-tocopherol? I bet not because New England Journal of Medicine doesn’t have a problem either. There are legitimate cases when “unlegitimate” variety of organic compounds are used. I know about one example when the “unlegitimate” variety was the solution because it could reach the targeted organ before being metabolized (and altered) by the body. The trick was that it wasn’t metabolized at all. And this is precisely what should make you worry. With other vitamins/hormones it can be even worse if their geometry contains more than one point of symmetry. The synthetic version can have only a quater, or eight part, of potency that the natural one has and proportionally more of untested, dangerous junk. But I guess, the concept of orthomolecular medicine coined by Linus Pauling is “unscientific” and you reject any bullshit of sort, right? What Linus Pauling proposes that in medical treatment mostly those substances that naturally occur in the body should be used is a slap in the face of the modern medicine, isn’t it? Rod, isn’t it strange that the New England Journal of Medicine runs a non-stop battle against everything in the vitamin world that can be (and is used) as therapy? High doses of vitamins proposed for helping autistic children, melatonin, DHEA, vitamin C - all this was and is a subject of attack. Vitamins are safe and the public knows it. Few years ago I started having problems with my nails. They become brittle. I prescribed myself biotin as a remedy, fount the dose that works the best for me and am very happy ever since. I have more confidence in my diagnosis, prescription and execution of the treatment than whatever you would advise me involving chemical drugs. With all due respect I consider your degree in chemistry as a handicap and not an asset when my body is concerned.

2. The person’s name I forgot when writing my previous post is Gerson, Max Gerson. Very fine chemist. http://www.gerson.org/
I am still searching in my mind for the name of the dentist from Texas.

3. Interesting alternative treatment of cancer is that done by Dr. Burzynski. FDA was trying to put him out of business suing him in court several times. Curiously enough the last trial, which ended in total victory for Burzynski caused such an uproar among jurors (one of them went to Washington to complain before Congress about the waist of taxpayers money and lack of any merit in the governement’s case) as to make it to the media. FDA tried very hard but couldn’t find a sigle patient willing to complain about the treatment received in Burzynski’s clinic (actually, it was the treatment for children). Don’t you find it strange how impotent, by contrast, is FDA when censoring pharma giants? At least that was the explanation given to the public at the Vioxx trial (poor toothless FDA overhelmed with work). Here is another website listing 300+ alternative cancer cures.
http://www.cancertutor.com/

4. I see that your preferred method of debating is to invoke authorities. You know, this method was very popular in Medieval Ages. It is called scholastic. Unfortunately, it didn’t get us far in science. The famous embarassment was to repeat after Aristotle how many teeth a horse has. It took a few centuries before somebody actually counted the horse’s teeth and found out that Aristotle made an error. Anyway, let’s play the our authorities against each other. Here is my list of Nobel prize winners (in relevant fields, they are not poets).
* “Everyone should know that the ‘war on cancer’ is largely a fraud.”
Two Time Nobel Prize Winner Linus Pauling, author of several books on Vitamin C and cancer

* Dr. James Watson won a Nobel Prize for determining the shape of DNA. During the 1970’s, he served two years on the National Cancer Advisory Board. In 1975, he was asked about the National Cancer Program. He declared, “It’s a bunch of shit.”
Nobel Prize Winner James Watson
See: http://www.altcancer.com/lysis.htm

Now some regular folks, medical doctors nevertheless

* “To the cancer establishment, a cancer patient is a profit center. The actual clinical and scientific evidence does not support the claims of the cancer industry. Conventional cancer treatments are in place as the law of the land because they pay, not heal, the best. Decades of the politics-of-cancer-as-usual have kept you from knowing this, and will continue to do so unless you wake up to their reality.”
John Diamond, M.D. & Lee Cowden, M.D.

*“Chemotherapy is an incredibly lucrative business for doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies…..The medical establishment wants everyone to follow the same exact protocol. They don’t want to see the chemotherapy industry go under, and that’s the number one obstacle to any progress in oncology.”
Dr Warner, M.D.

* “You wouldn’t believe how many FDA officials or relatives or acquaintances of FDA officials come to see me as patients in Hanover. You wouldn’t believe this, or directors of the AMA, or ACA, or the presidents of orthodox cancer institutes. That’s the fact.”
Hans Nieper M.D. (1928-1998) (Dr. Nieper used a cesium chloride protocol in Hanover, Germany)

* And there are many, many more such quotes. See:
http://www.whale.to/cancer/quotes.html
http://www.whale.to/m/quotes6.html
http://theanswertocancer.com/the_real_war.htm

5. One thing very shocking to me is the simplistic reasoning presented to the public by medical and nutritional “experts”. As a mathematician I am used to much higher standards of logic. Example. Cholesterol is the main culprit behind atherosclerosis. It is found in the blocked areas of artheries. Ergo, avoid foods high in cholesterol. One who is at least a little familiar with how the marvelous machine called human body works must reject such simplistic reasoning. This is not what I would understand as a proof or even plausible explanation. And of course a little digging shows the obvious inadequacy of the cholesterol theory. High in cholesterol content foods (essentially all animal food based diet) were a norm among primitive living people. Yet the heart disease was very rare among them. Cholesterol in blood is not the same cholesterol we get in food. The blood cholesterol is manufactured in our livers. What triggers abnormally high cholesterol levels? Maybe some other components, or the lack of them, in our diet? Schroeder thinks that in many cases it is chromium deficiency. Whatever it is some basic question must be asked and answered for goodness sake, Rod. There are some other questions as well. Cholesterol is not necessarily an evil thing. It is needed. We would die sooner without cholesterol than because of too much of it. Maybe elevated levels of cholesterols are the body’s response to something? (Filling lesions is the obvious hipotesis). Maybe fighting high cholesterol levels is as stupid as fighting high fever, which is a natural (and beneficial) response of the body attacked by virusus or bacterias. Same with prostate and elevated PSA reading. Some people think that elevated PSA is actually a good thing indicating that the body tries to confront the situation. Rod, I am not suggesting here any cures, or solutions. I am just pissed off that either - medical science employs idiots not skilled in logical thinking, or is addressing the public like if we were bunch of idiots, or is playing some politics and not caring very much about the actual research. Make your pick.

6. As a mathematician I know how the scientific discovery process works. You observe. Experiment. Use your intuition and gut feelings to see some light behind the fog. Formulate a hypothesis. Try to verify it. Finally, when you convinced yourself you start the routine process of putting everything into formal language of mathematics and publish. Trying to do things in reverse order would be a big fiasco. From what you (and other “scientifically” inclined defenders of the God of medicine) write I can conclude that you have no clue about the scientific process. Your “double blind study” norm is not the pinnacle od scientific method. It is the least important final formal finish to the discovery carrying some importance. Well, for most of what is reported in medical journals regarding drugs I see no beef so to speak. In the test results I only see a proof that drugs don’t address the underlying issue (curing disease) at all. The victory is announced when 10% improvement rate is shown. But what does it mean exactly? It means that the medicine is trying to fix the machine the Russian way (hit the radio with the hammer, it might work). The success rate of a drug should be 99%, anything else is a fraud. The double blind test requirement is a convenient way to go around the issue. You know, statistics is very easy to use as a tool to manipulate the reality. On the other hand, when something works consistently for me (like Ginkgo Biloba) I don’t care about what you published and what you not published in the New England Journal of Medicine. Especially, when the editorial serves as the jury, the court and the executioner. If I submit a paper with the results they don’t like here is what happens. They refuse to publish it. They accuse me of not being published. This is exactly what Linus Pauling experienced.

7. Placebo effect. Another good one. When all you have is a hammer and Russian mentality (see the paragraph above) you worry so much about what the test shows that you have to discard the “placebo” effect. Tell me what the placebo is because I have heard confusing explanantions. Is it that someone can get cured because he/she convinced him/herself about it - that would be the yoga approach but I doubt if you are ready to endorse yoga. Or is it that healing sometimes (most of the time) happens spontaneously, randomly, regardless or in spite of chemical poisons medicine uses?

8. Finally, I suggest we stop fighting because the subject becomes irrelevant. Some twenty years from now the oil reserves will be depleted and the drug industry, big pharma, and doctors trained in prescribing drugs will be no more. Join me in doing something practical like gardening (organic of course, remeber, no chemical fertilizers either).

9. You said that I am not capable of changing my mind. What should I change my mind about exactly? What are my mistaken beliefs? Did I mention anything? I hope that you don’t mean my using the ionized water because you didn’t give me any arguments against my misguided practice? Is “bullshit” what you mean by argument?

Warmest Regards,

Thomas Orr

Hi homunculus,

don’t worry. I find your reply very reasonable and I agree with you 100%. I think Rod is also a reasonable guy but he exploded when I mentioned Ginkgo Biloba. I acknowledge his expertise but I didn’t like that he wanted to take Ginkgo Biloba away from me. I definitely exaggerated with the tone of the debate but I hope we are both doing it for fun.

Regards,

Thomas Orr

Thomas,

Don’t worry, I don’t mind spending some time on this stuff. I’ll keep trying to give you answers….it’s just that it takes a while since I’m the only one insisting on evidence, while all I get in return are more claims and opinions stated as fact and some really whacky websites. You’re starting to scare me…..at first it was just an herb, then it appears you bought into reflexology and magnets….now you’re giving me websites that tell people to treat their own cancers with oleander soup. I’ve been reading for hours. It’s terrifying what desperate people could get into if they go for all your conspiracy theories. I really liked the one where the guy claimed he had completely solved the question of human evolution…it was driven by our inability to make vitamin C. This might be one reason the Orthomolecular stuff was dropped from serious med literature.

Please don’t load me up with any more of this stuff before I figure out where the heck to start. But in the meantime you might google something on cholesterol metabolism….and find out how it really works. I don’t know if I can find you something that proves that when you mix “ionized” water and stomach acid, you get water and stomach acid. If that helps you keep the weight off, who am I to argue?

Til tomorrow, Rod

Rod,

I will be calm this time and try to provide simple answers.

1. I don’t go around promoting reflexology. Some 20 years ago I had a painful condition of prostate. One evening, just for curiosity, I tried to massage my feet as explained in a short book on reflexology. The pain disappeared and the massage worked consistently ever since. Now, if you tell me that taking Tylenol for the problem is scientific and massaging the feet as described in the reflexology brochure is a sign of lunacy I think you are an idiot. By the way I didn’t rely on reflexology to address the underlying problem. I did some research on herbal extracts and was happy to find some that seemed worth trying. Zink supplements and pumpkin seeds didn’t work but few years later the saw palmetto extracts with array of additional herbal ingredients (stinging nettle) appeared on the market. They proved to be just what I needed. By the way, at that time I did visit the (conventionally trained) doctor. He performed the famous digital examination and told me not to worry meaning he didn’t know how he could help. Forgive me if I am missing something, perhaps some bigger picture, but I fail to understand how this should make me an enemy of alternative medicine as you and the guys you quote seem to imply. I guess I was lucky that I developed my interest in herbal supplements at the time when modern scientific methods of manufacturing them were introduced. Specific active ingredients in the plants have been identified and the potency standard established. The treatments were thoroughly evaluated in clinical trials in Europe and more specifically, in Germany. American medicine not only missed the revolution but started showing growing hostility toward new treatments. Initially herbal treatments were ridiculed as worthless. Recently you guys reversed yourself and started vilifying the same worthless treatments as dangerous. At least be consistent, please.

2. Which brings us to another point. Medicine doesn’t have much credibility these days for another reason. The doctors have been caught lying. By their own admission: “We made mistake telling young people that steroids didn’t work. But me meant well.” Well Rod, lie is a lie.

3. Here is the list of real dangers thanks to modern chemistry. Transfatty acids. Yes, you guys hailed them some time ago as better for the heart than butter. Estrogen mimicking compounds found in almost all plastics. Some fear that in twenty years all males will be infertile.

4. The name of the dentist from Texas is Kelley, Dr. William Donald Kelley. And here is the recent report on the efficacy of the Gerson/Kelley/Gonzales method (read below). Doesn’t it bother you at all that doctors were harassed, patients denied treatment, FDA raided doctors offices and sent people to jail in the name of fighting the pancreatic enzyme superstition? Read Kelley’s story (a lot is available on the internet). I am not fabricating any stories here. Go to the quackwatch website and see what Stephen Barrett has to say about Kelly, Gonzales and Gerson. Not only he (Barrett) endorses the Nazi style persecution of alternative medicine but he is very proud to have personally contributed to it.

A study published in the journal Pancreas suggests the effectiveness of pancreatic enzymes against cancer in mice. This form of nutritional cancer therapy has been used by Nicholas Gonzalez, M.D. in his medical practice in New York City. Gonzalez is one of the authors of the study, “Pancreatic Enzyme Extract Improves Survival in Murine Pancreatic Cancer” (Pancreas. 2004 May;28(4):401-12).

The study found that mice treated with pancreatic enzymes survived significantly longer than the control group. Tumors growth in the enzyme-treated group was significantly slowed compared to the control group.

In addition, while all mice in the control group showed the conditions steatorrhea, high glucose in the urine, high levels of bilirubin, and ketones in the urine at the early stages of tumor growth, only a few in the treated group showed some of these abnormalities at the final stage.

5. I didn’t try the magnet therapy personally. My fault. Shouldn’t mention it.

Warmest Regards,

Thomas Orr

Thomas,

In general, we need to get a few things clear. We both are in favor of medical therapies that are useful, right? Better yet, useful and safe. OK? We have conventional and alternative methods to choose from. Conventional theory looks at disease as a distubance of normal function, which may be genetic, immunologic, infectious, environmental, nutitional, simple wear and tear or effects of aging, and psychiatric, or even a combination of these. We know that many things affect each of these etiologies. For example a genetic defect may cause a nutritional disease that affects our psychiatric state. We know that “cancer” is not one disease, but often a combination of genetic mutation or predisposition in combination with immunologic or environmental problems. The possibilities are endless. This brings me to one point….the constant harping by conspiracy hacks that ” big pharma doesn’t want to cure disease” is pure baloney. You would think it’s their greed that caused all disease in the first place. Other than curing a disease by eliminating it’s one and only cause…..say, vitamin D deficiency, or athletes foot fungus, or a bad gallbladder….there are no cures! You keep harping about prevention….there is no universal capsule that will prevent a thousand different types of cancer, and there never will be. The causes are too multifactorial. Let’s face it, your genes largely determine how healthy you are and how long you live, as long as you don’t do something self destructive.

The inherent problem with many alternative treatments is that some possibly well intended but deluded practioner thinks he has found the panacea for all disease that everyone else just can’t see. Suddenly there’s a cure for cancer AND HIV. No amount of pseudoscientific talk can make this seem rational to most of us, but the desperate are easy victims. It will take evidence of efficacy before we accept it, not claims of persecution and anecdotal cures. Otherwise it is simply faith healing, which is against my religion :wink: I checked out your sites on cancer cures…you’re welcome to them. Ozone, DMSO, Electro treatments, oleander soup….all claiming to cure all kinds of cancer. The list went on and on and it’s all useless. Your guy Kelly was one helluva quack. He claimed he cured Steve McQueen of pancreatic cancer and then the actor was murdered by agents of big pharma the day after surgery to remove the dead tumor. Legitimate reports said he died of a coronary after surgery to remove a five pound abdominal metastasis of a huge lung mesothelioma (caused by asbestos exposure). He had been loaded up with Laetrile as well as Kelly’s regimen of beef pancreas, diet, and coffee enemas. Kelly claimed he cured his own pancreatic cancer, but get this, he never had a proven diagnosis; he could have had anything that would give abdominal pain and bloating… pancreatitis or a cyst. Who knows? If you got cancer, try this.

Nicholas Gonzalez Treatment for Cancer:
Gland Extracts, Coffee Enemas,
Vitamin Megadoses, and Diets
Saul Green, Ph.D.
Nicholas Gonzalez, MD, has developed a treatment for cancer that is a duplication of one devised by William Donald Kelley, a dentist from Grapevine, Texas [1,2]. Gonzalez heard about Kelley’s methods from a friend, and during his second year in medical school, he visited Kelley in Texas [3]. Gonzalez learned the details of Kelley’s cancer treatments by reading patients’ charts in which were recorded diagnoses, treatment regimens, and various anecdotes. Gonzalez continued his observations intermittently for five more years, wrote up his findings, but did not publish them.

The Kelley Treatment
The Kelley treatment, as outlined in his Newsletter on Cancer Remedies [4], is based on a belief in a relationship between diet and “detoxification” with coffee enemas as outlined by Max Gerson, MD [5,6]. According to Kelley, all cancers are one disease caused by a deficiency of protein digestive enzymes, which allows cancer cells to grow. Kelley explained that because this cause of cancer is so clear and simple, it is ignored by the medical establishment [7]. He offered this explanation:

The direct cause of cancer according to our research, is the changing of an ectopic germ cell into an ectopic trophoblast cell. An excess of female hormones brings about this change. Both men and women have sex hormones and when the delicate male-female sex hormone balance is upset, a cancer starts. Thus cancer is the growth of normal tissue, i.e. basic germ cells, in the wrong place. Cancer progresses because there is lack of cancer-digesting enzymes in the body. The solution is to get pancreatic enzymes to the place where cancer is growing, in a concentration high enough to stop growth, but not so high as to cause too rapid production of “toxins” from tumor breakdown.

This theory is also similar to that of Scottish anatomist, John Beard, as recorded in The Enzyme Treatment of Cancer and Its Scientific Basis (London: Chatto and Windus, 1911). It was also followed by Ernst Krebs Jr., developer of Laetrile.

To diagnose and monitor the effectiveness of his treatment, Kelley invented the “Kelley Malignancy Index,” “the most accurate and extensive cancer detection system ever developed.” The test is a questionnaire filled out by the patient. When completed, it is supposed to identify the presence and location of cancer, the cancer activity (growth), and to indicate the treatment based on the patient’s “metabolic classification as a sympathetic dominant, a parasympathetic dominant, or a balanced metabolizer.”

Kelley warned that while halting the growth of cancer is relatively simple, only those who followed his treatment program for the rest of their lives would benefit because the body must be continuously cleared of toxins. Patients were warned to continue the treatment until their Kelley Malignancy Index test scores dropped to zero “K-units” and to repeat the test every six months [1,9,10]

The Kelley treatment was divided into five parts:

1. Nutritional therapy: Tablets and capsules of coenzymes, megavitamins, minerals, high-dose vitamin C, bioflavonoids, rutin, a compound of “organic” and trace minerals, raw almonds, an amino acid-lipoid compound, and a formulation of concentrated beef pancreatic enzymes.

2. Detoxification: Since the proposed cause of death from cancer was from toxins in waste products given off by tumor tissue, they must be eliminated by laxative purging with epsom salts, fasts, and enemas with coffee, fermented milk, or lemon juice. Successful detoxification was said to take three weeks to twelve months.

3. Diet: Kelley initially proposed a strict vegetarian diet, but later advocated that diet must be tailored to each patient’s need. He developed ten basic diets with 95 variations. These ranged from pure vegetarian to exclusively meat. The diets forbade processed foods, pesticide residues, milk, soy beans, peanuts, food concentrates, white sugar, and white rice. It allowed almonds, low protein grains and nuts, yogurt, “organic” raw vegetable and fruit juices, salads, and whole grain cereals.

4. Neurological stimulation: Osteopathic, chiropractic, physiotherapeutic manipulation, or manual “reshaping” of the skull (mandibular manipulation).

5. Spiritual: Kelley urged patients to pray and seek the truth through the word of God in the Bible [10].

At the end of his unpublished report on the Kelley treatment, Gonzalez concluded, “A study such as mine cannot, of course, prove conclusively that Kelley’s treatment cures cancer, since the patients that were evaluated were not treated under controlled conditions. Nevertheless, significant number of patients with appropriately diagnosed terminal cancer enjoyed impressive regressions of the disease while on the Kelley regimen. This finding alone warrants a full, fair, and unbiased investigation of Kelley’s methods.” [11]

Obviously, Gonzalez at the time was aware of the sort of evidence needed to make Kelley’s claims credible.

The Gonzalez Treatment
Gonzalez’s cancer treatment resembles Kelley’s with some exceptions. Gonzalez dispensed with the neurological and spiritual components. He uses hair analysis instead of a questionnaire to monitor progress. As with Kelley, Gonzalez insists that a cancer can be eliminated “by the patient’s own body” if the liver, intestines, kidneys, lungs, and blood are detoxified and the body’s acid/alkaline balance as well as its mineral and enzyme equilibria are brought into balance. To accomplish this, Gonzalez treats with coffee enemas and supplements of megavitamins, trace minerals, glandular extracts, and diet [12].

Remember, that it cures ALL cancers. And now I’ve put it out there so no one has to go to Mexico.

Now….it appears that an MD degree doesn’t meet your requirements for an opinion on your issues. (It encompasses a little more than chemistry by the way.) Be that as it may, I ask you to gather up all the reasoning you can muster and everything you know about the body…..and tell me again that massaging your feet could cure internal disease as reflexologist claim, or do anything besides relaxing you for the moment. Are you really willing to give them any credence? Does it make sense to you that adjusting your neck will cure your allergies as some chiropractors claim? 

Thomas, I’m glad you saw a doctor for your prostate problem. You said you waited a couple of years after symptoms started, so I’m also glad it didn’t turn out to be the Big C. You sound like a healthy, stoic kind of guy, much like me, but just don’t let that be a stubbornness that makes you regret it latter. (Many stories there if you’re interested). BTW I had a few guys on saw palmetto too. Don’t know why your doc said he couldn’t do anything…there are a couple of good meds for prostate enlargement.

Did pick up a few tidbits on vitamin C that I didn’t know while doing a Medline search…helps post-op bleeding, may as an antioxident help with coronary disease and wound healing, but also increased mortality in post-menapausal diabetic women. A review of recent studies found no evidence for Pauling’s claims of cold or flu prevention, though there was a 8 percent reduction in duration of symptoms. Great.

Let’s get over this “ionized” water thing….water is acidic, neutral or alkaline, period. Drinking slightly acidic or basic solutions is harmless as your body will neutralize them to maintain a fairly even pH around 7.4 .....get to far away from this and you die. Water can become acidic or alkaline depending on what is dissolved in it….there’s your problem. Your study mentioned cadmium…yeh, that’s bad, along with lead and a bunch of other metals and organics. Then your guys want to put chromium back in the water, right. Chromium’s one of those cure alls for heart disease and diabetics, I’ve heard. But they don’t want flouride in the water….they’d rather see bad teeth again. You like your water with calcium and magnesium to maintain your weight….well, Florida’s water has got’em and have you seen some of the heffers down here. They need more water, huh?

2. Which brings us to another point. Medicine doesn’t have much credibility these days for another reason. The doctors have been caught lying. By their own admission: “We made mistake telling young people that steroids didn’t work. But me meant well.” Well Rod, lie is a lie.

Thomas, where do you get this stuff. Who the hell is “we”?

Guys, I have to go for the evening. We’ll cover more later.

Rod

[quote author=“Rod”]Noggin,

If you go running off to try herbal cures for allergies, I will personally smack you. If Dr. Orr can give us something besides the usual Peruvian Jungle Medical Journal article to back up any claims, we’ll listen. As usual, look before leaping, or you’ll end up chasing that Amway again.  A quote out of WebMD:

For example, Pitetti says, “ginkgo biloba probably should never be used in a kid. It can prevent blood from normally clotting. We know it has that side effect in adults, but it can be worse in kids.”

I’ve seen a serious allergic reaction to ginkgo biloba itself.

Stay safe,
Dr. Rod

Rod!

Hey, I missed this post of yours.  I forgot I even was a part of it.  I wasn’t ignoring you.  HOWEVER!  You are so dead ON about Amway with the Gingko Biloba deal-ee-whop.  My 18 month or so stint as a die hard Ambot included a job as an Amway carnival barker who rabidly attempted to molest..er… convert all my family and friends to take an ungodly and freakishly absurd amount of pills each day so I could get rich or die tryin’.  Gingko Biloba was all the rage!  I swear as an amway dude I took probably 30 herbal pills each day and pissed a Chernobyl-esque toxic looking orangey yellow urine.

Amway’s leading revenue is herbal pills.  They have their very own ten thousand acre ranch where they “grow their own”.

I have been there, done that with the herbal essence.  It is bunk.  Peer review, double blind scientifically objective testing shows little to no benefit of usage of 95% of all herbs over a normal healthy diet that incorporates moderate excersize.  But since humans are ever questing after that magic cure all pill… the suckers will line up ‘til the cows come home to buy it.

Noggin

Rod,

I sure welcome to concilatory tone of your post. I was ready to call for a truce anyway.

Yes, one thing that gets on my nerves with the alternative camp is that they have a habit of throwing in God as one of the main ingredients.

Who is the “we”? I was quoting from my memory as (unfortunately) I don’t have a habit of keeping notes. Well, there was this discussion on TV about steroids abuse problem among athletes in high schools. I think they got a doctor in the discussion panel who said “we” referring I guess to the medical authorities.

Noggin,

I agree with you about Amway. One thing especially despicable is how they treat their regular “army” of people who never make a buck. They brainwash them almost religion style into making more effort, motivating themselves. They also lie big time about their own enterprise. Like “we are able to offer excellent price by eliminating the middleman”. Yeah, right. Detecting an Amway salesman is almost as easy as detecting a Christian on his mission to convert the world. Joining the Amway enterprise is the sure way to lose friends, antagonize family and make a big fool of yourself. They are like a cult. However, they didn’t invent herbal supplements. They are opportunists who joined the health supplements quite late in the game. So, blaming Ginkgo Biloba for the sins of Amway is not quite logical. You wouldn’t blame laundry detergents just because Amway sells them, would you?

Regards,

Thomas Orr

Rod,

After more caruful reading of your post I noticed two points worth answering.

1. I never endorsed chiropractors. I don’t claim that they are all quacks but I have seen a few that definitely are. Besides, I don’t have a personal need for chiropractor services. So on the subject of chiropractors there is silence on my part. OK?

2. Reflexology is more than simple relaxation. It is very easy (and recommended) to stimulate the kidneys while you are working on some other problems. The results are easy to see when you urinate disposing of a lot of dark and ugly looking stuff. Never happened to me without working on kidney points. Same with the liver but since I don’t know how to observe the activity of the liver I will keep silent on this subject. By the way, you shouldn’t be surprised that reflexology works. It is similar to accupuncture, which has been accepted, even if reluctantly, by medical establishment.

Regards,

Thomas Orr

Rod,

Even as my level of hostility went down I still need to correct some assumptions you make. Nobody I quoted wanted to put chromium in water. You should know something more about the issue. Dr. Schroeder as a scientist (he actually was a trained doctor) was interested and concerned about the effects of industrial pollution, and specifically heavy metals, on the lifespan, susceptibility to develop tumors, growth, and health in general of human beings. He did tested chromium and didn’t find anything especially alarming or miraculously beneficial. Besides, he knew that chromium delivered as inorganic salts had a very poor absorption rate, below 1%. On the other hand he was very concerned about industrial process of refining sugar and flour, which stripped the cane sugar, or the grains of most of their mineral content necessary to properly metabolize carbohydrates in the human body. He found confirmation of the link between chromium deficiency and heart disease by performing many, many autopsis, not only on experimental rats and mice but also on dead humans. He did make some very interesting studies and comparisons. For instance, he compared the mineral content (separately for each mineral including chromium, manganese, magnezium, copper,...) of different internal organs between those who died of heart attack versus those who died in accidents. He compared immigrants versus people born in the US. He was also comparing different age groups and found out that an average American child starts “running out” of minerals at the age of 12.

While raising alarm that we as a nation are developing chromium deficiencies as the result of our diet he also pointed out that while most of our internal organs show chromium deficiency, our lungs have a very high chromium content apparently from the industrial pollution. Schroeder would never recommend anything foolish like adding chromium, or some other chemical component to our drinking water. To know him better just recall that he is the guy who persuaded our government to eliminate lead from the environment (gasoline, paint); on the other hand he was a lonely voice of reason in the histeria of arsenic in the pressure treated wood. His opinion was that the arsenic compounds used in the wood treatment pose minimal danger (they are very stable and don’t leach) while the benefits in saving trees are enormous.

Another issue I want to raise is prevention. I don’t know how you see yourself (or medical profession) in relation to the issue of prevention. I only hope that your position is consistent meaning that either you think that prevention is the responsibility of medicine, or not. Don’t be like the banking industry. First they complain how much it costs them to maintain the accounts of regular citizens - therefore all the fees they charge are a small compensation for the charity work they do - and then when credit unions step in they cry foul and complain about unfair competition.

I will understand either position you take. My own opinion is that prevention is the job for (socially responsible) government and not for any interest group, medical association being one of them. Maybe prevention is as simple as our best effort to provide honest, unbiased opinion based on available research. I laid out a plan of how to accomplish that but it would require many political changes.

Prevention is closely related to the topic of life extension. What I don’t like is the fact that currently the medical establishment is attacking whoever is working in this field. I have heard statements that life extension is not possible and everybody trying to make money in this area is a quack. I am not sure if Stephen Barrett aimed his guns on the folks from the life extension movement but at this time I don’t care and I am not motivated enough to go to his website and find out.

Life extension, however, brings us to the subject of what is and what is not science. As I said in my earlier post the claims that science in medicine is exclusively something that is verified in a double blind study make me laugh. Here is one example that has nothing to do with the double blind study but yet is a good science with possibly great impact on our desire to live longer and healthier. I am talking about the guy whose name is Kurzweil. You can find him on the internet, you may choose to buy one of his book or you may not. Let me give you a quick overview. Kurzweil made a prediction that in about 20 years science will offer immortality to humans. It will happen with the progress of nanotechnology. He is envisioning army of tiny robots circulating inside our body and fixing everything that brakes, genes, cellular membranes, you name it. Everything that our body fixes now only getting less efficient in doing this with age will be 100% fixed with nanotechnology. Now, to live his dream of becoming immortal Kurzweil has one problem, he must live long enough to have this new technology available. And here is where the science come in. I was impressed with Kurzweil approach to prolong his life. Well, certain things are not for me like never tailgating, wearing seatbelts and not exceeding the speed limit (just kidding). Here is the beef. He started with listing major causes of death, heart disease, cancer, obesity and changes in metabolism leading to diabetes. The next step was to educate himself by reading all literature available, conventional and alternative medicine alike. Then he proceeded to develop a course of action in doing something to prevent each of the major health risks (listed above) to get him. Well, at this stage he needed an overall philosophy to guide him and he enlisted some alternative practitioner. Some people are turned off at this point but I hope you will continue reading. And now comes the scientific step. He decided to test and fine tune whatever he does as prevention. He selected several tests/indicators of how his body is aging. Here are some of them. Blood sugar content, efficiency of oxygen utilization, body fat content. Whatever you think you cannot discard the results, which after all are based on objective and accepted methods of testing. Kurzweil reports that when he was 40 his biological age (an average of test/indicators) was 38. Now, at 56 his biological age is 40. In 16 years I only aged 2 years and I am trying to slow the aging process even further, says Kurzweil.

Unfortunately, it takes money (a lot of money) to follow Kurzweil’s path. He takes over 100 supplements every day. Every week he spends a day in a clinic undergoing a battery of tests and treatment including MRI and IV session.

Regards,

Thomas Orr

Thomas,

I caught your new religion on your Freedom Gates site on another thread and after that I’m wondering if you can truly be reasoned with at all. As a physician, I must say your ramblings have a spooky quality to them, but no matter for our purposes here. Your contradictory statements about christianity are striking but what struck me as most illogical is how you went on about christians not taking science seriously, when in this thread you have thrown science out the window to embrace really crackpot ideas or embraced totally outlandish claims of people who may have been on to something but then turned nonsensical.

Pick one of your previous assertions and we’ll go over it if you like…..one at a time.

I don’t even think you know when you are repeating something ridiculous, and there are many examples. For instance, you complained that refined sugar has 90 percent of the chromium removed. Do you not realize that refined sugar should be a pure organic compound and should have NO chromium in it, which I suspect is the actual case.

You haven’t really said what you think about Kelly’s cancer cure, how about it? I not going to keep throwing science at you if it gets no real response other than another list of assertions.

Rod

Rod,

You delighted me and disappointed at the same time. Yeah, my website is not for the faint hearted. Nevertheless, your accusations bear no merit.

and after that I’m wondering if you can truly be reasoned with at all

I only shocked you so how this imply that I cannot be reasoned with? Here is my little secret. I want to right a book and I want to sell it. In addition to my message, which is essentially political, I need to have a good story. Dead serious people like yourself don’t sell well. Well, I gave you the secret key to interpret Thomass Orr, the prophet.

As a physician, I must say your ramblings have a spooky quality to them, but no matter for our purposes here

I am not sure if I understand you correctly. Do you mean the ramblings of Thomas Orr, the prophet? I didn’t ask you to bring them to our discussion. I listed my website in the totally unrelated thread. But anyway, what ramblings? I consider myself logical and consistent and I challenge you to find anything of merit in “the ramblings” that you really disagree with.

Your contradictory statements about christianity are striking

Well Rod, sometimes I am amazed with myself of being able to say anything positive about Christians but on the other hand I have great respect for the works of Wendell Berry whose understanding of Christianity is so admirable. I also used to admire Jim Carter. Unfortunately his latest change of heart on abortion issues was very disappointing. I attribute it to his old age when many people yield to the fear of dying and lose the rational ground on which they bravely stood before. Anyway, isn’t it amazing that people of faith are frequently so frightened with the prospect of death? On average atheists face death with more stoicism.

Anyway, this is my short but complete summary of my prophecies.

1. Religions must fit into society and obey social norms required of public officials if they have ambitions to participate in public life.
2. All traditional values preached by organized religions are moral and ethical trash.
3. Science must be respected.
4. Human rights, freedom and dignity must be respected.
5. Religion can contribute to social progress but they must reject all ambitions to control.

So, what is the specific issue on this list you disagree with?

In addition my interpretation of the Bible is intellectually intriguing no less than the The DaVinci plot. I need an editor to help me overcome my struggle with the English language but unfortunately you are so dead and inapropriately serious you don’t qualify for the job.

Before I continue with the issues you challenged me to discuss I want to mention something. Although I personally haven’t seek an advice of doctor I had experience with doctors because my wife and my child were in the need of treatment. Maybe it will surprise you (it shouldn’t) knowing that my general opinion of doctors in New Jersey is quite favorable. They are not religious and most of them are probably atheists. Many of them are open minded when it comes to issues of alternative treatment. I also had a perception that most of them are true professionals and they want to do the best for the patient.

Ok, now back to discussion. My opinion about Kelley’s treatment? Here it is. I think that the whole story is a shame on the medical establishment, FDA and the FDA’s real bosses from the big pharma.
Here is the proof.
It all started with Max Gerson, a fine scientist whose idea of the role of pancreatic enzymes to treat cancer was perfectly within the realm of science. Kellye deserves a lot of credit. He educated himself in the details of Gerson’s therapy. He never denied what the source of his method was. He tried the method on himself before helping others. He also needs to be credited with having extensive and orderly records describing the patients, the treamtment they received and the results. If it wasn’t for those meticulously collected records Dr. Gonzales would never developed interest in investigating the Kellye/Gerson method. Finally, Gonzales proved in ways accepted by medical standards that there is a merit to the Gerson/Kellye/Gonzales method.

Now Rod, knowing all this and insinuating that Kellye was a misguided albeit well meaning amateur and deserved all the persecution he faced from FDA and medical establishment is the sign of a mind that cannot be reasoned with (to return the favor).

I suggest that we eliminate all the distracting subjects and concentrate on one thing. Is there a conspiracy going on and is the big pharma guilty of it? I am not a coward and I accept the challenge. I am willing to prove to you that indeed we deal with a conspiracy. Let me know if you are interested in continuing from this point.

Warmest regards,

Thomas Orr

Thomas,

Your “prophesies”:

1. Religions must fit into society and obey social norms required of public officials if they have ambitions to participate in public life.
2. All traditional values preached by organized religions are moral and ethical trash.
3. Science must be respected.
4. Human rights, freedom and dignity must be respected.
5. Religion can contribute to social progress but they must reject all ambitions to control.

Let’s examine number 3. You’ve also told me that rejecting anecdotal evidence is laughable. You’ve told me that insisting drugs or treatment show more efficacy than the placebo effect, or mere chance , is idiotic.  Where do these statements show a respect for the scientific rules of evidence?

The placebo effect is precisely most active in the arena where drugs or therapy claim to give subjective benefits, say, pain relief or a feeling of energy or well being. It has been shown that about 3 out of 10 patients will report improvement in these symptoms if they are convinced the therapy will work. This means that M&Ms; will help 30% of arthritic patients if I convince them M&Ms; are useful. Then I can go on TV and show their testimonials and claim my therapies are being fought by big pharma.(Actually, it’s legitimate doctors, like Stephen Barret, more often).  Better yet, I can go to Mexico and claim my M&Ms; cure HIV and cancer, with no proof at all. And additionally the M&Ms; have to be given by enema…nice touch, huh?

Finally, Gonzales proved in ways accepted by medical standards that there is a merit to the Gerson/Kellye/Gonzales method.

Now Rod, knowing all this and insinuating that Kelley was a misguided albeit well meaning amateur and deserved all the persecution he faced from FDA and medical establishment is the sign of a mind that cannot be reasoned with (to return the favor).

He proved nothing, Thomas. Nor did the guy who claimed he cured over three hundred HIV patients with ozone therapy. They should be in jail. If you’re going to take their evidence, how would you prove that prayer doesn’t work? Wait, maybe you do think prayer works….but, just not for amputees, right?

Fortunately, pharmaceutical companies are required to provide studies showing their products actually work, and if side effects can be a problem, that at least the benefits outweigh the risks. How would you like it if all of “big pharma” went to Mexico and could claim anything they wanted.

Has any pharmaceutical company ever falsified data or stretched their statistics? Most likely. But that doesn’t convince most of us that there is a giant conspiracy, when the evidence is that there are thousands of useful, safe drugs out there, and there are thousands of researchers who would love to get a Nobel Prize for the next great one. On the other side, have any alternative healers stretched their claims? You betch’ya…most do.

And in case your interested, as you seem to be in Vitamin E, daily doses over 400 IU are not recommended because of studies showing an increase in overall mortality. How’s that for a harmless herb? Safe rule…more is not always better.

My own opinion is that prevention is the job for (socially responsible) government and not for any interest group, medical association being one of them. Maybe prevention is as simple as our best effort to provide honest, unbiased opinion based on available research.

However you get your information, it’s out there. The evidence is that the FDA is for the most part socially responsible….and they don’t think pancreatic enzymes kill all cancers…OK?

Later, Rod

Rod,

Happy New Year to you.

I don’t want to spoil the holiday mood so I will reply to your post later. Just one thing.

[quote author=“Rod”]The evidence is that the FDA is for the most part socially responsible….

Prove it.

Warmest Regards,

Thomas Orr, the sceptic

Rod,

Here is how I would start in the renewed spirit of civility. I don’t reject the medicine and will even take a chemical drug if I believed it would help. Here is the key word, believe. As much as you and I would like to base every our decision on reason it is just impossible. When you walk you don’t analyze every step you make. Rational people are different from irrational ones in many ways but not using the sets of beliefs they developed is not one of them. You just committed one error because of trusting your belief system too much. You automatically assumed that Stephen Barrett is an honest doctor and scientist who does a good job of defending the public. Stephen Barrett doesn’t defend the public. He is a looser who failed in his profession, a low life who doesn’t hesitate to do the most dirty job to please his bosses from the big pharma. All his awards and honorary memberships are very suspicious. I would think that membership in scientific this and scientific that would require a degree, expertise and serious publications. Stephen Barrett doesn’t have any of that but apperently it is not a problem if you have a well connected bosses.

Which brings us to the conspiracy and continuation of my lecture on beliefs. The reason we are on the opposite side of the barricade, Rod, is that conventional medicine and pharma lost their credibility with American public. You said 20 “scientists” cannot be wrong. I say millions of people cannot be wrong either. It is not that I was born with distrust of medicine. As I mentioned earlier when I was in Poland I respected medicine and followed their advice. The difference between us is that I recognized that something is wrong with the American medicine and you refuse to admit it. That’s all. No matter how much you want it you are not more scientific than I am.

None of us can prove what we believe in. I say there is conspiracy, you say there is not. Neither of us has the power of a prosecutor, neither of us is Eliot Spitzer (New York State Attorney General). All I can do is point to the substantial body of evidence that something is not right with picture. If you can explain every one of my objections I would be happy to acknowledge that finally you speak like a reasonable person.

Let’s start with Stephen Barrett. Even assuming his impeccable credentials of a psychiatrist how did he become an authority on everything from fluridization of drinking water to evaluating cancer therapies? Once, in a party, I asked a simple question on chemistry to 4 chemists present. None of them knew the answer because they specialized in something else.

1. If Stephen Barrett who is not even a doctor pretends to be an authority on all the subjects raised by people from the alternative camp, some of those subjects being rather controversial and complicated, he is automatically a suspect.

2. To know Stephen Barrett opinion on any subject he gets involved into you only need to ask yourself the following question: what is the answer that pleases the big pharma the most?

3. I actually followed some links included in the quackwatch site and was very amused to find out that although they were listed as references supporting Stephen Barretts claims they were providing evidence to the contrary.

4. Stephen Barrett is cursing on his site some laws and decisions passed by the Congress or the courts. On the other hand his favorite way of discrediting people is to quote all the court verdicts where they lost and all the instances their offices were raided by FDA. Luckily, we now have a long list of court cases where Stephen Barrett not only lost but disgusted the judge in the process.

5. I am not surprise at all with your being familiar with Stephen Barrett. My friend chemist who teaches chemistry in college mentioned that she had to give students a lecture on the quackwatch website. In response to my ironic coments she said, oh, it is just a community college. So, don’t tell me that the big pharma is not meddling with the college curricula.

6. I actually once sent a letter to Stepehen Barrett. He wasn’t even half of a gentleman you are, he didn’t reply.

Stephen Barrett and FDA innocent? doing a socially responsible work? Huh? I am curious how you choose to explain the disgraceful persecution of Dr. Burzynski? Please do the google search and answer. Since dr. Burzynski runs legitimate FDA approved clinic and keeps all the records required, the repeated attempts to destroy him (last time it was the pretext that he treated kids from out of the state) have only one explanation - the CONSPIRACY.

Warmest Regards,

Thomas Orr