Aids HIV FAQ

Why "alternative medicine" SEEMS to work

Question:

>> Hydrazine sulfate is also more effective than what we have available, and >it > has not been big news either. And as I said the FDA is being sued to allow > it’s use. You said you did not have an answer for this either. So once >again > why don’t you call 60 Minutes and ask them why they have not reported on >it? >Hydrazine Sulfate will cure more cancer than any therapy available in the US?

With the exception of maybe blood and lymphatic cancers since they do not repsond the same way to HS. And keep in mind that HS does not cause secondary cancers like other chemo drugs. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >You said that it is THE GREATEST cancer treatment. > I also made it clear that it was in my opinion. Interesting how you always > manage to leave out important facts in an attempt to win a debate. > > But you won’t say how great > I have posted the mechanism of action, the low side effect rate, the fact >that > it does not destroy healthy tissue, and the fact that it does not cause >cancer > like chemo drugs and radiation therapy. I think that answered that question > pretty well. > >and then say it’s manipulation when assumptions are made. > You do manipulate. An example is your leaving out hte remainder of what I >say, > for instance when you wrote "You said that it is THE GREATEST cancer > treatment.". Where was the rest of what I said? That was important to the > argument, but you left it out to benefit your argument. That’s manipulation > Doggie! >So you admit that it hasn’t been proven to be the greatest.  Just in your >opinion.  Thanks.

So what is your opinion. I have shown you the mechanism of action. Ozone remains more effective in destroying cancer cells  than chemo drugs. It does not destroy healthy tissue like chemo drugs. It does not cause secondary cancers like chemo drugs. It ha sa vitually 0 side adverse side effect rate. It does not make the patient nauseous, does not cause the hair to fall out, does not cause hyperpigmentation or ulceration, etc. So which is better, ozone or chemo?

Response:

> >Herbie, it is THE biggest medical story in recent history.  A cheap and >highly effective cure for cancer that works better than anything available in > the >US.  I didn’t think that you could provide an answer. > Hydrazine sulfate is also more effective than what we have available, and it > has not been big news either. And as I said the FDA is being sued to allow > it’s use. You said you did not have an answer for this either. So once again > why don’t you call 60 Minutes and ask them why they have not reported on it?

Hydrazine Sulfate will cure more cancer than any therapy available in the US? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->You said that it is THE GREATEST cancer treatment. > I also made it clear that it was in my opinion. Interesting how you always > manage to leave out important facts in an attempt to win a debate. > But you won’t say how great > I have posted the mechanism of action, the low side effect rate, the fact that > it does not destroy healthy tissue, and the fact that it does not cause cancer > like chemo drugs and radiation therapy. I think that answered that question > pretty well. >and then say it’s manipulation when assumptions are made. > You do manipulate. An example is your leaving out hte remainder of what I say, > for instance when you wrote "You said that it is THE GREATEST cancer > treatment.". Where was the rest of what I said? That was important to the > argument, but you left it out to benefit your argument. That’s manipulation > Doggie!

So you admit that it hasn’t been proven to be the greatest.  Just in your opinion.  Thanks. >As for German clinics:  In FIFTY years they couldn’t rebuild them?  And, IIRC, > bombs weren’t exactly able to target something as small as a clinic back then. > What evidence do you >have that ozone clinics were singled out as attack targets for Allied bombing > raids? > I thought you could not comment? Contradicting yourself again Doggie.

I’m commenting on your claim dummy.  You claim that the lack of clinics is due to the bombing.  I pointed out that it’s been fifty years since then.  More than enough time to rebuild. > Many of hte clinics were right by Farbin Drug works which was left untouched. > Yet every ozone clinic in Germany was bombed. That sounds like deliberate > targets to me. Research the history Doggie.

The bombs then weren’t accurate enough to strike that discriminately.  Where is the evidence of this bombing campaign you refer to? hd

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >Why has no investigative reporter taken a group of oncologists to these > >clinics and blown the lid off this. > Maybe they are just as afraid of the truth as you are, or just plain close > minded. Maybe they never heard off hte therapy. Why don’t you call 60 >Minutes > and ask them instead. I cannot read their minds so I can not answer you as >to > why they have not reported on it. >Herbie, it is THE biggest medical story in recent history.  A cheap and >highly >effective cure for cancer that works better than anything available in the >US.  I >didn’t think that you could provide an answer.

Hydrazine sulfate is also more effective than what we have available, and it has not been big news either. And as I said the FDA is beinng sued to allow it’s use. You said you did not have an answer for this either. So once again why don’t you call 60 Minutes and ask them why they have not reported on it? > There you go with your "all" again. If you paln to quote someone write >exactly > what they said and stop filling in words to fit your needs. A sfar as the > question I already answered it. >No Herbie, you didn’t.

Maybe not with the answer you wanted to hear, but it was answered. > I don’t have a figure, nor do I need one. The fact remains that ozone has >been > clinically proven to cure various cancers, and it’s mechanism of action is >well > known. Furthermore it does not cause secondary cancers nor kill the patient >in > most instances as does conventional means of cancer treatment. >You said that it is THE GREATEST cancer treatment.

I also made it clear that it was in my opinion. Interesting how you always manage to leave out important facts in an attempt to win a debate. > But you won’t say how great

I have posted the mechanism of action, the low side effect rate, the fact that it does not destroy healthy tissue, and the fact that it does not cause cancer like chemo drugs and radiation therapy. I think that answered that question pretty well. >and >then say it’s manipulation when assumptions are made.

You do manipulate. An example is your leaving out hte remainder of what I say, for instance when you wrote "You said that it is THE GREATEST cancer treatment.". Where was the rest of what I said? That was important to the argument, but you left it out to benefit your argument. That’s manipulation Doggie! > And maybe there would be a lot more ozone clinics in Germany if allied >bombers > did not deliberately bomb them during WWII. >I don’t know anything about that story, so I can’t comment. >As for German clinics: >In FIFTY years they couldn’t rebuild them?  And, IIRC, bombs weren’t exactly >able >to target something as small as a clinic back then.  What evidence do you >have that >ozone clinics were singled out as attack targets for Allied bombing raids? >hd

I thought you could not comment? Contradicting yourself again Doggie. Many of hte clinics were right by Farbin Drug works which was left untouched. Yet every ozone clinic in Germany was bombed. That sounds like deliberate targets to me. Research the history Doggie.

Response:

> >> >Where is the clinic with the 90% cure rate for 90% of cancers?   Where are >> >the reporters? >> There are ozone clinics in Germany, South America, Cuba, etc. >Why has no investigative reporter taken a group of oncologists to these >clinics and blown the lid off this. > Maybe they are just as afraid of the truth as you are, or just plain close > minded. Maybe they never heard off hte therapy. Why don’t you call 60 Minutes > and ask them instead. I cannot read their minds so I can not answer you as to > why they have not reported on it.

Herbie, it is THE biggest medical story in recent history.  A cheap and highly effective cure for cancer that works better than anything available in the US.  I didn’t think that you could provide an answer. >That is hardly the same as a story by a significant media outlet that almost >all cancer can be cured almost all the time by a cheap and easily accessible >treatment.  Which is what I was talking about.  Again, where is such a >report? > There you go with your "all" again. If you paln to quote someone write exactly > what they said and stop filling in words to fit your needs. A sfar as the > question I already answered it.

No Herbie, you didn’t.  No significant media outlet has reported that a highly effective and inexpensive cancer treatment which is more effective than anything available in the US (happy with the wording now?) is available and proven effective. >> No, you are manipulating facts again. First of all I never said that >"almost all cancer is cured ". >Then please clarify your statement.  Give us a figure. > I don’t have a figure, nor do I need one. The fact remains that ozone has been > clinically proven to cure various cancers, and it’s mechanism of action is well > known. Furthermore it does not cause secondary cancers nor kill the patient in > most instances as does conventional means of cancer treatment.

You said that it is THE GREATEST cancer treatment.  But you won’t say how great and then say it’s manipulation when assumptions are made.  You can clear it up Herbie. Just give us a figure to work with. >Herbie, you claim that ozone is THE BEST cure for cancer.  Citing examples of >media omissions or repression doesn’t address the question of why this hasn’t > been >covered to the point where a public outcry demands that the government cease >its current cancer policies and concentrate on building ozone clinics. > I answered your question. So why are you ignoring my last question for you? > And maybe there would be a lot more ozone clinics in Germany if allied bombers > did not deliberately bomb them during WWII.

I don’t know anything about that story, so I can’t comment.  As for German clinics: In FIFTY years they couldn’t rebuild them?  And, IIRC, bombs weren’t exactly able to target something as small as a clinic back then.  What evidence do you have that ozone clinics were singled out as attack targets for Allied bombing raids? hd

Response:

>> Boy 3 insults in 2 sentences. Getting you feathers a little ruffled Doggie? >Or > does this go back to the projection thing I mentioned earlier, since you >stated > that the insults were to obscure the fact that the debate is being lost? >Herbie.  One of us has posted more insults.  Is it me or you?  Your answer >please.

Changing the subject again Doggie? The opoint was not who has made more insults. You claim I use the insults only when I do not have a good defense in this debate, which is absolutely false. That is why I told you what projection is, because it is actually you that uses the insults when you are at a loss for a good defense. I am doing a great job of whipping you in this debate even without the insults. But you know, I just love to insult complete assholes. > > You claimed that a cover-up conspiracy is keeping the supposed fact that >a > cheap and almost always effective cure for almost every kind of cancer away >from > the North American public.  Where is it common knowledge? > Germany for one. >Almost all cases of cancer can be cured in Germany?

Once again, the term "all" was your wording, not mine. > >Name me a country where cancer isn’t near the top of the list for killer > diseases. > Iceland. I spent 2 1/2 months over there. Beutiful country by the way, >highly > recommended. Diseases such as cancer are almost unheard of over there. >Almost unheard of Herbie.  Like less common than, say, diabetes?

Actually diabetes is almost non-existent over there as well. I was talking to a doctor over there when I went to his clinic to get some benzene for my stove. I asked him about the problems of disease over there. He said the main killer was heart disease. He said cancer was extremely rare, and generally occured from the use of tobacco. > >Where is the clinic with the 90% cure rate for 90% of cancers?   Where are > >the reporters? > There are ozone clinics in Germany, South America, Cuba, etc. >Why has no investigative reporter taken a group of oncologists to these >clinics and >blown the lid off this.

Maybe they are just as afraid of the truth as you are, or just plain close minded. Maybe they never heard off hte therapy. Why don’t you call 60 Minutes and ask them instead. I cannot read their minds so I can not answer you as to why they have not reported on it. > >Can you find any media outlet of any significance that has covered this > fantastic story with an investigative report?  Didn’t think so. > Answering questions tyou ask someone else before giving them a chance to >answer > is manipulation again.  The above is a good example. It is a very well >respected > journal. >That is hardly the same as a story by a significant media outlet that almost >all >cancer can be cured almost all the time by a cheap and easily accessible >treatment.  Which is what I was talking about.  Again, where is such a >report?

There you go with your "all" again. If you paln to quote someone write exactly what they said and stop filling in words to fit your needs. A sfar as the question I already answered it. > >Herbie, you’re making the great claim.  You’re in the corner.  You can’t >show > >where a place exists on earth where almost all cancer is cured.  Yet you >claim > that > >treatments that do exactly that exist. > No, you are manipulating facts again. First of all I never said that >"almost > all cancer is cured ". >Then please clarify your statement.  Give us a figure.

I don’t have a figure, nor do I need one. The fact remains that ozone has been clinically proven to cure various cancers, and it’s mechanism of action is well known. Furthermore it does not cause secondary cancers nor kill the patient in most instances as does conventional means of cancer treatment. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> I have another example for you. Back in the 1930s podophyllumtoxin, from >savin > junipers, was being tested as a cancer treatment. It was found to be highly > effective for 6 forms of cancer, especially breast cancer. It was reported >in > all the big journals like JAMA and the Journal of the American Cancer >Society. > Then we did not hear about it again for over 50 years until the University >of > North Carolina found a way to synthesize it so a patent could be placed on >it. > They then sold it to a California company who plans to market it as a new > chemotherapy drug. So where was the media for those 50 years while people >were > dying from the cancers that this compound was already shown to be effective >in > treating? >Herbie, you claim that ozone is THE BEST cure for cancer.  Citing examples of >media >omissions or repression doesn’t address the question of why this hasn’t been >covered to the point where a public outcry demands that the government cease >its >current cancer policies and concentrate on building ozone clinics. >hd

I answered your question. So why are you ignoring my last question for you? And maybe there would be a lot more ozone clinics in Germany if allied bombers did not deliberately bomb them during WWII.

Response:

> > >Here’s what you said: > > "And you really believe we are told the truth and that the media is not > >controlled? They are controlled as much as the simple minds of the sheep who > >blindly believe their lies." > And you wrote "all" the media. Wherein my statement did I say "all" the media? > See, you are manipiulating words again in an attempt to win the debate. Then > you skipped this part of my previous post: > You said "the media".  Period.  You did not qualify or limit it.  But, to get back > to the actual subject at hand, I accept that you didn’t mean "all the media" when > you said "they are controlled".  OK?

Any media that derives a substantial part of revenue from advertising is, to some degree (depending on the advertisers and their % contribution)  controlled (and that includes most media in the US).      The ASH (Action on Smoking and Health) study, for example showed a very strong negative correlation between the amount of tobacco advertising that a publication carried and the amount of coverage it gave to the link between smoking and health.        There are laws that restrict what can be claimed in an advertisement.  But that is clearly enough to insure good public infomation.   The REAL harm that is done is NOT in what IS printed but in what is NOT printed. Hopefully the internet will go far to alleviate that problem.     (But it’s increasing reliance on advertising is worrisome, IMHO). It doesn’t TAKE a conspiracy:   all it takes is a set of ground rules that gives one side a significant advantage over the other.  (Although it has been shown in the case of tobacco that a conspiracy did, in fact, exist.)

Response:

>> >Then, there is no hope.  You believe that all the media have hushed up >these > >stories because the "government" controls them. > Reading in to thing again, or just deliberately manipulating what is being >said > as usual? I never said that "all" the media is controlled, you said that in > your post. >Here’s what you said: > "And you really believe we are told the truth and that the media is not >controlled? They are controlled as much as the simple minds of the sheep who >blindly believe their lies."

And you wrote "all" the media. Wherein my statement did I say "all" the media? See, you are manipiulating words again in an attempt to win the debate. Then you skipped this part of my previous post:  I never said that "all" the media is controlled, you said that in your post. I pointed out about the  smallpox vaccine and appearance of AIDS making worldwide headlines except for in the U.S.. That is not control over "all" of the media. I also pointed out that the hyperthermia experiments were broadcast live on CNN. Again, how do you get complete control over "all" media out of my statements. That’s manipulation of the facts Doggie! >Quit crying Herbaby.  Like most nut cases, you assume that your opponents >have >nothing to say in response to your lunacy.

Boy 3 insults in 2 sentences. Getting you feathers a little ruffled Doggie? Or does this go back to the projection thing I mentioned earlier, since you stated that the insults were to obscure the fact that the debate is being lost? > You claimed that a cover-up conspiracy >is keeping the supposed fact that a cheap and almost always effective cure >for >almost every kind of cancer away from the North American public.  Where is it >common knowledge?

Germany for one. >In the fucking Bahamas Herbie?

Temper, temper. Try a nice warm bath with some lavender oil in the water to help you relax. >Name me a country where cancer >isn’t near the top of the list for killer diseases.

Iceland. I spent 2 1/2 months over there. Beutiful country by the way, highly recommended. Diseases such as cancer are almost unheard of over there. >Why doesn’t such a country >exist??

Oops, they do. Try again Doggie. >Where is the clinic with the 90% cure rate for 90% of cancers?   Where are >the reporters?

There are ozone clinics in Germany, South America, Cuba, etc. >And you still don’t see the obvious flaw in your theory of repression of your >pet >cancer cures by the capitalistic medical system.

There is no flaw in it, just someone on the other end whio cannot prove me wrong, but is determined to do so no matter how much they must manipulate the facts. >You said "the media" you weasel.  That can reasonably be read as "all the >media".

Only if the debating party needs to fill in the "all" in order to manipulate the debate.  your insults are getting more frequent. In your own words that shows you are loisng this debate quickly so you are going to resort to insults to divert attention. >What, exactly, do you, exactly, really and truly with out and possibility of >misconstrual, mean?  If you didn’t mean "ALL"tm the media, then which ones >have NOT >covered up your supposed cancer cure?

I am not going to type up a big list for you since it would not make a difference anyway. But an example is the journal Science who printed " Ozone selectively inhibits human cancer cell growth". >Can you find any media outlet of any >significance that has covered this fantastic story with an investigative >report? >Didn’t think so.

Answering questions tyou ask someone else before giving them a chance to answer is manipulation again. The above is a good example. It is a very well respected journal. >Herbie, you’re making the great claim.  You’re in the corner.  You can’t show >where >a place exists on earth where almost all cancer is cured.  Yet you claim that >treatments that do exactly that exist.

No, you are manipulating facts again. First of all I never said that "almost all cancer is cured ". That is your wording , not mine. I just pointed out that ozone can cure cancer, and I posted some of the mechanisms of action. Though as I also previously pointed out, just because something works, does not mean that all people will believe in it. So your argumants are invalid because they are full of manipulated and misleading wording. >You hide behind research that supports your >crazy ideas.

You ask for proof, then you say I am hiding behind the research that supports it. I think you are slipping a gear again Doggie. Yes,the research supports the fact that ozone works. Isn’t that why the research is done in the first place, to prove whether or not it works? And if the research supports my ideas, and my ideas are that ozone works, then your statement shows that you believe the research proves ozone therapy works. >Herbie, there was research that supported cold fusion.  There still >is.  But nobody is heating their homes with it.

The cold fusion experiments only generated a fraction of a degree. And you expect people to heat their homes with this technology? That statement would beat out Carol’s statement for the Stupid Statement for the Year Award. Congratulations, you are a winner! >Herbo, why can’t we find report after report by converted oncologists?

I know of several doctors who use ozone therapy on their patients, but they are somewhat quiet about it. Look at wht happened to the MD in Florida who used ozone. He was arrested and sent to prison for "practicing medicine without a license". Last i heard he was still in prison for over 4 years, and still had not had a trial. Rife was also busted for using RF devices. His original partner was murdered when they  were about to announce their cancer treatment findings before a world wide cancer symposium. His second partner was jailed based on an illegal trial. Rife was later killed with a valium overdose in the hospital. A doctor using his device in Utah had his license taken away. Another quit medicine because of the harrassment  he recieved. Many doctors are just flat out scared to use alternatives openly because they fear losing their licenses. That is why individual states are now legalizing alternative medicines, so these doctors can perform medicine without being harrassed or jailed for making people better. >Why hasn’t a major news organization broken this story?  They go >against the wishes of the government all the time.   All those questions >point out >serious flaws with your claim.  So quit obfuscating and address them. >erf

I have another example for you. Back in the 1930s podophyllumtoxin, from savin junipers, was being tested as a cancer treatment. It was found to be highly effective for 6 forms of cancer, especially breast cancer. It was reported in all the big journals like JAMA and the Journal of the American Cancer Society. Then we did not hear about it again for over 50 years until the University of North Carolina found a way to synthesize it so a patent could be placed on it. They then sold it to a California company who plans to market it as a new chemotherapy drug. So where was the media for those 50 years while people were dying from the cancers that this compound was already shown to be effective in treating?

Response:

> >Here’s what you said: > "And you really believe we are told the truth and that the media is not >controlled? They are controlled as much as the simple minds of the sheep who >blindly believe their lies." > And you wrote "all" the media. Wherein my statement did I say "all" the media? > See, you are manipiulating words again in an attempt to win the debate. Then > you skipped this part of my previous post:

You said "the media".  Period.  You did not qualify or limit it.  But, to get back to the actual subject at hand, I accept that you didn’t mean "all the media" when you said "they are controlled".  OK? >Quit crying Herbaby.  Like most nut cases, you assume that your opponents >have nothing to say in response to your lunacy. > Boy 3 insults in 2 sentences. Getting you feathers a little ruffled Doggie? Or > does this go back to the projection thing I mentioned earlier, since you stated > that the insults were to obscure the fact that the debate is being lost?

Herbie.  One of us has posted more insults.  Is it me or you?  Your answer please. > You claimed that a cover-up conspiracy is keeping the supposed fact that a > cheap and almost always effective cure for almost every kind of cancer away from > the North American public.  Where is it common knowledge? > Germany for one.

Almost all cases of cancer can be cured in Germany? >Name me a country where cancer isn’t near the top of the list for killer > diseases. > Iceland. I spent 2 1/2 months over there. Beutiful country by the way, highly > recommended. Diseases such as cancer are almost unheard of over there.

Almost unheard of Herbie.  Like less common than, say, diabetes? >Where is the clinic with the 90% cure rate for 90% of cancers?   Where are >the reporters? > There are ozone clinics in Germany, South America, Cuba, etc.

Why has no investigative reporter taken a group of oncologists to these clinics and blown the lid off this. >What, exactly, do you, exactly, really and truly with out and possibility of >misconstrual, mean?  If you didn’t mean "ALL"tm the media, then which ones >have NOT covered up your supposed cancer cure? > I am not going to type up a big list for you since it would not make a > difference anyway. But an example is the journal Science who printed " Ozone > selectively inhibits human cancer cell growth". >Can you find any media outlet of any significance that has covered this > fantastic story with an investigative report?  Didn’t think so. > Answering questions tyou ask someone else before giving them a chance to answer > is manipulation again.  The above is a good example. It is a very well respected > journal.

That is hardly the same as a story by a significant media outlet that almost all cancer can be cured almost all the time by a cheap and easily accessible treatment.  Which is what I was talking about.  Again, where is such a report? >Herbie, you’re making the great claim.  You’re in the corner.  You can’t show >where a place exists on earth where almost all cancer is cured.  Yet you claim > that >treatments that do exactly that exist. > No, you are manipulating facts again. First of all I never said that "almost > all cancer is cured ".

Then please clarify your statement.  Give us a figure. >Herbo, why can’t we find report after report by converted oncologists? > I know of several doctors who use ozone therapy on their patients, but they are > somewhat quiet about it.

When you hit a hundred, get back to us. >Why hasn’t a major news organization broken this story?  They go >against the wishes of the government all the time.   All those questions >point out serious flaws with your claim.  So quit obfuscating and address them. > I have another example for you. Back in the 1930s podophyllumtoxin, from savin > junipers, was being tested as a cancer treatment. It was found to be highly > effective for 6 forms of cancer, especially breast cancer. It was reported in > all the big journals like JAMA and the Journal of the American Cancer Society. > Then we did not hear about it again for over 50 years until the University of > North Carolina found a way to synthesize it so a patent could be placed on it. > They then sold it to a California company who plans to market it as a new > chemotherapy drug. So where was the media for those 50 years while people were > dying from the cancers that this compound was already shown to be effective in > treating?

Herbie, you claim that ozone is THE BEST cure for cancer.  Citing examples of media omissions or repression doesn’t address the question of why this hasn’t been covered to the point where a public outcry demands that the government cease its current cancer policies and concentrate on building ozone clinics. hd

Response:

> >Then, there is no hope.  You believe that all the media have hushed up these >stories because the "government" controls them. > Reading in to thing again, or just deliberately manipulating what is being said > as usual? I never said that "all" the media is controlled, you said that in > your post.

Here’s what you said:  "And you really believe we are told the truth and that the media is not controlled? They are controlled as much as the simple minds of the sheep who blindly believe their lies." You’re nit picking Herbie. The above statement clearly states that there is a massive cover-up. > Again, how do you get complete control over "all" media > out of my statements. You cannot unless you misinterpret or deliberately > manipulate the wording of what is being said. From your past record I would > definitely vote that it was deliberate manipulation since it do it so > frequently since it is the only hope you have of winning a debate.

Quit crying Herbaby.  Like most nut cases, you assume that your opponents have nothing to say in response to your lunacy.  You claimed that a cover-up conspiracy is keeping the supposed fact that a cheap and almost always effective cure for almost every kind of cancer away from the North American public.  Where is it common knowledge?  In the fucking Bahamas Herbie?  Name me a country where cancer isn’t near the top of the list for killer diseases.  Why doesn’t such a country exist??  Where is the clinic with the 90% cure rate for 90% of cancers?   Where are the reporters? >In socialized >> medicine you cannot stay in business by having sick people. While in a >> capitalistic medical system you cannot stay in business having healthy >people. >Like were giong to run out of sick people.  ROFL Herbie.  There are far fewer >sick people in communist countries?  Sure Herbie. > More manipulation of wording by Doggie.

And you still don’t see the obvious flaw in your theory of repression of your pet cancer cures by the capitalistic medical system.  That is what you said, no? >So your proof consists of a conspiracy theory > No, conspiracy fact. >and statements that your pet therapies are effective because some other > government allows them? > No, because the research, you refuse to look in to, proves they work. >Your suggestion that all the US media has covered up a sure cure for cancer > Here we go with the manipulation word "all" again. I never said all. The media > has reported on things like the lawsuit against the FDA to allow the use of the > proven cancer treatment hydrazine sulfate.

You said "the media" you weasel.  That can reasonably be read as "all the media". What, exactly, do you, exactly, really and truly with out and possibility of misconstrual, mean?  If you didn’t mean "ALL"tm the media, then which ones have NOT covered up your supposed cancer cure?  Can you find any media outlet of any significance that has covered this fantastic story with an investigative report? Didn’t think so.  So I guess it pretty much is ALL. > I was wondering at what point you’d resort to a paranoid conspiracy theory > Yep, knew that was going to come sooner or later. When backed in to a corner > Doggie resorts to calling people "paranoid" and "conspiracy theorists". I think > you have called nearly everyone on this board these at one time or another. Why > don’t you try providing evidence that we are wrong and stop with "I am better > than everyone else because they are nothing more than paranoid conspiracy > theorists" attitude.

Herbie, you’re making the great claim.  You’re in the corner.  You can’t show where a place exists on earth where almost all cancer is cured.  Yet you claim that treatments that do exactly that exist.  You hide behind research that supports your crazy ideas.  Herbie, there was research that supported cold fusion.  There still is.  But nobody is heating their homes with it.  Or anything else.  I didn’t call you paranoid.  Learn to read before you claim bullshit like that.  I didn’t have to resort to calling your theory a conspiracy theory.  You did that yourself.  Again Herbo, why can’t we find report after report by converted oncologists?  I mean hundreds of them.  Why hasn’t a major news organization broken this story?  They go against the wishes of the government all the time.   All those questions point out serious flaws with your claim.  So quit obfuscating and address them. erf

Response:

>Then, there is no hope.  You believe that all the media have hushed up these >stories because the "government" controls them.

Reading in to thing again, or just deliberately manipulating what is being said as usual? I never said that "all" the media is controlled, you said that in your post. I pointed out about the  smallpox vaccine and appearance of AIDS making worldwide headlines except for in the U.S.. That is not control over "all" of the media. I also pointed out that the hyperthermia experiments were broadcast live on CNN. Again, how do you get complete control over "all" media out of my statements. You cannot unless you misinterpret or deliberately manipulate the wording of what is being said. From your past record I would definitely vote that it was deliberate manipulation since it do it so frequently since it is the only hope you have of winning a debate. >In socialized > medicine you cannot stay in business by having sick people. While in a > capitalistic medical system you cannot stay in business having healthy >people. >Like were giong to run out of sick people.  ROFL Herbie.  There are far fewer >sick >people in communist countries?  Sure Herbie.

More manipulation of wording by Doggie. The point is not whether communist countries have more sick people. If oyu want to go there then we would have to get off of the subject of alternative compared to conventional and get in to industrial pollution, lack of medical services in rural areas, etc. >So your proof consists of a conspiracy theory

No, conspiracy fact. >and statements that your pet >therapies are effective because some other government allows them?

No, because the research, you refuse to look in to, proves they work. >Your suggestion >that all the US media has covered up a sure cure for cancer

Here we go with the manipulation word "all" again. I never said all. The media has reported on things like the lawsuit against the FDA to allow the use of the proven cancer treatment hydrazine sulfate. > I was wondering at what point you’d resort to a paranoid >conspiracy theory

Yep, knew that was going to come sooner or later. When backed in to a corner Doggie resorts to calling people "paranoid" and "conspiracy theorists". I think you have called nearly everyone on this board these at one time or another. Why don’t you try providing evidence that we are wrong and stop with "I am better than everyone else because they are nothing more than paranoid conspiracy theorists" attitude.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->You have avoided answering the question again.  Your "answer" is to insult me >if I don’t believe that there is a massive conspiracy to suppress the miraculous >treatments you support.  Again, Herbie, why hasn’t the media blown the lid >off this?  If Ozone worked and CNN invested a few dozen grand in sending a >reporter to investigate the story would be oned of the biggest in history.  Why > hasn’t >this happened Herbie?  Try answering the question instead of asking another one >and obfuscating with tales about the evils of the FDA et al.  I DON’T like them >either.  OK? > There is a lot that we are not told. They tell us that the government is > fighting a war on drugs. Then the CIA crashes a plane in New York loaded with > cocaine that they were smuggling in. It is in the news one day then hushed up. > The Vincennes warship shoots a plane out of the sky. Photographers and rescue > ships are on the site within minutes. photographers take photos of the bodies > being collected, but something is obviously wrong. The bodies are all naked. > They are also stiff, bloated, and there is no shrapnel marks, burns, cuts, > blood, or any other signs of trauma after they supposedly got hit by a missle. > And you really believe we are told the truth and that the media is not > controlled? They are controlled as much as the simple minds of the sheep who > blindley believe their lies.

Then, there is no hope.  You believe that all the media have hushed up these stories because the "government" controls them.  There are no reporters and editors going on Larry King to expose this massive conspiracy of which you speak. Presumably because Larry’s in on it too.  Ditto for sixty minutes.  Yet they don’t hush up hundreds of stories that embarass the government daily.  Odd, don’t you think Herbie?  What went wrong with the Monica situation? > Why don’t you consider this. If ozone does not work then why are other > governments not cracking down on it’s use? The answer is simple. In socialized > medicine you cannot stay in business by having sick people. While in a > capitalistic medical system you cannot stay in business having healthy people.

Like were giong to run out of sick people.  ROFL Herbie.  There are far fewer sick people in communist countries?  Sure Herbie. > The U.S. is ranked 17th in the world for health care. The countries with better > health care systems openly allow the use of what we call alternative medicines.

So your proof consists of a conspiracy theory and statements that your pet therapies are effective because some other government allows them?  Your suggestion that all the US media has covered up a sure cure for cancer, one of the most feared and horrible killers of humans, because the medical establishment, through the government, censors them, is preposterous.  You cite some supposed coverups as evidence.  But you can never prove this claim because, hey, there’s just too many people in on it.  I was wondering at what point you’d resort to a paranoid conspiracy theory to answer the obvious question that a sure cure for cancer would be public knowledge by now.  Thanks for answering. hd

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >Herbie, why haven’t oncologists from the US gone and set up clinics in > >another country, cured almost every one who they treated with ozone > Dr. Theodore Myer did. He went to the Bahamas to open a clinic with full > approval of their government. The real question is why should doctors have >to > leave this country when it is supposed to be "free" and therefore we should > have the right to choose any therapy we wish? >Quit obfuscating.  I have no argument that the government’s handling of >treatments >is efficacious but you keep tossing it in.  The real question is still, if >he’s >curing almost everyone, why haven’t hundreds of oncologists done this?  A >month’s >vacation in the Bahamas would make believers of them.  No?

For the same reason you are not using it, because they refuse to research the therapy. I could refuse to research chemotherapy and claim it has no effect just as easily because I would believe there is no proof of it’s effectiveness. But unlike you I have done the research and realize that it does work, rarely, but it does work none the less. Though I prefer ozone because it is more effective, it does not cause serious side effects, adn it does not cause secondary cancers. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >gone on CNN (or is CNN controlled by the FDA too?) > Remember the hyperthermia experiments for AIDS shown on CNN? One patient >had a > 100% remission, the second a 50% remission, and the 3rd was so far gone he >died > a few hours later. The FDA halted all further testing  of hyperthermia >saying > that there is no evidence of it’t effectiveness. Isn’t this what further > testing would have been done for, to see if there is any effectiveness? And > after the success of the first 2 patients they claim that there is no >evidence > of effectiveness. Doesn’t  this and the FDA’s stopping of any further >testing > of this therapy in light of the positive results strike you as strange? >Try answering the question.  You’re starting with this FDA stuff again.

The question was answered. Hyperthermia was aired live on CNN. You asked why these therapies were not aired on CNN. You are just trying to squirm out of a tight position of being wrong again. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >and blown the lid off this whole thing?  People would > >flock to the clinics.  They would be rich and famous.  Why hasn’t this > >happened Herbie?  Could it be because it doesn’t work as claimed? > >hd > I pose this question to you. Let’s there was a "magic" pill that cured any > disease you could name and there was no regulation or patents on it so that > anyone could sell it. How long do you think it ould remain on the market >before > some way was found to ban it? Or do you honestly believe that it would be > allowed to remain on the market? If you believe it would remain on the >market > then you are dumber than I thought. >You have avoided answering the question again.  Your "answer" is to insult me >if I >don’t believe that there is a massive conspiracy to suppress the miraculous >treatments you support.  Again, Herbie, why hasn’t the media blown the lid >off >this?  If Ozone worked and CNN invested a few dozen grand in sending a >reporter to >investigate the story would be oned of the biggest in history.  Why hasn’t >this >happened Herbie?  Try answering the question instead of asking another one >and >obfuscating with tales about the evils of the FDA et al.  I DON’T like them >either.  OK? >erf

There is a lot that we are not told. They tell us that the government is fighting a war on drugs. Then the CIA crashes a plane in New York loaded with cocaine that they were smuggling in. It is in the news one day then hushed up. The Vincennes warship shoots a plane out of the sky. Photographers and rescue ships are on the site within minutes. photographers take photos of the bodies being collected, but something is obviously wrong. The bodies are all naked. They are also stiff, bloated, and there is no shrapnel marks, burns, cuts, blood, or any other signs of trauma after they supposedly got hit by a missle. And you really believe we are told the truth and that the media is not controlled? They are controlled as much as the simple minds of the sheep who blindley believe their lies. How about the story of the link between the smallpox vaccines and the appearance of AIDS in Africa. The story started front page in England,a nd made the front page around the world. Only one major country did not run the story, the good ol’ U.S. In fact all the major news agencies denied even hearing of hte story. Why don’t you consider this. If ozone does not work then why are other governments not cracking down on it’s use? The answer is simple. In socialized medicine you cannot stay in business by having sick people. While in a capitalistic medical system you cannot stay in business having healthy people. The U.S. is ranked 17th in the world for health care. The countries with better health care systems openly allow the use of what we call alternative medicines.

Response:

> >Herbie, why haven’t oncologists from the US gone and set up clinics in >another country, cured almost every one who they treated with ozone > Dr. Theodore Myer did. He went to the Bahamas to open a clinic with full > approval of their government. The real question is why should doctors have to > leave this country when it is supposed to be "free" and therefore we should > have the right to choose any therapy we wish?

Quit obfuscating.  I have no argument that the government’s handling of treatments is efficacious but you keep tossing it in.  The real question is still, if he’s curing almost everyone, why haven’t hundreds of oncologists done this?  A month’s vacation in the Bahamas would make believers of them.  No? >gone on CNN (or is CNN controlled by the FDA too?) > Remember the hyperthermia experiments for AIDS shown on CNN? One patient had a > 100% remission, the second a 50% remission, and the 3rd was so far gone he died > a few hours later. The FDA halted all further testing  of hyperthermia saying > that there is no evidence of it’t effectiveness. Isn’t this what further > testing would have been done for, to see if there is any effectiveness? And > after the success of the first 2 patients they claim that there is no evidence > of effectiveness. Doesn’t  this and the FDA’s stopping of any further testing > of this therapy in light of the positive results strike you as strange?

Try answering the question.  You’re starting with this FDA stuff again. >and blown the lid off this whole thing?  People would >flock to the clinics.  They would be rich and famous.  Why hasn’t this >happened Herbie?  Could it be because it doesn’t work as claimed? >hd > I pose this question to you. Let’s there was a "magic" pill that cured any > disease you could name and there was no regulation or patents on it so that > anyone could sell it. How long do you think it ould remain on the market before > some way was found to ban it? Or do you honestly believe that it would be > allowed to remain on the market? If you believe it would remain on the market > then you are dumber than I thought.

You have avoided answering the question again.  Your "answer" is to insult me if I don’t believe that there is a massive conspiracy to suppress the miraculous treatments you support.  Again, Herbie, why hasn’t the media blown the lid off this?  If Ozone worked and CNN invested a few dozen grand in sending a reporter to investigate the story would be oned of the biggest in history.  Why hasn’t this happened Herbie?  Try answering the question instead of asking another one and obfuscating with tales about the evils of the FDA et al.  I DON’T like them either.  OK? erf

Response:

>> >OK, can you tell me what percentage of HIV tests are false? > It is impossible to say, but it is high. >How is it known that it is high?  Were tests done using more accurate methods >and >compared?

If we look at at the list of causes for false positives, then consider the number of people that fall under these headings then we can assume that the numbers are very high. For instance what percentage of the population eats beef or drinks milk? If BLV antiodies are present then those antibodies will circulate in the blood for a month before being destroyed. And as long as they circulate they will yield a false positive. Remember the news story they did in Southern California where they bought a steak and had it HIV tested? The steak came back HIV positive! The newspeople tried to claim the cattle were being infected by the meat inspectors. But dead cattle do not form antibiodies. What they were detecting were BLV antibodies. Though I would like to see what tests you used to get your quote: "Anyway, if AIDS drugs don’t work, why the huge drop in deaths from AIDS when the infection rate has remained the same?" How can you prove the infection rate has remained the same when the primary tests still being used (ELISA, Western blot) only test for antibodies and not virus? Come on Doggie, where is your evidence? > Some scientists beleieve this is because another > virus, such as HHV6-A actually causes viral induced AIDS, and HIV is >actually > an opportunistic infection. >But does HHV6-A cause the necessary conditions?  

Yes, It destroys CD4 cells as well as other immune cells leading to a collapse of the immune system leading to the opportunistic infections leading to a diagnosis of AIDS. And since it destroys CD4 cells, and CD4 cell counts below 200 give a diagnosis of AIDS, then HHV6-A can cause AIDS. >And has it been detected in all >AIDS victims tested for it?

It is not always looked for, but it is found in most AIDS patients when it is tested for. Though we must also keep in mind that not all cases of AIDS are caused from a virus. If the person develops AIDS from the use of AZT then neither HIV or HHV6-A may be found. (snip) >Again, the Concorde study proved that AZT did not increase AIDS deaths.  You >disagree?

I posted references for you which showed that AZT increased the death rate in AIDS patients. And as I previously said the PDR even states that AZT can cause symptoms of AIDS. So your use of the word "proved" is wrong. > So common sense > tells us that as we give fewer patients AZT, the less number of AIDS cases >we > will get. Do some research on the immune system Doggie so I don’t  have to >keep > explaining the obvious to you. >Or the more that protease inhibitors are used, the less AIDS deaths there >will be.

Then why was AIDS on the decline before protease inhibitors hit the market? Though the use of AZT was on the decline as well at his time. >Herbie, why haven’t oncologists from the US gone and set up clinics in >another >country, cured almost every one who they treated with ozone

Dr. Theodore Myer did. He went to the Bahamas to open a clinic with full approval of their government. The real question is why should doctors have to leave this country when it is supposed to be "free" and therefore we should have the right to choose any therapy we wish? >gone on CNN (or is CNN >controlled by the FDA too?)

Remember the hyperthermia experiments for AIDS shown on CNN? One patient had a 100% remission, the second a 50% remission, and the 3rd was so far gone he died a few hours later. The FDA halted all further testing  of hyperthermia saying that there is no evidence of it’t effectiveness. Isn’t this what further testing would have been done for, to see if there is any effectiveness? And after the success of the first 2 patients they claim that there is no evidence of effectiveness. Doesn’t  this and the FDA’s stopping of any further testing of this therapy in light of the positive results strike you as strange? >and blown the lid off this whole thing?  People would >flock to the clinics.  They would be rich and famous.  Why hasn’t this >happened >Herbie?  Could it be because it doesn’t work as claimed? >hd

I pose this question to you. Let’s there was a "magic" pill that cured any disease you could name and there was no regulation or patents on it so that anyone could sell it. How long do you think it ould remain on the market before some way was found to ban it? Or do you honestly believe that it would be allowed to remain on the market? If you believe it would remain on the market then you are dumber than I thought.

Response:

> >OK, can you tell me what percentage of HIV tests are false? > It is impossible to say, but it is high.

How is it known that it is high?  Were tests done using more accurate methods and compared? > Some scientists beleieve this is because another > virus, such as HHV6-A actually causes viral induced AIDS, and HIV is actually > an opportunistic infection.

But does HHV6-A cause the necessary conditions?  And has it been detected in all AIDS victims tested for it? >There is proof that AZT wasn’t very effective compared to protease inhibitors. > Or do you think that they don’t do anything as well? > And yes protease inhibitors work, at least in principal. The alternative > medical community was using protease inhibitors from sources like olive leaves > long before pharmaceutical protease inhibitors were on the market. Maybe some > day conventional medicine will catch up with alternative medicines. Though we > must keep in mind that  not all AIDS  patients are tested for viruses, only > antibodies. And in those who test positive on a PCR, we must consider that some > are goign to be false positive from cross contamination. So there is no way to > test the actual effectiveness of protease inhibitors. > Though none of this was the original point anyway. The point was that we have > moved away from the use of AZT as a first line defense, and we are now using > new drugs that do not collapse the immune system like AZT.

Again, the Concorde study proved that AZT did not increase AIDS deaths.  You disagree? > So common sense > tells us that as we give fewer patients AZT, the less number of AIDS cases we > will get. Do some research on the immune system Doggie so I don’t  have to keep > explaining the obvious to you.

Or the more that protease inhibitors are used, the less AIDS deaths there will be. >So, where are the places where they cure almost every type of cancer with >ozone?  Why hasn’t word gotten out?  All it would take would be a few > researchers to >vists this magical place and confirm the miraculous results and  the people > running >it would become instant billionaires.  Why isn’t this happening Herb? > The word is out and the research has been done. I have even explained how it > works to you because you do not know how to do research on the subject. But it > will not be accepted in a country like this where the FDA is out to protect > pharmaceutical profits at any cost.

<rest of anti FDA rant snipped> Herbie, why haven’t oncologists from the US gone and set up clinics in another country, cured almost every one who they treated with ozone, gone on CNN (or is CNN controlled by the FDA too?) and blown the lid off this whole thing?  People would flock to the clinics.  They would be rich and famous.  Why hasn’t this happened Herbie?  Could it be because it doesn’t work as claimed? hd

Response:

>> >I made a mistake about the Concorde Study.  To bad you missed it.  Anyway, >if > >AIDS drugs don’t work, why the huge drop in deaths from AIDS when the >infection > >rate has remained the same? > Two part answer. First we have no idea what the infection rate is because >of > the high percentage of false positives on HIV tests which look for >antibodies, > not virus. >OK, can you tell me what percentage of HIV tests are false?

It is impossible to say, but it is high. Known causes of false positives include exposure to sheep maedi visna visus antibodies from consuming lamb, exposure to bovien leukemia virus antibodies from contaminated beef and milk, insome cases of pregnancy and multiple pregnancies from maternal antibodies, flu vaccine, typhoid vaccine, polio vaccine, HIV vaccine, gammaglobulin shots, insome cases of autoimmunity due to the nonspecific nature of the antibodies raaising the chance of serological cross reactivity, and from exposure to HIV without chronic infection. Keep in mind that this is only known causes of false positives. There could be more that have not beeen discovered yet. > Second, AIDS cases started declining once we started moving away > from using AZT as a first line defense in someone testing HIV positive, >whether > infected with the HIV virus or not. As previously explained numerous times, >AZT > leads to AIDS by collapsing the immune system through bone marrrow >destruction. > No immune system leads to opportunistic infections and lowered CD4 counts > giving a diagnosis of AIDS. >Are you saying that there is no possible way to detect viral loads?

That is not what I said. Viruses can be detected with PCR, but even this is not 100%. Cross contamination is a common problem. Remember the sailor who supposedly died of AIDS in the 50s? It was proven several years later that the tissue samples were contaminated in the lab. And yes their are other tests for viral activity such as p24 antigen. What you have overlooked is cost and availability. PCR has only recently become relatively common, yet the cost is still prohibitive to test every person with. This is why they use cheaper antibody tests (ELISA, and Western blot) and assume there is a virus present. And since these tests were not widely available, if at all, when AIDS first appeared then we have no way to determine the percentage of viral induced AIDS to AZT induced AIDS. >No way to know >of HIV is present in a patient?

As I said we can find HIV in infected patients with some accuracy if the poerson can afford the tests. But there is still no solid evidence that HIV causes AIDS. This still remains a hypothesis started by the person holding the patent rights on the HIV test. As long as we believe it he makes money. Though noone has yet explained how destruction of only CD4 cells, but not T killer and B cells,  can collapse the immune system allowing for th eformation of opportunuistic infections. Some scientists beleieve this is because another virus, such as HHV6-A actually causes viral induced AIDS, and HIV is actually an opportunistic infection. So when you can explain the question I keep asking of how HIV could cause AIDS then you will have an argument. Until then you are just blowing smoke over something you obviously have no comprehension of. >There is proof that AZT wasn’t very effective >compared to protease inhibitors.  Or do you think that they don’t do anything >as >well?

AZT was effective for doing one thing, causing chemical induced AIDS. Why do you think AZT was originally banned when it came out in the 60s, because it was too toxic for human use. And yes protease inhibitors work, at least in principal. The alternative medical community was using protease inhibitors from sources like olive leaves long before pharmaceutical protease inhibitors were on the market. Maybe some day conventional medicine will catch up with alternative medicines. Though we must keep in mind that  not all AIDS  patients are tested for viruses, only antibodies. And in those who test positive on a PCR, we must consider that some are goign to be false positive from cross contamination. So there is no way to test the actual effectiveness of protease inhibitors. Though none of this was the original point anyway. The point was that we have moved away from the use of AZT as a first line defense, and we are now using new drugs that do not collapse the immune system like AZT. So common sense tells us that as we give fewer patients AZT, the less number of AIDS cases we will get. Do some research on the immune system Doggie so I don’t  have to keep explaining the obvious to you. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >> >You haven’t convinced me that ozone is effective > >> Only becasue you refuse to research the therapy. If you looked in to it, >as > >you claim you have, you would have seen the evidence. > >Uh Herbie, you haven’t convinced very many oncologists either.  Nobody >has. > >And the only reason that this miracle cure hasn’t been proven effective >and put > >drug companies out of the chemo business is because there’s a conspiracy >to > >supress it or some other equally unlikely reason.  Herbie, if it really >worked > as you > >claim, there would be reports pouring from other places around the world. >It > would > >be impossible to ignore.  IF it really worked as claimed. > As I keep telling you the documents are out there. There is over 7,000 > documents on ozone therapy in Germany alone. Other research has also been > conducted in Canada, South America, Cuba, U.S., etc. Of course you would >not > know this because you do not look. The chemistry and effects of ozone is >well > known, but it is cheap, safe, and effective making it a threat to > pharmaceutical profits. >So, where are the places where they cure almost every type of cancer with >ozone? >Why hasn’t word gotten out?  All it would take would be a few researchers to >vists >this magical place and confirm the miraculous results and  the people running >it >would become instant billionaires.  Why isn’t this happening Herb? >hd

The word is out and the research has been done. I have even explained how it works to you because you do not know how to do research on the subject. But it will not be accepted in a country like this where the FDA is out to protect pharmaceutical profits at any cost. For example I mentioned that protease inhibitors were in use as an AIDS treatment before pharmaceutical protease inhibitors came on the market. Yet I do not see any billionaires from people selling protease inhibitors, natural or synthetic. The FDA has had people busted for building ozone devices and for giving the therapy. This despite the fact that that ozone has a grandfathered approval since it came to the U.S. in 1898. So why is the FDA breaking the law,a nd why was a licensed medical doctor in Florida arrested and charged with practicing medicine without a license for using ozone? There are many things we could do if we did not have the corruption of the FDA "protecting" us. These therapies are used in other countriesallt he time, which helps explain why the U.S. is ranked 17th in the world for health care. The only countries worse off than we are are generally poor 3rd world countries.

Response:

> >I made a mistake about the Concorde Study.  To bad you missed it.  Anyway, if >AIDS drugs don’t work, why the huge drop in deaths from AIDS when the infection >rate has remained the same? > Two part answer. First we have no idea what the infection rate is because of > the high percentage of false positives on HIV tests which look for antibodies, > not virus.

OK, can you tell me what percentage of HIV tests are false? > Second, AIDS cases started declining once we started moving away > from using AZT as a first line defense in someone testing HIV positive, whether > infected with the HIV virus or not. As previously explained numerous times, AZT > leads to AIDS by collapsing the immune system through bone marrrow destruction. > No immune system leads to opportunistic infections and lowered CD4 counts > giving a diagnosis of AIDS.

Are you saying that there is no possible way to detect viral loads?  No way to know of HIV is present in a patient?  There is proof that AZT wasn’t very effective compared to protease inhibitors.  Or do you think that they don’t do anything as well? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text ->> >You haven’t convinced me that ozone is effective >> Only becasue you refuse to research the therapy. If you looked in to it, as >you claim you have, you would have seen the evidence. >Uh Herbie, you haven’t convinced very many oncologists either.  Nobody has. >And the only reason that this miracle cure hasn’t been proven effective and put >drug companies out of the chemo business is because there’s a conspiracy to >supress it or some other equally unlikely reason.  Herbie, if it really worked > as you >claim, there would be reports pouring from other places around the world.  It > would >be impossible to ignore.  IF it really worked as claimed. > As I keep telling you the documents are out there. There is over 7,000 > documents on ozone therapy in Germany alone. Other research has also been > conducted in Canada, South America, Cuba, U.S., etc. Of course you would not > know this because you do not look. The chemistry and effects of ozone is well > known, but it is cheap, safe, and effective making it a threat to > pharmaceutical profits.

So, where are the places where they cure almost every type of cancer with ozone? Why hasn’t word gotten out?  All it would take would be a few researchers to vists this magical place and confirm the miraculous results and  the people running it would become instant billionaires.  Why isn’t this happening Herb? hd

Response:

>> >Herbie, for the ??? time, the FDA sucks!!  It isn’t orthodox medicine.  It >is > >a regulatory body. > There are 2 bodies involved in getting these drug approved. The drug >company > who provides the research, which in many cases has been shown to be >falsified, > and the FDA.  So I am not only referring to the FDA here. >The whole thing is an ocean of shit.  I agree.

You agree with me!? The world must be coming to an end. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >> Like I said it is not rare. Chemo drugs which have a high average >failure > >rate are another good example, and let’s not forget AZT. > >AZT was proven effective in the huge concorde study. > Proven effective for what? Causing chemical induced AIDS by collapsing the > immune system by destroying the bone marrow, thereby preventing the >formation > of immune cells? HIV antibody tests are highly inaccurate, how could they >tell > if the drug was working when they could not even prove a virus was present? >I made a mistake about the Concorde Study.  To bad you missed it.  Anyway, if >AIDS >drugs don’t work, why the huge drop in deaths from AIDS when the infection >rate has >remained the same?

Two part answer. First we have no idea what the infection rate is because of the high percentage of false positives on HIV tests which look for antibodies, not virus. Second, AIDS cases started declining once we started moving away from using AZT as a first line defense in someone testing HIV positive, whether infected with the HIV virus or not. As previously explained numerous times, AZT leads to AIDS by collapsing the immune system through bone marrrow destruction. No immune system leads to opportunistic infections and lowered CD4 counts giving a diagnosis of AIDS. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -> >> So Doggie, what is wrong with using a therapy that is more effective and > >safer than chemo to treat cancers? Do you have a problem with people >actually > >living, or do you just enjoy watching them suffer greatly before the chemo >and > >> radiation kill them? > >You haven’t convinced me that ozone is effective > Only becasue you refuse to research the therapy. If you looked in to it, as >you > claim you have, you would have seen the evidence. >Uh Herbie, you haven’t convinced very many oncologists either.  Nobody has. >And >the only reason that this miracle cure hasn’t been proven effective and put >drug >companies out of the chemo business is because there’s a conspiracy to >supress it >or some other equally unlikely reason.  Herbie, if it really worked as you >claim, >there would be reports pouring from other places around the world.  It would >be >impossible to ignore.  IF it really worked as claimed. >erf

As I keep telling you the documents are out there. There is over 7,000 documents on ozone therapy in Germany alone. Other research has also been conducted in Canada, South America, Cuba, U.S., etc. Of course you would not know this because you do not look. The chemistry and effects of ozone is well known, but it is cheap, safe, and effective making it a threat to pharmaceutical profits.

Response:

Filed under: HIV