| Author |
Message |
    
Barbara J. Petzing
| | Posted on Friday, March 07, 2003 - 01:51 pm: | |
My friend used Black Salve to remove a large lump in breast. She later had the lump excised. The doctor told her that the kind of cancer she had ALWAYS COMES BACK. Is there any evidence that her having used the black salve will have eliminated future cancerous growths? |
Ingrid
| | Posted on Tuesday, March 11, 2003 - 01:27 am: | |
I'm a tad confused here. She "removed" a large lump using the salve. Later, she had the lump "excised" meaning another lump appeared where she applied the salve or she had the eschar analyzed to see what it was she removed?
Obviously, I don't quite know what happened, but I will comment on the situation in general.
Many people who use the black salve do not remove all of the tumor. They fail to examine the treatment site after the first eschar detaches. Sometimes, that piece is nothing more than some skin. Of course, sometimes what comes out is the tumor, but without examining the site carefully and using the correct follow up methods, it's possible that some of the tumor is left in the body.
The second point is that recent studies with mice suggest that when tumors are deliberately transplanted into mice, the mice that were first treated with the bloodroot paste failed to develop cancer when the second effort was made to cause them to develop cancer.
My comments on this study, besides the horror of causing suffering to innocent creatures, is that the interval between the two procedures was very short. Therefore, even if there is some residual immunity or resistance to cancer, it may not be permanent. However, the mice that were treated conventionally developed cancer both times. This is significant, but when a 40-year old treats a tumor with a salve, there would be no way to say that at age 60 or 70 or 80, she could not develop cancer again, in the same or a different place.
I feel that the predisposition to cancer tends to exist regardless of the treatment used so immunity or resistance would last as long as the body could sustain good health. Stress, careless diet, failure to address life issues, etc. could build up to critical mass and another tumor could form.
Most people believe we develop sub-clinical cases of cancer constantly. Efficient immune systems, good habits, attention to minor matters before they become major, etc. helps to avert crises.
This said, I do not agree with the doctor who said that the cancer will "always" come back. When a person addresses the cause of the disease, the factors that could produce a recurrence are gone. This, to me, implies profound attention to emotional and spiritual factors, the kind of attention that sometimes leads to spontaneous remissions and other inexplicable occurrences. This said, it would irresponsible to say that any treatment is so terrific that recurrence is impossible; likewise, telling someone that he or she will never be free of the risk of cancer does not show compassion much less good bedside manners. . . even if it might be accurate professional judgment.
Perhaps here we see one of the strangest dichotomies between allopathic and holistic medicine. Conventional medicine alleges that alternative medicine offers false hope . . . but between taking away hope and false hope, there might be a middle ground. |
Anonymous
| | Posted on Sunday, August 03, 2003 - 12:21 am: | |
Thanks---I am dealing with a group of doctors at Scrips Clinic in La Jolla and I do find them to be too typical and much too pushy...I am going to Mexico to see Dr. B. on Thursday and have him look at my left breast which has cancer....i think the cancer is growing since it was bioposied...I know I need to do something soon.
Bea |
|
