Your first link is vs. placebo. Has it been compared to "phamco" poison? And I fail to see how you conclude "doctors aren't allowed..." on the basis that no one you've talked to has heard about it.

He took a spill due to poor vision and died shortly thereafter. My father was chemoed and radiated to death and not once was any nutritional intervention mentioned. In the east it is common practice to use extracts of various plants to stimulate a more robust immune response to various cancers.


Are you claiming that the western medicine killed them? How do you know that they would've died sooner had they not been treated? How do you know that they would of survived if they had nutritional supplements? Answer: you do not. I'm sory for your losses, but that doesn't give you the right to shit all over evidence-backed treatments and recommend treatments to people that have little to no evidence supporting their efficacy over other known treatments, doctor. It's not a vast conspiracy. If the cure for cancer were discovered tommorrow to be a common plant, it wouldn't result in a massive cover-up because "phamco" couldn't patent it.

I hate to break it to you, but much of the woo (woo being treatments not supported by evidence) does detract from genuinely sick people seeking out treatment that could help them. It should be (and is, depending on the circumstances) criminal. Why just the other day I read about a doctor being charged with manslaughter for killing an autistic boy by performing chelation therapy.