Blackjack said, quoting me "But, think I missed the part where Cashless, Bubba or anyone else made any sort of claim that they had scientific proof of their diet?"
BJ responds "We ALL strongly agree that there is no science
It's pseudoscience. It is a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly
regarded as being based on scientific method.
Furthermore, it's preposterous to believe that cancer is controlled by one's diet. Influenced, yes. Controlled, no."
BB answers: No Blackjack, with all due respect, you are wrong, and just stirring up needless strife on an otherwise peaceful thread. Here is where you are are wrong: Indeed, we do all agree that there is no scientific proof here. You are correct on that.
But when you say "It's pseudoscience. It is a collection of beliefs or practices mistakenly
regarded as being based on scientific method.", you are wrong. There is no pseudoscience here(PS). There is no PS, because no one here is claiming they are using the scientific method or that they are offering scientific proof. The only one bringing up anything regarding that is you.
Cashless is simply saying "based on somethings I have read, (insulin, iron, etc) I decided to try X.
And when I tried it, I got a positive result Y. Specifically, Y = my PSA's doubling rate slowed down noticeably. Who can say if X actually influenced Y, or if it is just coincidence, or even placebo effect. But since that did actually happen, I think I will do it some more. If I decide to reverse that and a negative happens, I will go back to X once gain" ( to paraphrase what I think CC has said ). I don't think he has ever once said "I've got some scientific proof for you guys, obtained via the scientific method". The only one that brings up such a things, saying he is claiming scientific proof, IS YOU. Why are you doing that?
Now, I see you actually admit that one's diet can influence cancer, though not control it ( I hope you have some level 1 RCT proof for such an outrageous claim, otherwise you are just presenting pseudoscience. Do you have some RCTs proving diet can INFLUENCE cancer? ) However, I'm sure CC- and others here as well- would be thrilled beyond belief if their diet ONLY influenced their cancer in a positive way, something you admit is possible. I'm sure CC will find his efforts worthwhile if he can actually positively influence his cancer as well as other health issues.
Now the big question is, why aren't YOU happy that some one MIGHT actually be influencing their cancer by diet? Just as a famous person here used to get about
mentioning any possibilities for vitamins or diet vs PC, you seem to be unhappy that this discussion is taking place. That other guy used to say he was keeping me from killing some one by pointing them to a study about
vitamin D, or insulin. Is that how you feel about
CC's diet efforts? Are you here to protect us from CC's diet reports? If so, I do not understand such attitudes.
I just say to CC " well, obviously you have not provided any scientific proof that your diet is really helping you. After all, there are so many variables for your study of N=1. But if you are seeing positive results when you do X, and bad results when you do the opposite, then good for you, keep on keeping on!"
Post Edited (BillyBob@388) : 1/23/2019 5:49:03 PM (GMT-7)