Alternatives & Traditional

Posts tagged ‘Curezone’

Top 5 Worst Internet Health Information Sites: Curezone.org Part 2: Iodine Supplementation Support Forum by VWT Team Part 1

Curezone actually has two separate iodine support forums.  I don’t trust the information being given on either one of the forums.  The forum that most worries me though is the Iodine Supplementation Support Forum by VWT Team forum.

One of the issues I have with this forum is that I have read so many people complaining of iodine poisoning symptoms on this forum.  When people report their side effects though it is always the same false reply.  The people dealing with iodine poisoning are told that their symptoms are actually from a “bromine detox”.

Two of the main recommendations that the people suffering from iodine poisoning are given is to do a salt flush and then increase their iodine intake even more.  The salt flushes are claimed to flush the bromine out of their systems, but salt flushes push the excess iodine causing the poisoning out of their system.  The induced hyperthyroidism from the toxic levels of iodine is then suppressed by taking even larger doses of iodine, which force the thyroid to start shutting down thus getting rid of the iodine induced hyperthyroidism.

The VWT team is not worried about who their advice is going to injure, they just want people to consume more iodine so they can sell those people more iodine.  It’s actually quite a scam.  Get people to take toxic levels of iodine, get them to flush out the excess iodine with a salt flush and finally get them to buy and take even more iodine from them to suppress the thyroid the iodine induced hyperactivity in.

Anyone questioning the safety of the recommendations are banned from the forum as I was and this poster:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1588144#i

I was eventually banned completely from Curezone after putting up several posts proving the dangers of taking too much iodine.  I found out later that Trapper, the “T” in VWT was one of the originals on Curezone and is an advertiser on Curezone.  And since the Curezone Webmaster cares as little about safety as the VWT team and is also money oriented I clearly had to go since I was questioning safety of Curezone protocols.

One of the common symptoms that are reported is acne, which again is incorrectly blamed on a bromine detox.  It was known long before bromine became somewhat common in food that iodine could cause acne.  This article from 1912 demonstrates this fact.

http://journals.lww.com/amjmedsci/Citation/1913/04000/Generalized_Iodine_Acne_and_Macular_Exanthem.67.aspx

 

More currently, these articles again show a link between iodine and acne:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2005/12/051207181144.htm

http://ezinearticles.com/?Does-Food-Aggravate-Acne?-Part-1—The-Controversy&id=348151

http://www.zerozits.com/Articles/guesswho.htm

http://archderm.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=527138

 

Even naturopathic doctors  admit that iodine can cause acne:

http://tahomaclinicblog.com/iodide/

“SSKI or iodine can very occasionally cause acne, which also goes away once the source of iodine is discontinued.”

 

When I posted the Science News article discussing the connection I had several iodine supporters start claiming that I was against iodine supplementation.  Despite explaining to them multiple times that I use and recommend herbs with iodine and that the problem only occurs in some sensitive individuals the iodine forum supporters kept up with the same bogus claims.

I have never been against iodine, I am against the recommending of toxic doses of iodine.  As I told the iodine forum supporters too much water or oxygen can kill a person.  This does not mean people should not drink water or stop breathing.

It has been shown that both bromine and iodine can cause acne for the same reasons, irritation and inflammation off the follicles, there are differences.  Bromine induced acne results in  deeper infections and abscesses.  In addition, bromine acne takes much longer to clear up than iodine induced acne.  Bromine induced acne takes around 3 weeks to clear up as where iodine induced acne clears up in a short time.

Despite the acne breakouts from the excess iodine people are reporting not fitting the description of bromine induced acne the iodine forum supporters keep holding to their bogus claim.

More evidence that their claim is bogus can be seen by the simple fact that the breakouts only occur when iodine is ingested.  How is this proof?  Simple.   People are not being exposed to anywhere near as much bromine as the iodine forum supporters are trying to lead people in to believing.  This is why bromism (bromine poisoning) is considered extremely rare.  And in those very rare cases they have been linked almost exclusively to the use of bromine pharmaceutical drugs, which are not widely used.  Since bromine has a very short half-life in the body it just does not get built up in the body again except in extremely rare cases.  In addition, bromine is readily displaced by chlorine and especially fluoride.  The average person is exposed to tremendously larger amounts of chlorine and fluoride than bromine.  Simply taking a bath or shower leads to the absorption of a large amount of chlorine.  Swimming in a pool can do the same thing.  Eating most processed foods or drinks exposes us to large amounts of fluoride as fluoridated water is used to produce the products.  Drinking tap water or brushing the teeth or using fluoridated mouthwash can further expose people to more fluoride.  Green tea has been especially popular over the last few years due to its purported health properties.  Green tea, oolong and black teas are extremely high in natural fluoride, yet there is no epidemic of acne outbreaks among tea drinkers.  With all these more reactive halogens constantly displacing the already short half-life bromine in the body how does it build up in the body as the iodine forum supporters claim?   So far, they have yet to explain this magical phenomenon that they tout.

Also of interest is that when people complain of iodine poisoning symptoms the iodine forum supporters keep telling people to do a salt flush to flush out the bromine that they claim is built up in the tissues.  The salt actually flushes out the excess iodine helping to reduce the symptoms of iodine poisoning.   The important point here though is that the salt (sodium chloride) is half chlorine, which displaces the iodine, especially if not iodized itself.  The salt can also displace bromine out of the body as well if present.  This brings us to the question though of considering how much salt people consume on a daily basis from processed foods, salting their foods, salts naturally occurring in meats,  beer, etc. how can bromine that we are hardly exposed to build up even with all the salt people consume?  Add to this all the other sources of halogens we are exposed to that displace bromine on a daily basis and it is pretty clear that the “bromine detox” claims are simply a myth.

Yet, there is still even more evidence the “bromine detox” claims are a myth.

For example, why don’t people break out all over from soaking in brominated hot tubs?

So far the iodine forum supporters have never been able to answer my questions or counter any of my points with evidence.  Only personal attacks, which proves to me that they cannot support their claims.

If the do try then they don’t even read their own evidence.  For example, in one post an iodine forum supporter posted this study as evidence:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9140329

As we read the study we find out that the study is based on ONE case. Yet the people arguing with me try to make it sound like we have a widespread epidemic of bromine poisoning because they found one study about one person developing bromism. Or they read the claim from the first person who made this claim and ran with it without ever checking their facts. In fact the first line of the abstract states “Bromism is an UNUSUAL occurrence”.

Then there is this statement from the same review:

“Bromism, the chronic intoxication with bromide is rare and has been almost forgotten.”

So where are all the cases of bromism?  The iodine forum supporters are making it sound like bromine is in everything so most people will have excess bromine in their system.  If this were the case though then the MAJORITY of the population would have serious acne lesions.  In reality though this is obviously is not the case.  Even when I used to drink sodas like Mountain Dew and ate tons of bread I never got acne.  I never suffered brain damage either or any of the other side effects they claim can occur.  Different people can react differently to bromine, but I find it interesting that as common as they claim bromine exposure is that we do not see more symptoms actually associated with bromism.  Are the majority of people immune to the supposed side effects of bromine, soy and the many other substances that the “sky is falling” proponents are running around warning us about?  Or is it simply more hype than fact?  If it were fact I would also expect there to be a lot of research backing up these claims.  Yet the research is seriously lacking.

Additionally, look at the reactivity of different halogens:

http://www.docbrown.info/page03/The_Halogens.htm

The reactivity of halogens goes from fluorine to chlorine to bromine and finally iodine with fluorine being the most reactive and iodine the least reactive.

The more reactive halogens will displace the less reactive halogens, not the other way around.  So how can the iodine being pushing the bromine out of the body to cause acne when the bromine is a more reactive than the iodine.  If anything the bromine would be pushing the iodine out through the skin once again causing iodine induced acne.

So the iodine forum supporters keep claiming that all the more reactive fluorine and chlorine we are exposed to on a daily basis are not displacing the bromine, but taking less reactive iodine is somehow, suddenly pushing the bromine out of the body.

As we can see the reality of the situation is that the iodine, not bromine, is responsible for these common acne breakouts when taking excess iodine.

Advertisements

Top 5 Worst Internet Health Information Sites: Curezone.org Part 2: Cancer Support Forum

There is no disease that scares the average person more than cancer.  Unfortunately there are a lot of con artists out there that are ready to take advantage of people’s fears about cancer in both the allopathic and the holistic fields to sell them on bogus therapies.

The danger is not just from bogus therapies being promoted but also from the misinformation that keeps getting repeated.  Large part of the problem is that someone reads or hears something about cancer on the Internet, from a book or from some other person that they never bother to research to confirm if the claims are true.  This leads to the same misinformation being repeated over and over.

Having been doing cancer research for 32 years I have looked in to numerous therapies and claims.  I am even working on a book currently as a review of holistic cancer therapies explaining the facts behind various cancer myths and explaining what works, what is questionable and what is outright quackery.  I decided to write the book after being banned from the Cancer Support forum on Curezone for posting evidence against some of the quackery and other misinformation.

A lot of the misinformation was being posted by Tony Isaacs, who has his own forum on Curezone, but moderates the Cancer Support forum.  As with so many of the moderators on Curezone, Isaacs has a tendency to suppress any evidence he disagrees with.  We ended up butting heads numerous times especially over his misrepresentations of “oleander soup” being effective against cancer including misinterpreting studies that showed oleander as being ineffective but presenting them as proof as effectiveness.  When I posted evidence to the contrary my posts were moved or deleted from the Cancer Support forum and Mr. Isaacs went on a personal campaign to attack me personally and even tried recruiting others to join in on the attacks despite the attacks being a violation of the Curezone Terms of Service (TOS).  Reporting the violations to the Webmaster got me nowhere since Isaacs pays for advertising on Curezone.  Therefore, the Webmaster once again is putting money before health and safety.  Interestingly, I had saved my messages to the Webmaster with all the evidence of Mr. Isaacs violations in my personal folder on Curezone.  After posting about the violations on my own forum on Curezone my personal messages with the evidence were suddenly deleted.  Luckily I learned a long time ago though to back up posts and messages of Curezone since they do have a tendency to be deleted or reworded to hide violations, especially by moderators and their associates.

Oleander is the most promoted treatment on the Curezone Cancer Support forum due to Isaac being the moderator.  Most promoted does not mean most effective though, or even effective at all.  Oleander has been shown to be effective against a few cancer cell lines in Petri dishes, but actual human studies have found oleander to be ineffective for cancer.  I addressed Mr. Isaac’s claims in my previous blog posts:

https://medreview.wordpress.com/2012/10/

https://medreview.wordpress.com/2012/11/

Another person that posts on the Curezone Cancer Support forum is Bret Peirce, who is the founder of American Cancer Advocates.  Mr. Peirce has made numerous claims about cancer that directly contradict what the studies in the various medical journals claim.  Although, Mr. Pierce has stated several times that he would post the evidence to his claims or send me the evidence neither has ever happened.  Even my repeated requests reminding Mr. Peirce about his statements that he was going to supply the research to back his claims have been ignored.  This leads to me to believe that the “evidence” Mr. Perice claims to have that is the basis for this recommendations does not exist in the first place.

Another problem I have with Mr. Peirce is that he loves to use a lot of scientific words that appears he does not understand.  There is nothing wrong with using scientific words provided they are used properly.  When someone tries to use scientific words though just to make themselves sound more intelligent then this presents a problem.  I am going to address some of his other posts in future blogs.  As an example though, I have addressed some of Mr. Peirce’s claims on ozone in this blog post:

https://medreview.wordpress.com/2013/01/

When people post their health issues on places like Curezone they are putting their health, safety and trust in to the people who are responding to their posts.  When people make up claims as to the safety or effectiveness of therapies or pretend to know things they really know very little to nothing about then the persons health and trust is put at risk.  Would you ask your auto mechanic who knows nothing about cancer how to treat cancer?  Of course not.  If you are going to ask advice like this you expect the person you are asking to have a good knowledge of the subject.

Unfortunately, Curezone’s Cancer Support forum has a lot of people who simply post answers to promote their own agenda or information they simply read on a sale’s site somewhere.   They are not even taking the time to research what they read on these sales sites to see if the claims are true or not, so a lot of proven misinformation simply gets repeated over and over.  Some of the common misconceptions that keep getting repeated include:

  • Everyone has cancer cells.  If this were the case then none of us would be alive considering how well cancer cells can evade the immune system.  People claiming this either heard this myth somewhere and are repeating it or are mistaking excessive cellular growth with actual malignancies.
  • Cancer cannot survive in a high oxygen atmosphere.
  • Cancer cells thrive in the absence of oxygen.  In reality a lack of oxygen kills cancer cells, which stimulates the process of angiogenesis to increase oxygen levels to the tumor so it can survive.
  • Cancer cells are anaerobic.  Cancer cells have actually been found to be highly aerobic, but like healthy cells rely on both anaerobic glycolysis and oxidative phosphorylation for survival and function.
  • Shark’s don’t get cancer.  This myth was heavily promoted by the books titled Shark’s Don’t Get Cancer and Shark’s Still Don’t Get Cancer.  The book was published to promote shark cartilage as an angiogenesis inhibitor to treat cancer.  The fact though is that sharks DO get cancer and the whole shark cartilage thing was heavily mispromoted.  I will go in to this more in detail in a later blog post.
  • Oxygen cannot enter cancer cells unless alkalized.
  • Cancer cannot survive in an alkaline environment.  Actually the internal pH of cancer cells are more alkaline than healthy cells, which helps them to survive and thrive.
  • Cancer is a survival mechanism.
  • Cancer is a mold or fungus.
  • Cancer is caused by a parasite.  Even though there are some parasite associated cancers these types of cancer are EXTREMELY rare.
  • Cancer is a modern disease.  Fossil records show evidence of cancer even pre-dating modern humans.
  • Cancer cells are acidic because they produce lactic acid.  Actually , cancer cells produce non-acidic lactate.  They do not produce lactic acid as is commonly claimed.  The drop in extracellular pH (acidity) comes from the acidic protons generated by cancer cells that they export out of themselves since cancer cells cannot tolerate an internal acidic pH.
  • Phytoestrogens promote cancer.  Phytoestrogens, which are found in all plants have a long history of being used to treat cancer.  For example,  various studies have found soy phytoestrogens to be effective against estrogen promoted cancers.  Flax seed, which is nearly 4 times higher in phytoestrogens than raw soy has also been used therapeutically to treat cancer.  For example, these studies:

http://medcapsules.com/forum/showthread.php?tid=4622

And a series of medical abstracts on the subject:

http://medcapsules.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=541

One of the most persistent myths about cancer is that Otto Warburg won the Nobel Peace Prize for proving cancer was the result of a lack of oxygen.  Warburg actually won the Nobel Peace Prize for the discovery of an enzyme associated with cancer.  And Warburg never claimed cancer was the result of a lack of oxygen.  If people read his actual speech they will find that what Warburg actually claimed was that cancer cells would continue to ferment regardless of how much oxygen was present.  Despite what Warburg actually stated not even being close to the “cancer is caused by a lack of oxygen” the claim was repeated over and over primarily through sales sites.  Eventually Warburg’s statement eventually morphed in to the false notion that cancer was the result of a lack of oxygen.  Here are some of the examples of research readily available that prove cancer cells are reliant on oxygen:

https://www.medical-library.net/content/view/82/index.html

It is interesting to note that cancer cells use sixty percent anaerobic metabolism. Anaerobic conditions may be a significant risk factor for cancer. The fact is, in normal cells both types of metabolism are going on at all times, but the experience of vital, normal health requires that aerobic metabolism predominate. That is where TNAS comes in.”

http://www.tarosan.de/Coy_science_p53_mitochondrien.pdf

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/66/2/632.full

“In contrast to tumor-associated fibroblasts, the newly formed endothelial cells expressed GLUT1 well above the levels exhibited by mature colon vessels, suggesting active uptake of glucose from the blood stream, ready to be used aerobically for energy production. The oxygen, diffused through the tumor-associated vasculature, seems to be necessary for the survival of intratumoral endothelium and stroma but is unlikely to have a major contribution to energy production for cancer cells, as it is indicated by the low PDH, high PDK1, high LDH5, and high GLUT1 cancer cell reactivity.”

“Thompson et al. showed in a recent study that activation of a single oncogene, Akt, is sufficient to stimulate aerobic glycolysis in tumors ( 5)”

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/27/6_Part_1/1020.full.pdf

“The experimental procedure showed very clearly that the 3 tumors studied were able to remove oxygen from blood as well as or better than non-neoplastic tissues. This would not be expected to occur if any impairment of the ability to utilize oxygen did involve the neoplastic cells in vivo. A deficiency of oxygen produced by hypo-oxygenation was unable to induce an appreciable increase of blood flow through the tumor. From our data, one would expect that in vivo the tumors will compensate for a deficiency of oxygen by an increase of the oxygen removal ratio rather than by an increased blood flow.”

 

http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/64/11/3892.abstract

“Cancer cells frequently display high rates of aerobic glycolysis in comparison to their nontransformed counterparts”

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0360301686901525

“These data suggest that activation of the Akt oncogene is sufficient to stimulate the switch to aerobic glycolysis characteristic of cancer cells and that Akt activity renders cancer cells dependent on aerobic glycolysis for continued growth and survival.”

One of the most bizarre claims I have seen made about cancer is that cancer is a survival mechanism made by Andreas Moritz.  I addressed some of Moritz’s other wild claims on my previous blog post Top 5 Worst Internet Health Information Sites: Curezone.org Part 3: Liver Flush Forum:

https://medreview.wordpress.com/2013/03/01/top-5-worst-internet-health-information-sites-curezone-org-part-3-liver-flush-forum/

Moritz’s claims are not only bizarre but very dangerous.  By convincing people that cancer is a survival mechanism people may decide to not do anything about their cancer since they will see the cancer as a benefit and think the body will right itself in the long run.  Cancer is not a survival mechanism, it is not beneficial to the body and cancer does not keep the body alive.  Cancer is dangerous, damaging and deadly.  I addressed some of Moritz’s wild claims regarding his “cancer is a survival mechanism” myth here:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1567784#i

As mentioned previously too many of these claims being made are simply from someone reading bogus information on sales sites then repeating the claims without ever bothering to verify the claims.  I posted a great example of this back a while ago on the claims being made by Ty Bollinger:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1944145#i

Another example of questionable information was posted on my forum about Dr. Harvey Bilgelsen.  The link that was posted to his site is no longer functioning.  Bilgelsen also claims that Warburg found that if oxygen levels in a cell drop below 60% that the cell becomes cancerous.  Not only did Warburg never make that claim, but current research has disproven this claim anyway.

This is not the only error Bilgelsen makes though.  Bilgesen’s premise is that cancers are caused from the blood becoming too alkaline. Here is a quote from his site “When the body is stressed, the sympathetic nervous system takes over and the cells become more acid and they dump alkaline waste, which elevates the pH of the venous blood setting up the cancer terrain.” This is the exact opposite of the alkaline supporters who falsely claim that acidity causes cancer.  Neither alkalinity nor acidity are the cause of cancer.

I wonder what kind of doctor Bilgensen is supposed to be since his statements regarding physiology are contradictory.  For example, Bilgensen states that cancer develops when blood oxygenation is low and the pH of the blood is high.  The problem with this claim is that it is contradictory.  Blood pH is increased by oxygen, which reduces carbonic acid and acidic protons from the blood.  A lack of oxygen in the blood actually decreases the pH by increasing the level of carbonic acid and protons.

Later in his article he claims that hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) is effective for treating cancer.  I don’t know where he is getting his information, but HBOT has never been shown to cure cancer.  And again, this contradicts his earlier claim that alkalinity causes cancer since HBOT will raise the pH of the blood increasing its alkalinity.

Bilgensen continues by claiming “, if you ever get the pH of the blood below 7.35 or definitely 7.32, Cancer will die all over the body”.  At first glance the premise does seem plausible since cancer cells can be damaged or killed by acidity.  This is why cancer cells export acidic protons in to the extracellular matrix to protect themselves from the acidity.  This leaves the cancer cells more alkaline than the healthy surrounding cells.  This leaves the obvious question though of if the blood pH below 7.32 is sufficient to kill cancer cells then why doesn’t the acidity of the protons in the extracellular matrix kill the cancer cells?

Another misconception by Bilgensen is that cancer is a mold.  This is similar to the claims of Dr. Simoncini who claims cancer is a fungus.  Cancer cells are not even close to the same as mold or fungi cells.

Despite these contradictions, misrepresentations and outright false information it amazes me how many posters on Curezone not only fall for these kind of claims, but worse yet keep promoting it despite the solid evidence to the contrary.

As a final note I want people to remember that misinformation can be more dangerous than the cancer itself.

Top 5 Worst Internet Health Information Sites: Curezone.org Part 2: Liver Flush Forum

The name, “Liver Flush”, alone should be enough to raise red flags since this procedure does nothing to flush the liver.

The so-called “liver flushes” consist of ingesting olive oil, lemon juice and magnesium sulfate (Epsom salts), or variations of these ingredients.  The magnesium sulfate is to relax the bile ducts to allow the gallbladder to release gallstones easier.  I have seen different claims as to why the lemon juice is used from softening the stones to stimulating gallbladder contractions.  The oil is to contract the gallbladder to push the stones out of the gallbladder.

Ingestion of a large amount of oil will stimulate of gallbladder contractions.  The gallbladder though is not the liver.  Therefore, “liver flushing” is not only misleading, but also inaccurate.  The fact that the “liver flush” supporters do not know the difference between the liver and the gallbladder is very concerning by itself.  There are many more discrepancies though as well as dangers that the “liver flush” supporters have been making sure are not reported on Curezzone.

One of the largest supporters of “liver flushing” was Andreas Moritz.  One of his supporters told me that I should read his book because this has all the evidence proving “liver flushing” is for real.  Just because something is in print this does not mean something is true.  I addressed some of the claims in Moritz’s book here:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1568425#i

People doing these “flushes” pass soft, squishy, greenish blobs that they claim are gallstones being passed from the gallbladder and the liver.  Lab analysis of these so-called “stones” have proven that they are not real gallstones, but rather saponified oil.  Saponification, which is the process of forming soap compounds, is a normal occurrence within the body, and are also known as fecal soaps.  The reaction occurs between the ingredients of the “liver flush” and the bile released in to the intestine forming the blobs of saponified oil.

Some of the “liver flush” supporters have claimed that it takes hundreds of degrees for the process of saponification to occur and since the body never reaches that temperature that it would be impossible for soap stones to form in the intestines.  Apparently these individuals have never had hydroxides come in to contact with their skin.  I don’t recommend testing this due to the dangers, but I have had caustic hydroxides come in to contact with my skin when doing some experiments.  The hydroxides react with the oils of the skin immediately forming soaps that can be easily felt on the skin.  Hundreds of degrees not required as the “liver flush” supporters falsely claim and it does not take days or weeks also contrary to their claims.

Other compounds formed in the intestines that can also be mistaken for real gallstones include sterol-cholesterol complexes and calcium oxalate stones.

Sterols are common in plant materials we consume, including olive oil, and have a very high affinity for cholesterol.  Cholesterol from our diets and cholesterol in the bile released from the gallbladder bind strongly with the sterols forming an insoluble complex that is excreted in the feces.  This is the same reason sterol sources are used to lower cholesterol.  By binding dietary cholesterol it prevents the absorption of the cholesterol.  By binding bile cholesterol the sterols prevent the reabsorption of this cholesterol.

Calcium oxalate is formed from the reaction of calcium with oxalic acid from our diets or produced within the body from sources such as excess vitamin C (ascorbic acid).  It is commonly thought that most calcium oxalate is excreted in the urine, where it is responsible for the formation of some kidney stones.  In reality though, most calcium oxalate is formed in the intestines by dietary oxalates reacting with dietary calcium.  This forms the insoluble salt calcium oxalate, which cannot be absorbed.  Therefore, the calcium oxalate formed in the digestive system is excreted in the feces where it can be mistaken for calcified gallstones.

The “liver flush” supporters claim that if fecal soaps were for real that people would see the fecal soaps more often in their feces.  The problem with their claim is that saponified oils are very common in the feces, but very few people go picking through their feces to find it.

Also keep in mind that the amount of saponified oil is dependent on the amount of oil ingested.  Even though fecal soaps are formed all the time in the intestines, it is usually in small amounts.   Most people do not go around consuming a cup of oil on top of the oils and fats they already consumed in their diet.  Therefore, the amount of fecal soaps produced by the average diet is small.  Consuming the large amount of oil though as people do with these so-called “liver flushes” provides much larger amounts of saponifiable material leading to the large lumps of saponified oil being excreted in the feces.

Some people have claimed that what is being passed must be gallstones because they have passed these blobs without using oil and with repeated “flushes” they no longer pass these blobs.  What needs to be kept in mind is that our diets contain other sources of oils or fats that can be saponified.  The reason that they may not still pass these blobs after repeated “flushes” is that repeated, frequent flushes can deplete the level of cholesterol in the bile, which would otherwise become part of the saponified oil or sterol-cholesterol complexes that the “liver flush” supporters frequently mistake for real gallstones.

One of the regular posters on my old forum decided to find out if these “flushes” were for real or not.  She started by having an ultrasound performed, which confirmed she did not have any gallstones.  Then she tried the “liver flush” and passed the same green, squishy blobs despite not having any gallstones.

Some of the “liver flush” supporters have also posted their own evidence proving that these so-called “stones” were formed in the intestines, not the liver or gallbladder.  Various people have tested this by mixing red dye in the olive oil before ingesting it. When they collected the blobs from their feces and cut them open they found specs of the red dye in these blobs.  Since the dye never travels to the liver, nor the gallbladder the only possible way for the dye to have gotten in to these blobs was to have formed in the intestines where saponification is well known to take place.  Some of the supporters have claimed the dye got inside as what they refer to as “stones” passed in to the intestines since the stones are permeable to the dye.  Real gallstones though are hard and not permeable to dye.

Gallstones are soft when they first start out and they are super tiny and crumbly.  As they grow though real gallstones calcify making them hard and impermeable. As they grind against each other the gallstones form facets.  At no point are real gallstones soft, squishy, shapeless blobs like the soap stones passed during these so-called “liver flushes”.

There are various other facts that prove these blobs are not real gallstones:

  • Real gallstones do not melt.  Many of the websites promoting this quackery tell their readers to freeze the “stones” so they do not melt.  Again, large gallstones are calcified and do not melt.
  • People have claimed to have passed “stones” the size of quarters to the size of baseballs.  If these were real gallstones then this would have been impossible.  The maximum size the bile ducts can possibly expand, even with all the magnesium is only 8mm.  A real stone the size of a quarter would be around 25mm, which means that it could not possibly pass from the gallbladder in to the intestines
  • Real gallstones are dense and sink in water.  The squishy blobs that people are passing during these so-called “liver flushes” float due to their high fat content and lack of calcification since they are mostly saponified oil formed in the intestines.
  • The so-called “stones” people are passing during these “flushes” are bright green and translucent.  Real gallstones are not bright green and they are opaque due to their calcification.
  • People claim to only see these “stones” when they do these “flushes”.  If it were possible to pass real gallstones this large though by the ingestion of oil as they are claiming then simply eating high oil or fatty meals such as a hamburger would regularly flush the gallstones from the gallbladder.  Yet these people don’t find these large blobs in their feces unless they drink an excessive amount of oil during their “flushes” because they are formed from the “flush” ingredients.
  • People are claiming to pass amounts of “stones” that far exceed the amount of real gallstones the gallbladder can actually hold.  I read posts where people have claimed to pass cups full of “stones”, which far exceeds the size of the gallbladder.  Although the most ridiculous claim was from a man who gave the size and amounts of everything he passed in a week that he claimed were gallstones.  Calculating the total the volume of the so-called “stones” would have literally filled him up from his neck to his knees.  All these “liver flush” supporters need to do is to research the size of the gallbladder to realize that the gallbladder is not large enough to hold what they are claiming is being excreted.
  • I have had some people try and argue that the cups full of “stones” were coming from  the liver.  There are various flaws with their hypothesis though.  First of all there would not be this much space in the liver either.  Secondly, liver stones, which do exist, are EXTREMELY rare.  Most liver stones are found in Asian countries where they are formed as a result of parasitical infection.
  • People are claiming to pass these “stones” in amounts not only in quantities larger than the gallbladder can actually hold, but they are also claiming to do this repeatedly within short periods of time.  This provides more solid proof that these are not real gallstones.  Real gallstones are very slow growing and literally take years to form.  So how can people pass cups of what they are calling gallstones several times a week or month?  The answer is they can’t.  Real gallstones cannot form that fast.
  • One of the posters trying to argue that these really were gallstones told me that he cut them open and the smelled claiming that they therefore had to be in his body for years since food matter, such as oil cannot smell in such a short time. I wonder how he would explain the smell of feces since he claims that food matter cannot smell unless it is in your system for years?  Actually his claim provides even more evidence that these blobs are not real gallstones.  First of all the smell is from the action of bacteria on various substances.  But the gallbladder almost never contains any bacteria, and therefore we do not find bacteria in real gallstones.  On the other hand as the oil is saponified in the intestines bacteria is trapped within these soap stones the same way the red dye was trapped in the soap stones as I referred to earlier.  It is the bacteria acting on the materials in the soap stones that create the intense smell the poster referred to.

As an example look at these pictures soap stones, produced in the intestines, that are being posted as gallstones from a “flush”:

http://curezone.com/ig/i.asp?i=1110

Now compare those soap stones  to these pictures of real gallstones:

https://s3.amazonaws.com/healthtap-public/ht-staging/user_answer/avatars/263182/large/open-uri20120701-17085-p20tka.jpeg?1341153391

Notice the differences.  For example, the soap stones are not solid like the real gallstones.  The real gallstones are also faceted unlike the soft, squishy soap stones.  This occurs with larger real gallstones in the gallbladder because the stones calcify as they grow becoming hard and solid.  As the real gallstones rub against each other the faceted faces form on the stones.

If they were soft and squishy like the soap stones produced during these “flushes” they would simply break down in to little, irregular chunks during the gallbladder contractions.

Also note that the soap stones in the Curezone link would be way too large to pass through the bile ducts if they were real gallstones.  Because they are produced in the intestines though and do not have to pass through the ducts since they do not come from the liver or gallbladder there is no problem excreting them.

Often the amount of soap stones being passed far exceed the total volume that the gallbladder could actually hold if these were actually gallstones.  The Curezone “liver flush” supporters falsely claim that the reason for this is that the “stones” are not coming from the gallbladder, but rather the liver.  There are several problems with this claim though.  First of all I have seen people on Curezone claim to have passed “stones” in volumes that far exceed the volume of the liver and the gallbladder combined.  Secondly, liver stones are EXTREMELY rare and are seen almost exclusively in Asian countries where the stones are caused from parasites.  Still this myth persists among the “liver flush” supporters.  One even posted this photo claiming this was proof that liver stones are real:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1871497#i

Yes, liver stones are real.  But once again they are extremely rare.  Furthermore, what the picture shows in this liver with macronodular cirrhosis.  Those little green round parts are nodules, not stones.  The green color comes from bile accumulations that can result from either a biliary obstruction or damage to the liver.  Bile is not the same as stones.  In fact, bile is a liquid while real gallstones are a solid.

Some “liver flush” supporters claimed that they were confirmed to have gallstones by ultrasound and after doing the “flush” their gallbladders no longer contained any gallstones.  This can be easily explained.  There is a somewhat common condition in which the gallbladder can build up with precipitated cholesterol known as sludge.  Sludge particles are very tiny and with a little help from gallbladder contractions can easily pass through the bile ducts along with tiny stones.  On an ultrasound sludge is frequently mistaken for gallstones since real gallstones look the same on an ultrasound.  When these people drink the large amount of olive oil this stimulates the strong contractions of the gallbladder that can move the sludge and tiny real gallstones out of the gallbladder.

This also brings up though why these so-called “liver flushes” can be so dangerous.  If a person really has gallstones of any significant size the ingestion of a large amount of oil can cause the gallbladder to contract strong enough to force a real stone in to the bile ducts where it can get lodged.  This leads to pancreatitis and requires emergency surgery to correct.  This is not hypothetical, cases of this happening after people did these so-called “flushes” have been reported in the medical journals.  I have also read posts on Curezone where supporters reported symptoms of a lodged gallstone in their ducts after doing these flushes.  The symptoms were blamed on other things though such as having a panic attack.

It was posting this warning that got me banned from Curezone’s Liver Flush Support forum.  As with so many forums  on Curezone posting potential dangers is not considered “support”.  “Support” means agreeing with the moderator’s opinion no matter how much evidence there is to the contrary.  This also means that questioning the validity of these so-called “flushes” or providing any evidence that they are bogus is not allowed either.  Even posting evidence to the contrary is taboo in the “Liver Flush Debate” forum.  Unless you are agreeing with the false claims made by the “liver flush” supporters you are not welcome on the “Liver Flush Debate” forum either.  Interestingly, since they cannot argue the facts they try to turn the tables and require that others provide proof that the “flushes” are bogus. And when you do they twist what was said, go on the attack, try to get the evidence provider banned, etc.  Here is a thread of posts that are a clear example of the multiple games the “liver flush” supporters play to make sure their quackery is not exposed:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1752316#i

Another mistake the “liver flusher” supporters make is that they report they feel better after doing the “flushes” and thus this is proof they are passing gallstones.  Claims of being cured from everything from indigestion to allergies have been reported even though the passing of gallstones would not do anything for these.  Still, the unverified testimonials of all these cures after doing the “flushes” abound as evidence the “flushes” work.  One of the things that the “liver flush” supporters do not seem to comprehend is that feeling better does not mean one has been cured of something.   Morphine can make a person with a broken leg feel better, but this does not mean their leg is healed.

There are several things that can explain why people feel better though.

First of all the ingestion of all the oil has a laxative effect due to the oil itself and the release of the bile, which both promote bowel movements.  If you have ever been constipated didn’t you feel better when the constipation was corrected?

The ingestion of oil can also prevent bile stagnation, which can also make a person feel better.  But it is safer and less caloric to prevent bile stagnation by ingesting small amounts of oil/fat with each meal to stimulate the gallbladder rather than ingesting single large amounts of oil.

It also helps to keep the hormones in balance since both elevated estrogen and progesterone contribute to actual gallstone formation.  This is also why women are more prone to gallstones than men.

Another factor with the “liver flushes” that can make a person feel better is the ingestion of the magnesium sulfate.  Magnesium deficiencies are actually rather common and can lead to a variety of health problems including muscle cramping, constipation, high blood pressure and increased risk of asthma attacks.  Magnesium is involved in about 300 different processes within the body.  Simply correcting the magnesium deficiency with the ingestion of magnesium salts therefore can make a person feel better.

I have had posters repeatedly tell me that the burden of proof of these claims is on me and that I should demonstrate this principle in an experiment to prove the claims.  My responses to this claim are first of all the burden of proof is on the original claimants, which are the “liver flush” supporters.  Secondly, this process has been shown in experiments and is one of the experiments demonstrated in college chemistry classes.  Since the burden of proof is really on the “liver flush” supporters though they can run the experiment themselves if they really want to see the proof.  All they need to do is to buy some cholesterol from a lab supply, which is about $500-600 a pound.  Get some oil, magnesium hydroxide (formed from the breakdown of magnesium sulfate) and some bile then go to town  with the experiment.

Personally I think it would be a waste of time since the process is already known and all the evidence already presented proves beyond a reasonable doubt that those big squishy blobs are not real gallstones.

Still, people are not going to test this concept nor accept the evidence for a simple reason.  When people have been duped by such quackery they feel foolish when they finally see the truth.  And nobody likes feeling like a fool.  Therefore, some people will continue to try and argue that those blobs are real gallstones until the day they die despite the overwhelming evidence.  This is why places like Curezone attract so many quacks and gullible people.

Top 5 Worst Internet Health Information Sites: Part 2 Curezone.org Introduction

I started posting on Curezone about 5 years ago.  The moderators liked the detailed posts I wrote explaining health so much that I had several moderators asking me if I wanted my own forum.  Because of time restrictions I originally did not want to have my own forum.   After having my information altered and censored on various Curezone boards because the evidence was contradictory to the moderators of certain boards I finally decided I needed my own forum.  This way I could post evidence without moderators altering, moving or deleting my posts just because the evidence was contradictory to their beliefs.  I aptly named my forum “The Truth in Medicine”.  The archives can be found here:

http://curezone.com/forums/f.asp?f=980

In the time I was on Curezone my forum climbed to 25th position in the top 300 forums and has been still climbing despite my not being there anymore.  Currently The Truth in Medicine is in 23rd place with all the forums ahead being on Curezone for many more years than my forum.   The reason my forum climbed so fast and has continued to climb is simple.  People are putting their health and lives as well as the health and lives of their family and friends in the hands of someone they never met in person.  Therefore, people have to put their trust in the information being presented to them.  Curezone is full of outright ridiculous claims, recommendations from people who have no idea how the body works, people there just to try to sell their products at any cost,  people who are simply repeating what they read somewhere on a sales or propaganda site and people who think the only evidence required are unsubstantiated testimonials.  My forum was one of the few on Curezone where the owner had a medical background and where evidence from actual studies were being presented.

I had repeatedly stated that the concept of Curezone was great, but not the way it was run.  Curezone was overrun by Internet trolls who continually harassed or had banned anyone posting evidence against bogus claims and therapies being presented.  And the rules were very selectively enforced to suppress information that moderators did not agree with.  I actually held the distinction of being banned from more forums than anyone else ever in Curezone history.  Not because I violated the Terms of Service (TOS), but because I was posting actual studies proving that information being presented was not only wrong, but dangerous.   For example, I discussed being banned from the Adrenal Support forum for posting the dangers of ingesting caustic calcium hydroxide here:

http://curezone.com/forums/fm.asp?i=1822388#i

I was even banned from all the debate forums by the Webmaster for the same reason while the trolls who were repeatedly violating the TOS were given free reign.   Entire threads were even dedicated solely to conduct personal attacks against me and personal attacks were allowed against anyone supporting me in direct violation of TOS and not one of these Internet trolls were banned from Curezone, nor were their personal attacks removed.  One of the moderators who promotes a worthless cancer therapy called “oleander soup” sent out a series of messages to other Curezone members trying to recruit them to join in on his campaign of personal attacks against me.  Messages to the Webmaster that included evidence of these TOS violations only resulted in my being banned from more forums by the Webmaster instead of banning the TOS violators. Why?  Because many claims I was exposing as quackery and the TOS violations were being made by Curezone moderators were also advertising their products on Curezone.  Therefore, profits were being put before health and safety on Curezone.  Ironically, this is the same thing that so many people on Curezone complain the pharmaceutical companies are doing.

It is also ironic that the motto for Curezone is “educating instead of medicating”.  Why is this ironic?  Well first of all how are people being educated when the heavy hand of censorship is being wielded on Curezone?  The only information that is allowed are statements the moderators agree with regardless If it is true or not.  The other irony about the motto has to do with the fact of how often pharmaceutical drugs are pushed on Curezone.  For example, one of the largest sites on Curezone, and from what I heard the founder of the forum is also one of the people who founded Curezone, is the “Iodine Supplementation Support Forum by VWT Team”.  This site routinely promotes toxic levels of Lugol’s iodine, which the forum owner sells.  Lugol’s iodine is not a natural product though, but rather a pharmaceutical drug.  This is not educating, but rather medicating with toxic levels of a drug.  More on that later.  I have also seen various other pharmaceutical drugs pushed on Curezone including Fluconazole on the Candida Support forum and steroids on the Adrenal Support forum.  On the Cancer Support forum the moderator pushes oleander extracts for cancer and other diseases.  The extracts he promotes include pharmaceutical oleander extracts, which have been shown to be ineffective for cancer in human trials.

If the Webmaster of Curezone wishes to be honest then the motto of Curezone should be changed to “Doing whatever it takes to make a profit regardless of who gets hurt”.

Another problem I had with Curezone is that warning of potential dangers was never allowed on support forums.  “Support” was defined as agreeing with the moderator’s opinions.  It does not include safety tips or warning of potential dangers. The first forum I was ever banned from was the “Liver Flush Support” forum.  I was banned for posting there is a risk of lodging a real stone in the bile ducts, which can lead to pancreatitis and require emergency surgery.  Such cases have been reported in the medical journals after people attempted these so-called “liver flushes”.  In my view support should include any and all helpful information, which includes potential dangers.  Otherwise, someone may not realize what is going on and get the proper help if such an event does occur.  I found out though that such warnings will get you banned from a number of Curezone forums.

Such heavy handed censorship really discredits sites like Curezone.  The vast majority of people running Curezone forums have no medical background at all and don’t even know how to research for or interpret medical studies.  Therefore, they simply repeat they read on sales or propaganda sites without ever bothering to verify if the claims have any truth to them.  For example, I have seen it stated on Curezone over and over that Otto Warburg won the Nobel Peace Prize for showing that cancer resulted from a lack of oxygen.  This, or variations of this claim, are commonly made on various websites particularly selling oxygenating or alkalizing products.  The problem is that this is not what Warburg won the Nobel Peace prize for, nor did he ever claim that cancer resulted from a lack of oxygen.  Warburg won the Nobel Peace Prize in 1931 for discovering a respiratory enzyme he called “iron oxidase”.   Furthermore, Warburg never claimed that cancer resulted from a lack of oxygen.  Warburg claimed that cancer would continue to ferment REGARDLESS of how much oxygen was present.  In fact, we know today that cancer cells actually rely quite heavily on oxygen and respiration.

This is a good example of why researching claims is so important.  Otherwise the same old misinformation just keeps getting recycled over and over misleading people and putting their health at risk.

Different views should be allowed.  For example, I allowed debate on my forum and I still do on MedCapsules.com as long as it is actual debating and it is kept civil.  Debate involves taking stand on a view and presenting evidence to back that view.  Debate is not simply repeatedly saying someone you disagree with is wrong without presenting evidence to back that claim.  It is not name calling either.  I have banned people previously for both actions, but when people actually debated civilly I allowed it because it served several important actions.  First and foremost it requires the presentation of evidence to back the claims.  Not opinions or hearsay, but actual evidence.  Secondly, researching claims to back a stance in a debate increases the knowledge of a subject as the person finds new research on the subject.  It also allows other research to be presented and reviewed to see if any of the research was manipulated or misinterpreted so that old outdated or simple misinformation gets discarded rather than repeated.

Debate is not allowed on Curezone though, even in the debate forums.  If evidence is presented in the debate forums that the moderators disagree with the messages are deleted and the poster is banned from the forum.  Therefore, evidence of quackery nor safety issues behind claims are not allowed unless in line with the moderators beliefs.  You can say that chemotherapy is dangerous and can kill you, but you are not allowed to point out that excess alkalinity is dangerous and can kill you.

Interestingly, one of the arguments I have heard numerous times on Curezone when updated research is presented is that current ideas get changed in the future as new research shows something different.   This is true in some cases, but not always.  For example, it has been known that blood is pumped by the heart for hundreds of years, but this finding has never been discredited with new research.  When it fits their needs though, this principle no longer applies.  Research for example has proven that the big, squishy green blobs passed from doing the so-called “liver flushes” are saponified oil.  This has been confirmed by actual analysis of these blobs by laboratories.  Despite this fact the “liver flush supporters still claim these are real gallstones because this is the misinformation that has been passed down for around a century.

The other tactic I ran in to repeatedly on Curezone when I presented solid evidence against claims being made on Curezone was the chronic name calling.  I had been called everything from the Devil to a quack on Curezone for presenting proof of quackery on Curezone.  More commonly I was referred to as a pharmaceutical shill since the Curezone trolls had nothing to counter my evidence with.  Anyone knowing me though knows that I am highly against pharmaceutical drugs and don’t believe in most medical procedures except in very extreme cases.  This is why I have written extensively about the dangers of various pharmaceutical drugs, false claims made about their effectiveness, medical corruption, how often unnecessary medical procedures are performed, the high inaccuracies of many lab tests, etc.  I have not even been to a doctor myself in 32 years because I have personally witnessed more than enough medical malpractice and quackery by allopathic doctors.  All this gets ignored on Curezone though since facts and evidence are considered highly taboo on most of Curezone.

I have watched activity drop drastically on Curezone over the last year as people realize that Curezone is not a very credible source of health information.  Many of the most informative posters have also left because they did not want to deal with the extreme politics of Curezone where if you are not part of the Curezone troll clique they make sure you know it.  This has also left a large number of people simply too afraid of posting any questions or answers because they have seen other harassed relentlessly on Curezone for simply disagreeing with a protocol, posted evidence to the contrary, posted dangers or mentioned they had side effects to a certain protocol.  One doctor on Curezone, Dr. Lam who was very much in to supporting the adrenals with vitamin C and herbs was harassed so bad he finally left as well.   In my personal case the harassment even included a threat sent to me by one Curezone poster who frequents the Cancer Support forum  and I have had others post things on my old personal message board that was so derogatory that I would not even repeat what was written.  Other Curezone trolls even used my icon and tried to impersonate me to make it sound like I was agreeing with their false claims.

It is really a shame the way Curezone is run because it really is a good concept.  Promoting so much quackery though, censoring real research and prohibiting any posts other than those that are in line with the moderator’s opinion don’t do anyone any good.  Worse yet, such actions are very detrimental to the holistic medicine field.  Holistic medicine is always under a microscope unlike allopathic medicine.   Hundreds of thousands of people can die as a result from chemotherapy and nobody pays attention.  One person dies from a holistic therapy and it is front page news.  When Curezone promotes quackery and suppresses actual functional and safe holistic therapies supported by studies this gives the FDA and other groups more ammunition against the holistic health field.  If we are ever to get holistic medicine to be accepted in the same manner as allopathic medicine then proven bogus therapies such as “liver flushing” need to be stop being promoted and the proven therapies need to be brought back to the forefront.

Why People Need to be Careful Obtaining Health Advice From the Internet

The internet has made doing medical research so easy, but it has also opened the door to anyone making whatever dubious health claims they wish.

For example, I found a post on Curezone where a woman claimed to have multiple sclerosis (MS) that she assumed was from her amalgam fillings.  According to her story she had the amalgam fillings removed and replaced with gold.  She claims that within 10 days she had no more symptoms of MS.

So what is wrong with the story?  Plenty!

First of all MS is an autoimmune disease caused from a virus and adrenal dysfunction.  It has nothing to do with mercury.

Secondly, even if mercury was involved then the symptoms would not have cleared that quick since mercury is stored in fat tissues including the brain.  It would take a lot longer than 10 days to clear the mercury from the body.  Furthermore, anyone knowing how the body really works would have known that MS causes damage to the myelin that insulates the nerves causing the MS symptoms.  Even if the source of the MS is eliminated the lesions would have to be eliminated somehow and the myelin would have to be regenerated in order for the symptoms to disappear.  The lesions are basically scar tissue and are permanent.  Myelin will regenerate, but this can take many months to years.  For someone to claim that they were symptom free of MS in 10 days just proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the whole story was fabricated!

Despite the literal impossibilities of the story though there were still people buying I to the claims without question.

Another example I have made reference to in the past are the supposed “oleander soup testimonials” that keep getting posted on the internet on various sites.  One problem with these so-called “testimonials” is that there is no way to confirm if any of them are true to begin with.  I have always found it interesting that Dr. Ozel has supposedly cured thousands of patients using “oleander soup” but the same dozen or so “testimonials” are the only “evidence” being presented.  Where are these thousands of patients supposedly cured?  Why aren’t they all over the media praising Dr. Ozel’s name if they are still alive?  Instead, the way these “testimonials” are presented there is no way to confirm if the people really exist.  And if they do are they still alive?  What other therapies did they use in conjunction if any?  Did their cancers come back?

This is a major problem with “testimonials” on the internet.  Anyone can make up fake testimonials and put them up on the internet to mislead people in to thinking these were written by actual people who used the therapy and succeeded.  In fact, if you do a quick search on the internet you will find that there are even companies whose sole business is to write phony testimonials for products.

Therefore, are unverifiable testimonials proof of effectiveness?  Of course not.  But this tactic is used all the time, especially on the internet.  I gave an example in my previous blog post:

https://medreview.wordpress.com/2012/10/19/is-oleander-soup-for-cancer-a-scam-part-2-2/

in which Tony Isaacs claimed the studies showing oleander did not work against cancer failed because they were not conducted long enough.  According to Mr. Isaacs oleander takes at least several months to even start seeing results with oleander.  Yet, Mr. Isaacs keeps posting the same unverifiable “testimonials” that include a supposed complete remission of cancer in 12 days.  Such clear contradictions call all of the unverifiable claims in to question since both completely opposite claims cannot be true.

Don’t get me wrong, testimonials are wonderful.  But only if they are real to begin with and the facts can be verified to confirm a particular treatment is what actually worked.   They are not wonderful when they are too fantastic to be true and clearly contradict real evidence, such as every in vivo oleander study, which has shown it to be ineffective for cancer.

There used to be another poster on Curezone who went by the name Moreless that also touted all sorts of testimonials to his protocol, which included the ingestion of caustic calcium hydroxide.  If anyone questioned him or his dangerous claims they were immediately banned from his forum and were literally told they were Satan or the Satan’s disciples.  He was finally banned from Curezone for pulling stunts such as editing posts on his forum that disagreed with him or discussed the side effects and injuries people had to make the post appear they were agreeing with Moreless and the protocol was safe and effective.

I had a number of people contact me directly through private messages and e-mails discussing their injuries and even hospitalizations after following this protocol.  Of course these testimonials were erased immediately if they were reported on that forum so others would not find out how dangerous his advice really was.

Actually, if anyone looked in to his other claims they would have known better than to follow anything this person claimed.  Some of my favorite ridiculous claims being made by this person included:

  • Sunlight is acidic because it contains a lot of hydrogen.  The fact is that the sunlight does not have a pH.  Light consists of photons, which are elementary particles, not atoms.  Just because a neon light emits light this does not mean that light contains neon atoms.
  • That acidity would turn the tissues in to a “puddle of goo”.  He never did answer my question as to how the parts of the body that were naturally acidic had not dissolved into puddles of goo.  Or why someone running a marathon did not dissolve into a puddle of goo from the acidity generated during intense exercise.
  • That nitrogen is a protein.  Nitrogen is an atom and a diatomic gas, not a protein.
  • That there are subatomic minerals.  If minerals are made up of multiple full size atoms then how can a mineral be smaller than an individual atom?   It’s impossible.

Despite these and other totally ridiculous and dangerous claims made by Moreless he had a cult-like following.  At least in part as it was later revealed that Moreless was using different posting names to make it appear he had more followers than he actually had.  This also brings up the question of how many of the “testimonials” did Moreless fabricate to make his protocol appear effective?

In one post one of his followers claimed she was cured by the Moreless protocol.  But then in another post she wrote “Yes, I have had candida and MCS.  First the candida, then several years later after nothing I did to relieve it worked, very severe MCS.”

And:

“2 1/2 years on the Moreless protocol, getting better every day!!!”

So here was a “success testimonial” from a person who was admitting that after years on the Moreless protocol was still sick.

Isaacs and Moreless are only a couple of the people on Curezone presenting bogus information and giving dangerous advice.

These are just a few examples of some of the bogus, misleading and dangerous health advice I have seen on the internet.  I will be addressing other examples in future blog posts.  The point that was being made is that just because someone makes a health claim on the internet this does not automatically make it true and “testimonials” mean nothing unless the facts can be verified.

It may be nice and easier to just ask someone health advice rather than taking a little personal responsibility and researching the claims from credible sources to see if they are legitimate and safe.

This does not apply only to holistic medicines, but allopathic medicines as well.  I have seen so many people harmed by unnecessary medications and procedures because they did not question their doctors or research their conditions, medications or procedures.

For example, someone I know personally was put on Lasix (furosemide) for over 2 years without potassium, which is a major medical mistake.  Lasix (furosemide) drops potassium levels significantly causing heart arrhythmias.  Instead of giving him potassium though to prevent the side effect of the Lasix he was instead prescribed a very dangerous drug known as Amiodarone, which ended up causing iodine toxicity that has taken months for him to recover from.  All it would have taken to avoid the situation was a little simple research on the drugs to know that the Amiodarone was not necessary and the arrhythmias could have easily been prevented with the safer potassium that was being depleted by the Lasix.

Tag Cloud