1. Dalene,

You need to follow your own advice about researching everything thoroughly.

I know Dr Sartori. I know his treatment. And I know he has achieved amazing results, shrinking tumours by 90% in 2 weeks.

He is not a quack, he is the most amazingly knowledgeable cancer doctor around and the conventional doctors could learn a thing or by looking at his treatment.

He has been persecuted because his treatment is not orthadox. And it's not orthadox because there's no way for big phamaceutical companies to trademark his treatment and make money out of it.

These reports are completely inaccurate about his treatment and what it consists of and this only goes to show that the authorities are not even interested in whether it works or not and what his success rate is.

Think about the conventional treatments of Chemotheraphy, Radiation and Surgery. How many people do they kill? And yet that's ok? Dr Sartori was treating people who the conventional doctors had washed their hands off and left to die. So who's in the wrong.

I hope to god that these charges get dropped because we need someone like this man to treat people with no hope.

Posted at 6:46AM on Jul 14th 2006 by Natasha Guise

2. How come "orthodox" doctors are not jailed after their patients die in their care - from their treatment methods -whether in hospital or medical centre??
Maybe this guy is truly a fraud - but also maybe this just another case of "orthodox" jealousy taking the law into it's own hands- that's right it would not be the first time.
These people went to him of their own free will - so what about the times people are forced to go the "orthodox" way and die ?? That's okay is it???
Lets have the truth please - the REAL TRUTH.

Posted at 12:55AM on Aug 26th 2006 by Frances

3. This is a comment heard often in the "alternative" community:

"Western medicine practitioners kill people, too, ya know."

This is an appeal to emotion fallacy.

An appeal to emotion is a type of argument which attempts to arouse the emotions of its audience in order to gain acceptance of its conclusion.
More accurately, it is considered a "Two wrongs make a right" logical fallacy. (Also know as "Tu Quoque" or "You Too.")

Tu quoque: Literally, you too.

Here we have an attempt to justify wrong action because someone else also does it. "My evidence may be invalid, but so is yours." It happens when someone defends his/her position alleging that the opponent makes the same mistake he/she denounces.

The argument is: it's acceptable to do something, not because other people are doing it, but because they are doing other things just as bad.

A suggestion is made by these individuals that a questionable action is made right based on how frequently people use the services of the alternative practitioner. Also, that claim of the other's (traditional medicine's) "bad" action is often unsupported and exaggerated.

To sum up, the argument tries to support a position by showing that its shortcomings are shared by an opposing position. In effect, the argument says, "My position may be bad, but you should accept it because my opponent's position is just as bad."

It's the old "So's your old lady" from the schoolyards of yore. It is a primitive and effective fallacy. But, a fallacy nonetheless as it points out a real or imaginary problem with the claimant rather than responding to the claim.

In this case, to equate a quack with no evidence to back his claims with an oncologist who possesses decades of research on benefits and risk, is imaginary.

Posted at 10:00AM on Aug 26th 2006 by Michelle

4. Yes, I am a physician. I recently lost a patient to cancer. I learned more about cancer treatment from him than the years at Yale could teach me.
Why is one patient different? He was also my best friend's father. At age 62, I had to give him and the rest of his family (including my wife's matron of honor) the worst news of all= his cancer was not curable.
Over the next 6 months, we (his family and I) spent countless of hours looking at both traditional and non-traditional treatments.
There are two small lessons learned and ONE BIG ONE.
First, false hope is no hope at all. For myself, friend, family, and most of all, the patient this is devastating. Every treatment promise of a cure/ remission leads to more heartbreak. We tried the big boys of cancer and tried the big boys of non- traditional treatment. The difference was the money charged (non-traditional bill was higher= not because of insurance coverage-- we were way, way, way out of network) and the false hope given.
The other small lesson learned: the large "traditional" cancer centers ARE looking at the alternative/ nutitional treatments. the NIH/NCI (National Institute of Health/ National Cancer Institute) is not funded by Pharmaceutical companies- they are funded by you and me. If you look at their web site- there are protocols upon protocols of non-traditional treatments.
HERE is THE BIG LESSON: LIVE. It was my friend's father who finally said enough. The supplements he was forcing robbed him the appetite to eat- often having to ingest 100 pills a day. The chemotherapy robbed of the energy to stay awake. We all learned the lesson I was supposed to learn the first day in medical school- there is dignity in dying. This was the most noble gift given to me by the most giving person I know (other than my parents)
P.S.
1. Most chemo agents are not made/ sold by the big pharmaceuticals- it's too expensive for them to develop.
2. Just because it isn't proven right doesn't mean it doesn't work. (but don't run out and buy from the person who is pitching it to you)
3. Just because it is "natural" doesn't mean it can't hurt you and doesn't mean the person who is selling it is a pilanthropist (ask their lawyers/accountants)

Posted at 12:55AM on Aug 30th 2006 by David, M.D.

5. Natasha states:
"I would just like to see more information provided on what is available instead of forcing people to investigate this on their own, and for the Conventional Establishment to have an open mind about these treatments and their results."

1.Forcing people?
2.Physicians have an open minds.
3.Alternative practitioners have no data and no results.

"There's a school of thought that all disease is an illness of the mind. A psychological trauma which a person hasn't got over, turns into a physical disease. The only treatment for this is to address and resolve the original psychological trauma through therapies such as relaxation, meditation or hypnosis."

1.This is New Age mumbo jumbo...the same type of "blame the patient", Louise Hays, type of scenario we've heard since the 70s. I guess HPV is caused by a psychological imbalance.
2. Give me an example, in the literature, of a psychological trauma that turns into disease.
3. It's sometimes so hard to believe we don't live in the Middle Ages.

Posted at 12:53PM on Sep 1st 2006 by Michelle

6. Michelle,

I'm glad you posted another comment because to be honest I didn't know what your point was initially. I thought you were just taking the opportunity to expand upon the "two wrongs don't make a right", phrase with a little bit of Latin thrown in along the way.
Now I can see that you just have a problem with anything that might be conceived as "New Age". I wonder why you have such a problem with this? Is it so bad to not prescribe a pill for every kind of sickness? To hope that whilst, "blaming the patient", is a little incompassionate, there should be a certain amount of responsibility on a person to take care of themself. Certainly ideas like, eating plenty of fresh fruit and vegetables, taking lots of exercise and general rest and relaxation were born from New Age thinking and then adopted and promoted by the Conventional Establishment.

Unfortunately in my experience Physicians have not had an open mind. I apologise to the few who do not fall under this banner but I'm pretty sure that if you are diagnosed with Cancer, you'll only hear about Chemotherapy, Surgery or Radiation as a form of treatment. When these do not work for you, you are then forced, (yes forced because the only alternative given to you then is to get your affairs in order and wait to die), to investigate other alternatives usually via the Internet. Thank God for the Internet. These are definitely not the Middle Ages.
Unfortunately because most of these alternative treatments are not acknowledged by Physicians, this has resulted in many bogus treatments appearing which prey on the desperate. What I am in favour of is for these Conventional Cancer Establishments and even some of these Cancer Charities to run trials on these alternative treatments and then post the results as compared to Chemo, Surgery and Radiation. Let us see what really does work and forget about the 5 year point as showing that a person is cured from cancer, let's monitor the people in these trials for the rest of their lives.

Michelle, I am not prepared to state examples of psychological traumas that turn into diseases. I am the first to admit that I am not so clever as to have indepth knowledge on every disease. However, please find the time to research a person called Dr Ryke Geerd Hamer and his theory of New Medicine. Dr Hamer started off as a Conventional Cancer doctor, however a tragic accident left him investigating the relationship between a person's psyche and disease. He carried out a series of experiments and you may find this amusing but he recorded all the data and the results. In fact he had incredible results. But the conventional establishments for reasons of their own were not interested and prevented him from practising medicine. Not surprisingly he has been jailed several times as seems to be happening to these Alternative Medicine geniuses.
I strongly believe that Dr Hamer's theory is the key to understanding all disease.

Posted at 11:11AM on Sep 3rd 2006 by Natasha

7. "Now I can see that you just have a problem with anything that might be conceived as "New Age"."

No I don't JUST have problem with the "New Age." Again, it is your dilemma. You need to show causality between your "alternative" treatments and disease regression. I'm sorry, but you can't criticize "conventional" medicine without doing the hard work.

"Is it so bad to not prescribe a pill for every kind of sickness?"

Physicinas don't do that. Patients are instructed every day to lose weight, stop smoking and eat better. Look around you. How many do that? If I am a responsible healthcare provider I will encouage that (and the vast majority do). IN THE MEANTIME, if your blood pressure is repeatedly 160/90 and it is not treated with an antihypertensive, many times proven to decrease morbidity and mortality, then you should leave medicine.

"Certainly, ideas like eating plenty of fresh fruit and vegetables, taking lots of exercise and general rest and relaxation were born from New Age thinking and then adopted and promoted by the Conventional Establishment."

It was born from the New Age movement? So our great grandparents and grandparents, who worked on farms and ate from their gardens were born from the New Age movement?

"Let us see what really does work."

The NIH is doing that and so far the results don't look good at all (see Echinacea and St. John's Wort studies). More studies are ongoing.

"There's a school of thought that all disease is an illness of the mind. I am not prepared to state examples of psychological traumas that turn into diseases."

No response needed.

"please find the time to research a person called Dr Ryke Geerd Hamer and his theory of New Medicine. "

This Hamer?->

**The Iron Rules of Cancer**

1. Every cancer and related disease starts as a DHS that is a Dirk Hamer Syndrome, which is a serious, acute-dramatic and isolating conflict-shock-experience. It manifests simultaneously on three levels, psyche, brain and organ.
2. The theme of the psychic conflict determines the location of the focus or HAMER Herd in the brain, and the location of the cancer in the organ.

3. The course of the psychic conflict correlates with the development of the HAMER Herd in the brain, and the course of the cancer in the organ.

At the moment of the conflict-shock a short circuit occurs in a pre-determined place of the brain. This can be photographed with computed-tomography (CT) and looks like concentric rings on a shooting target or like the surface of water after a stone has been dropped into it. Later on, if the conflict becomes resolved, the CT image changes, an edema develop, and finally scar tissue.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryke_Geerd_Hamer

Posted at 1:44PM on Sep 3rd 2006 by Michelle

8. Curious. Why does a September 1st posting occur after a Sept. 3rd posting?

Posted at 10:21AM on Sep 4th 2006 by Michelle

9. A very good friend of mine was in May 06 diagnosed with the worst kind of brain tumor, a glioblastoma. The treatment the conventionel doctors could offer was chemotherapi, radiation and only 14 months to live. She chose to look at other options and found Dr. Sartori on the internet. The went to Thailand and Dr Sartori treated her with ozone and cesium chloriode injection, along with diet and therapi to find the caurse. She finised the treatment last month. Last week she got MR-scanned in Denmark and the tumor is gone. Dr. Sartori´s treatment cured her cancer. The conventionel doctors could give her 14 months to live. I thank God for his treatment and I really hope that he will be relieved as soon as possible so he can help others like her.

Posted at 4:00PM on Sep 4th 2006 by Heidi Birkemose

10. http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/HL0608/S00107.htm

Sorry, Heidi. I need to see before and after CT scan results and treatments she received. A blog post is nice, but just that, nice.

http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com/inside.asp?AID=2265&UID=

Posted at 6:14PM on Sep 4th 2006 by Michelle

11. Natasha, if you had only said in your comment #6 (as of 9/4) that most in the medical profession treating cancer considered surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy as leading options, at times neglecting other options, you and I would be in agreement.

However, your statement indictes virtually the whole, non-alternative, medical profession, with few exceptions. Please consider several points involving the cancer I have and know, prostate cancer.

Since 2002 several major surgical prostate cancer institutions, including at least two of the most highly regarded surgeons (Patrick Walsh and Peter Scardino) have had their studies published that endorsed deferring therapy as a reasonable option in the right circumstances, mainly, low-risk cases, especially for men aged in their 70s and older, though opening the possibility of deferring therapy in much younger men. The institutions included: The University of Toronto, Sunnybrook (2002); Johns Hopkins (2003); Memorial Sloan-Kettering (2004); Erasmus University (believe either 2004 or 2005); an institution of the British government (2006) and others. My recollection is that the studies I specifically cited are all in major, widely read, peer-reviewed journals. Deferring therapy, hopefully forever, does not involve surgery, radiation or chemo.

Many prostate cancer doctors do counsel their patients on the benefits of nutrition and physical activity, including supplements, if needed, where there is good preliminary evidence, such as there is for lycopene, selenium, vitamin E, vitamin D3, and soy. Some of this evidence involves gold-standard type clinical trials. The NCI now has a very large trial ongoing to test the effectiveness of selenium and vitamin E, alone and in combination, to prevent prostate cancer (the SELECT trial).

The Journal of the National Cancer Institute just published what should be considered a major verification of the power of finasteride (also known as Proscar, just went generic) to lower the incidence of prostate cancer (by about 25%) safely. The study, in context with other studies, fairly conclusively favorably resolved a concern over high-grade cancer and finasteride. That's prevention, and of course it does not involve surgery, radiation or chemo.

Also, in your comment #8 (as of 9/4), you were frustrated that information is not available on alternative therapies and nutritional elements. One place is to go to www.pubmed.gov and search for studies. Another is to go to the Government's CAM site: http://nccam.nih.gov . Other sites I know are www.mayoclinic.com (search for alternative medicine) and www.mdanderson.org/department/cimer/index (at least that will get you close).

Jim Web Page at http://www.mycancerplace.com/profile.php?id=147

Posted at 8:04PM on Sep 4th 2006 by Jim Waldenfels

12. This is so not a case of trying to defend Dr Sartori by saying that 2 wrongs make a right. The point here is that the Orthadox establishment are not even interested in whether his treatment work or not. It's a knee-jerk response to a treatment they know nothing about and which to be honest would probably scare the hell out of them if they saw it in progress.

The bottom line is that there is a huge amount of hypocrisy with regards the Orthodox attitude to Alternative therapy. Most people who turn to Alternative means have no other option. They are in a very weakened and ill state, (usually from the Chemo, Radiation and Surgery), and would probably die within the year. So when this happens as it inevitable does for some people, the Alternative doctors gets the blame and as happened with Dr Sartori, end up in jail.

Another problem with the Conventional Establishment is that they are all too keen to treat the symptom and not the cause. It's not enough to blame smoking, obesity and lifestyle on cancer. You only have to look at some people who fall into these categories, yet are not ill with cancer to see that these can't be the only causes.
There's a school of thought that all disease is an illness of the mind. A psychological trauma which a person hasn't got over, turns into a physical disease. The only treatment for this is to address and resolve the original psychological trauma through therapies such as relaxation, meditation or hypnosis. This isn't new stuff this is stuff that's older than conventional medicine treatments. Think Ancient China, Egypt, Native American Indians. But unfortunately this is all laughable stuff to the Conventional authorities.

I have no doubt that the Traditional establishment is attempting to move into Alternative areas, but this does not seem to be happening fast enough and too few funds are being pushed in this direction.

I can't believe that most Chemo agents aren't made by big pharmaceutical companies. If it's too expensive for them how can small companies make them instead? The Phamaceutical Industry is the 2nd biggest industry in America after the Oil Industry. You can't say money doesn't play a big part in what treatment is available.

I'm not saying that all Alternative Therapies work. I would just like to see more information provided on what is available instead of forcing people to investigate this on their own, and for the Conventional Establishment to have an open mind about these treatments and their results.

Posted at 12:53PM on Sep 26th 2006 by Natasha