Prior to accusing someone of being a fake, a charlatan or master exploiter, it is critical to carefully research and investigate the charlatans purported transgressions, before condemning that person’s behavior, philosophy or assertions. Many people accuse adherents of alternative medicine of being charlatans and their treatments as being unproven or disproven, therefore, they surmise that such treatments should not be used or relied upon as being potentially beneficial for Cancer patients.
I think we would all agree that empty accusations (from any party), lacking any substantiation from opposing interests, may be tantamount to defamation. Thus, we must seriously consider the motivations and underlying agenda of both the so-called charlatan and those parties who would seek to discredit them.
New research, promising clinical studies, anecdotal evidence and numerous credible testimonials, from people, who have found success from different alternative treatments, are constantly coming to light. These should be investigated closely. Conversely, there are alternative therapies, e.g., quick fix cures, being aggressively foisted upon vulnerable late stage Cancer patients that are clearly devoid of any health related benefit.
Because a therapy has not been scrutinized by the conventional medical establishment or been subject to exhaustive, controlled, randomized clinical trials over the course of 10 years or so, does not in itself discredit the fact that some alternative treatments may in fact be quite helpful : to boost Cancer patients' immune systems, attack and shrink malignant tumors, or otherwise promote positive health benefits; especially, when traditional medicine has given up (stage 4 Cancer, frequently) in its fight to cure Cancer patients.
At the same time,it cannot be denied that charlatans do thrive in the “cancer marketplace” and, for that matter, charlatans thrive in all marketplaces whether it be the healthcare sector or any industry. Any purveyor of fraud and misrepresentation (charlatans) should be exposed and “taken to task” for their immoral and possibly illegal actions. Prior to making accusations, however, about anyone or anything, it is imperative that we look at all sides of a situation, to ascertain very carefully whether someone is guilty as charged or not.
Sometimes the line may be blurry as the varied concepts of “proof”, “evidence” and “efficacy” can be illusive and unclear.
Historically, in the annals of science and medicine, treatments which were condemned as questionable or unproven in one generation, may become the “gold standard” or conventionally-accepted treatment in another generation.
Those who seek to discredit providers and beneficiaries of alternative treatments, should communicate with the stage 4 Cancer and terminal Cancer thrivers who have been given an extra “lease on life”, before capriciously condemning these therapies and their proponents.
Many times in life we are encouraged to “think creatively outside of the box”, in order to attempt to solve difficult problems ... analogously, the conventional healthcare establishment needs to be more open to the possibilities of alternate and progressive Cancer treatments which are found “outside of the conventional Cancer treatment box”.
The establishment may find some "unorthodox tools" in that box which could help treat some seemingly unsolvable problems.
Keep the Hope !!
