Gerson: Cancer and Disease - What corporations do not want you to know

[Monica]

So the most pertinent question to me is... how many people need to die at the hands of extremists in order for humanity to learn that extremism and zealotry isn't an effective way to bring "peace and prosperity" to human beings?

We have to pick our battles. I have much more issue with the pharmaceutical industry than with overzealous alternative practitioners. Occasionally we might hear of someone who did some alternative therapy and it harmed them. It happened to me. But how often do we hear of people dying after conventional cancer 'treatment'? All the time. It's much more prevalent and insidious. At least when people pursue alternative therapies, they know it's likely not 100% proven. But if the doctor says to do something, they do it without questioning. I see this everyday in my business. People will be getting great results, but then they get the surgery or treatment because the doctor said to, and then they die.

But I see your point. Taken as a whole, people who are into alternative medicine are probably more likely to be free thinkers- since one would assume they had to get themselves out of that box to begin with.

Exactly.

It is presented as, you MUST do A, B, and C, EXACTLY as we instruct you. If you do, then your cancer will most definitely be cured. Instead of saying "I know the way! Follow me!" it would have been better to present it as: "Here try this and see what happens."

I think a great many alternative practitioners scam people by concocting elaborate rituals and specific protocols which they claim must be followed EXACTLY in order for it to work. It gives them a convenient "out" for when their patients don't get results that were promised.

Yes, many of them act as though their way is the only way. Yet look at how many different ways there are to heal cancer. It would be funny if it weren't so tragic, that there are so many ways that people are oblivious to! Those new to the alternative path often get confused because there are so many ways. I recently told a young woman pursuing alternative therapy to rejoice at how many options she had, rather than get bogged down and confused about which ones to do.

I think a distinction needs to be made between principles and protocols. A principle might be well established, but different so-called 'experts' have different opinions as to how to apply that principle.

Examples of established principles:

Contributors to healing
Exercise
Proper sleep and relaxation
Positive attitude
Fresh fruits and vegetables
Detoxify pesticides, heavy metals, etc.
Rebuild inner terrain for healthy bacteria
Less animal food

Detractors
Junk food
Stress
Environmental and dietary toxins
Excess animal foods

Those are just the basics. Even with the last one in both lists, there is some debate. But other than that, no one is going to disagree with those basics. But, the question of how much of the diet should be raw fruits and veggies, etc. and how to detoxify, and how to rebuild, all will yield differing answers. And that's not even getting into the issue of supplements.

What I'm hearing you say is that Gerson is too rigid on protocol. But they probably are like that because they're really just a notch above conventional treatment, as far as the mentality of those they attract. Those choosing such a rigid protocol might still be seeking some 'expert' to 'cure' them, rather than realizing that they are in charge of their own healing process.

Then you have Dan the Man, at the opposite end of the spectrum! He's so goofy and stoned looking, I cannot fathom anyone viewing him as any kind of authority!

Now I have a question for you, Tenet. What is your opinion on calcium? Of course there are many forms, and many cofactors, which I understand. My specific question is regarding the disagreement over whether to supplement with more calcium (with cofactors) or with magnesium, in order to correct a calcium deficiency.

This article says to take more calcium, and that mag is antagonistic to calcium:

http://www.xtend-life.com/downloads/report_cc.pdf

But then you have sellers of mag products claiming that most people already get plenty of calcium in the diet, but it's the mag that they're deficient in. Take more mag, and it will get the calcium into the bones and tissues where it belongs. They say mag deficiency affect calcium by keeping it locked up, outside the cells, resulting in bone spurs etc. which people think is too much calcium, but is actually a sign that calcium isn't being absorbed, and mag is the solution to free it up.

http://www.calmnatural.co.uk/magnesium-deficiency

http://www.ancient-minerals.com/magnesiu...oms-signs/

http://bodyecology.com/articles/magnesiu...JMKnW_Tcsc

What do you think?