Evidence for God from Science

How many of those deaths were due to impure water? You'd probably be shocked. Even today, millions of deaths occur due to water contamination.
If you think water quality was good 100 years ago, you need a history lesson.

jlay wrote:

Our bodies cannot cure and heal plenty of diseases....are we denying now some basic truths of disease etiology? Have we forgotten how awful mortality rates of even 100 years ago? Even before the nastiness of processed foods and awful toxins, with plenty of water and good food, plenty of people became sick and died.

How many of those deaths were due to impure water? You'd probably be shocked. Even today, millions of deaths occur due to water contamination.
If you think water quality was good 100 years ago, you need a history lesson.

RickD wrote:

Alkaline Cure for Cancer
By an eHow Contributor
I want to do this! What's This?

The alkaline cancer cure is a suggested cure for cancer, which involves eating a specialized diet designed to adjust the acid/alkaline base in the body. Because some people believe tumors grow and thrive in acidic environments, the premise behind an acid alkaline diet is that making a body more alkaline will help to cure cancer.

Why Would Alkaline Cure Cancer?
1. Our bodies have a natural pH balance, which is the balance between acid and alkaline. According to Lymphoma Nation, various test tube studies have shown that tumors and cancer cells tend to grow faster in acidic environments, and that chemotherapy works better on tumors surrounded by an alkaline environment. Therefore, those who believe in alkaline cures believe that we can make our bodies more alkaline and less acidic by eating alkaline foods and refraining from eating acidic foods. The belief is that by creating an alkaline environment, the cancer will be less likely to grow and cancer treatments will be more effective.
How does the Alklaine Cure work
2. Proponents of the alkaline cure believe that the acid/alkaline pH balance in the body can be affected by diet. Patients are advised to eat onions, lettuce, ginger, broccoli, carrots, celery, tomatoes, peppers, squash, garlic, cucumber, parsley, basil, kidney beans, squash, olive oil, lemons, limes and watermelon because these are considered alkaline foods. Patients are advised to refrain from eating meat, dairy products, sugar, white flour, wheat and pasta because these are acidic foods. This diet will allegedly change the pH balance of the body, creating an inhospitable environment for cancer.
Does it Work?
3. Some medical professionals do not believe the alkaline cure is an effective cure for cancer. Lymphoma Nation suggests that the fundamental premise behind the cure--that tumors thrive in acidic environments and fail in alkaline environments--is unproven. Lymphoma Nation states that just because this result has been observed in test tubes, there is no reason to suggest it can be recreated in humans. Furthermore, doctors at Bringham and Women's Hospital, which is a teaching hospital associated with Harvard University, argue that diet will not have a lasting impact on the acid/base pH balance in the body, because the body self regulates its pH balance using breathing and the excretory system.

However, According to Cancer Cure.org, there are medical professionals, most notably Carl J. Reich, M.D. and Bob Barefoot, who endorse the alkaline diet as an effective alternative therapy for cancer.



Read more: Alkaline Cure for Cancer | eHow.com http://www.ehow.com/way_5285958_alkalin ... z13THQZ1Vn

Here is a sampling of Barefoot's claims followed by my comments in red type. Except as noted, all are from his infomercial "A Closer Look."

* "Over 200 degenerative diseases are caused by calcium deficiency. That includes cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Alzheimer's, you name it." These diseases are caused by acidosis—acidification of the body—lack of minerals, especially calcium. When you start taking coral calcium, your body alkalizes and drives out the acid [5 ]. All of these statements are incorrect. Calcium deficiency can weaken bones (osteoporosis), but it does not make the body more acidic or cause a wide range of diseases. The idea that calcium supplements (or dietary strategies) can change the acidity of the body is nonsense. The only acid level that diet or supplements can modify is the degree of acidity (pH) of the urine [6].
* "There are seven major cultures in the world that never, ever, ever get sick. They never get cancer, they never get heart disease, they never get diabetes. They have no doctors. These people live 30, 40 years longer, and they don't grow old. What's the common denominator? One hundred times the RDA of everything. So they're taking 100 times the RDA. They take so much, they get all they need and the body passes what it doesn't need." [5] This statement is preposterous. There is no culture in which nobody gets sick. And nobody ingests 100 times the Recommended Dietary Allowances of everything. That amount of iron, for example, would probably be fatal within a few days.
* "The body can cure itself of all disease if given the nutrients it needs." [1:142] Ninety percent of the disease in America can be wiped out if people get on appropriate nutrients. Not true. Although nutritional strategies can help prevent and manage some diseases (most notably cardiovascular diseases), they are rarely curative. Moreover, the vast majority of diseases have little or nothing to do with nutrient levels; and few diseases are treatable by administering dietary supplements.
* Ninety-eight percent of people over age 60 are "totally calcium-deficient." That's why we have all this trouble with heart disease, lupus, and Parkinson's disease. Barefoot doesn't say what "totally deficient" means or where he gets this figure. However, U.S. government surveys indicate that at least half the people in this age group are getting at least 900 mg per day, which would hardly make them "totally deficient." [7] Calcium's relevance to high blood pressure may play a small role in the incidence of heart disease, but lupus and Parkinson's disease are not caused by calcium deficiency. Keep in mind that low calcium intake has very little impact on calcium blood levels. Most of the body's calcium is stored in the bones, which can release whatever amounts are needed to maintain adequate blood levels. Over a period of many years, this can produce osteoporosis, but it has little or no effect on other disease processes.
* Testing the pH level of the saliva is the most reliable test of calcium deficiency and can also tell the state of a person's health. Testing saliva has no practical value in evaluating general health. The level is usually similar to blood pH, which the body keeps within a narrow range. When the saliva flow is high, the pH is usually about 7.4 (7 is neutral, low numbers are acid, and higher numbers are alkaline). Calcium intake does not affect the pH of saliva. The most common cause of low (acid) salivary pH is the presence in the mouth of bacteria that cause cavities. In diseases (such as diabetic acidosis) in which blood pH is dangerously low, the level is determined by blood pH testing and calcium pills have no relevance to treatment.
* People should not be concerned about their cholesterol levels because abnormal levels are not the cause of heart disease. The real problem is calcium deficiency. Cholesterol problems will correct themselves if your minerals are balanced. (In another TV interview, Barefoot even states ""Everyone blames cholesterol, but it absolutely has nothing to do with heart disease." Hundreds of scientific studies support the medical belief that cholesterol is a major factor in cardiovascular disease. I am not aware of any relationship between abnormal cholesterol levels and calcium deficiency; and Barefoot cites no evidence that supports what he says.
* The two most important things people can do to be healthier, live longer, and disease-free are to take coral calcium and get a minimum of two hours of sunlight on their face every day—without sunscreen. Barefoot presents no data to back either of these claims. Even worse, two hours a day of unprotected sun exposure—particularly in warm climates—would place the person at high risk of getting skin cancer.
* Experts quoted in the Journal of the American Medical Association say that calcium can prevent and reverse colon cancer. Barefoot doesn't cite the article, but I searched the journal site for "calcium" and "colon cancer" and found it. In 1998, researchers at the Strang Cancer Prevention Center and another prominent medical institution reported that increasing the daily intake of calcium by up to 1,200 mg via low-fat dairy food in subjects at risk for colonic cancer reduced growth characteristics thought to be associated with the development of cancer [8]. The study indicates that increased attention to calcium may find a role in cancer prevention, but the study had nothing to do with either calcium supplements or the "reversal" of an established cancer.
* Barefoot claims to have seen "millions" of testimonials, had a thousand people tell him how they cured their cancer, and witnessed people with multiple sclerosis "get out of wheelchairs just by getting on the coral." He doesn't say how he could possibly have received and read millions of testimonials, investigated a thousand cases of alleged cancer cures, or determined that patients with multiple sclerosis were actually helped by coral calcium. Proper evaluation of claimed cancer cures would require (a) checking whether the patient had a biopsy, (b) checking whether or not the patient had standard treatment, (c) checking whether the patient was actually cancer-free, (d) following the patient's course for several years, (e) and compiling detailed statistics. Do you think that Barefoot has done any of these things? The Calcium Factor contains seven brief testimonials from cancer patients, but none contains enough detail either to identify any of the people or to evaluate what they report. Multiple sclerosis testimonials are even more difficult to verify because the disease normally has ups and downs. Controlled studies are needed to determine whether a method is effective.
* All cultures in which people live very long, all the people consume 100,000 milligrams of calcium. That would be enough to cause kidney stones, calcium deposits throughout the body, and death within a short period of time [9]. The Institute of Medicine recommends taking no more than 2,500 milligrams a day [7]. Taking twice that amount would be risky [9]. Taking 40 times that amount would be insane.
* The Calcium Factor contains hundreds of scientific references that back up what it says. If it does, they are well hidden. I found fewer than 100 citations, many of which were to magazine articles and quacky books. The normal way to report journal references is to list the author, journal, volume, page numbers, and year of publication. Although I looked carefully, I only found a few that were specified in this way, and some were written by authors I know to be untrustworthy. A few passages gave enough information to locate the article to which they referred, and some passages cited standard medical textbooks. However, many of these were outdated, some were quoted out of context, and none appears to support any of the the claims I have challenged in this article.
* About 600 years ago, people in Okinawa began putting coral calcium in their food and discovered that they gradually got healthier. About 100 years later, Spanish explorers came and found virtually no disease. So they filled up their shipholds and brought it to Spain, where they analyzed it and found not only calcium but a perfect balance of magnesium and 70 other trace metals and other minerals. That's an amazing story, considering the fact that 500 years ago the nature and existence of trace minerals was unknown.
* Okinawans do not get cancer. This is easy to explode by doing a Medline search for articles about cancer that mention Okinawa in their title. I found at least ten that describe the incidence of various cancers.
* The calcium in coral calcium is far more absorbable (100%) than the calcium in milk (17%) , calcium citrate products (10%) and antacid products (1-2%). Experts interviewed by the Washington Post state that pure calcium carbonate products are 30-35% absorbable [10].

Rick, I suspect zoe knows what cancer is.

Do you really want to promote your argument by attempting to portray those who disagree with you as ignorant?

I know what cancer is too, if you wish to try that track. I've been a survivor of it for 24 years and I serve as a volunteer chaplain for the American Cancer Society.

Endorsement by medical professionals as an "alternative therapy" means it's something that remains unproven but in the absence of anything that medicine can do, it's worth a shot. That's not hard evidence. It carries about as much weight as an infomercial where a doctor endorses a diet pill. It's an advertising technique appealing to individual authority where no collective authority exists.

Probably not what you want to hear, but there it is.

(sorry, but I view Quackwatch and NIH and Johns Hopkins to be more trustworthy sources) (I have underlined and bolded the response to Barefoot's claims...

RickD wrote:

(sorry, but I view Quackwatch and NIH and Johns Hopkins to be more trustworthy sources) (I have underlined and bolded the response to Barefoot's claims...

Zoe, I have already posted and sent you info about quackwatch. All you have to do is see who funds him. You can choose to ignore that, if you wish. The article was to show the link between alkalinity and health, not an endorsement of those doctors. I'm not familiar with either of them.

Canuckster1127 wrote:

RickD wrote:

(sorry, but I view Quackwatch and NIH and Johns Hopkins to be more trustworthy sources) (I have underlined and bolded the response to Barefoot's claims...

Zoe, I have already posted and sent you info about quackwatch. All you have to do is see who funds him. You can choose to ignore that, if you wish. The article was to show the link between alkalinity and health, not an endorsement of those doctors. I'm not familiar with either of them.

Why not address the detailed responses to the points contained in your article? Does the funding of them refute the point by point addressing of the article?

Are we forgetting the past 100 years of careful study? This is not hard, guys. If you want to show a CAUSAL relationship with water, there are strict controlled studies that need to be performed and followed. Otherwise everything you say is simply anecdotal and prone to human flaws (potentially).

RickD wrote:another link that talks about cancer, alkalinity, etc:http://www.advancedhealthplan.com/flyer.html

BUt you are claiming that I could stop taking my medicine (or rather that my medicine is unecesasry or akin to toxins).

if you were wrong (or rather the effects were due to simple placebo affects),

On Dr Young's website, he claims to cure diabetes and actually borders on encouraging stopping the use of insulin. Does it not seem harmful to make claims without evidence?

COnsidering BArt's testimony concerning his father and cancer, claims made by BArefoot and Young several others, whose credentials are dubious (nevermind who is paying the Quackwatch, it certainly is rather problematic to claim expertise when there is none)

Canuckster1127 wrote:

RickD wrote:another link that talks about cancer, alkalinity, etc:http://www.advancedhealthplan.com/flyer.html

Another link that talks about Reich and Barefoot. http://healthwatcher.net/Quackerywatch/ ... index.html