HIDDEN CURE.Cancer is a deficiency disease caused by the lack of an essential compound in the modern diet just as scurvy is a deficiency of vitamin C.Big Pharma/FDA profiteers have covered up the cure and have declared it fraud and quackery for over 60 years.Watch A WORLD WITHOUT CANCER YouTube documentary and investigate these facts.Thousands have been cured just by adding this essential compound to their diet without destructive and devastating drugs, chemo and radiation.Choose life instead
"My wife did take B17, high doses of Vitamin C and did NOT take any radiation or chemo (other than the estrogen blocking Tamoxifin pill) and she has been alive and cancer free for 3 years after stage 2/3 breast cancer. Of course the medical Dr. in our country said masectomy and chemo+raidation was the only way to survive. The older I get, the less I believe what is the so called truth from our so called leaders. I don't really find this funny, better words might be close minded." sonFreeman./
@Tealy855- This would be a compelling argument if the majority of the research undertaken throughout the world was being performed in medicine for profit countries. Additionally, if we simply didn't care about cures or prevention, we would scrap the polio vaccine and let tens of thousands of people pay me for their iron lung treatments. As an infectious diseases physician, I "cure" people all the time and discharge them from my practice. Your all caps paranoid rants are unfounded.
@quinndiesel1977 Why is it that Mennonites and Amish children who never get vaccinated have a near zero rate of Autism ? Why do they have so much less bad health issues. Are we beginning to see the big lie ?
@Tealy855 You obviously are oblivious to the "big lie." As a doctor in Central Pennsylvania I take care of a lot of Amish and Mennonites. 1)It is a myth that they have a religious prohibition on vaccination. 2) It is a myth that their autism rate is zero. You must not interact with a lot of Mennonites. I suggest that you do. Their cheese and pretzels are EXCELLENT! Due to their genetic isolation, the Amish have been studied quite extensively in genetic studies.
@Tealy855 You are a fool if you think they have less "bad health issues." Their rates of certain genetic diseases are much higher than ours. When Autism was screened in an Amish population of 1899 children, a rate of 1:271 was found. There is plenty of Autism in the Amish communities. Like I said, Data talks and Bullshit walks. When you pretend that google is a substitute for "research" you insult those of us who actually DO research.
@Tealy855 Suggesting that those of us who actually do research should "do some research" when you don't even know anything more than the misinformation fed to you from the pseudoscience websites you read is really insulting to anyone with an intellect. Incidentally, I do have some friends studying the Dunning-Kruger effect. Perhaps I could recommend you as a subject. I doubt your degree from "Google University" would disqualify you.
@quinndiesel1977 LOL- "Google University" - Now thats a good one - With all the disinformation on the internet and TV people dont know what to believe. .
@quinndiesel1977 What do you think about the metabalic theory of cancer ? That cancer cells are trophoblast cells and the enzymes trypson and chymotrypson produced by the pancreas are needed to destroy such cells as a 1st line of defense. I have been looking into this theory for 3 months.
@Tealy855 Pancreatic enzymes are not used by the body to defend itself from cancer cells. Pancreatic enzymes are highly destructive to tissue and are used for digestion. Cancer is a genetic dysfunction caused by mutations to a cell's DNA. Cells have genetic mechanisms for regulating their growth. When this mechanism is altered or mutated then the cell can't turn it's own growth off becoming "immortal," and hence a cancer cell. While metabolism can play a minor ancillary role in cancer...
@Tealy855 ...Cancer is not primarily a metabolic disorder. Having cancer has metabolic consequences. Cancer cells continually divide and require more energy than non dividing cells. In that sense there is a metabolic consequence but it is not the driving factor in cancer.
HIDDEN CURE.Cancer is a deficiency disease caused by the lack of an essential compound in the modern diet just as scurvy is a deficiency of vitamin C.Big Pharma/FDA profiteers have covered up the cure and have declared it fraud and quackery for over 60 years.Watch A WORLD WITHOUT CANCER YouTube documentary and investigate these facts.Thousands have been cured just by adding this essential compound to their diet without destructive and devastating drugs, chemo and radiation.Choose life instead
@Tealy855 Firstly: No - cancer is not a 'deficiency disease'. Second: Not only is Vitamin B17 - or 'laetrile' - completely and utterly ineffective at treating cancer at any level, it is potentially dangerous as the doses recommended can lead to cyanide poisoning. By spreading and endorsing such lies as 'World Without Cancer', you are directly endangering the lives of real cancer patients. Hope you feel really good about yourself.
@SuperShiningSun The American Cancer Society tells us that in metastatic (advanced ) cancer, with early diagnosis and early treatment with surgery, and/or radiation and/or chemotherapy, only 0.1% (one out of one thousand) of those patients will survive 5 years. If you consider only those patients who have survived five years or more, this means that my results were 287% better than those reported by the American Cancer Society for the treatment of metastatic cancer by "orthodox" methods alone.
@SuperShiningSun Laetrile does contain the cyanide radical (CN–). This same cyanide radical is contained in Vitamin B12, and in berries such as blackberries, blueberries and strawberries. You never hear of anyone getting cyanide poisoning from B12 or any of the above-mentioned berries, because they do not.
"My wife did take B17, high doses of Vitamin C and did NOT take any radiation or chemo (other than the estrogen blocking Tamoxifin pill) and she has been alive and cancer free for 3 years after stage 2/3 breast cancer. Of course the medical Dr. in our country said masectomy and chemo+raidation was the only way to survive. The older I get, the less I believe what is the so called truth from our so called leaders. I don't really find this funny, better words might be close minded." sonFreeman./
@SuperShiningSun The cancer cell has an enzyme, beta-glucosidase, which when it comes in contact with nitrilosides, converts those nitrilosides into two molecules of glucose, one molecule of benzaldehyde and one molecule of hydrogen cyanide. While the hydrogen cyanide may exert some toxic effect, it is the benzaldehyde that is extremely toxic to the cancer cell. What is so significant about this is that this is a target-specific reaction.
@SuperShiningSun Within the body, the cancer cell, and only the cancer cell contains the enzyme beta-glucosidase. Thus, the benzaldehyde and the hydrogen cyanide can be formed in the presence of the cancer cell, and only the cancer cell. Thus they are toxic to the cancer cell and only the cancer cell. Normal cells contain the enzyme rhodanese, which converts the nitrilosides into food
@Tealy855 Stop! I am not interested in you trying to explain known quackery. All I wanted was to point out to you how incredibly dangerous your actions are, as I don't really think you grasp the serious implications of your spreading of these lies. Wear your tin-foil hat in regards to modern medcine if you must, but kindly keep your ramblings to yourself where they cannot endanger real cancer patients.
@Tealy855 Oh and by the way: beta-glucosidase is an enzyme used by certain fungi and bacteria as well as termites to dissolve cellulose - or plant fibre if you will. It has absolutely nothing to do with cancer cells or Vitamin B17 metabolism.
@Tealy855 Oh dear - the internal consistency is fading. Three comments ago, it read: "Within the body, the cancer cell, and only the cancer cell contains the enzyme beta-glucosidase.", whereas now: "The quantity of beta-glucosidase in cancer cells is 3000 times the quantity found in normal cells." and that's disregarding me pointing out that humane cells do not even contain that enzyme. A little freudian slip, perhaps, revealing that you make this shit up as you go along?
@Tealy855 My religious views - if any - are irrelevant to this conversation, so do not try to pull that red herring. And you are talking bullshit again: The only place I have found mention of beta-glucosidase being pressent human cancer cells are... surprice, surprice at sites that promote Laetrile-quackery. Will you please understand that Laetrile is a toxic substance, that has utterly failed to show any benefit in cancer treatment?
Look at this little girl , she took her father's Laetrile tablets and died of cyanide poisoning." Just then a little lady stood up:"Dr. Manner let me answer that question.I think I am entitled to because I am that little baby's mother. That baby never touched her father's Laetrile tablets.The doctor, knowing the father was on Laetrile, marked down "possible cyanide poisoning At the hospital they used a cyanide antidote and it was the antidote that killed the child.
@Tealy855 You can take your anecdotes and showe them. Here's a real story of a child: Pediatrics Vol. 78 No. 2 August 1, 1986 pp. 269 -272 : "Cyanide Poisoning From Laetrile Ingestion: Role of Nitrite Therapy - A 4-year-old child ingested laetrile and almost died of cyanide poisoning. Treatment with the Lilly cyanide antidote kit resulted in rapid, complete recovery. Extremely high whole blood cyanide levels were documented.(...)"
of this risk. Perhaps it would be better to start at smaller doses. Personally , however if I had to choose between chemo and the enzyme/ nitriloside treatment I would choose the natural treatment. I am currently taking 100mg of B17 along with 2 apricot seeds and mulivitamins and minerals as a cancer maintenance
program. It has been my observation that most who gets chemo die within 5 years of the chemo/radiation and those who use this treatment become cancer free
@Tealy855 I do not deal in names, rumors or anecdotes, but I do deal in peer reviewed scientific journals, so here you go: Annals of Emergency Medicine, Volume 12, Issue 7 , Pages 449-451, July 1983: Case report: "Acute cyanide poisoning from laetrile ingestion"
@SuperShiningSun Laetrile does contain the cyanide radical (CN–) Another side effect is low blood pressure- I did receive a report of a man who was consuming 9 grams per day and was treated on record for cyanide buildup.I would like to get the actual medical record- Cancer patients being robbed for their oxycodone stash seems to be a bigger problem Perhaps oxycodone could be replaced with curcumin/turmeric-Thanks I will review this info and get back to you perhaps a report should be published.
@SuperShiningSun I have read the 2 articles cyanide poisoning by laetrile and apricot kernels. With the 2nd line of defense nitilosides (laetrile or apricot kernels etc.. ) The fist being
the enzymes trypsin and chymotrypsin. When the nitilosides come into contact with the cancer cells the benzaldehyde and the hydrogen cyanide
radicals in the laetrile or apricot kernel etc.. are converted to the actual poison. So if their is not enough rhodanese enzymes to covert the dead..
@SuperShiningSun ..poisoned cancer cells the subject would experience a toxic crisis. In theory if the subject has no cancer cells than there is no posibility of such poisoning. So the process of killing off cancer is taking place so fast that the metabolism of the subject cant handel it. Everyones metabolism is different.
So the possibility of toxicity exists for anyone using this ttreatment who has cancer. Therefore those who engage in this treatment should be informed .....continued..
In orthodox medicine, they often speak of cures, but the patients are dead! According to the death certificates, they don't die of cancer, but of heart failure, lung failure, liver failure, or hemorrhage. But what caused these? They are the secondary effects of their treatments for cancer. "We got it all," is a common refrain. "I'm happy to report that we cured him of his disease — just before he died." This is not really a joke. It is the reality of orthodox cancer therapy.
@SuperShiningSun No just against a treatment that kills nearly everyone whom it is applied to. The evidence is clear that B17 laetrile and enzyme therapy have cured thousands.
@SuperShiningSun No it has been well established in science for over 100 years that the beta-glucosidase enzyme is contained within cancer cells. Also in fungi and some insects.
DrSugiura found that, when he used Laetrile on these mice, seventy-seven per cent of them did not develop a spread of their disease The results were always the same.Dr. Sugiura took his findings to his superiors at Sloan-Kettering, but his study was never published. Instead, Sloan-Kettering published the results of someone else used Dr. Sugiura's protocol. This "someone else's" study showed that there were no beneficial effects from the use of Laetrile.Dr. Sugiura complained. He was fired.
Excellent video. Definetely the way each category of the public understands Science creates multiple problems in Society and Science. The funny thing is one can observe both irresponsible use and alarmism at the same time. People just group around 2 opposite poles. I think we are in lack of moderation. There is no need to panic about cellphones, but then again phonecalls that last almost hours, are not too reasonable either. And I have seen them happen as well as the panic.
thats it man :) please spread the word that hemp cures cancer please . you can find the answers online you can find the truth here on the internet . you can even find it here on youtube . I should'nt have to say this but people don't trust anything but hard evidence these days : it has been scientifically proven . you should want to know the truth. type it here on youtube.
WEED OR HEMP CURES CANCER. Either one is fine :) please spread the word :) and curse tumors. and hemp oil.
Can anyone tell me what documentary the last sentence on some of C0nc0rdance's videos are from? I mean "Every cell of each plant and animal contains genetic information coded onto the DNA molecule. The model rep..."
Can you do one about smart meters? these things have been getting a lot of heat lately on health issues. but i heard they emit less radio waves than televisions or cellphones. so whats the hype?
Even though I have large doubts about cell phones causing cancer there is always the possibility that it's not the radio waves that are responsible, but rather carcinogens in the materials used in their construction. Also even though their usage may only be indirectly involved, asn in influencing behaviors which may be more directly responsible, wouldn't it still be a good idea to limit their usage if that is the case?
If the materials being used are carcinogenic, they won't cause any damage unless they are ingested. Carcinogens aren't radio-active.They can't cause cancer without being absorbed in the bloodstream.
I don't know if you've been following the Burzynski Clinic controversy that's been going on over the last few weeks. I would love to see a video by you on it.
Cellphones do cause osteoporosis in the hip, on long term exposure. It was in the news paper. Remember, cellphones work with microwave... Which is the same thing used in Microwaves.
@Poodleinacan Newspaper? Thats not legitmitate plus cellphones use a different frequency than that used in the microwave. Microwaves emit microwave radiation at 2.5Ghz heating up water,fat etc via dielectric heating. You cant say cellphone radiation microwave radiation are the same.
Another comment. I've heard that the discovery of the mechanism by which aspirin works came some 80-100 years after people were convinced it worked. I prefer a mechanistic explanation of why some drug or treatment works, but such is not always required. If it works, it works.
Quick question. I've heard many times that cell phone radiation is too weak to damage DNA or alter other chemicals in the body and based on this the cell phone issue is dismissed. But isn't cancer now thought of as being a result of some gene or protein being activated? If so, how much energy would it take, typically, to do this using the microwaves from a cell phone?
Regarding the jury analogy: the guilt or non-guilt of cell phones in relation to cancer is ancillary to the question that most people really care about - do the benefits of using a cell phone outweigh the risks? Certainly, accurately quantifying the true risks of cell phone use allows that decision to be made more carefully. However, many decisions are made under significant uncertainty.
I look at when the media says something is bad is relatable to radio shock jocks, just looking for something to spin ratings and put ass's in front of the tv. There a things they tell us are bad that I look at our ancestors having survived on for centuries. Really media knows not even two shits what their talking about. I would rather hear what a credible scientist has to say first!
it's not always practical to wait for the end of the trial. a risk assesment has to be done and then decided whether to suspend the practice or continue it until the end of the trial.
even though cellphone waves don't have the energy to directly cause ionization, they change to potential and by doing so, change the probailities for higher energy radiation to successfully cause ionization. in the real world most effects have compound causes.
Didn't the tobacco companies convince the majority of you SHEEPLE that cigarettes don't cause cancer, but now we know better. Truth is, we always knew better.
.
.
FACT: Cell phones will have some sort of long term effect
@smileyking96 Apple seeds contain amygdalin of which laetrile is a modified version - the supposed "vitamin" B17 cancer cure that C0nc0rdance mentioned in the video.
@Cactarpus Also I wonder if they were holding the cell phone with there hands, sometimes I put my hands over my ears to warm them up even when not holding a cell phone and it seems to be effective.
Where are you getting your information ? It's established that they DO cause tumors the evidence is overwhelming ask Australia's world renowned neurosurgeon Dr Charlie Teo, he's removing brain tumors every day and he's convinced. Apart from the fact that he'll attempt surgery when others are too afraid to have a go he knows brain tumors and what he's seen so far has scared the shit out of him because it's getting worse. He says we should use hands free "all the time" and I believe him.
"Removing them every day" doesn't tell you a thing about what caused the tumors in the first place.
If all you got is your belief in what Teo says and all he got is his "conviction", then you're pretty much nowhere. If there is evidence, then present it!
I'm afraid you completely missed the point of the video, otherwise you would have done so in the first place, instead of relying on the good old appeal to authority.
This is called the "personal testimonial" argument. It's not used in science, but very popular in marketing and the media. People, it turns out, are not very reliable at recalling the statistical significance of past events. Las Vegas is built on this single fact.
Great job once again! The literature in my area (epidemiological/clinical research) have different definitions of case-control studies and RCTs (separate designs). RCTs involve undiseased subjects that are randomly assigned to control/test groups that receive the same exposure - therefore the exposure causes the disease/outcome that develops. Case-control studies involve existing diseased cases, whereupon control subjects are found retrospectively to determine the exposure (in reverse of RCTs).
I think this might just be a terminology difference. Several people have commented that I've mixed up RCT and prospective studies. I don't think I agree: RCT and case-control suggest that a large population are randomized and assigned to arms of a study, either intervention or no intervention, for example. Prospective cohorts are not segregated prior to endpoint.
I may be wrong on this, there are several (very smart) people with your viewpoint in messages.
@C0nc0rdance Prospective/retrospective describes whether the exposure/diagnosis occurs AFTER (pros) the study begins, or BEFORE (retro) - thus, RCTs are an experimental prospective study. Case-control studies involve cases that are ALREADY exposed (e.g. cancer patients in a clinic) whereupon similar controls are identified to perform retrospective comparisons of risk factors - an observational retrospective study. With RCTs, none of the participants have been exposed before the study begins.
@naskies You are right: "prospective" and "retrospective" refer to when information is recorded in regard to the study period.
However, information may be recorded before the study begins for other purposes: that is the soul of register-based studies, geography studies and nested case controls.
@C0nc0rdance The reason that words "prospective" and "retrospective" make no sense is the posibility of "prospective case-control". Timing when exposures (including confounders) and outcome are recorded is the key point!
In RCTs, "prospective" cohorts and "nested case-control" the exposure is recorded before the outcome; in "retrospective" designs the exposure is recorded after the outcome ocurrs.
There is no recall bias possible if the exposure is recorded before the outcome!
Outstanding! Though it's always possible that evidence-based medicine will acquire causal signs before a causal mechanistic model is developed. Indeed, it would seem unlikely that a causal theory for x usually precedes evidence for x.
An example I've read of lately is calcium supplementation increasing the clearance of radio-strontium in studies (done during weapons testing in the 60s), but in those same studies the causal mechanism was expressly stated to be unknown.
There are a lot of things that seem to work but we don't know why (including some that are probably just placebos). It's a "shades of grey" kind of scenario.
I share your optimism that, given enough time and research, we'll be able to winnow the wheat from the chaff.
Cell phones and brain cancer again? This was huge in the news back in the late 90's. The news and rumors from the news was that brain cancer was caused by cell phone antennas. Supposedly the tumors would show up at the point where the antenna and head lined up. This, of course, was back when cell phones still had the pull out antennas. The rumors and fears eventually went away. I guess they've come back in a slightly updated form.
And would not want to come out and say "It is as likely that power lines cause cancer as it is you having a pet stegosaurus.", not technically impossible, though highly unlikely.
Thanks for that. In my opinion though, it might be a thought to include the conflicts of interest that many studies may have fallen prey too - again this should be taken with a grain of salt but it bears looking into (in my opinion).
*After reading the comments I realise how this could quickly turn into 'conspiracy theory' fodder, but many scientists are employed by such studies as those done on the effects of power line emissions and such...
Ahhhm, you should probably make a note on that slide of the profile thermograms of before and after phone use as coming from quack / huckster websites. At least, that's the only origin of it I can find on an image search. There's simply no friggin way a mere tenth of a watt of GHz radiation is going to heat your head enough for it to be visible on an IR imaging system like that.
It looks somewhat scientific, doesn't it? The thermal imaging is over-dramatizing the actual degree of heating, and the mechanism. Batteries do get warm, and holding a solid object to your ear traps heat. Does gently heating skin promote localized cancer? I think that's pretty unlikely, but it's not SO ridiculous that I'm prepared to throw it out entirely.
@C0nc0rdance I'm fully prepared. If people are seriously proposing that as a mechanism now, I want to see studies on earmuffs, ski masks, and fluffy pillows. posthaste. The subject is essentially closed for me. It's a repeat of the low freq. / power line hype of the 90's, there's nothing in it. I'll keep an eye on ow. ly/7NPwp over the next 5 years perhaps, then it should be considered proven beyond any reasonable doubt there's no link.
A friend of mine passed up a steal on a house rental because it was close to some power lines. his mother is convinced that those caused cancer and she refused to co-sign the lease... yay parents.
We already know that IF cell phones cause cancer the risk is low. This reminds me of the drug companies trying to show that taking cholesterol lowering drugs could make you live longer. The studies showed that they don't so they kept doing bigger and bigger studies trying to show that they have some tiny benefit.
I have been hearing about this for years and I always thought there might be something truthful about it since cell phones can emit high doses of microwave radiation. If cell phones were found to be harmful, I'm not sure how long it would take for the truth to come out since there is so much money in the cell phone industry.
@apatheticwretch even if it was a known fact that 3 weeks of using a cell phone caused cancer people would still do it because the media isnt going to cover the issue, and capitalism is flawed,You might get in a car accident and a .30 cent part couldve saved your life but the designer saved 30 mill taking out the part when he designed it,obviously our system hasnt taken into consideration that we breed hate and envy,
Ciggerette companies dont care just as long as they make money
@apatheticwretch I think the important thing would be to watch for a 'Documentary' about it. If it made a strong assertion one way or the other, you could be fairly certain the motives for its production were not neutral.
Especially if it stated as fact that they don't cause cancer.
The work you do through your videos is incredibly important.
Whether people are receptive or not in the end cannot be our responsability, but at least info and proper methodology is explained and out there for anyone who cares to grab it.
Loved this video. It does so much more than its title suggests. I wish everyone in highschool could watch this video and understand the differences in the quality, preponderance and corroboration, concordance data toward a convergent conclusion. So fatiguing to deal with people that don't understand the differences.
When drawing a benzene ring, when should you use three lines (like in the diagram), and when should you use a circle? Or is it purely aesthetic? I think that it makes more sense and looks better as a circle, but I don't understand why people continue to use the three lines.
@aliendragon17 If I remember correctly, it has to do with the number of valence electrons being shared in the benzene ring. Been a while since I studied that, and given I haven't done anything with that info, I might be wrong.
I wonder if anyone doing those thermal images bothered to take a picture after holding to your face a turned off cellphone or a cellphone in airplane mode or earmuffs or a scarf or even your hand for 15 minutes.
@spinynorman1982 The one on the left is Laurence Krauss and the one on the right is Michael Shermer. The one in the middle I'm not sure about, but I've seen him somewhere before...
What a surprise, yet another video "debunking" the danger of some industrial-corporate created thing, because we all know corporations always have the health and interest of the general public as a paramount concern in their business model. The of course would never deceive, lie, use propaganda, lobbyist, or snake oil salesmen co-opted scientist to misinform the consumer of any peril associated with their product and would always be forthcoming of any said hazardous concerns promptly.Mmhhmm...
@terminaldeity Historically and factually corporations are the most dangerous entities on this planet along side and hand in hand with the military-industrial complex. Their lies, greed, corruption, atrocities, and violence are unsurpassed. To list them would fill this comment thread. So forgive me if I'm highly skeptical of this channels constant condemnation of natural foods and products and consistent praise and love fest of all things industrial and corporate created.
Im extremely glad you make these videos. You've taught me a great amount in the practice and application of skepticism towards "science" news articles as well as various other things that need to stand up to scrutiny before accepted as-is. It's a shame that you aren't one of the channels with a few million views on each video. I'm sure if that were true we'd all be a little better off. Thanks for your time and videos.
I see no harm in convincing all the annoying dingbats who have to have their private conversations and arguements in public areas that their phones will give them cancer. ANYTHING to get them to STFU is ok by me. I can't even use a public bathroom without listening to some ditz gabbing away about meaningless tripe.
As a diabetic who is fairly interested in research into prevention and cures for type 1 diabetes, I can complement your rule 4 with A rule 4b: Everything cures diabetes in NOD mice. We clearly need a better animal model.
All actions must be measured on a risk vs. benefit scale. Every action has a risk. Eat and you could choke. Drive and you could crash. Talk on the phone and you could get cancer (maybe). However, you can't stop eating, driving, or talking on the phone or life would be very inconvenient. Such actions are worthwhile risks. The best we can do is eliminate as much risk as possible. Eat slow, drive safe, and talk in moderation. I hate fear mongers on the web. They contribute nothing practical.
I think it's more about changing the public's understanding of science first... demand side rather than supply side. We need to start with kids, and we need a massive overhaul of the educational system. What we have now is not getting the job done. Kids need to learn critical thinking and independent research. They need to understand how to find answers, and how to critically analyze arguments and data. Too many "Google Scholars" out there.
Excellent exposition of methodological naturalism; I wish more people who make philosophical criticisms of science were aware. of the distinction between being 'evidence based' and 'scientific'. The balance between observation and theory is very little understood outside scientific and sympathetic philosophical circles; which is a shame as grasping it could lead to people in general being a lot better informed about important issues like health and climate change. This is good work to that end.
thats why i like concordance videos, no bullshit, just science and pure honesty even if the outcome is against concordance preference as i have seen in other videos of his, he still sticks with the facts, the hallmark of a good scientist, and the defining feature (i should say lack of) in anti-vaxers, anti-evolution and just anti-science people in general
This has been flagged as spam show
CURE RATE WAS 287% HIGHER THAN ORTHODOX !!
FREE CANCER CURE BOOK " ALIVE AND WELL" by Philip E. Binzel, Jr., M.D
Google it : ALIVE AND WELL Whale
Google it : A WORLD WITHOUT CANCER
Google it : Curcumin and Piperine Destroy Breast Cancer Cells
Tealy855 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
treatmentfor-cancer.blogspot.com
Costynel14 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
FREE CANCER CURE BOOK " ALIVE AND WELL" by Philip E. Binzel, Jr., M.D
Google : ALIVE AND WELL Philip E. Binzel MD Whale
Tealy855 5 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
HIDDEN CURE.Cancer is a deficiency disease caused by the lack of an essential compound in the modern diet just as scurvy is a deficiency of vitamin C.Big Pharma/FDA profiteers have covered up the cure and have declared it fraud and quackery for over 60 years.Watch A WORLD WITHOUT CANCER YouTube documentary and investigate these facts.Thousands have been cured just by adding this essential compound to their diet without destructive and devastating drugs, chemo and radiation.Choose life instead
Tealy855 1 week ago
"My wife did take B17, high doses of Vitamin C and did NOT take any radiation or chemo (other than the estrogen blocking Tamoxifin pill) and she has been alive and cancer free for 3 years after stage 2/3 breast cancer. Of course the medical Dr. in our country said masectomy and chemo+raidation was the only way to survive. The older I get, the less I believe what is the so called truth from our so called leaders. I don't really find this funny, better words might be close minded." sonFreeman./
Tealy855 1 week ago
Excellent video again C0nc0rdance. The information on the different techniques of investigation is golden content. Keep up the good work.
quinndiesel1977 1 week ago
BIG PHARMA : A PATIENT CURED IS A CUSTOMER LOST FOREVER !! Notice the word "CURED' is not in the vocabulary of
modern Medicine. Cancer is metabolic and Curable.
Tealy855 3 weeks ago
@Tealy855- This would be a compelling argument if the majority of the research undertaken throughout the world was being performed in medicine for profit countries. Additionally, if we simply didn't care about cures or prevention, we would scrap the polio vaccine and let tens of thousands of people pay me for their iron lung treatments. As an infectious diseases physician, I "cure" people all the time and discharge them from my practice. Your all caps paranoid rants are unfounded.
quinndiesel1977 1 week ago
Comment removed
Tealy855 1 week ago
@Tealy855 I'll give you a chance to back up that alex jones nonsense before I start laughing uncontrollably. Data talks and bullshit walks.
quinndiesel1977 1 week ago
Comment removed
Tealy855 1 week ago
Comment removed
Tealy855 1 week ago
Comment removed
Tealy855 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@quinndiesel1977 Why is it that Mennonites and Amish children who never get vaccinated have a near zero rate of Autism ? Why do they have so much less bad health issues. Are we beginning to see the big lie ?
Tealy855 1 week ago
@Tealy855 You obviously are oblivious to the "big lie." As a doctor in Central Pennsylvania I take care of a lot of Amish and Mennonites. 1)It is a myth that they have a religious prohibition on vaccination. 2) It is a myth that their autism rate is zero. You must not interact with a lot of Mennonites. I suggest that you do. Their cheese and pretzels are EXCELLENT! Due to their genetic isolation, the Amish have been studied quite extensively in genetic studies.
quinndiesel1977 1 week ago
@Tealy855 You are a fool if you think they have less "bad health issues." Their rates of certain genetic diseases are much higher than ours. When Autism was screened in an Amish population of 1899 children, a rate of 1:271 was found. There is plenty of Autism in the Amish communities. Like I said, Data talks and Bullshit walks. When you pretend that google is a substitute for "research" you insult those of us who actually DO research.
quinndiesel1977 1 week ago
@Tealy855 Suggesting that those of us who actually do research should "do some research" when you don't even know anything more than the misinformation fed to you from the pseudoscience websites you read is really insulting to anyone with an intellect. Incidentally, I do have some friends studying the Dunning-Kruger effect. Perhaps I could recommend you as a subject. I doubt your degree from "Google University" would disqualify you.
quinndiesel1977 1 week ago
@quinndiesel1977 LOL- "Google University" - Now thats a good one - With all the disinformation on the internet and TV people dont know what to believe. .
Tealy855 1 week ago
@quinndiesel1977 What do you think about the metabalic theory of cancer ? That cancer cells are trophoblast cells and the enzymes trypson and chymotrypson produced by the pancreas are needed to destroy such cells as a 1st line of defense. I have been looking into this theory for 3 months.
Tealy855 1 week ago
@Tealy855 Pancreatic enzymes are not used by the body to defend itself from cancer cells. Pancreatic enzymes are highly destructive to tissue and are used for digestion. Cancer is a genetic dysfunction caused by mutations to a cell's DNA. Cells have genetic mechanisms for regulating their growth. When this mechanism is altered or mutated then the cell can't turn it's own growth off becoming "immortal," and hence a cancer cell. While metabolism can play a minor ancillary role in cancer...
quinndiesel1977 2 days ago
@Tealy855 ...Cancer is not primarily a metabolic disorder. Having cancer has metabolic consequences. Cancer cells continually divide and require more energy than non dividing cells. In that sense there is a metabolic consequence but it is not the driving factor in cancer.
quinndiesel1977 2 days ago
Comment removed
Tealy855 3 weeks ago
@Tealy855
LOL. I like how you misspelled metabolic.
C0nc0rdance 3 weeks ago
HIDDEN CURE.Cancer is a deficiency disease caused by the lack of an essential compound in the modern diet just as scurvy is a deficiency of vitamin C.Big Pharma/FDA profiteers have covered up the cure and have declared it fraud and quackery for over 60 years.Watch A WORLD WITHOUT CANCER YouTube documentary and investigate these facts.Thousands have been cured just by adding this essential compound to their diet without destructive and devastating drugs, chemo and radiation.Choose life instead
Tealy855 1 week ago
@Tealy855 Firstly: No - cancer is not a 'deficiency disease'. Second: Not only is Vitamin B17 - or 'laetrile' - completely and utterly ineffective at treating cancer at any level, it is potentially dangerous as the doses recommended can lead to cyanide poisoning. By spreading and endorsing such lies as 'World Without Cancer', you are directly endangering the lives of real cancer patients. Hope you feel really good about yourself.
SuperShiningSun 1 week ago
@SuperShiningSun The American Cancer Society tells us that in metastatic (advanced ) cancer, with early diagnosis and early treatment with surgery, and/or radiation and/or chemotherapy, only 0.1% (one out of one thousand) of those patients will survive 5 years. If you consider only those patients who have survived five years or more, this means that my results were 287% better than those reported by the American Cancer Society for the treatment of metastatic cancer by "orthodox" methods alone.
Tealy855 1 week ago
@SuperShiningSun Laetrile does contain the cyanide radical (CN–). This same cyanide radical is contained in Vitamin B12, and in berries such as blackberries, blueberries and strawberries. You never hear of anyone getting cyanide poisoning from B12 or any of the above-mentioned berries, because they do not.
Tealy855 1 week ago
@SuperShiningSun Tell that to the thousands who are now cancer free.
Tealy855 1 week ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"My wife did take B17, high doses of Vitamin C and did NOT take any radiation or chemo (other than the estrogen blocking Tamoxifin pill) and she has been alive and cancer free for 3 years after stage 2/3 breast cancer. Of course the medical Dr. in our country said masectomy and chemo+raidation was the only way to survive. The older I get, the less I believe what is the so called truth from our so called leaders. I don't really find this funny, better words might be close minded." sonFreeman./
Tealy855 1 week ago
@SuperShiningSun The cancer cell has an enzyme, beta-glucosidase, which when it comes in contact with nitrilosides, converts those nitrilosides into two molecules of glucose, one molecule of benzaldehyde and one molecule of hydrogen cyanide. While the hydrogen cyanide may exert some toxic effect, it is the benzaldehyde that is extremely toxic to the cancer cell. What is so significant about this is that this is a target-specific reaction.
Tealy855 1 week ago
@SuperShiningSun Within the body, the cancer cell, and only the cancer cell contains the enzyme beta-glucosidase. Thus, the benzaldehyde and the hydrogen cyanide can be formed in the presence of the cancer cell, and only the cancer cell. Thus they are toxic to the cancer cell and only the cancer cell. Normal cells contain the enzyme rhodanese, which converts the nitrilosides into food
Tealy855 1 week ago
@Tealy855 Stop! I am not interested in you trying to explain known quackery. All I wanted was to point out to you how incredibly dangerous your actions are, as I don't really think you grasp the serious implications of your spreading of these lies. Wear your tin-foil hat in regards to modern medcine if you must, but kindly keep your ramblings to yourself where they cannot endanger real cancer patients.
SuperShiningSun 6 days ago
Comment removed
Tealy855 6 days ago
@Tealy855 Oh and by the way: beta-glucosidase is an enzyme used by certain fungi and bacteria as well as termites to dissolve cellulose - or plant fibre if you will. It has absolutely nothing to do with cancer cells or Vitamin B17 metabolism.
SuperShiningSun 6 days ago
Comment removed
Tealy855 6 days ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Tealy855 Oh dear - the internal consistency is fading. Three comments ago, it read: "Within the body, the cancer cell, and only the cancer cell contains the enzyme beta-glucosidase.", whereas now: "The quantity of beta-glucosidase in cancer cells is 3000 times the quantity found in normal cells." and that's disregarding me pointing out that humane cells do not even contain that enzyme. A little freudian slip, perhaps, revealing that you make this shit up as you go along?
SuperShiningSun 6 days ago
Comment removed
Tealy855 5 days ago
@Tealy855 My religious views - if any - are irrelevant to this conversation, so do not try to pull that red herring. And you are talking bullshit again: The only place I have found mention of beta-glucosidase being pressent human cancer cells are... surprice, surprice at sites that promote Laetrile-quackery. Will you please understand that Laetrile is a toxic substance, that has utterly failed to show any benefit in cancer treatment?
SuperShiningSun 5 days ago
@SuperShiningSun Religious views ??? wacko jacko !!! It is less toxic than sugar !!!!
Thats FDAs BS. Only toxic to cancer cells - thats the point //
Tealy855 5 days ago
Look at this little girl , she took her father's Laetrile tablets and died of cyanide poisoning." Just then a little lady stood up:"Dr. Manner let me answer that question.I think I am entitled to because I am that little baby's mother. That baby never touched her father's Laetrile tablets.The doctor, knowing the father was on Laetrile, marked down "possible cyanide poisoning At the hospital they used a cyanide antidote and it was the antidote that killed the child.
Tealy855 5 days ago
@Tealy855 You can take your anecdotes and showe them. Here's a real story of a child: Pediatrics Vol. 78 No. 2 August 1, 1986 pp. 269 -272 : "Cyanide Poisoning From Laetrile Ingestion: Role of Nitrite Therapy - A 4-year-old child ingested laetrile and almost died of cyanide poisoning. Treatment with the Lilly cyanide antidote kit resulted in rapid, complete recovery. Extremely high whole blood cyanide levels were documented.(...)"
SuperShiningSun 5 days ago
of this risk. Perhaps it would be better to start at smaller doses. Personally , however if I had to choose between chemo and the enzyme/ nitriloside treatment I would choose the natural treatment. I am currently taking 100mg of B17 along with 2 apricot seeds and mulivitamins and minerals as a cancer maintenance
program. It has been my observation that most who gets chemo die within 5 years of the chemo/radiation and those who use this treatment become cancer free
within a few months.
Tealy855 3 days ago
@SuperShiningSun Please provide some information regarding persons who have died as a result of consuming laetrile . Names ...? dates...?...etc..
Tealy855 5 days ago
@Tealy855 I do not deal in names, rumors or anecdotes, but I do deal in peer reviewed scientific journals, so here you go: Annals of Emergency Medicine, Volume 12, Issue 7 , Pages 449-451, July 1983: Case report: "Acute cyanide poisoning from laetrile ingestion"
SuperShiningSun 5 days ago
@SuperShiningSun Laetrile does contain the cyanide radical (CN–) Another side effect is low blood pressure- I did receive a report of a man who was consuming 9 grams per day and was treated on record for cyanide buildup.I would like to get the actual medical record- Cancer patients being robbed for their oxycodone stash seems to be a bigger problem Perhaps oxycodone could be replaced with curcumin/turmeric-Thanks I will review this info and get back to you perhaps a report should be published.
Tealy855 4 days ago
@SuperShiningSun I have read the 2 articles cyanide poisoning by laetrile and apricot kernels. With the 2nd line of defense nitilosides (laetrile or apricot kernels etc.. ) The fist being
the enzymes trypsin and chymotrypsin. When the nitilosides come into contact with the cancer cells the benzaldehyde and the hydrogen cyanide
radicals in the laetrile or apricot kernel etc.. are converted to the actual poison. So if their is not enough rhodanese enzymes to covert the dead..
continued
Tealy855 3 days ago
@SuperShiningSun ..poisoned cancer cells the subject would experience a toxic crisis. In theory if the subject has no cancer cells than there is no posibility of such poisoning. So the process of killing off cancer is taking place so fast that the metabolism of the subject cant handel it. Everyones metabolism is different.
So the possibility of toxicity exists for anyone using this ttreatment who has cancer. Therefore those who engage in this treatment should be informed .....continued..
Tealy855 3 days ago
In orthodox medicine, they often speak of cures, but the patients are dead! According to the death certificates, they don't die of cancer, but of heart failure, lung failure, liver failure, or hemorrhage. But what caused these? They are the secondary effects of their treatments for cancer. "We got it all," is a common refrain. "I'm happy to report that we cured him of his disease — just before he died." This is not really a joke. It is the reality of orthodox cancer therapy.
Tealy855 2 days ago
@Tealy855 In your deluded fantasy, perhaps, but I see I'm wasting my time with you
SuperShiningSun 2 days ago
@SuperShiningSun No just against a treatment that kills nearly everyone whom it is applied to. The evidence is clear that B17 laetrile and enzyme therapy have cured thousands.
Tealy855 2 days ago
@SuperShiningSun No it has been well established in science for over 100 years that the beta-glucosidase enzyme is contained within cancer cells. Also in fungi and some insects.
Tealy855 5 days ago
@SuperShiningSun FREE CANCER CURE BOOK " ALIVE AND WELL" by Philip E. Binzel, Jr., M.D Google : ALIVE AND WELL Philip E. Binzel MD Whale
Tealy855 5 days ago
DrSugiura found that, when he used Laetrile on these mice, seventy-seven per cent of them did not develop a spread of their disease The results were always the same.Dr. Sugiura took his findings to his superiors at Sloan-Kettering, but his study was never published. Instead, Sloan-Kettering published the results of someone else used Dr. Sugiura's protocol. This "someone else's" study showed that there were no beneficial effects from the use of Laetrile.Dr. Sugiura complained. He was fired.
Tealy855 2 days ago
@Tealy855
No cut and pasting from whale dot to. Repeat offenders are blocked.
C0nc0rdance 2 days ago
Excellent video. Definetely the way each category of the public understands Science creates multiple problems in Society and Science. The funny thing is one can observe both irresponsible use and alarmism at the same time. People just group around 2 opposite poles. I think we are in lack of moderation. There is no need to panic about cellphones, but then again phonecalls that last almost hours, are not too reasonable either. And I have seen them happen as well as the panic.
ONESPECIES 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
thats it man :) please spread the word that hemp cures cancer please . you can find the answers online you can find the truth here on the internet . you can even find it here on youtube . I should'nt have to say this but people don't trust anything but hard evidence these days : it has been scientifically proven . you should want to know the truth. type it here on youtube.
WEED OR HEMP CURES CANCER. Either one is fine :) please spread the word :) and curse tumors. and hemp oil.
ThePeopleneedhelp 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Voici la methode des gitans pour voler arnaquer manipuler...affaiblir en rendant malade et DONNANT LE CANCER
L'unique chose qu'il ne font pas c'est tuer avec violence (phisiquement) et il ne manque pas d'autres methodes...
"Arnaque des gitans" sur google
La stupiditer allier a la débiliter profonde...
zitous1 1 month ago
Can anyone tell me what documentary the last sentence on some of C0nc0rdance's videos are from? I mean "Every cell of each plant and animal contains genetic information coded onto the DNA molecule. The model rep..."
IblameBlame 1 month ago
Can you do one about smart meters? these things have been getting a lot of heat lately on health issues. but i heard they emit less radio waves than televisions or cellphones. so whats the hype?
TheZachary86 1 month ago
Ohey this video just gave me an idea! I can buy feeder mice for my cat to play with!
Laughingblades 1 month ago
Even though I have large doubts about cell phones causing cancer there is always the possibility that it's not the radio waves that are responsible, but rather carcinogens in the materials used in their construction. Also even though their usage may only be indirectly involved, asn in influencing behaviors which may be more directly responsible, wouldn't it still be a good idea to limit their usage if that is the case?
pocoapoco2 1 month ago
@pocoapoco2
If the materials being used are carcinogenic, they won't cause any damage unless they are ingested. Carcinogens aren't radio-active.They can't cause cancer without being absorbed in the bloodstream.
siddharthjoshi91 1 month ago
@croissaintwithcheese It still causes osteoporosis over a long period of time
Poodleinacan 2 months ago
omg but how
peeweelover57 2 months ago
Excellent. Thanks.
ShawnsterVideos 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
excellent video! great ending!
siplementehumano 2 months ago
Comment removed
siplementehumano 2 months ago
Oooon
mileycyrusrulesful 2 months ago
Really. Come loon
mileycyrusrulesful 2 months ago
I don't know if you've been following the Burzynski Clinic controversy that's been going on over the last few weeks. I would love to see a video by you on it.
IAmARationalApe 2 months ago
Cellphones do cause osteoporosis in the hip, on long term exposure. It was in the news paper. Remember, cellphones work with microwave... Which is the same thing used in Microwaves.
Poodleinacan 2 months ago
@Poodleinacan Newspaper? Thats not legitmitate plus cellphones use a different frequency than that used in the microwave. Microwaves emit microwave radiation at 2.5Ghz heating up water,fat etc via dielectric heating. You cant say cellphone radiation microwave radiation are the same.
croissaintwithcheese 2 months ago
Another comment. I've heard that the discovery of the mechanism by which aspirin works came some 80-100 years after people were convinced it worked. I prefer a mechanistic explanation of why some drug or treatment works, but such is not always required. If it works, it works.
Prelude610 2 months ago
Great work, again. Thanks.
Quick question. I've heard many times that cell phone radiation is too weak to damage DNA or alter other chemicals in the body and based on this the cell phone issue is dismissed. But isn't cancer now thought of as being a result of some gene or protein being activated? If so, how much energy would it take, typically, to do this using the microwaves from a cell phone?
Prelude610 2 months ago
Nothing makes me more horny than well structured ideas with a good methodology. I find it easy to masturbate to your videos. Am I a weirdo?
Tamizushi 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
CELLPHONE USE IS NT GUD
Feroozpsoe 2 months ago
CELLPHONE USE IS NT GUD
Feroozpsoe 2 months ago
There was also a report on laptops causing testicular and ovular (?) cancer :p
FHomeBrew 2 months ago
Regarding the jury analogy: the guilt or non-guilt of cell phones in relation to cancer is ancillary to the question that most people really care about - do the benefits of using a cell phone outweigh the risks? Certainly, accurately quantifying the true risks of cell phone use allows that decision to be made more carefully. However, many decisions are made under significant uncertainty.
dubinspath 2 months ago
Awesome video! If everyone understood this, the world would be a much better place.
kyebean 2 months ago
I look at when the media says something is bad is relatable to radio shock jocks, just looking for something to spin ratings and put ass's in front of the tv. There a things they tell us are bad that I look at our ancestors having survived on for centuries. Really media knows not even two shits what their talking about. I would rather hear what a credible scientist has to say first!
wakcedout 2 months ago
nice vid as usual, two remarks:
it's not always practical to wait for the end of the trial. a risk assesment has to be done and then decided whether to suspend the practice or continue it until the end of the trial.
even though cellphone waves don't have the energy to directly cause ionization, they change to potential and by doing so, change the probailities for higher energy radiation to successfully cause ionization. in the real world most effects have compound causes.
beyondEV 2 months ago
I'm not worthy of watching C0nc0rdance.
Rarae192 2 months ago
What, no inverse of the 4th law, ie, Everything CAUSES cancer in lab mice? ;)
evilotakuneko 2 months ago
Didn't the tobacco companies convince the majority of you SHEEPLE that cigarettes don't cause cancer, but now we know better. Truth is, we always knew better.
.
.
FACT: Cell phones will have some sort of long term effect
themack411 2 months ago
@themack411 Yah, just like the radio in your car is causing a long term effect?
unclexbob 2 months ago
Apprently, apples cuase cancer. In fact, every causes cancer.
smileyking96 2 months ago
@smileyking96 *thing
smileyking96 2 months ago
@smileyking96 Apple seeds contain amygdalin of which laetrile is a modified version - the supposed "vitamin" B17 cancer cure that C0nc0rdance mentioned in the video.
Rarae192 2 months ago
Fantastic. I really love your vids.
Moxiah 2 months ago
fav youtuber!
r2k85 2 months ago
i was just arguing this exact point with someone about cellphones yesterday. ty for the Awesome videos
isrealjason 2 months ago
I was just thinking for the thermal images, where were the phones prior to being placed by the head?
Cactarpus 2 months ago
@Cactarpus Also I wonder if they were holding the cell phone with there hands, sometimes I put my hands over my ears to warm them up even when not holding a cell phone and it seems to be effective.
ArchNME 2 months ago
Where are you getting your information ? It's established that they DO cause tumors the evidence is overwhelming ask Australia's world renowned neurosurgeon Dr Charlie Teo, he's removing brain tumors every day and he's convinced. Apart from the fact that he'll attempt surgery when others are too afraid to have a go he knows brain tumors and what he's seen so far has scared the shit out of him because it's getting worse. He says we should use hands free "all the time" and I believe him.
TonyBurke100 2 months ago
@TonyBurke100
"Removing them every day" doesn't tell you a thing about what caused the tumors in the first place.
If all you got is your belief in what Teo says and all he got is his "conviction", then you're pretty much nowhere. If there is evidence, then present it!
I'm afraid you completely missed the point of the video, otherwise you would have done so in the first place, instead of relying on the good old appeal to authority.
primzahl13 2 months ago
@TonyBurke100
This is called the "personal testimonial" argument. It's not used in science, but very popular in marketing and the media. People, it turns out, are not very reliable at recalling the statistical significance of past events. Las Vegas is built on this single fact.
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago
Great job once again! The literature in my area (epidemiological/clinical research) have different definitions of case-control studies and RCTs (separate designs). RCTs involve undiseased subjects that are randomly assigned to control/test groups that receive the same exposure - therefore the exposure causes the disease/outcome that develops. Case-control studies involve existing diseased cases, whereupon control subjects are found retrospectively to determine the exposure (in reverse of RCTs).
naskies 2 months ago
@naskies
I think this might just be a terminology difference. Several people have commented that I've mixed up RCT and prospective studies. I don't think I agree: RCT and case-control suggest that a large population are randomized and assigned to arms of a study, either intervention or no intervention, for example. Prospective cohorts are not segregated prior to endpoint.
I may be wrong on this, there are several (very smart) people with your viewpoint in messages.
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago
@C0nc0rdance Prospective/retrospective describes whether the exposure/diagnosis occurs AFTER (pros) the study begins, or BEFORE (retro) - thus, RCTs are an experimental prospective study. Case-control studies involve cases that are ALREADY exposed (e.g. cancer patients in a clinic) whereupon similar controls are identified to perform retrospective comparisons of risk factors - an observational retrospective study. With RCTs, none of the participants have been exposed before the study begins.
naskies 2 months ago
@naskies You are right: "prospective" and "retrospective" refer to when information is recorded in regard to the study period.
However, information may be recorded before the study begins for other purposes: that is the soul of register-based studies, geography studies and nested case controls.
hedleypanama 2 months ago
@C0nc0rdance The reason that words "prospective" and "retrospective" make no sense is the posibility of "prospective case-control". Timing when exposures (including confounders) and outcome are recorded is the key point!
In RCTs, "prospective" cohorts and "nested case-control" the exposure is recorded before the outcome; in "retrospective" designs the exposure is recorded after the outcome ocurrs.
There is no recall bias possible if the exposure is recorded before the outcome!
hedleypanama 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Damm it >.> I was hoping it was for someone >.> THANK you for crashing my HOPES and DREAMS -___-
MistressArte 2 months ago
Comment removed
MistressArte 2 months ago
Outstanding! Though it's always possible that evidence-based medicine will acquire causal signs before a causal mechanistic model is developed. Indeed, it would seem unlikely that a causal theory for x usually precedes evidence for x.
An example I've read of lately is calcium supplementation increasing the clearance of radio-strontium in studies (done during weapons testing in the 60s), but in those same studies the causal mechanism was expressly stated to be unknown.
iamgoddard 2 months ago
@iamgoddard
There are a lot of things that seem to work but we don't know why (including some that are probably just placebos). It's a "shades of grey" kind of scenario.
I share your optimism that, given enough time and research, we'll be able to winnow the wheat from the chaff.
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago
Cell phones and brain cancer again? This was huge in the news back in the late 90's. The news and rumors from the news was that brain cancer was caused by cell phone antennas. Supposedly the tumors would show up at the point where the antenna and head lined up. This, of course, was back when cell phones still had the pull out antennas. The rumors and fears eventually went away. I guess they've come back in a slightly updated form.
thisisaguy 2 months ago
This is a public service announcement, brought to you by your friends at AT&T... :D
Soulfree2008 2 months ago
Cont'd.
And would not want to come out and say "It is as likely that power lines cause cancer as it is you having a pet stegosaurus.", not technically impossible, though highly unlikely.
IDGAFcoolface 2 months ago
Thanks for that. In my opinion though, it might be a thought to include the conflicts of interest that many studies may have fallen prey too - again this should be taken with a grain of salt but it bears looking into (in my opinion).
*After reading the comments I realise how this could quickly turn into 'conspiracy theory' fodder, but many scientists are employed by such studies as those done on the effects of power line emissions and such...
IDGAFcoolface 2 months ago
thank you again for your valid inciteful reminders...
lawbag1 2 months ago
Ahhhm, you should probably make a note on that slide of the profile thermograms of before and after phone use as coming from quack / huckster websites. At least, that's the only origin of it I can find on an image search. There's simply no friggin way a mere tenth of a watt of GHz radiation is going to heat your head enough for it to be visible on an IR imaging system like that.
10mintwo 2 months ago 4
@10mintwo
It looks somewhat scientific, doesn't it? The thermal imaging is over-dramatizing the actual degree of heating, and the mechanism. Batteries do get warm, and holding a solid object to your ear traps heat. Does gently heating skin promote localized cancer? I think that's pretty unlikely, but it's not SO ridiculous that I'm prepared to throw it out entirely.
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago
@C0nc0rdance I'm fully prepared. If people are seriously proposing that as a mechanism now, I want to see studies on earmuffs, ski masks, and fluffy pillows. posthaste. The subject is essentially closed for me. It's a repeat of the low freq. / power line hype of the 90's, there's nothing in it. I'll keep an eye on ow. ly/7NPwp over the next 5 years perhaps, then it should be considered proven beyond any reasonable doubt there's no link.
10mintwo 2 months ago
@C0nc0rdance *quotemine* Wearing ear muffs causes cancer! Concordance said so!
unclexbob 2 months ago
A friend of mine passed up a steal on a house rental because it was close to some power lines. his mother is convinced that those caused cancer and she refused to co-sign the lease... yay parents.
ryoshi100 2 months ago
This just in! Scientific study concludes eggplant causes cancer! ...The same study also concludes that lack of evidence also causes cancer!
Odashiman 2 months ago
We already know that IF cell phones cause cancer the risk is low. This reminds me of the drug companies trying to show that taking cholesterol lowering drugs could make you live longer. The studies showed that they don't so they kept doing bigger and bigger studies trying to show that they have some tiny benefit.
WarmWeatherGuy 2 months ago
I always find your videos fascinating. Nice job, as usual.
419Films 2 months ago
I have been hearing about this for years and I always thought there might be something truthful about it since cell phones can emit high doses of microwave radiation. If cell phones were found to be harmful, I'm not sure how long it would take for the truth to come out since there is so much money in the cell phone industry.
apatheticwretch 2 months ago
@apatheticwretch even if it was a known fact that 3 weeks of using a cell phone caused cancer people would still do it because the media isnt going to cover the issue, and capitalism is flawed,You might get in a car accident and a .30 cent part couldve saved your life but the designer saved 30 mill taking out the part when he designed it,obviously our system hasnt taken into consideration that we breed hate and envy,
Ciggerette companies dont care just as long as they make money
itsadeadmansparty 2 months ago
@apatheticwretch I think the important thing would be to watch for a 'Documentary' about it. If it made a strong assertion one way or the other, you could be fairly certain the motives for its production were not neutral.
Especially if it stated as fact that they don't cause cancer.
Keinlicht 2 months ago
A few months ago? I have been hearing this same thing since the 90's
FattyMcFox 2 months ago
How might we study "faith based" medicine?
kellygiz 2 months ago
Thank you for teaching people how to think.
The work you do through your videos is incredibly important.
Whether people are receptive or not in the end cannot be our responsability, but at least info and proper methodology is explained and out there for anyone who cares to grab it.
thenoeggplantzone 2 months ago 6
Wouldn't we also see an increase in hand-cancer?
CodeSculptor 2 months ago
Loved this video. It does so much more than its title suggests. I wish everyone in highschool could watch this video and understand the differences in the quality, preponderance and corroboration, concordance data toward a convergent conclusion. So fatiguing to deal with people that don't understand the differences.
EV4UTube 2 months ago
You let the cat out of the bag. At 3:54 "better medical care is responsible for the increase". As always big pharma is responsible.
EvolutionaI 2 months ago
Thanks for your videos!
pbezunartea 2 months ago
A shame that I can't do mechanistic studies in sociology. The control of variables is practically impossible to control
BjornSeverinLarsen 2 months ago
Thanks to youtube's new interface, I'm just now seeing this video...Good vid by the way...
CompleteRationality 2 months ago
I always thought it was pronounced "Lay uh trill"....
kabloozie 2 months ago
OH GOD, I'm going to get cancer of the lap.
kabloozie 2 months ago
i always felt like if i slept near my cell phone it would be bad for me lol
MrBigEnchilada 2 months ago
as always concordance, making me wish i went to school for science related activities instead of illustration
cobetco 2 months ago
8:42-9:31
Regarding the structure of laetrile...
When drawing a benzene ring, when should you use three lines (like in the diagram), and when should you use a circle? Or is it purely aesthetic? I think that it makes more sense and looks better as a circle, but I don't understand why people continue to use the three lines.
aliendragon17 2 months ago
@aliendragon17 If I remember correctly, it has to do with the number of valence electrons being shared in the benzene ring. Been a while since I studied that, and given I haven't done anything with that info, I might be wrong.
NoNamesLeft0102 2 months ago
More people need to watch intelligent videos like this.
uriituw 2 months ago in playlist Uploaded videos
Excellent video, thanks for uploading.
roflpl0xnubsauce 2 months ago
I wonder if anyone doing those thermal images bothered to take a picture after holding to your face a turned off cellphone or a cellphone in airplane mode or earmuffs or a scarf or even your hand for 15 minutes.
mrgne1 2 months ago
Sagan, Tyson, Dawkins... Who are the bottom three? I want to look them up!
spinynorman1982 2 months ago
@spinynorman1982 The one on the left is Laurence Krauss and the one on the right is Michael Shermer. The one in the middle I'm not sure about, but I've seen him somewhere before...
mrgne1 2 months ago
@mrgne1
Victor J Stenger. He's one of the more prominent skeptics who is also an outspoken atheist. You may know his:
"Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings"
You might enjoy his debate with WL Craig.
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago 12
This has been flagged as spam show
@spinynorman1982
Carl Sagan, Neil Degrasse Tyson, Richard Dawkins
Lawrence Kraus, Victor Stenger, Michael Shermer
unamaxify 2 months ago
Good video as usual.
thefusilier1000 2 months ago
Brilliant. Love it, thanks for the videos.
josww2 2 months ago
What a surprise, yet another video "debunking" the danger of some industrial-corporate created thing, because we all know corporations always have the health and interest of the general public as a paramount concern in their business model. The of course would never deceive, lie, use propaganda, lobbyist, or snake oil salesmen co-opted scientist to misinform the consumer of any peril associated with their product and would always be forthcoming of any said hazardous concerns promptly.Mmhhmm...
mattghtpa 2 months ago
@mattghtpa
You really don't understand how science works, do you?
terminaldeity 2 months ago 2
@terminaldeity You really don't understand much history , do you?
mattghtpa 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mattghtpa
Neither do you if you honestly believe what you said.
terminaldeity 2 months ago
@terminaldeity Historically and factually corporations are the most dangerous entities on this planet along side and hand in hand with the military-industrial complex. Their lies, greed, corruption, atrocities, and violence are unsurpassed. To list them would fill this comment thread. So forgive me if I'm highly skeptical of this channels constant condemnation of natural foods and products and consistent praise and love fest of all things industrial and corporate created.
mattghtpa 2 months ago
97% of people agree that statistics will say anything if tortured enough. ( ^_~)
AvalonDraconis 2 months ago
Im extremely glad you make these videos. You've taught me a great amount in the practice and application of skepticism towards "science" news articles as well as various other things that need to stand up to scrutiny before accepted as-is. It's a shame that you aren't one of the channels with a few million views on each video. I'm sure if that were true we'd all be a little better off. Thanks for your time and videos.
-BacklTrack
BacklTrack 2 months ago
I see no harm in convincing all the annoying dingbats who have to have their private conversations and arguements in public areas that their phones will give them cancer. ANYTHING to get them to STFU is ok by me. I can't even use a public bathroom without listening to some ditz gabbing away about meaningless tripe.
Primalxbeast 2 months ago
As a diabetic who is fairly interested in research into prevention and cures for type 1 diabetes, I can complement your rule 4 with A rule 4b: Everything cures diabetes in NOD mice. We clearly need a better animal model.
EebstertheGreat 2 months ago
All actions must be measured on a risk vs. benefit scale. Every action has a risk. Eat and you could choke. Drive and you could crash. Talk on the phone and you could get cancer (maybe). However, you can't stop eating, driving, or talking on the phone or life would be very inconvenient. Such actions are worthwhile risks. The best we can do is eliminate as much risk as possible. Eat slow, drive safe, and talk in moderation. I hate fear mongers on the web. They contribute nothing practical.
MunkyDrag0n 2 months ago
Do you think there is anyway we can change today's science news?
waterresist123 2 months ago
@waterresist123
I think it's more about changing the public's understanding of science first... demand side rather than supply side. We need to start with kids, and we need a massive overhaul of the educational system. What we have now is not getting the job done. Kids need to learn critical thinking and independent research. They need to understand how to find answers, and how to critically analyze arguments and data. Too many "Google Scholars" out there.
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago
A few months ago? Where i live this kind of thing was in the hype several years ago.
volbla 2 months ago
Excellent exposition of methodological naturalism; I wish more people who make philosophical criticisms of science were aware. of the distinction between being 'evidence based' and 'scientific'. The balance between observation and theory is very little understood outside scientific and sympathetic philosophical circles; which is a shame as grasping it could lead to people in general being a lot better informed about important issues like health and climate change. This is good work to that end.
wisdominnature7 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
PLEASE DON'T STOP TO MAKE THESE VIDEOS !!!
rafaelwaa 2 months ago
Comment removed
rafaelwaa 2 months ago
ive been wondering this for awhile now, where did you get that outro clip from?
Killerwhalepat 2 months ago
@Killerwhalepat
It's from the UK Creationist Museum in Portsmouth, kindly donated by AnswersinBooks.
C0nc0rdance 2 months ago 5
I would have thought anyone with a working brain would just dismiss these types of preliminary studies.
adrenacrumb 2 months ago
thats why i like concordance videos, no bullshit, just science and pure honesty even if the outcome is against concordance preference as i have seen in other videos of his, he still sticks with the facts, the hallmark of a good scientist, and the defining feature (i should say lack of) in anti-vaxers, anti-evolution and just anti-science people in general
wearestarstuffsagan 2 months