a while back we were discussing cancer and healing and i had seen her story and was interested in more information.

[www.rubylathon.com]

she said she had cancer and healed herself so i had asked a few questions a while back. she finally answered.

questions: did you have a firm diagnosis by a regular doctor and did you have any standard treatments done after diagnosis, or just dietary change?

answer:
hi yes my endocronologist diagnosed the cancer. i didn't have any standard treatment. no meds surgery radiation nor chemo. i made only dietary and lifestyle changes and added supps to boost my immune system

Impressive testimonial and her whole team is amazing; lucky D.C. residents. I would ask her if she ate 100% Raw.

Good for you for having the initiative to find out the specifics on her healing story. You could be a part of Gosia's team - she'd be the one asking for the proof, like copies of all the paperwork from Dr. Ruby's endocronologist and results of tests, labwork, etc. - LOL

I have a question for you, fresh - Do you ever use capital letters?

Why does she refer to herself as "Dr." when promoting her holistic teaching? Her PhD. is in engineering from an unnamed school.

doctor = learned person
in latin, it means teacher

HH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Why does she refer to herself as "Dr." when
> promoting her holistic teaching? Her PhD. is in
> engineering from an unnamed school.

Okay but just to be clear, she's not a medical doctor. She's an engineer who's suddenly an expert in nutrition. People who engage full transparency will always put a PhD. or M.D. behind their name when referring to themselves as Dr. This serves to clarify what kind of doctor they are and to eliminate any possibility that they're being shady. It's standard practice.

Also, her saying in an email that she had cancer is not proof that she had cancer. I'd have to see actual documentation. I'm not saying that she didn't have cancer and I don't care because I'm too smart for whatever she's selling, but still, I'm simply pointing out the obvious. Her email is far from being an "impressive testimonial." Show me hospital paperwork, medical bills, etc. Get a testimonial from a real doctor who witnessed the healing. Whatever. Anything that goes well beyond the word of someone that I don't know at all.



Panchito Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> doctor = learned person
> in latin, it means teacher
>
> HH Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Why does she refer to herself as "Dr." when
> > promoting her holistic teaching? Her PhD. is in
> > engineering from an unnamed school.

I agree with you about transparency. On a side note, people usually are unaware that everybody has cancer. People diagnosed with cancer have uncontrollable cancer, but cancer cells exists in everybody guranteed. So anybody claiming to have cancer is technically correct.

Lois Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Impressive testimonial and her whole team is
> amazing; lucky D.C. residents. I would ask her if
> she ate 100% Raw.
>
> Good for you for having the initiative to find out
> the specifics on her healing story. You could be a
> part of Gosia's team - she'd be the one asking for
> the proof, like copies of all the paperwork from
> Dr. Ruby's endocronologist and results of tests,
> labwork, etc. - LOL
>
> I have a question for you, fresh - Do you ever use
> capital letters?

NO.

i am e e cummings reincarnate

Asking questions is a totally cool thing to do.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams

rawgosia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Asking questions is a totally cool thing to do.


Yes, but you are in favor of mandatorily providing proof to some government authority of any and all health issues, medical intervention and claims of healing when posting online. That is what my reference to you - in jest - in my above post was alluding to.

I never said that asking questions of someone about their health issue and healing claim was not OK - in this or your other thread - in case that is what you're inferring.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2015 02:55PM by Lois.

I am in favor of what?! You are putting words in my mouth. I kindly request that you do not do this as you are misrepresenting me. And I was not referring to you at all. I was addressing fresh, not you.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2015 03:37PM by rawgosia.

rawgosia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am in favor of what?! You are putting words in
> my mouth. I kindly request that you do not do this
> as you are misrepresenting me. And I was not
> referring to you at all. I was addressing fresh,
> not you.

Rawgosia, in case you were wondering, I'm sure I'm not the only other one who saw what she did there but I'm glad you cleaned that mess up for those who might have missed it.

Yeah, what I did was to use different words that have the exact same meaning as Gosia's words.




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2015 04:57PM by Lois.

First of all, to be clear on the meaning of 'government' - which is probably one of the words you are taking exception to my using in place of your word 'regulating'

Government means, "the action or manner of controlling or regulating a community or people"

(as in 'The Raw Food Community')

Different people use different words that mean the same thing. Some people use plain English, others use fancy words or ambiguous words. I like to call a spade a spade.

**********

[www.google.com]



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2015 05:03PM by Lois.

rawgosia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am in favor of what?! You are putting words in
> my mouth. I kindly request that you do not do this
> as you are misrepresenting me.


I was referring to here -

[www.rawfoodsupport.com]

Gosia said:

"the lies by self-made wellness guru Belle Gibson.I think that it is a real issue that there are no regulatory bodies which impose certain standards of behaviour online. people can just make up anything they like, in order to gain popularity and make money. So I do believe that certain standards are needed. How would you like to see accountability work in the raw food community?"

***************

- where you said you thought there should be 'standards' 'regulations' and 'accountability' in the Raw Food Community (in relation to the Bella case where she lied and could not provide 'proof').

That would be a 'governmental body' because the word government does not only mean our Federal, State and Local Government, but it also means the Governing Body of a COMMUNITY. And 'standards' 'regulations' 'accountability' would be rules or laws of government, of which one rule/law - I don't know because they haven't been laid down yet, but I presume - would be that those posting/online behavior of such health issues/medical intervention/healing would be required to provide such 'proof'.




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2015 05:09PM by Lois.

Not sure what your thought processes are Louis but let me make it perfectly clear to you that your conclusions about my inner thoughts are completely erroneous. Cognitive processes of humans amaze me at times... I can see how lynch mobs are able to generate in an environment in which people just don't pay attention to the facts or the meaning of the of words. I watched that video by Jo Best by the way. Seems like another pattern of that sort of behaviour, again.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2015 05:06PM by rawgosia.

I'm not concerned with your inner thoughts, Goose, I'm concerned with your words. And you were concerned with my words. We're talking words here.

Words Have Meaning!

I'm not done yet proving that my words have the exact same meaning as your words, but my words are in Plain English and your words are ambiguous. Beating around the bush.

I shall continue....



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 07/06/2015 05:25PM by Lois.

Since, as you observed, my words are ambiguous, there can be other interpretations to them than what you imagined. No, I have not said or suggested that we need police. If this is what you think I meant, then I hereby declare that such supposition is entirely false and completely out of whack with my intentions. What I feel is important is to talk about those things in order to raise awareness and better practices within the raw community.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams

rawgosia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am in favor of what?! You are putting words in
> my mouth.


So to dissect my words -

I said:

you are in favor of mandatorily providing proof to some government authority of any and all health issues, medical intervention and claims of healing when posting online

Because you said:

"the lies by self-made wellness guru Belle Gibson
people can just make up anything they like
I think that it is a real issue that there are no regulatory bodies which impose certain standards of behaviour online.
like to see accountability work in the raw food community

(The full text is here - [www.rawfoodsupport.com]

*************

You said: "exposed the lies by self-made wellness guru Belle Gibson" (your words) -

I took that to mean you were referring to her 'health issue/medical intervention and claim of healing'(my words)

You said: "I think that it is a real issue that there are no" (your words)

I took that to mean 'you are in favor of' (my words)

You said - "regulatory bodies" (your words)

I took that to mean 'government authority' (my words - they mean the same thing,look it up)

You said, "which impose certain standards" (your words)

I took that to mean "laws that would include mandatorily providing proof" (of such claims) ('government imposing certain standards' means "Laws"

You said: "of behaviour online" (your words)

I took that to mean, "when posting online" (my words)

*********

So - Different words, same meaning.

I am NOT in favor of mandatorily providing proof to some government authority of any and all health issues, medical intervention and claims of healing when posting online.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams

rawgosia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Since, as you observed, my words are ambiguous,
> there can be other interpretations to them than
> what you imagined.


I didn't 'imagine their interpretations', I looked up their meaning.

So yes, excellent point on the word 'ambiguous'. That was probably the wrong word for me to use. 'Innocuous' would have been a much better choice of words on my part.

For example, your word, 'standard' means my word 'rule':

"standard applies to any definite rule, principle, or measure established by authority"

But 'standard' sounds more Innocuous than 'rule' or 'law'. Same meaning. But if I said to someone, "Should there be Standards relating to the Raw Food Community?" they would probably say, "Sure." But if I said, "Should there be Laws relating to the Raw Food Community," most people would probably say, "No!"

> No, I have not said or
> suggested that we need police. If this is what you
> think I meant, then I hereby declare that such
> supposition is entirely false and completely out
> of whack with my intentions.

No, I never used the word "police", and the word "police" has never entered my head in either this thread or the other one where you said you thought we needed regulations imposed on the Raw Food Community. So that is sort of out of left field.

> What I feel is
> important is to talk about those things in order
> to raise awareness and better practices within the
> raw community.


Cool, I love to talk about stuff.

rawgosia Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I am NOT in favor of mandatorily providing proof
> to some government authority of any and all health
> issues, medical intervention and claims of healing
> when posting online.


If you are in favor of a Government Imposing Laws about Online Behavior on the Raw Food Community -and in light of your relating such approval to the case of Bella lying and not providing proof of her story - that would surely be or become one of the laws, so you cannot pick and choose which laws you would be in favor of, because I would imagine you would not be one of the lawmakers. If you are in favor of the concept of Government taking over the Raw Food Community, then you would be held accountable for each individual law. Just imagine how the number and scope of the laws would snowball

Are you now not in favor of 'Regulations of online behavior and accountability in the Raw Food Community.'?

I have yet to see any reason to believe anyone cured themselves of Thyroid cancer. So, as of now, I don't believe it.

I thought the same exact thing as Lois, when gosia posted..and Lois has dissected the discussion accurately.

Gosia has posted similar desires for authoritative controls on other topics, so it's clear that she wishes they exist, and thinks they are desirable.

What is clear is that people have different ways of thinking and interpreting other people's words. But that's nothing new.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> rawgosia Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > I am in favor of what?! You are putting words
> in
> > my mouth. I kindly request that you do not do
> this
> > as you are misrepresenting me. And I was not
> > referring to you at all. I was addressing
> fresh,
> > not you.




> Rawgosia, in case you were wondering, I'm sure I'm
> not the only other one who saw what she did there



On second thought - maybe I was.

Stating there are issues about low standards that it would be wise to address does not necessarily mean a call to rally for government mandates regardless of how many people here take the giant leap to that conclusion. Geez.

On the one hand there sure seems to be plenty of fear of authority figures meddleing while the other hand is ever moments from dialing 911 to be rescued instead of doing an little due diligence on one's own ...

"So I do believe that certain standards are needed. How would you like to see accountability work in the raw food community?"


I tell you what, gosia, why don't you answer your own question? have you answered that question already? I don't recall seeing it. That may clarify it. I was referring to yours and many other people coming down on the side of censorship and authoritarian control on opinions such as durianriders and freelees shared online, the kayla itsines issue for example.

SueZ Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On the one hand there sure seems to be plenty of
> fear of authority figures meddleing while the
> other hand is ever moments from dialing 911 to be
> rescued instead of doing an little due diligence
> on one's own ...


When you're as feminine and delicate as I am, you just don't go out alone in the middle of the night to see if someone's there.....

<<I tell you what, gosia, why don't you answer your own question?>>

The purpose of me asking "How would you like to see accountability work in the raw food community?" was to open a discussion. I value a collaborative discussion as a better way of developing an idea than a debate. The approach is, here is an issue, let's explore the possibilities. Rather than, here is an issue, here is my opinion, what is your opinion, let's debate. A collaboratively-developed idea is of more value than one person's current opinion. This is a tool used in collaborative research.


RawGosia channel
RawGosia streams

I am quite aware, Gosia, of your intent, and thank you once again for your scientific methodology lecture.

And I remain puzzled why you do not offer your own view on the topic as I have just asked you to do; why you exempt yourself. I said nothing about a debate.

"Long-Term Thyroid CA Survival High, Even if Untreated"

..."Out of the entire study population, 440 patients, or 1.2%, did not have immediate, definitive treatment (defined as hemithyroidectomy or total thyroidectomy, with or without postoperative irradiation, received within a year or more after diagnosis).

The researchers found that 20-year cancer-specific survival rates among patients who had immediate treatment and those who didn't were "nearly identical," although the size of the two cohorts was significantly different. The survival rate for those who had treatment was 99%, compared with 97% for those managed with watchful waiting.

An accompanying editorial, however, noted that while the difference in survival rate was only 2%, the log rank test of survival equality was significant at P<0.001.

Among the untreated group, only six people died from their cancer. This number isn't statistically different from the number of thyroid cancer deaths in the treated group over the same period, the researchers said (1.3% versus 0.45%, P=0.09).

In another analysis, the researchers also found that 10-year survival rate was nearly the same. It was 98% among those who declined treatment despite recommendations to have it, compared with 99% among those for whom treatment had been recommended.

The typical reason for thyroid cancer patients not to undergo treatment is that they are usually too sick to do so. The researchers saw the survival lines diverge in the first one to two years after diagnosis, but after that, "become nearly parallel."

The study was limited by its reliance on the accuracy of the coding of secondary data (specifically, the trustworthiness of the "no immediate, definitive treatment" variable). Some patients, for example, had open biopsies of nodules but did not undergo a thyroidectomy or hemithyroidectomy.

Still, the researchers concluded that the outcomes in localized thyroid cancer "are extremely favorable" and survival "is so good that it is appropriate to consider whether the risk of complications outweighs the benefits of treatment."

In the editorial, Erich M. Sturgic, MD, MPH, and Steven I. Sherman, MD, of the M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, wrote that they "completely agree" that more thyroid cancers are being detected and treated invasively when they may only need observation.

However, they cautioned that physicians still need "a better understanding of which occult PTCs will progress to clinically relevant cancers" and which "highly selected cases" may be followed with "appropriate biopsy, evaluation, and treatment by an experienced multidisciplinary team." The editorial noted that patients with a family history of PTC or a personal history of radiation exposure may require thyroid nodule biopsy or (for many small nodules) serial ultrasonography" ...

[www.medpagetoday.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 07/07/2015 03:57PM by SueZ.