The logical and factual problems with the post appended below should be obvious
to any rational person. I list them below because such brazen adherence to, and
promotion of, scientific ignorance have become hazardous to public health in
the internet age. Many people might unwittingly fall for this material because
of the pretensions of its author, and seek quack treatments and "miracle cures"
for scientifically curable cancers such as choriocarcinoma, Hodgkin's lymphoma
and childhood acute lymphoid leukemia.
1. The author who has no familiarity with the current state of knowledge in
scientific medicine makes a categorical statement about lack of evidence on
cancer cures. When I present evidence from the current medical literature and
from one of the world's renowned cancer institutes, which clearly shows that
he is wrong, he defiantly declares that he is not interested in this evidence,
and in medical literature in general. When I point out the absurdity of this
assertion, he lashes out at me with spurious accusations and innuendo about my
reference to somebody else's atheism.
2. Without reading any of the medical evidence I have provided and the
peer-reviewed literature that I am referring to, the author falsely claims that
it comes from one "unknown university". I doubt if he even knows which
university this is, and which universities of the world are known and unknown.
But the important fact is that the information I had provided is common
knowledge in the field of cancer therapy and research. It has not come from
just one university. This practical knowledge disseminated by world-renowned
cancer organizations and centers has been the result of decades of research in
the best universities and institutions of the world.
3. The author is oblivious of the absurdity of his claim that people ought to
trust his personal observations and anecdotes rather than the collective
experience and objective knowledge in cancer science and medicine. Please see
this preposterous assertion:
"I said that I am not 'interested in the published evidence', because it
contradicts totally what we are witnessing here."
...Fr. Ivo
In other words, here is a man who willfully rejects scientific evidence
gathered by the best cancer experts in the world because it contradicts his own
parochial beliefs, experiences and anecdotes. What's more, he has no
compunction about ignoring the anecdotes and experiences of others who have
been cured of various types of curable cancers, including many Goanetters such
as Mario and Viviana. BTW, since this thread refers to Ted Kennedy, I should
point out that Ted Kennedy's own son was cured of bone cancer in 1973. I have
scores of anecdotes of my own, but genuine science ought to rely only on
properly collected objective evidence.
So to summarize, the author of the post appended below believes he possesses
some special "wisdom" that the real specialists in the fields of cancer and
medical science do not possess. He adamantly and irrationally clings to his own
insular ideas and uneducated hunches despite overwhelming scientific evidence
to the contrary. Moreover, in his version of reality the only anecdotes that
count are his own, and only those that confirm his preconceived beliefs. Coming
back to my original point, it shouldn't be hard to understand why acting on a
belief in such a worldview might kill a person who suffers from a form of
cancer that is known to be curable.
Cheers,
Santosh
--- On Fri, 8/28/09, isouza <icso...@sancharnet.in> wrote:
>
> ***This is another blatant example of how the scientist
> Dr.Santosh can take the statement out of context and
> misunderstand the authors. This was the classical procedure
> with the text of the Cardinal Cormack Murphy-O'Connor, who
> was turned into an atheist... I have not made any "bogus
> categorical claims"... From our experience in India
> (including Goa), people are dying of cancer in spite of all
> modern Western treatment. I said that I am not "interested
> in the published evidence", because it contradicts totally
> what we are witnessing here. What is the use of reading the
> "scientific evidence" given by the scientists in the
> American corner, if we are losing people everyday to cancer.
> I am meeting everyday people who have no hope of being cured
> of cancer... What is the value and authority of the "genuine
> medical literature" if these people find no medical cure? It
> is not "wilful ignorance of scientific evidence", but the
> fact is that I find no evidence with the patients that I
> know... and, therefore, I am skeptical of the barrage
> of selected articles (from an unknown University),
> presented by a physician without any experience in oncology.
>
