What Charity should we pick? Prevent Cancer Foundation

2010-10-12 05:56:08 pm

Visit my profile to see my runs!

So, is cancer research the settled topic, or is Mike just pitching ideas for specific charities in case cancer research is our ultimate choice? Just curious. I was hoping it would be an autism/asperger's charity. Not that I would not donate to anything else which is worthwhile, just thought there was going to be a poll or some kind of vote and tally. Even then, cancer related charities would probably win, but still.

MatrixTN

2010-10-13 06:50:22 am

You got a deletion wish?

Quote from InsipidMuckyWater:

I was hoping it would be an autism/asperger's charity.

Ditto.

Carcinogen

2010-10-13 07:00:31 am

Do you have an autism/asperger's charity in mind?

mikwuyma

2010-10-13 07:22:29 am

My feelings on The Demon Rush

Cancer research was mostly settled since most of the people who spoke up in the topic supported it.

Also, it looks like I'm going to go with either Pediatric Cancer Research Foundation or Prevent Cancer Foundation. I could just email both and see who responds quickest, heh.

Carcinogen

2010-10-15 06:38:28 pm

I like that idea best.

InsipidMuckyWater

2010-10-16 03:34:26 pm

Visit my profile to see my runs!

Quote from MatrixTN:

Ditto.

It's okay. We can shoot for an autism/asperger's charity for the next event.

aleckermit

Edit history:

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:28:07 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 12:55:06 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 12:53:08 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 12:52:33 pm

2010-11-07 12:50:09 pm

I HIGHLY plead that we do not choose a cancer research charity such as the The American Cancer Society. Cancer research organizations like them are only interested in making money by treating cancer using harmful methods, not researching to find cures/preventions for it. The cure for cancer has been known for over half a decade (Google "Gerson Therapy"). Educating people about harmful foods, and treating cancer/diabetes, etc naturally is the answer.

I suggest choosing:
http://www.gerson.org/

The Gerson therapy for treating/curing cancer has proven to cure patients that were given only months to live by hospitals by using organic and whole foods along with natural treatments . They need the money to most.

arkarian

Edit history:

arkarian: 2010-11-07 12:54:38 pm

2010-11-07 12:53:41 pm

gamelogs.org

lol

Quote:

Gerson's therapy required the patient to consume a raw plant based diet and to drink an 8-ounce glass of fresh organic juices every waking hour. Coffee and castor oil enemas were among several types of prescribed enemas, and some patients were given hydrogen peroxide orally and rectally. Rectal ozone was also applied. Dietary supplements include vitamin C and iodine. The diet prohibited the drinking of water and consumption of berries and nuts, as well as use of aluminium vessels or utensils.

sounds gud bro

aleckermit

Edit history:

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:34:30 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 12:59:36 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 12:58:57 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 12:57:10 pm

2010-11-07 12:56:08 pm

Quote from arkarian:

lol<br /><br /><div class="quotearea"><div class="quotelabel">Quote:</div><div class="quotetext">Gerson's therapy required the patient to consume a raw plant based diet and to drink an 8-ounce glass of fresh organic juices every waking hour. Coffee and castor oil enemas were among several types of prescribed enemas, and some patients were given hydrogen peroxide orally and rectally. Rectal ozone was also applied. Dietary supplements include vitamin C and iodine. The diet prohibited the drinking of water and consumption of berries and nuts, as well as use of aluminium vessels or utensils.</div></div><br /><br />sounds gud bro

This is a proven science. The treatment isn't expensive no, but the Gerson organization needs money to raise awareness via documentaries and educational programs as well as help build more Gerson clinics around the world.

aleckermit

Edit history:

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:21:51 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:11:59 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:10:16 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:08:59 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:07:27 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:07:25 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:07:08 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:05:08 pm

2010-11-07 01:04:06 pm

PS: Your quote is totally out of context.

Fruits and veggies contain water if you didn't know, this is what Gerson was talking about:

http://www.reverse-osmosis-water-filter-guide.com/dangers-of-tap-water.html

And yes, enemas such as "coffee enemas" work incredibly well to heal the colon.

Cancer comes from everday sources such as genetically modified foods and chemicals in the water, air, treated soil, etc.

Anyway Uyama, if you read this please take a little time to research the Gerson Institute for yourself.

Josh the Funkdoc

Edit history:

Josh the Funkdoc: 2010-11-07 01:29:29 pm

2010-11-07 01:28:57 pm

spread the dirt to the populace

Quote from aleckermit:

And yes, enemas such as coffee enemas work incredibly well to heal the colon.

Cancer comes from everday sources such as genetically modified foods and chemicals in the water, air, treated soil, etc.

Anyway Uyama, if you read this please take a little time to research the Gerson Institute for yourself.

Poxnor

2010-11-07 01:46:44 pm

Moo! Flap! Hug!

First, I want to make clear that nothing I write here is an attack on you, aleckermit. I see your passion for finding a cure for a horrible disease, and I respect that.

However, I would be strongly opposed to a marathon funding this manner of quackery, and I would not personally donate towards it.

Many of these quackery treatments emerge on account of a fundamental misunderstanding of how science research works. If this approach worked, independent research scientists would be all over it, as a means of advancing their careers, getting funding, publishing, winning prizes, etc. Instead, independent review has found that this approach has killed people (your colon does good job of cleansing itself already, about once a day; rinsing it out with coffee can inflame it, leading to serious complications, and even death among seriously ill patients).

Quote:

some patients have failed to experience results simply by using the wrong juicer.

Another warning sign that you're staring quackery in the eye: there's always a simple, nonsensical explanation for why the treatment doesn't work for some people. The fact it works sometimes isn't proof that it works: placebos work sometimes.

Quote:

Cancer comes from everday sources such as genetically modified foods and chemicals in the water, air, treated soil, etc.

Many forms of pollution do have carcinogenic properties. Genetically modified foods, on the other hand, do not. Human beings have been genetically modifying foods for about as long as we've been planting crops. Those organic strawberries are just as GMO'd as regular strawberries. Canola oil isn't killing anyone, except by the occasional kitchen fire.

Good medicine is based on two properties: efficacy (it works better than a placebo) and safety (side effects and risks of treatment have to be reasonable, relative to the efficacy of the treatment and the seriousness of the illness). Sadly, these two properties are no longer "in vogue," relative to "all natural" treatments that provide neither.

First, I want to make clear that nothing I write here is an attack on you, aleckermit.  I see your passion for finding a cure for a horrible disease, and I respect that.

However, I would be strongly opposed to a marathon funding this manner of quackery, and I would not personally donate towards it.

Many of these quackery treatments emerge on account of a fundamental misunderstanding of how science research works.  If this approach worked, independent research scientists would be all over it, as a means of advancing their careers, getting funding, publishing, winning prizes, etc.  Instead, independent review has found that this approach has killed people (your colon does good job of cleansing itself already, about once a day; rinsing it out with coffee can inflame it, leading to serious complications, and even death among seriously ill patients).

[quote]some patients have failed to experience results simply by using the wrong juicer.[/quote]
Another warning sign that you're staring quackery in the eye: there's always a simple, nonsensical explanation for why the treatment doesn't work for some people.  The fact it works sometimes isn't proof that it works: placebos work sometimes.

[quote]Cancer comes from everday sources such as genetically modified foods and chemicals in the water, air, treated soil, etc.[/quote]
Many forms of pollution do have carcinogenic properties.  Genetically modified foods, on the other hand, do not.  Human beings have been genetically modifying foods for about as long as we've been planting crops.  Those organic strawberries are just as GMO'd as regular strawberries.  Canola oil isn't killing anyone, except by the occasional kitchen fire.

Good medicine is based on two properties: efficacy (it works better than a placebo) and safety (side effects and risks of treatment have to be reasonable, relative to the efficacy of the treatment and the seriousness of the illness).  Sadly, these two properties are no longer "in vogue," relative to "all natural" treatments that provide neither.

VorpalEdge

Edit history:

VorpalEdge: 2010-11-07 01:51:39 pm

2010-11-07 01:50:30 pm

welcome to the machine

I really like how some people like Gerson try to simplify a highly murderous, amorphous bastard of a disease with multiple well-documented causes into little more than a case of poisoning by bogeyman buzzwords people don't like. And then curing the cancer by drinking juice/hydrogen peroxide or getting a coffee enema, lol. Yeah right.

Poxnor

2010-11-07 01:54:58 pm

Moo! Flap! Hug!

VorpalEdge is more concise than me, and says it better Smiley

aleckermit

Edit history:

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 02:09:18 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 02:07:01 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 02:03:10 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 02:00:27 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 01:59:50 pm

2010-11-07 01:59:20 pm

Quote from VorpalEdge:

I really like how some people like Gerson try to simplify a highly murderous, amorphous bastard of a disease with multiple well-documented causes into little more than a case of poisoning by bogeyman buzzwords people don't like.  And then curing the cancer by drinking juice/hydrogen peroxide or getting a coffee enema, lol.  Yeah right.

I never said it was a simple disease. And somehow subjecting the body to radiation is fine but natural medicine and enema use to send nutrients to the lower organs quickly is absurd? By the way, "coffee enemas" have been reported to have caused 3 deaths in the United States. I'm sure radiation treatment sports a much larger number of caused deaths.

Also, not to stray off-subject but my Mom was diagnosed with breast cancer (falsely btw) and was given radiation treatment as well as had limp nodes removed and was sick for more than a year afterwords. Her immune system is not nearly as strong as in once was. A simple bee sting to her left arm is an emergency now. I don't like the idea of supporting research that is not advancing or looking for preventative medicine. Conventional hospital cancer treatment is only interested in continually treating cancer so that they can continue to make money (ACS clears 1 billion a year after all expenses). "Buying the right blender" pales in comparison, the Gerson Institute is not a money making business.

[quote="VorpalEdge"]I really like how some people like Gerson try to simplify a highly murderous, amorphous bastard of a disease with multiple well-documented causes into little more than a case of poisoning by bogeyman buzzwords people don&#39;t like.&nbsp;  And then curing the cancer by drinking juice/hydrogen peroxide or getting a coffee enema, lol.&nbsp; Yeah right.[/quote]

I never said it was a simple disease. And somehow subjecting the body to radiation is fine but natural medicine and enema use to send nutrients to the lower organs quickly is absurd? By the way, "coffee enemas" have been reported to have caused 3 deaths in the United States. I'm sure radiation treatment sports a much larger number of caused deaths.

Also, not to stray off-subject but my Mom was diagnosed with breast cancer (falsely btw) and was given radiation treatment as well as had limp nodes removed and was sick for more than a year afterwords. Her immune system is not nearly as strong as in once was. A simple bee sting to her left arm is an emergency now. I don't like the idea of supporting research that is not advancing or looking for preventative medicine. Conventional hospital cancer treatment is only interested in continually treating cancer so that they can continue to make money (ACS clears 1 billion a year after all expenses). "Buying the right blender" pales in comparison, the Gerson Institute is not a money making business.

moooh

Edit history:

moooh: 2010-11-07 02:18:12 pm

2010-11-07 02:17:38 pm

Exoray

Quote from aleckermit:

I don't like the idea of supporting research that is not advancing or looking for preventative medicine.

Quote from mikwuyma:

Prevent Cancer Foundation

http://www.preventcancer.org/

This one is a bit different from the other two. PCF not only focuses on cancer research, they also educate people ob how to prevent cancer.

How did you miss the word prevent? It's mentioned like 3 times Smiley

aleckermit

Edit history:

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 02:30:25 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 02:28:58 pm

aleckermit: 2010-11-07 02:27:40 pm

2010-11-07 02:25:15 pm

http://www.preventcancer.org/

I'm all for donating to a charity like this directly, but if the money is sent to a wide organization such as the ACS, they're able to split the money and send it to any department of the organization as they choose. Mike Uyama is right to want to give to a smaller, and more specific charity.

If the Gerson Institute is not a favorable choice, that's fine. Our charity of choice should be smaller and focused for sure though :).

VorpalEdge

Edit history:

VorpalEdge: 2010-11-07 02:52:22 pm

VorpalEdge: 2010-11-07 02:49:40 pm

VorpalEdge: 2010-11-07 02:47:38 pm

2010-11-07 02:46:02 pm

welcome to the machine

I am sorry about your mom (and I'm not saying that facetiously, either), and yeah, radiation/chemo does do that. The thing is, though, that it's used because it kills cancer faster than it kills you. You shouldn't take a treatment that has a much higher rate of success than placebos and demonize it because your mother was given a false diagnosis and because of bad side-effects.

Meanwhile, coffee enemas have produced "3 deaths" but do nothing more than screw with your colon (this is the blog of a respected doctor). I know which I'll recommend when someone is dying and needs good treatment. And fruit juice, heh. I don't mean to knock fruits and veggies but I'm pretty sure that if they magically cured cancer someone would have noticed by now, especially after how often modern medicine stumps for eating healthy. I guess they don't have Gerson's special kind of blender though. Wonder how much it costs.

Quote:

limp nodes

lymph nodes

Quote:

Conventional hospital cancer treatment is only interested in continually treating cancer so that they can continue to make money (ACS clears 1 billion a year after all expenses).

Ah, of course. Big pharma is out to get us. Was wondering when this would come up.

Look here. They're getting better. No, really. Also, think about it: how can they make money if their patients are dead?

anyways, I don't actually want to spend much time arguing about this on an unrelated forum, so this will probably be my final post on the subject.

I am sorry about your mom (and I'm not saying that facetiously, either), and yeah, radiation/chemo does do that.  The thing is, though, that it's used because it kills cancer faster than it kills you.  You shouldn't take a treatment that has a much higher rate of success than placebos and demonize it because your mother was given a false diagnosis and because of bad side-effects.

Meanwhile, coffee enemas have produced "3 deaths" but do nothing more than [url=http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2006/09/your_friday_dose_of_woo_coffee_doing.php]screw with your colon[/url] (this is the blog of a respected doctor).  I know which I'll recommend when someone is dying and needs good treatment.  And fruit juice, heh.  I don't mean to knock fruits and veggies but I'm pretty sure that if they magically cured cancer someone would have noticed by now, especially after how often modern medicine stumps for eating healthy.  I guess they don't have Gerson's special kind of blender though.  Wonder how much it costs.

[quote]limp nodes[/quote]

lymph nodes

[quote]Conventional hospital cancer treatment is only interested in continually treating cancer so that they can continue to make money (ACS clears 1 billion a year after all expenses).[/quote]

Ah, of course.  Big pharma is out to get us.  Was wondering when this would come up.

Look [url=http://seer.cancer.gov/faststats/selections.php?run=runit&output=1&data=2&statistic=1&cancer=1&year=201001&race=1&sex=1&series=age&age=9;136]here[/url].  They're getting better.  No, really.  Also, think about it: how can they make money if their patients are dead?

anyways, I don't actually want to spend much time arguing about this on an unrelated forum, so this will probably be my final post on the subject.

mikwuyma

Edit history:

mikwuyma: 2010-11-07 02:56:56 pm

2010-11-07 02:56:33 pm

My feelings on The Demon Rush

I am currently in talks with the Prevent Cancer Foundation. I've signed forms for our event and everything, and we're approved. The only thing I need to work on is convincing them to get a Paypal account. I would have done it last week, but my contact was out of the office.

Aleckermit: If PCF ends up being our charity (they most likely will), 100% of the money donated will go to them.

P.S. I tried PCRF, but the email bounced. D:

PJ

2010-11-07 03:32:05 pm

Is PJ

All I needed to see with that Gerson therapy was "rectal ozone" before I called hoax. Ozone itself is extremely toxic, so introducing it into the body where it is most easily absorbed into the bloodstream is just plain suicide. But hey, at least cancer will no longer be the primary concern.

Poxnor

2010-11-07 03:40:18 pm

Moo! Flap! Hug!

Quote:

The only thing I need to work on is convincing them to get a Paypal account.

Lazy. Just lazy, Mike. Making the charity do all the work, instead of just collecting the money for them and sending them a cheque.

Joking aside, if for whatever reason PCF is unwilling or unable to get a Paypal account, would it be possible to request (in advance) the documentation that Paypal required for the previous marathon? Then, hopefully getting the money to them would be a minor thing?

mikwuyma

2010-11-07 04:01:51 pm

My feelings on The Demon Rush

Yeah I might be able to Poxnor, but I'd rather not put it all in my Paypal account again.

Poxnor

2010-11-07 04:33:06 pm

Moo! Flap! Hug!

But we'll miss out on hearing the angry, epic tale if you don't Wink

Pootrain

2010-11-07 06:00:03 pm

train kept rollin

Quote from Poxnor:

But we'll miss out on hearing the angry, epic tale if you don't Wink

One mans suffering is another mans interesting read.

DRybes

2010-11-07 06:58:02 pm

O Zlda?

In the interests of helping truly 100% of the money donated going to charity, I'll post this even if you all know it already...

You can avoid the 1-2% vig on a paypal to paypal transfer if you select the purpose as "gift". Funding your paypal and doing the transfer this way instead of "payment" seems more important/appropriate since they'll be taking something like 70 cents plus a percent out of that, and it's not a payment but a donation.