Hi Jim.. i am from the U.S... i live in Montana, about 15 miles from Church Universal and Triumphant. This church is considered by many to be a cult. it was established by Elizabeth Claire Prophet who has since passed away. She died in 2009 at the age of 70... she died of complications of severe Alzheimer's.
I am not and have never have been a member of CUT. My husband and i moved to this area in 2002. We live close to Yellowstone National Park, which is where the main head quarters for C.U.T is.
We knew nothing of C.U.T OR its teachings when we moved here but after living in the area for several years, where church member predominate as our neighbors. i have gotten to know many of the members , more like... former members.
Many have left the church after the transition of Elizabeth Claire Prophet but they still adhere to many of C.U.T' S strict dietary rules that were established by E.C.P for her church member's spiritual growth..
The focus of this church group is not food, but rather to live a holy life and attain deification... which involves strict rules around eating. they pretty much eat a vegan diet, raw food diet with emphasis on fasting and decreeing...
C.U.T is very much into the Masters and has it's roots in Theosophy .
As for my friend who passed away, she was not a member of this group. She was a well known artist/ rancher from the area. When she found out she had cancer she did research and found the Gershon diet, which she followed to a tee....................... juicing 9 times a day. .. enema's the whole bit. she was absolutely certain until the very end that this diet would cure her cancer.
I hope this answers your questions. i have no idea why she had her blood work sent out. Next time i talk with her husband i will ask him.
Oddly, he has been very much into this diet as well.. he is 63 years old and recently had a major heart attack to everyone's surprise. Actually, he just got out of the hospital. He has never been overweight. also a health food activist. He does not eat meat or dairy...but eats a raw food diet.
what i meant by the raw food diet and the spirituality i see within this group is 'obsession' with diet.
we have a woman's group where we get together monthly. we have for years. The big topic is everyone's health and diet..all consider themselves experts on nutrition.. but all have serious health issues..or avoid doctors like the plague .. When we eat, people pull out their green drinks and are horrified by anything that even remotely appears to be considered a normal American diet. what i see is a lot of fear.. the bottom line i see in them is fear of illness and death.. a natural part of being human is getting sick and dying.
i drew a comparison to my family and this sort of thing i see in this group and my friend who passed. .. my family has always lived life and rolled with it..we die when we die .. it is not our focus to eat breathe and live our diets... but rather our life has always been living in balance with God and all of is creation.. accepting our fallibility .. here , i suspect is the key to joy and happiness...that and good genes
i did not see that in my friend's life as she struggled with her illness , nor do i see it in the church group who lives eats and breathes 'diet' at the expense of living life.....
That's good to hear. For you to get a serious hearing from the medical community, however, you will still need to be more precise in your language about biochemistry. For example, I've taken courses in human physiology, plant physiology, comparative invertebrate physiology, and vertebrate physiology -- all years ago. I also taught human physiology a couple of times. To my recollection, glucose is glucose is glucose, and that includes fruit-derived-sugars. I have never heard of single-helix-proteins coming from plants, so you'll have to point out some resources for that one. As I say, it's been decades since I've studied and taught this stuff.
Of course the pharmaceutical industry wants to make money. They spend millions and millions on research and testing, with many "dead-ends." Nothing is approved that has not gone through trials and, eventually, approval by the FDA. You continue to project ill-motives onto them, and you will lose a hearing for doing so. Wanting to make money is not a bad thing. There's a business side to the pharmaceutical industry, and business is not bad.
Re. the advisory board for the cancer site.
Conjecture . . . (and "poisoning the well" fallacy -- again!). You have no idea what they are really paid, but so what if they are on a retainer? They are paid, and therefore crooked? Biased? You will have to stop making those kinds of points to be taken seriously, as it only demonstrates your own bias.
Anyway, good luck with your work. I hope you can find some rigorous science to back it up. We need all the help we can get to fight cancer.
ANTI - ANGIOGENESIS, POWERFUL FOODS STARVE CANCER?
Are these the types of foods you are using in
Thanks for sharing the information about the studies. It will just take a lot more studies at many more universities before I am thoroughly convinced. I think the old adage "Time will tell" pretty much sums it up for me.
This issue is of major concern to me because I had two people who I loved very much have cancer.
One was middle-aged and opted for conventional
allopathic treatment which was a success. She lived well into old age and died of other causes.
This was in spite of the fact that initially the conventional allopathic tests done to detect the cancer all came out fine. It was only through her insistence and her allopathic physicians ability to listen to her concerns and act on them that the cancer was found early and her life was saved.
The other was elderly and frail and chose to simply live life to the fullest without any conventional or alternative treatment until life came to its natural end. In this case, the end turned out to be from other causes, too. So, there was no running to doctors of any sort in a state of panic, no futile, frustrating searches for a cure. No invasive tests. No gallons of carrot juice. There was a simple living out of each day one day at a time with grace, dignity, and a sense of acceptance.
Ultimately, I think each person must chose the course of action that is right for them and their specific situation. We are all unique creations and need to deal with our situations in our own way. I don't think there is a 'one size fits all' answer to this issue. I think the broad term "cancer" is an umbrella for many different but related diseases. I don't think 'A cancer is a cancer is a cancer.' (Pardon me, Gertrude Stein) I do know that cancer can engender great vulnerability in people and I know there are some who will take advantage of that vulnerability. It takes a great deal of inner strength and courage and focus to keep to one's own convictions, to try to find a path that accommodates one's belief system, and to not fall prey to those who would exploit the vulnerable.
Best wishes to you. Good luck with your work.
The frustrating thing with doing a blog is people focus on some aspect or quote and then go off with their own ideas and beliefs, desires and dispositions. In my books and most that I’ve read they start with a topic, lay a foundation and build upon it in over a hundred pages. Most of my books are systematic and have hundreds of footnotes. It usually takes several chapters to lay the foundations and then several more chapters to build the structure. Books are able to systematically explain things without going off on tangents, blogs are all other the place.
Cancer like all degenerative diseases has 4 or 5 stages that can be explained. In the Gerson diet it has 100% for stages 1 and 2. Stage 3 is 82% (70% for regionally metastasized) and for stage 4 it is only 39%. All four of these are better than conventional. The Gerson diet is a very difficult diet but one of the most effective for all types of cancer. It doesn’t always work for some reason or other, I don’t have all the answers, especially for advanced cancers.
As to the questions on the pharmaceutical industry and their advisory boards and related issues, most of my book on, The Bioethics of Drug Intervention is online on my site and covers these topics by citing at length material written by experts, who know the field and are not bias. As to glucose and the differentiation of glucose or protein molecules I speak of that in my cancer book. There is a difference and that is why some diets work and others don’t. Gabriel Cousens, MD goes into this on this its next deeper level of energy in his books.
|Powered by Social Strata||Page 1 2|