Speaker Added For This Satuday's Greater Clare Compassion Club Meeting!

[Dr. Bob]

Are you being obtuse again?  Your contributions here are useless when you pretend to have the mind of a 5 year old.  If you think chemo cures nothing then you really, REALLY need to get out more. 

 

Take childhood leukemia as an example.  In 1950 the overall survival rate for those with childhood leukemia was less than 5%.  After targeted chemo treatments have developed since then the survival rate is over 85%.  Get that?  Learn something please instead of spreading ridiculously bad information. 

 

As noted, the strategy used is to make a basis statement (chemo cures nothing) and use that as justification that it must be the oil.  The fact chemo DOES make a huge impact is brushed aside. Recall what I said about faith based logic- if CL wishes to engage and has the time to do so, more power to him, but I do not. 

 

As far as 'not being allowed to say anything' that is also a cop out.  I don't know what you are and are not allowed to say or who makes that determination, but I do know you recently had a 'cannabis cures cancer' thread that had all sorts of wild false hope snake oil pitch statements that were not found to be helpful.  Perhaps that is what you are referring to?  If so, I think it is a pretty good idea you follow the advice you've apparently been giving and restricted some of your more outlandish statements and claims.

[Dr. Bob]

And for the record, I think cannabis is helpful in cancer.  As an adjunctive 'do no harm' therapy.  Does it improve quality of life?  Of course- and that is huge with a life threatening disease.  Does it impact the cancer?  Strong maybe, and it certainly by itself does not make it worse.  Does it matter how it is used?  Don't know, but certainly would not claim one form is a cure over the others.

 

It is a personal choice issue.

 

Now if you will excuse me I have to go down to MSU and give a lecture on medical sociology and the challenges facing cannabis in the medical community.

 

Dr. Bob

[peanutbutter]

Are you being obtuse again?  Your contributions here are useless when you pretend to have the mind of a 5 year old.  If you think chemo cures nothing then you really, REALLY need to get out more. 

 

Take childhood leukemia as an example.  In 1950 the overall survival rate for those with childhood leukemia was less than 5%.  After targeted chemo treatments have developed since then the survival rate is over 85%.  Get that?  Learn something please instead of spreading ridiculously bad information. 

 

I guess it depends on what you intend the word "cure" to be limited to.

 

If "cure" means 100% of the time, then a single failure proves it's not a cure. So cannabis does NOT cure anything. Neither does chemo.

[CaveatLector]

I guess it depends on what you intend the word "cure" to be limited to.

 

If "cure" means 100% of the time, then a single failure proves it's not a cure. So cannabis does NOT cure anything. Neither does chemo.

Wow, that's deep.  So that's what you are hanging your hat on when you claim chemo cures nothing?  Funny how your definition has conveniently changed since you started the thread claiming "cannabis cure cancer."

[peanutbutter]

Dr. Bob;

 

I think it is fair game to say "There isn't enough proof."

 

I think it is completely unfair to say "It doesn't work." No testing was used to determine your statement, correct?

[CaveatLector]

Dr. Bob;

 

I think it is fair game to say "There isn't enough proof."

Then stop acting like there is enough proof because that can prompt some patients to disregard proven treatments.  Simple as that.

[peanutbutter]

Then stop acting like there is enough proof because that can prompt some patients to disregard proven treatments.  Simple as that.

 

I'm talking about a professionals point of view.

 

It is improper to issue a conclusion based on a lack of evidence. "It doesn't work." has CLEARLY not been proven.

[CaveatLector]

I'm talking about a professionals point of view.

 

It is improper to issue a conclusion based on a lack of evidence. "It doesn't work." has CLEARLY not been proven.

Semantics is your friend, I see.  Is there evidence that drinking orange juice will cure cancer?  If there has been no study on same then should a doc tell a pt that they should try it rather than chemo since, well, there is no proof it won't work?  Make some sense please.

[+greaterclare]

Hi everyone. I created a new area to continue this discussion regarding the whole RSO debate. This thread here was intended to bring awareness regarding this past week's GCACC guest speaker, and her progress. It did take a turn (a valid and heated one) towards "can cannabis cure cancer", which is good conversation, but not really in line with what this thread is about. Here is the link to continue this conversation...thanks!  http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/43040-rso-and-cancer-debate-forum/

[michaelscott]

the staff should be able to slide the debate stuff over there

[GregS]

Good idea. Glad you thought of it.

[Dr. Bob]

Dr. Bob;

 

I think it is fair game to say "There isn't enough proof."

 

I think it is completely unfair to say "It doesn't work." No testing was used to determine your statement, correct?

Again, this is an example of the 'attack tactic'.  You attribute a statement I never made to me and then try and 'refute' the statement.  I never said it didn't work, had you read what I wrote.  I said I had no evidence that it worked in this or any other case, but was inclined to believe that it MAYBE was helpful.  It isn't a cure and by claiming chemo doesn't work (another falsehood) you come to the unfounded conclusion that it was the oil.  That isn't a valid argument.  Then you take my position (there isn't proof) as your own, while making me appear as stating outright that it doesn't work.  Here the strategy is to try and show I am very concrete and unjustified in my position while you are the 'new voice of reason and fairness'.  Again, not a valid argument as it is based on a false premise.

 

I've never said that it doesn't work.  I've stated repeatedly that I've not seen any evidence that it does other than incidental stories of isolated good outcomes that could be explained in other equally valid ways.  Including spontaneous remission and placebo effects.

 

Dr. Bob

[Dr. Bob]

I agree it is a good idea.  Move the stuff over there.  I'm more interested in Compassion Clubs and helping patients so I'll stay here.

 

Dr. Bob

[+Malamute]

Again, this is an example of the 'attack tactic'.  You attribute a statement I never made to me and then try and 'refute' the statement.  I never said it didn't work, had you read what I wrote.  I said I had no evidence that it worked in this or any other case, but was inclined to believe that it MAYBE was helpful.  It isn't a cure and by claiming chemo doesn't work (another falsehood) you come to the unfounded conclusion that it was the oil.  That isn't a valid argument.  Then you take my position (there isn't proof) as your own, while making me appear as stating outright that it doesn't work.  Here the strategy is to try and show I am very concrete and unjustified in my position while you are the 'new voice of reason and fairness'.  Again, not a valid argument as it is based on a false premise.

 

I've never said that it doesn't work.  I've stated repeatedly that I've not seen any evidence that it does other than incidental stories of isolated good outcomes that could be explained in other equally valid ways.  Including spontaneous remission and placebo effects.

 

Dr. Bob

 

 

 

..

 

 

Thanks GCCC for putting up good speakers and info.  Makes me happy to see more informational clubs and social gatherings happening.

[peanutbutter]

So it isn't a cure. 

 

For the sake of the exact wording.