File Name: alive and well by philip e binzel jr m d .zip
Among the nutrients they contain is one called amygdalin, which is also known as vitamin B This attacks cancer cells, and thus can help prevent cancer from breaking out in our bodies. Amygdalin vitamin B17 is contained in many hundreds of foods, but ones that are particularly rich in amygdalin have disappeared to a large extent from our Western diet.
Published January by Irvington Publishers. Written in English.
Different problems have arisen of late and edit warring makes it difficult to track what problems exist at any particular time.
First, too much of the article particularly the lede goes into the evils of laetrile. Necessary debunking of laetrile is properly done in the laetrile article.
I submit that debunking should be placed in a short footnote. Next, too much of the article particularly the lede, which uses the term 3 times mentions conspiracy theory without sufficient explanation. As the term is derogatory, it should be used with more caution.
These problems are evidenced by the section headings. For example "Fringe" is used as a heading without explanation. Rich talk , 14 December UTC. In my view, the section header accurately reflects the section contents. I honestly don't understand your objection. Please explain. As you acknowledge, two of the four paragraphs are about conspiracy theories.
This accurately reflects the contents. So what is the issue? Jytdog talk , 14 December UTC. This we could maybe reduce to one. To say he is a conspiracy theorist in the same manner you say he is an author is contentious labeling and a BLP violation. The opinions of others should not be the opinion of Wikipedia, and that is exactly what you're doing.
Critics consider him a conspiracy theorist, others consider him an author who presents facts. I've explained how the term can be included without violating BLP. Please read my comments. Looks like I am going to have go find the precedental discussions I mentioned earlier. I will go do that. I will say that doing it in a footnote is an interesting compromise, though. Thoughts on that by others? Not sure what you mean by "too much".
Do you mean "at all"? An opinion stated numerous times does not make it fact. American conspiracy theorist in the lead is a descriptive term based on opinion. Usually, articles will contain information about the significant opinions that have been expressed about their subjects. However, these opinions should not be stated in Wikipedia's voice. Rather, they should be attributed in the text to particular sources, or where justified, described as widespread views, etc. For example, an article should not state that "genocide is an evil action", but it may state that "genocide has been described by John X as the epitome of human evil.
Griffin's view of the term "conspiracy" as quoted from a published interview: First of all, we need to define this horrible word, conspiracy. A lot of people have a knee-jerk reaction to that. Conspiracies are very real in history. If you doubt that just go to any courtroom and sit there and listen to the cases that come before the judge and before the jury, and a good percentage of them involve conspiracies of one kind or another. So when people talk about conspiracy theories, I have to laugh.
WP:Fringe theories - Questionable science: Hypotheses which have a substantial following but which critics describe as pseudoscience, may contain information to that effect; however it should not be described as unambiguously pseudoscientific while a reasonable amount of academic debate still exists on this point.
References to laetrile and quackery in the article to describe Griffin's opinions and writings are POV and UNDUE as written, partly because the earlier claims are outdated by 35 years or so. Ernest T. Krebs, Jr. Richardson, Philip E. Binzel, Jr. Bouziane, M. Where is the balance? Where is NPOV? Some of the theories Griffin pointed out in his book have been validated by factual information that was recently published, such as Ralph Moss' book, Second Opinion , and John A. Richardson's book, Laetrile Case Histories .
Further validation relative to the above is further evidenced here:  Following are two excerpts from that published work:. The other major criticism made by Second Opinion has been corroborated by the New York Academy of Sciences through its official publication, The Sciences. As a result of the Academy's investigative work, Sloan- Kettering had to alter its manuscript which was forthcoming in the Journal of Surgical Oncology. Our position is impartial, or perhaps even agnostic: we are not directly concerned with whether or not Laetrile cures or controls cancer.
Rather, as in an analysis of the Velikovsky conflict, our interest is in 'the methodological significance of the affair,'93 or 'the methods which are actually used to distinguish those knowledge claims which are "true" from the rest. Finally, by giving equal time to both sides of the controversy, we are not suggesting that both sides have similar legitimacy. Rather, our explanation of the phenomenon is symmetrical, meaning that the behaviours of both sides must be understood if the controversy is to be understood.
The same issues apply to The Creature It is not our job as editors to advocate for or against what is written in Griffin's books. Our job is to present in a non-partisan manner what reliable secondary sources have published about the subjects, and in some circumstances what the subjects have published about themselves. And therein the problem lies. If Guy is referring to Moss' book, Second Opinion , as mentioned above, then please refer to the source I actually cited.
I did not cite Second Opinion. Griffin is not an article about laetrile, therefore citing sources that don't meet the standards of MEDRS is not an attempt by me to "trump" anything.
Different RS will be cited in order to validate what we write about a particular opinion or passage in Griffin's book. Regardless, we should not be conducting a scientific debate in Griffin's BLP regarding the use of laetrile.
Also keep in mind that we cannot exclude the information that inspired Griffin to write, World Without Cancer , which may include information Griffin refers to in John A. Richardson's book. I suppose not, Jytdog, considering Dr. Nacci's documentation on the whole laetrile thing, and all the sources he cited. Sometimes we get too focused on U. A good place to start would be changing the section titles so they reflect NPOV. We can't just leave the article looking like a WP:Coatrack.
Guy Help! I think the Undue tag can go, as it gives undue weight to a single opinion that of Atsme and it is abundantly clear by now that this is motivated in no small part by desire to advance a WP:FRINGE idea, the quack cancer treatment known as laetrile. Nobody else here seems to support the idea that the article gives undue weight to anything.
The subject is known for his advocacy of crank ideas, and we reflect that dispassionately. Atsme and Srich it is silly that you are resorting to edit warring instead of talking. Let's try to identify the specific things you are objecting to, so we can consider taking them to mediation or crafting a series of RfCs to address them in other words, do dispute resolution.
I've just commented there. Jytdog talk , 29 December UTC. I don't understand why some were left and some not. Jytdog talk , 6 January UTC.
This is what Srich proposed - I added conspiracy theories for laetrile, since he does that too, per the content in the article. Jytdog talk , 8 January UTC. Per the discussion above, would an admin please change the Occupation field in the infobox, and add a "known for" field, as follows?
Thx, Jytdog. I am not forum shopping. I presented the notice to address RS only which is more of an issue to me now because of the criticism I've received over the sources I've listed.
Srich has been manually and selectively archiving things. I have been reverting. Srich added an "archive me" tag, which I just removed. This page has an archiving bot. It also has had a very active set of discussions. I would be fine with changing the bot settings so that things archive more regularly. The current settings are:. Other thoughts? Jytdog talk , 4 February UTC.
Binzel , Jr. Dedication Acknowledgments Preface Introduction 1. Case Dismissed 2. The Nutrition Connection 3. New Doc on the Block 4.
Philip E. Binzel Hi friends, what are you reading this book today? Binzel PDF ePub book very easily enough you take phone and open the browser on your phone then visit this website, after download and save on your phone. Let's get the book before it runs out!
If you feel you have been helped by this site, please share the message and take a look at the easy ways you can contribute at no financial cost. Outstanding resource on the holistic healing of cancer. See alternative cancer treatment researcher Lothar Hirneise pages. Price UK: John Diamond, W. Lee Cowden, Burton Goldberg pages.
Actual Cases of Cancer Victors. Dee Simmons writes: "Twelve years ago I was diagnosed with breast cancer. First of all I couldn't believe this could happen to me. I had never been sick, not even a cold, and had always considered myself to be a very healthy person. Immediately, I had a decision to make
Different problems have arisen of late and edit warring makes it difficult to track what problems exist at any particular time. First, too much of the article particularly the lede goes into the evils of laetrile. Necessary debunking of laetrile is properly done in the laetrile article. I submit that debunking should be placed in a short footnote. Next, too much of the article particularly the lede, which uses the term 3 times mentions conspiracy theory without sufficient explanation.
Binzel jr. View more ebooks on ebookbrowse. The posts created within this blog are my opinions or those of other proponents of apricot kernels and their use therapeutically.
Увы, у этой программы такого тщеславия нет, у нее нет инстинкта продолжения рода. Она бесхитростна и целеустремленна, и когда достигнет своей цели, то скорее всего совершит цифровое самоубийство. - Джабба театральным жестом указал на громадный экран.
- Меган все пыталась его кому-нибудь сплавить. - Она хотела его продать. - Не волнуйся, приятель, ей это не удалось. У тебя скверный вкус на ювелирные побрякушки. - Ты уверен, что его никто не купил.
Вы набрали правильно, - сказал он осторожно, - но это служба сопровождения. Звонивший некоторое время молчал. - О… понимаю.
ГЛАВА 79 Стратмор спрятал пейджер в карман и, посмотрев в сторону Третьего узла, протянул руку, чтобы вести Сьюзан за. - Пошли.
Lean in book pdf free trekking in the nepal himalaya pdfMark C. 29.05.2021 at 18:02
Trekking in the nepal himalaya pdf free haynes repair manual pdf downloadsRestthrifpicbirth 01.06.2021 at 03:29
ALIVE AND WELL. One Doctor's Experience with Nutrition in the. Treatment of. Cancer Patients. By. Philip E. Binzel, Jr., M.D.. ALIVE AND WELL by Philip E.