Creation vs. Evolution

[gcthomas]

How many examples do you know of where chemotherapy or radiation treatment actually cured the cancer? As in it never came back, they died of old age 40 years later?

A properly functioning immune system destroys cancer. Chemo and radiation nuke the immune system.

I should have known that you would follow 6Days down this rabbit trail. Is there any anti-science nonsense that you don't believe?

This is not on thread, but healthy tissues recover from cytotoxic chemo better than cancer tissues, so it is a positive benefit during treatment, and although the benefits are rather small, they are not negative as you claim without evidence. Check out an Oncology Journal for data. Radiation therapy is targeted as a beam and doesn't damage the immune system in the same way as the effects are localised. For example, irradiating a lung cancer won't kill the immune system cells in the long bone marrow.

It doesn't destroy the reason for the cancer, which is why it typically comes back with a vengeance following those treatments.

I don't understand what sort of quackery you are proposing here. If the cancer was caused by a mutation, then killing that cell will indeed destroy the reason for the cancer. If the cause was smoking, then no, you will need some smoking cessation support to remove the cause. What else could you mean?

 

[Rosenritter]

I should have known that you would follow 6Days down this rabbit trail. Is there any anti-science nonsense that you don't believe?

This is not on thread, but healthy tissues recover from cytotoxic chemo better than cancer tissues, so it is a positive benefit during treatment, and although the benefits are rather small, they are not negative as you claim without evidence. Check out an Oncology Journal for data. Radiation therapy is targeted as a beam and doesn't damage the immune system in the same way as the effects are localised. For example, irradiating a lung cancer won't kill the immune system cells in the long bone marrow.

I don't understand what sort of quackery you are proposing here. If the cancer was caused by a mutation, then killing that cell will indeed destroy the reason for the cancer. If the cause was smoking, then no, you will need some smoking cessation support to remove the cause. What else could you mean?

So you don't know what it is you are arguing against, but it is "quackery?" For anyone who is dealing with cancer right now I would share information / videos etc with them, but you're showing that you just automatically pledge allegiance to majority opinion. I think I'll tend to want to hear more about the non-lethal methods (chemo and radio kill) that cure brain cancer, skin cancer, and so forth.

 

[Jose Fly]

Is there any anti-science nonsense that you don't believe?

Crank magnetism

 

[gcthomas]

So you don't know what it is you are arguing against, but it is "quackery?" For anyone who is dealing with cancer right now I would share information / videos etc with them, but you're showing that you just automatically pledge allegiance to majority opinion. I think I'll tend to want to hear more about the non-lethal methods (chemo and radio kill) that cure brain cancer, skin cancer, and so forth.

I tend to trust those who have spent their lives studying the science of cancer and/or spent their lives surgically removing cancers, testing the treatments and studying the outcomes, rather than some anonymous web-crank who seems to reject half of the widely accepted science in the world.

You, Ros, seem to reject a variety of sciences on the basis that they don't fit with your pre-existing world-view, instead of making use of your rational faculties. Your loss, though.

 

[gcthomas]

Crank magnetism

NO, he won't believe that. It is not remotely cranky enough for him.

 

[Tyrathca]

How many examples do you know of where chemotherapy or radiation treatment actually cured the cancer? As in it never came back, they died of old age 40 years later?

I know this wasn't directed at me but I'll answer anyway.

Hundreds at least. Perhaps thousands. You've probably met a lot too though you were probably unaware. Even my own grandmother is an example of it. Generally it's not chemotherapy alone, often it's a combination that works far better together than any alone do. Sometimes however it is just the chemo (particularly for haematological cancers)

Then there is also the cancers that the chemotherapy was never meant to cure. It was always known to be going to not achieve that but what it does is give them several more quality years (many chemotherapy agents have become quite gentle, particularly the modern immunomodulators)

That said technically no one actually dies of old age anyway, so what I'm really answering is that they lived decade/s until they were elderly.

A properly functioning immune system destroys cancer.

You're an idiot who doesn't know enough to understand how little you know.

The immune system is actually very good at preventing cancers, picking off pre-cancerous cells very early on. Those that grow enough to be noticed have actually been evading the immune system for quite some time and have evolved different mechanisms to help them do it. So if the cancer is noticeable enough to warrant chemo then that is a sign that the immune system is already incapable of fitting it alone. Now that said some modern chemos are actually immunomodulators which actually help enhance the immune system's response to certain cancers by various mechanisms (often by synthesised antibodies targeting the cancer, though even then it is not without potential collateral damage throughout the body)

Chemo and radiation nuke the immune system. It doesn't destroy the reason for the cancer, which is why it typically comes back with a vengeance following those treatments.

If that were true then how come there are now so many cancers which have good/better prognoses when treated with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy? You're just spouting what you feel emotionally makes sense rather than care about the real data.


Is ALL of science a conspiracy to you? Is there anything in science you DO believe?

 

[patrick jane]

you should refrain from discussing Arthur now that he has left us.

His name is Al

 

[redfern]

... God's Word is absolute truth.

What does “God’s Word” mean? If I had it (in printed form) in my hand, what would I be holding?

Starting from a neutral opinion, how would I be able to establish that in fact it was absolutely true?

 

[Rosenritter]

I know this wasn't directed at me but I'll answer anyway.

Hundreds at least. Perhaps thousands. You've probably met a lot too though you were probably unaware. Even my own grandmother is an example of it. Generally it's not chemotherapy alone, often it's a combination that works far better together than any alone do. Sometimes however it is just the chemo (particularly for haematological cancers)

Then there is also the cancers that the chemotherapy was never meant to cure. It was always known to be going to not achieve that but what it does is give them several more quality years (many chemotherapy agents have become quite gentle, particularly the modern immunomodulators)

That said technically no one actually dies of old age anyway, so what I'm really answering is that they lived decade/s until they were elderly.

You're an idiot who doesn't know enough to understand how little you know.

The immune system is actually very good at preventing cancers, picking off pre-cancerous cells very early on. Those that grow enough to be noticed have actually been evading the immune system for quite some time and have evolved different mechanisms to help them do it. So if the cancer is noticeable enough to warrant chemo then that is a sign that the immune system is already incapable of fitting it alone. Now that said some modern chemos are actually immunomodulators which actually help enhance the immune system's response to certain cancers by various mechanisms (often by synthesised antibodies targeting the cancer, though even then it is not without potential collateral damage throughout the body)
If that were true then how come there are now so many cancers which have good/better prognoses when treated with chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy? You're just spouting what you feel emotionally makes sense rather than care about the real data.


Is ALL of science a conspiracy to you? Is there anything in science you DO believe?

Tyrathca, you're simply ignorant. Well, not exactly, you're also rude and offensive in addition.

 

[6days]

I said that there were no critically peer reviewed articles on those sites.

This is what you said... "There are no critically peer-reviewed articled, just a lot of love-in fawning over each others persuasive efforts.
Then you said this...Please read what I wrote — if you think I was wrong please reference a Creationist's paper that demonstrated a creationist topic and that has been peer reviewed in a non-creationist journal"
It would seem you have created different sets of goalposts...a shell game.*

Perhaps clarify your point, which was in response to this...

Amusing how evolutionists demand rigorous explanations from creationists, when they themselves are satisfied with vague and often psuuedo scientific just so stories. If you wish answers from Biblical astronomers and astrophysicists, you can find them at sites like ICR, Creation.com, AIG, etc.

 

[6days]

What does “God’s Word” mean? If I had it (in printed form) in my hand, what would I be holding?

The Bible, although what we have now is translations.

Starting from a neutral opinion, how would I be able to establish that in fact it was absolutely true?

How do you determine any historical book or manuscript is true? Is it internally consistent? Is it supported by external sources? Is there archaeology that supports it?
You don't start from a neutral position Redfern..... neither do I.

 

[Stripe]

Do we know for certain that Alwight passed away?

 

[Tyrathca]

Tyrathca, you're simply ignorant. Well, not exactly, you're also rude and offensive in addition.

You have no idea how mistaken you are Rosenritter. But I will not sit idly while you suggest that people not access life saving treatment (or that those who have are fools), if you think me rude for doing that then so be it. I'm going to guess you've read a few websites and been on a few forums and heard a few testimonials so now consider yourself an "expert".

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[MichaelCadry]

Do we know for certain that Alwight passed away?

Dear Stripe,

I guess his recent health problems are new to you. Alwight has been suffering from colon cancer and had to have a section of his colon cut out, and then sewn back 2gether. He had to wear a colostomy bag for way too long and he wasn't thrilled, to say the least. The doctor gave him 2 months to live. He lasted longer than that, but I think he succumbed from the cancer. He was emailing me every day or two and me to him, and it just stopped and I wrote to him, telling him I needed to hear from him to know if he was still okay. He never emailed me back and it's been months now.

Even if he went to a nursing home, the cancer would have gotten him by now. I know Alan to know that he would not mind me sharing these things with his cohorts/friends. I hope someone will do the same for me when my time comes. I saved almost every email he sent to me so I could reflect back. Sure, I miss him a lot, but I feel that he is in a better place, to be honest. I prayed for him every night on my knees. I hope that God will smile upon him, despite his Christian orientation or lack thereof.

He wouldn't just stop emailing me suddenly and not answer my many emails to him afterwards. Take it from there.

May God Watch Closely Over You For Good!!

Michael

 

[Tyrathca]

Do we know for certain that Alwight passed away?

Not that I'm aware, I think it's been extrapolated from loss of contact in the context of his illness. Though unless a friend or family member comes to this site to tell us I doubt we'd ever be sure. It may be that circumstances mean he can't (or does not desire to) visit TOL at the moment.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

 

[MichaelCadry]

Not that I'm aware, I think it's been extrapolated from loss of contact in the context of his illness. Though unless a friend or family member comes to this site to tell us I doubt we'd ever be sure. It may be that circumstances mean he can't (or does not desire to) visit TOL at the moment.

Sent from my SM-N910G using Tapatalk

Dear Ty,

The only family that he had left was a brother-in-law that he didn't speak too much to. He was a landlord and had two tenants in the flat next to him, so that he would be able to pick his own neighbors. The money came in handy for him and was an additional income for him. He bought the flat as an investment. He had two guys renting the place and from what he told me, they were good renters. There are no relatives to come and let us know when he passed away. He wouldn't just quit emailing me. It wasn't like him. Make of it what you will. I can't stress enough that the doctor gave him 2 mos. to live and he outlasted that by about a month. Then he quit getting in touch with me. I don't think he would keep me and us, hanging.

Warm Wishes & Cheerio!!

Michael

 

[Stripe]

Dear Stripe,

I guess his recent health problems are new to you. Alwight has been suffering from colon cancer and had to have a section of his colon cut out, and then sewn back 2gether. He had to wear a colostomy bag for way too long and he wasn't thrilled, to say the least. The doctor gave him 2 months to live. He lasted longer than that, but I think he succumbed from the cancer. He was emailing me every day or two and me to him, and it just stopped and I wrote to him, telling him I needed to hear from him to know if he was still okay. He never emailed me back and it's been months now.

Even if he went to a nursing home, the cancer would have gotten him by now. I know Alan to know that he would not mind me sharing these things with his cohorts/friends. I hope someone will do the same for me when my time comes. I saved almost every email he sent to me so I could reflect back. Sure, I miss him a lot, but I feel that he is in a better place, to be honest. I prayed for him every night on my knees. I hope that God will smile upon him, despite his Christian orientation or lack thereof.

He wouldn't just stop emailing me suddenly and not answer my many emails to him afterwards. Take it from there.

May God Watch Closely Over You For Good!!

Michael

I think it would be best if you corroborated your guess. :thumb:

Reporting a guy dead on a guess is just plain dumb.

Not that I'm aware, I think it's been extrapolated from loss of contact in the context of his illness. Though unless a friend or family member comes to this site to tell us I doubt we'd ever be sure. It may be that circumstances mean he can't (or does not desire to) visit TOL at the moment.

Exactly.

I think it's wiser to err on the side of life.

 

[Stripe]

Cadry:

Can you search FB for his e-mail address, full name and home city. You might be able to find something that way to help us know more.

 

[gcthomas]

This is what you said... "There are no critically peer-reviewed articled, just a lot of love-in fawning over each others persuasive efforts.
Then you said this...Please read what I wrote — if you think I was wrong please reference a Creationist's paper that demonstrated a creationist topic and that has been peer reviewed in a non-creationist journal"
It would seem you have created different sets of goalposts...a shell game.*

Perhaps clarify your point, which was in response to this...

No - I am not persuaded by vague and woolly science, no matter who publishes it. The AIG etc stuff is extremely woolly and vague, missing as it is any consistent link to reality.

 

[6days]

*I am not persuaded by vague and woolly science, no matter who publishes it

The old goalposts didn't work out for you?

GC...it seems you are willing to believe in vague and wooly 'science'. You seem willing to believe silly things simply because its peer reviewed in secular magazines. For example there is no end to new articles suggesting that life can arise from non life. Atheists often admit that life has the appearance of design, yet are unwilling to follow evidence leading to the Designer Creator.*