Actually, it's more that PC is generally intolerant of bullshit. If you're trying to make an argument on cancer from a scientific perspective, I'd recommend looking into more than a single book from the 1930s. Science changes. You don't get to pick and choose what you believe, you need to look at all available evidence.…
Yeah not the best comparison ;] It would be cool to hear something from specialists in this topic. If its legit I think something might come up in the news. I just really hope its something worth looking up to.
I think you need to pick better books next time, sounds like purest, finest bullshit. cancer might be a nature's over-population management mechanism, but I'm not sure anyone affected will be relieved by this. Fingers crossed for this development, I'm especially glad it doesn't come from the US, so patients will be less…
Shame its in the daily fail, that tabloid is just bonkers. I don't know what to believe on this, Sir Paul M. Nurse in an interview said it would be impossible to come up such a wide covering vaccine on the account that cancer is just a name for a myriad of different diseases that all have different genetic triggers. My Dad…
I appreciate your concern, but it was actually a really wonderful book. And I said nothing about it being a natural form of depopulation; I said that it is your body's attempt at maintaining life in a difficult and acidic environment. What about that doesn't make sense? And Zac, check out "Nutrition and Physical…