There are serious researchers at eg Moffitt who believe sodium bicarbonate or Tham can be promising anti-cancer agents. If you can prove them wrong, I would be very interested in it!
-
-
Replying to @larshaakon @JackWestMD and
I don't need to prove them wrong, they need to prove themselves right, which they cannot do because there is no evidence to back their claims.
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likes -
Replying to @DocBastard @JackWestMD and
You could equally well say that there is no evidence backing up the claim that the treatment does not work. Don't confuse absence of evidence for evidence of absence.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @larshaakon @DocBastard and
Agree w/
@DocBastard - onus isn't on rest of scientific community to irrefutably disprove a theory for which there is no clinical evidence. If investigators at Moffitt, etc, are investigating alkaline Rx, they shouldn't promote off-trial use, or they are unqualified to work there.1 reply 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @JackWestMD @DocBastard and
We are not talking onus,
@JackWestMD. As you know, patients have to make decisions under uncertainty, regardless of who has onus to prove this or that. You said you could definitely prove alkaline treatments don't work. Do you still stand by that?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @larshaakon @DocBastard and
OK. More fair to say that there isn't an iota of clinical evidence to support them, and there is good reason to be concerned about potential harms. You can cling to the tiny minority of docs who don't think it's a colossally horrible idea, but perhaps the 99.8% are right here.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @JackWestMD @larshaakon and
If alkalinization is anything close to the remarkable benefit it's purported to be by the zealots, why it is so elusive to show ANY benefit beyond anecdotal reports (w/unknown denominator, likely enormous # of ppl who died w/no benefit). Can't argue rationally w/zealots.
3 replies 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @JackWestMD @larshaakon and
Spot on here. Also evidence of direct harm and no benefit based on investigations of those offering these therapies. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/magazine-38650739 …pic.twitter.com/bSX17Wnb5T
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @sky__john @JackWestMD and
You rely on news articles to direct your practice? News article like this is not "evidence". They are as bad evidence when they retell stories of tragic deaths as they are when they recount miraculous cures.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @larshaakon @JackWestMD and
Also, a legal investigation by the California Medical Board is not the same as sensationalized news stories.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like
It was more than that. The San Diego attorney general investigated, indicted, and prosecuted Robert O. Young for all the crimes for which he was ultimately convicted. Compare that to patient testimonials that are poorly sourced and spread on quack websites.
-
-
Replying to @gorskon @sky__john and
Not sure what you mean, David. Are you saying Young's criminal conviction proves alkaline treatments don't work? Criminal convictions are not usually regarded evidence one way or the other in the scientific literature I read. PubMed is usually a better source of information.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
This Tweet is unavailable.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.