Doctor John Campbell

[harm_less]

This sounds pretty reputable to me: https://gmri.org.nz/cms/the-paradigm-shi...-industry/
This research follows the same strategy pioneered by Jane McLelland who is living proof of the results of this approach and that 'terminal' cancer isn't necessarily fatal.

Well yes it does but that looks very aspirational, in the process of developing new and better systems for cancer treatment.  Not really an established treatment ready for the masses, might be a few years yet...

the use of ivermectin for covid treatment isn't really comparable though, as it hasn't been proven to be safe 'enough' for mass distribution, which is obviously whats required to treat covid.

Ivermectin has been used extensively in certain African countries to combat a parasitic issue that causes 'River blindness'. These same countries have a curiously low incidence of COVID which is where the idea of using the drug as an anti COVID prophylactic originated.

The use of Ivermectin in this off-label way is directly comparable to that of using various outdated but proven drugs in combatting cancer. For Jane, she embarked on this strategy over 20 years ago following a terminal cancer diagnosis so the treatment regime has been proven in her case.

[Olive]

It seems that some people are happy to compromise their outlooks when the situation demands.

You are missing my point. Not all of us start out looking for information with an "outlook" i.e . a set of prejudices. I set out to find out what I could without relying on institutionalised/accepted beliefs, I ended up with a set of protocols that improved my life. I think that's what attracts people to the likes of Campbell, but what I am saying is that he may once have been simply an explorer of information, but he now seems to have been overtaken by blind contrarianism to the point that he can no longer be taken seriously.

[king1]

Well yes it does but that looks very aspirational, in the process of developing new and better systems for cancer treatment.  Not really an established treatment ready for the masses, might be a few years yet...

the use of ivermectin for covid treatment isn't really comparable though, as it hasn't been proven to be safe 'enough' for mass distribution, which is obviously whats required to treat covid.

Ivermectin has been used extensively in certain African countries to combat a parasitic issue that causes 'River blindness'. These same countries have a curiously low incidence of COVID which is where the idea of using the drug as an anti COVID prophylactic originated.

The use of Ivermectin in this off-label way is directly comparable to that of using various outdated but proven drugs in combatting cancer. For Jane, she embarked on this strategy over 20 years ago following a terminal cancer diagnosis so the treatment regime has been proven in her case.

Well it's interesting reading but still appears to have a large chunk of uncertainty involved that would need resolving for mass distribution.  I personally think curious associations or correlations really need to be resolved into certainties and rigid causation before it will garner mainstream support.  I don't think i'll be first in the queue.

[harm_less]

It seems that some people are happy to compromise their outlooks when the situation demands.

You are missing my point.  Not all of us start out looking for information with an "outlook" i.e . a set of prejudices.    I set out to find out what I could without relying on institutionalised/accepted beliefs, I ended up with a set of protocols that improved my life.  I think that's what attracts people to the likes of Campbell, but what I am saying is that he may once have been simply an explorer of information, but he now seems to have been overtaken by blind contrarianism to the point that he can no longer be taken seriously.

Your situation in getting your dietary inputs on line are all too familiar as I also have significant food and other environmental intolerances. Luckily my partner is a qualified holistic nutritionist so I have access to instant dietary recommendations.

The issues you have had in finding reputable dietary advice is far from isolated to the health sector. I've struck the same in Organic horticulture and alternative energy generation systems. In both cases I embarked on self education in order to ensure whatever advice and service providers I enlisted was reliable and economically robust.

For health issues this isn't quite as easy so we often resort to web based info sources which generates a whole new level of confusion. I'm equally comfortable with science based or 'traditional' treatment methodologies and when I lose direction I have a sister with degrees in her profession alongside her 40+ years of hospital experience. Her confirmation of much of Dr Campbell's content is proof enough for me of his accuracy.

A recent experience for me with cancer treatment was also a useful experience in being on the receiving end of the pharmaceutical side of the health sector. Prognosis is positive so far but if my condition heads south I'm preparing for how I will deal with it and what health professionals will be on my team.

[Olive]

"Your situation in getting your dietary inputs on line are all too familiar"

Where did I say I got my information on line? I prefer to read books when available, with citations that can be followed up. I read journals on line but never watch Youtube presentations.

[Magoo]

i get most of my dietary information right off the back of the box.

[Oldfellah]

Until reading this thread I can honestly say I have never heard of him and frankly I dont care what he has to say about the pandemic, there are so many experts with so many different opinions its getting to the stage of who to believe.
So really what folk need to do as from the beginning of this horrible virus is to look after yourself the best way that you think fit, yes I am triple vaxxed, wear a mask everywhere I go and this is my choice, its only going to get worse when the floodgates are fully opened and all the EXPERTS are saying we should be doing this and that, the only thing we should be doing is staying safe as best we can.

[Oh_hunnihunni]

I often discuss my physical activity with my GP, and I have indeed received dietary advice on occasion - it looks like that rabbit hole is getting bigger.

Not necessarily. We have no idea whether you are a bloated blimp or conversely have a stick figure build which in either case would make dietary advice blatantly relevant. You may also be consulting an integrative health focussed GP which would also explain your experiences.

Oh c'mon. 

Any adult with half a brain knows that if you ask questions of your GP you will get advice, on most subjects. Trouble is far too many people fail to ask questions. And even more expect their GPs to be cure everything  mind readers with the magical ability to extend their ten minute allocated consultation time into considerably more...

---

You are missing my point.  Not all of us start out looking for information with an "outlook" i.e . a set of prejudices.    I set out to find out what I could without relying on institutionalised/accepted beliefs, I ended up with a set of protocols that improved my life.  I think that's what attracts people to the likes of Campbell, but what I am saying is that he may once have been simply an explorer of information, but he now seems to have been overtaken by blind contrarianism to the point that he can no longer be taken seriously.

Your situation in getting your dietary inputs on line are all too familiar as I also have significant food and other environmental intolerances. Luckily my partner is a qualified holistic nutritionist so I have access to instant dietary recommendations.

The issues you have had in finding reputable dietary advice is far from isolated to the health sector. I've struck the same in Organic horticulture and alternative energy generation systems. In both cases I embarked on self education in order to ensure whatever advice and service providers I enlisted was reliable and economically robust.

For health issues this isn't quite as easy so we often resort to web based info sources which generates a whole new level of confusion. I'm equally comfortable with science based or 'traditional' treatment methodologies and when I lose direction I have a sister with degrees in her profession alongside her 40+ years of hospital experience. Her confirmation of much of Dr Campbell's content is proof enough for me of his accuracy.

A recent experience for me with cancer treatment was also a useful experience in being on the receiving end of the pharmaceutical side of the health sector. Prognosis is positive so far but if my condition heads south I'm preparing for how I will deal with it and what health professionals will be on my team.

You fail to mention that dietary recommendations are inclined to be confused with fashion fads, as well as based on research that when reexamined turns out to be less than reliable.
For instance, remember the eggs are bad for your heart advice - subsequently debunked. The blood group diet?  Vegan trend? The sugar free thing that fails to mention the chemical substitutes?

The best dietary advice remains the simplest. Eat less, move more. Haven't met a doc yet who argues against that...

[Olive]

"We have no idea whether you are a bloated blimp or conversely have a stick figure build " Another straw man argument. All these incorrect assumptions are getting tiresome.

[harm_less]

Not necessarily. We have no idea whether you are a bloated blimp or conversely have a stick figure build which in either case would make dietary advice blatantly relevant. You may also be consulting an integrative health focussed GP which would also explain your experiences.

Oh c'mon. 

Any adult with half a brain knows that if you ask questions of your GP you will get advice, on most subjects. Trouble is far too many people fail to ask questions. And even more expect their GPs to be cure everything  mind readers with the magical ability to extend their ten minute allocated consultation time into considerably more...

---

The problem is that the failure to ask their GP is indicative that most people really do have "half a brain", particularly when it comes to chronic medical conditions which is where the modern health system really struggles. And to further complicate matters doctors are averse to accepting queries that are conveyed in a self diagnosis way which they all too often write off as the patient relying on 'Dr Google', or that the issue is psychosomatic. A system destined to fail?

Sure the diagnosis of an acute condition is straightforward in terms of both the doctor asking the relevant questions and in the patient recognising what is relevant to the affliction but for more complex and subtle conditions the medical practice's 'sausage factory' model is all too superficial to work successfully.

---

"We have no idea whether you are a bloated blimp or conversely have a stick figure build "  Another straw man argument.  All these incorrect assumptions are getting tiresome.

No. Just trying to ascertain all the relevant details as I'm all too aware that "half a truth is often a great lie".

---

You fail to mention that dietary recommendations are inclined to be confused with fashion fads, as well as based on research that when reexamined turns out to be less than reliable.
For instance, remember the eggs are bad for your heart advice - subsequently debunked. The blood group diet?  Vegan trend? The sugar free thing that fails to mention the chemical substitutes?

The best dietary advice remains the simplest. Eat less, move more. Haven't met a doc yet who argues against that...

Dietary advice research is an expensive exercise which is all too often far too blinkered in its parameters to provide real life results, and designed to be self serving by the funder of that research.

Sure there is a long list of dietary items that have changed from positive to negative, or vice versa, over the years with eggs, butter, artificial sweeteners, meat, soy, wheat/gluten, wine and coffee being just a few of them. The benefits of avoiding many of these foods will differ from one individual to the next as every one of us has a unique bodily terrain with toxin levels, stress factors, gut biome and genetic influences all dictating what best fuels our lives. The human body is an incredibly complex organism so it's not surprising that the typically reductionist scientific research methods that our pharmaceutical based health system relies on fails to get it right on numerous occasions. But that's a whole other discussion thread for elsewhere.

[harm_less]

The good Doctor posted one of his best videos to date a couple of days back. A full scale criticism of the "Evidence Based" medical system, and it was virtually a recitation of this release from the British Medical Journal so pretty much free from any personal spin on the doctor's part.
https://www.bmj.com/content/376/bmj.o702

Essentially the scientific and research models within the health system are corrupted to the degree that public health is under real risk as a result.