This reminds me of the story of Dr. Ben Carson, a famous neurosurgeon who also teaches oncology at John Hopkins. In 2002, he was diagnosed with prostate cancer and successfully underwent traditional treatment.
However, Dr. Carson has stated publicly, both at conferences and on radio interviews, that he believes he was largely cured by a controversial holistic treatment called glyconutrients.
However, due to legal liabilities on the company's part, they banned all testimonials and would threaten lawsuits to anyone who publicized this information.
20/20 did a story on glyconutrients, disproving them based on glycobiologist Dr. Ronald Schnaar from John Hopkins School of Medicine. Dr. Schnaar said, "All of the sugar building blocks that we need in our body are made from the most common foods we eat."
Contrary to this, Dr. Carson says we do not get these simple sugars from our natural diet and said that his family, his employees and everyone he knows uses glyconutrients with great results.
He said he considered not having traditional surgery but he didn't want others mistakenly following his path to the detriment of their health.
Dr. Carson is not a glycobiologist. However, he is the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at John Hopkins and a colleague of Dr. Schanaar. He's been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom and had a film made about his life story starring Cuba Gooding Jr.
But none of this information about his alternative cancer treatment is widely known. Not one word on his Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Carson) nor on the page about glyconutrients.
It's disappointing there's no unbiased scientific research to explain what is factually true. And it's unbelievable that such a high profile cancer survivor could make these claims with virtually no one knowing.
1. Post hoc, ergo propter hoc - "he tried a controversial holistic treatment, therefore he was cured" - My father was cured of prostate cancer just after he quit smoking. Therefore I advocate quitting smoking as a cure for prostate cancer.
2. Fallacy of the single cause - "he believes he was largely cured by" - it's unlikely that any single cause is responsible for something as large as being successfully treated for cancer. Many prostate cancers are simply left untreated with no harm.
3. Hasty generalization - "his family, his employees, and everyone he knows" - We can know nothing about the effect on the general population from anecdotal evidence.
4. Red herring, subtype appeal to authority - "However, he is the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery" - entirely irrelevant to prostate cancer treatment.
5. Ad populum, in reverse - "None of this information [...] is widely known" - whether it is widely known or not, it should stand up to scrutiny on it's own.
And of course, my post itself suffers from 'argument from fallacy' - something need not be false just because it is argued for in a fallacious manner.
That said, you can roll your quackery up and take it with you.
As far as I (IANAD) understand, there is no such thing as an universal cure for cancer. If and when we beat cancer, the solution will not present itself as a magic pill.
Therefore for any instance of magic pills (glyconutrients included) we can infer that it won't cure cancer with any reliability. You can have a narrow tool that strikes one kind of cancer and does nothing (or even harms a little) on all others, or we can have something that comforts you a bit but without much statistical outcome.
If you have malignant cells dividing inside you, they would not be easily stopped.
Trying to self-medicate a random cancer with a random magic pill will likely yield no result at all - or maybe only from Placebo effect.
Therefore if you're at earlier stage, your best bet is conventional treatment, and if you're at late stage, it might be better to spend the remaining time wisely.
However, Dr. Carson has stated publicly, both at conferences and on radio interviews, that he believes he was largely cured by a controversial holistic treatment called glyconutrients.
However, due to legal liabilities on the company's part, they banned all testimonials and would threaten lawsuits to anyone who publicized this information.
20/20 did a story on glyconutrients, disproving them based on glycobiologist Dr. Ronald Schnaar from John Hopkins School of Medicine. Dr. Schnaar said, "All of the sugar building blocks that we need in our body are made from the most common foods we eat."
Contrary to this, Dr. Carson says we do not get these simple sugars from our natural diet and said that his family, his employees and everyone he knows uses glyconutrients with great results.
He said he considered not having traditional surgery but he didn't want others mistakenly following his path to the detriment of their health.
Dr. Carson is not a glycobiologist. However, he is the Director of Pediatric Neurosurgery at John Hopkins and a colleague of Dr. Schanaar. He's been awarded the Presidential Medal of Freedom and had a film made about his life story starring Cuba Gooding Jr.
But none of this information about his alternative cancer treatment is widely known. Not one word on his Wikipedia page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ben_Carson) nor on the page about glyconutrients.
It's disappointing there's no unbiased scientific research to explain what is factually true. And it's unbelievable that such a high profile cancer survivor could make these claims with virtually no one knowing.
Dr. Carson's speech http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ROzftYwJihg
Dr. Carson's Story in the Dallas Weekly http://glyconutrientsarevital.blogspot.com/2006/08/dr-ben-ca...
Related Local News story on Baby Hadley http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oK3U4mrqslk