Anita Moorjani Experiance?

[Kumar]

Cancer treatment isn't an instant cure, and takes considerable time to work. Things often get worse before they get better. It is quite common that patients undergo a course of treatment which knocks them about but actually has an effect - cancer treatment is rough, no doubt, and it can make you morose and hallucinatory.[/quote

Yes it is commonly agreed. But why there can't be sudden remission due to some sudden physiological extreme physiological changes triggered by sure death impression? Doesn't our body has capacity to react alike it? pH cange can be one. Transcellular shifts can be other. Then hormones etc.

When some patients end that treatment, go home and take their herbal remedies, homeopathy or rainbow unicorn therapy, this just happens to coincide with them getting over the actual treatment and starting to recover. But they confuse cause and effect, and credit the woo therapy with any improvements.

Yes it can also be possible provided previous treatments were sure shots.

Moorjani was being treated with conventional medicine for lymphoma, just prior to her "NDA episode". She says as much herself.

Moorjani now travels the world doing lectures on her experiences. That's an expensive hobby. So do you think she affords this from her housekeeping and seeks no publicity? Maybe she hasn't published a best-seller book either...

Do you think her assertions are true or false? Do you think she knows herself if they are true or false? Do you think her audience would be different if they were proven false?

I work in a children's hospital and I see every day the outcomes of people who do NOT do their research but take these charlatans' notions on board unquestioned, only to have to turn to conventional medicine when it is far too late. Others on this forum are doctors and will have more similar stories. Be very careful who you disparage.

The facts are readily available on this person, and often on all these people who make miraculous claims.

 

[Kumar]

I suspect you don't really care about any answer that would be given to you.

I do care but if I could be able to fully understand that.

 

[Daylightstar]

How it can be done? Or how spontaneous remission can be taken as treatment given?

Do you define spontaneous remission as a natural remission without any modern medical intervention?

Kumar, why do you ask this and ignore this post which addresses your current question?

 

[Pup]

Immunotherapy is one of the hot topics in cancer research now. It's possible a high fever and infection could stimulate the immune system to turn against the cancer in an extreme coincidence in certain patients--obviously not every time else every patient with a urinary tract infection or something would be cured. But even the best immunotherapy drugs don't work all the time, so we still don't fully understand the mechanism.

 

[annnnoid]

Cancer treatment isn't an instant cure, and takes considerable time to work. Things often get worse before they get better. It is quite common that patients undergo a course of treatment which knocks them about but actually has an effect - cancer treatment is rough, no doubt, and it can make you morose and hallucinatory.

When some patients end that treatment, go home and take their herbal remedies, homeopathy or rainbow unicorn therapy, this just happens to coincide with them getting over the actual treatment and starting to recover. But they confuse cause and effect, and credit the woo therapy with any improvements.

Moorjani was being treated with conventional medicine for lymphoma, just prior to her "NDA episode". She says as much herself.

This statement is just bursting with blatant generalizations and unsupported assertions.

…and confusing cause and effect (assuming that is what is even happening…and you have yet to explicitly establish that it is in any specific case) is not lying, it is simply making an honest mistake.

Moorjani now travels the world doing lectures on her experiences. That's an expensive hobby. So do you think she affords this from her housekeeping and seeks no publicity? Maybe she hasn't published a best-seller book either...

You said they make up lies (a bare assertion) about everything (another bare assertion). You also claimed to know their motive: To get publicity and money (yet another bare assertion).

…you then defend this with more insinuations and bare assertions.

You’re definitely on a roll!

Do you think her assertions are true or false?

I have no idea. I’ve come across some very credible claims in quite a number of areas…but I never waste my time expecting anything as basic as accuracy in this place. One thing I can tell you without any doubt what-so-ever is that the claims made by the skeptics who ridicule them are often just as full of crap as the claims made by those who support them.

Do you think she knows herself if they are true or false?

I think there is a possibility that she knows one way or the other…and I think you and probably every one else here have already decided based on nothing more than ideology that she’s a fraud. Good for you.

Do you think her audience would be different if they were proven false?

If it were proven false then I expect her new audience would be you folks.

I work in a children's hospital and I see every day the outcomes of people who do NOT do their research but take these charlatans' notions on board unquestioned, only to have to turn to conventional medicine when it is far too late. Others on this forum are doctors and will have more similar stories. Be very careful who you disparage.

…oh, I see. You’re God so logical fallacies just don’t work the same for you. Sorry dude, anyone who flings crap around the way you do has no right to claim any credibility. And then you behave as if you're somehow entitled to it! Wow...that's impressive.

The facts are readily available on this person, and often on all these people who make miraculous claims.

Like I said earlier…there are lots of facts. You folks are very selective in which ones you listen to. My experience has been that skeptics are just as prone to BS as the folks who make and believe these claims.

 

[Daylightstar]

... I’ve come across some very credible claims in quite a number of areas… ...

Could you give an accurate example of such a very credible claim?
You may be as accurate as you can

E.T.A.: An accurate example relevant to the thread's topic.

 

[John Nowak]

Yes it can also be possible provided previous treatments were sure shots.

No, it is not. I don't believe any reputable doctor would leave off "...and if it doesn't work, we try something else."

 

[Kumar]

Immunotherapy is one of the hot topics in cancer research now. It's possible a high fever and infection could stimulate the immune system to turn against the cancer in an extreme coincidence in certain patients--obviously not every time else every patient with a urinary tract infection or something would be cured. But even the best immunotherapy drugs don't work all the time, so we still don't fully understand the mechanism.

Targetting Ion channels esp Potassium Channels are under active research. Probably, some extreme physiological changes either naturally due to extreme patient condition or due to cancer treatments may do sudden remission.

 

[Kumar]

No, it is not. I don't believe any reputable doctor would leave off "...and if it doesn't work, we try something else."

Targeting Ion channels esp Potassium Channels for cancer are under active research. Probably, some extreme physiological changes either naturally due to extreme patient condition or due to cancer treatments relevant to Ion Channel may do sudden remission.

 

[Kumar]

Spontaneous remission
Definition
The spontaneous regression and remission from cancer was defined by Everson and Cole in their 1966 book as "the partial or complete disappearance of a malignant tumour in the absence of all treatment, or in the presence of therapy which is considered inadequate to exert significant influence on neoplastic disease."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spontaneous_remission

Don't we need to better understand above and its science?

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

Don't we need to better understand above and its science?

Of course we do. And real scientists are working on it using real scientific research. None of this involves the use of Google to pull up random websites run by idiots, fools and promoters of Noetic Science (sic).

 

[Donn]

The Body Fights Back. News at eleven.

 

[MuDPhuD]

Hello Friends,

Greetings!



I just came to know about this case and seems to be spreading fast:-







It looks to be a factual case so may not be a fraud. Is it scientific, accident, paranormal, misconception or what? How it can be possible? I am just sceptical in it.



Best wishes.



Bes

She suffered from "cancer", in fact lymphoma, for four years, untreated as far as I can tell from her relatively uninformative website.
Lymphoma is an interesting form of cancer. If it is Hodgkin's lymphoma it is "one of the most curable cancers", and would be a medical travesty to allow it to go untreated.
https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000580.htm

If it is non-Hodgkin lymphoma
http://m.cancer.org/cancer/non-hodgkinlymphoma/detailedguide/non-hodgkin-lymphoma-factors-prognosis

It would be more difficult, but still could have as high 91% survival at 5 yrs (with treatment).

 

[MuDPhuD]

Hello Friends,

Greetings!



I just came to know about this case and seems to be spreading fast:-







It looks to be a factual case so may not be a fraud. Is it scientific, accident, paranormal, misconception or what? How it can be possible? I am just sceptical in it.



Best wishes.



Bes

She suffered from "cancer", in fact a lymphoma, for four years, untreated as far as I can tell from her relatively uninformative website.
Lymphoma is an interesting form of cancer. If it is Hodgkin's lymphoma it is "one of the most curable cancers", and would be a medical travesty to allow it to go untreated.
https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000580.htm

If it is non-Hodgkin lymphoma
http://m.cancer.org/cancer/non-hodgkinlymphoma/detailedguide/non-hodgkin-lymphoma-factors-prognosis

It would be more difficult, but still could have as high 91% survival at 5 yrs (with treatment).

She did receive treatment during hospitalization so her remission would not be spontaneous, or miraculous, just a successful medical treatment.

The fact that she had dreams and hallucinations during her hospitalization is not surprising. Claiming that these dreams represent a genuine experience of the afterlife on the other hand is unfounded assertion. Claiming that this experience resulted in her cure, while ignoring the role of her medical treatment in hospital is even more absurd.

Judging by her website she has a clear monetary incentive to persist in these claims, without providing any believable documentation, while taking advantage of the gullible.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

She suffered from "cancer", in fact a lymphoma, for four years, untreated as far as I can tell from her relatively uninformative website.
Lymphoma is an interesting form of cancer. If it is Hodgkin's lymphoma it is "one of the most curable cancers", and would be a medical travesty to allow it to go untreated.
https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000580.htm

If it is non-Hodgkin lymphoma
http://m.cancer.org/cancer/non-hodgkinlymphoma/detailedguide/non-hodgkin-lymphoma-factors-prognosis

It would be more difficult, but still could have as high 91% survival at 5 yrs (with treatment).

She did receive treatment during hospitalization so her remission would not be spontaneous, or miraculous, just a successful medical treatment.

The fact that she had dreams and hallucinations during her hospitalization is not surprising. Claiming that these dreams represent a genuine experience of the afterlife on the other hand is unfounded assertion. Claiming that this experience resulted in her cure, while ignoring the role of her medical treatment in hospital is even more absurd.

Judging by her website she has a clear monetary incentive to persist in these claims, without providing any believable documentation, while taking advantage of the gullible.

Exactly!

 

[Kumar]

Of course we do. And real scientists are working on it using real scientific research. None of this involves the use of Google to pull up random websites run by idiots, fools and promoters of Noetic Science (sic).

We can be concerned about sense instead of popularity.

 

[Kumar]

She suffered from "cancer", in fact a lymphoma, for four years, untreated as far as I can tell from her relatively uninformative website.
Lymphoma is an interesting form of cancer. If it is Hodgkin's lymphoma it is "one of the most curable cancers", and would be a medical travesty to allow it to go untreated.
https://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000580.htm

If it is non-Hodgkin lymphoma
http://m.cancer.org/cancer/non-hodgkinlymphoma/detailedguide/non-hodgkin-lymphoma-factors-prognosis

It would be more difficult, but still could have as high 91% survival at 5 yrs (with treatment).

She did receive treatment during hospitalization so her remission would not be spontaneous, or miraculous, just a successful medical treatment.

The fact that she had dreams and hallucinations during her hospitalization is not surprising. Claiming that these dreams represent a genuine experience of the afterlife on the other hand is unfounded assertion. Claiming that this experience resulted in her cure, while ignoring the role of her medical treatment in hospital is even more absurd.

Judging by her website she has a clear monetary incentive to persist in these claims, without providing any believable documentation, while taking advantage of the gullible.

It looks more scientific. But still we can explore possible physiological mechanisms to spontaneous(sudden or looking miracle) either caused by cancer treatments or naturally due to reaching cancer at end state. What can the possibilities?

 

[Kumar]

The Body Fights Back. News at eleven.

I think we are gifted by nature one of the best survival mechanism. When we talk about scientific, we actually talk about science relative to current understandings not related to absolute and final understandings. So scope for better understandings remain open.

 

[Daylightstar]

It looks more scientific. But still we can explore possible physiological mechanisms to spontaneous(sudden or looking miracle) either caused by cancer treatments or naturally due to reaching cancer at end state. What can the possibilities?

Kumar, it is better for such things to be discussed by truly interested people who can actually conduct a meaningful conversation.

You are not one of those people.

People are not all that keen on 'exploring' spontaneous remission with you because you pollute the discussion with nonsensical gibberish, you clearly do not learn and as such it is not really a meaningful effort, in this setting.

 

[Norman Alexander]

This statement is just bursting with blatant generalizations and unsupported assertions.

…and confusing cause and effect (assuming that is what is even happening…and you have yet to explicitly establish that it is in any specific case) is not lying, it is simply making an honest mistake.

In this particular case, the facts are readily available if you only but take the time to look. And if Moorjani made an "honest mistake", why is she now making a living from it?

You said they make up lies (a bare assertion) about everything (another bare assertion). You also claimed to know their motive: To get publicity and money (yet another bare assertion).

…you then defend this with more insinuations and bare assertions.

You’re definitely on a roll!

I have over a decade of first-hand experience with these sorts of people and the results they produce (or, more accurately, fail to produce) for their "patients".

Alt. med. people such as Moorjani have far more in common with religious zealots than medical practitioners. They think they have "the answers" and can never admit they have done anything wrong or that their diagnoses are faulty. So they do lie, repeatedly and with no shame, and in the face of all the evidence of their misdeeds that turns up. The underlying reason for this is usually as simple as for religious evangelists - it pays to rip off the gullible.

I’ve come across some very credible claims in quite a number of areas…but I never waste my time expecting anything as basic as accuracy in this place. One thing I can tell you without any doubt what-so-ever is that the claims made by the skeptics who ridicule them are often just as full of crap as the claims made by those who support them.

Got evidence? Bring it. That will convince a skeptic.

I think there is a possibility that she knows one way or the other…and I think you and probably every one else here have already decided based on nothing more than ideology that she’s a fraud. Good for you.

Ah, so you contend that Moorjani has completely accidentally set out on a globe-trotting lecture career and best-selling authorship based on her own hearsay. She sort of just fell into it? Forgot she wrote a book and was driving to work one day and found herself on the New York Times best seller list? Sounds legit.

If it were proven false then I expect her new audience would be you folks.

Why? It's already been shown her story is far more likely to be 95% made up with embellishments. Skeptics like a good fictional story as much as the next person, but this one is a repeat of many before her with nothing much to add.

…oh, I see. You’re God so logical fallacies just don’t work the same for you. Sorry dude, anyone who flings crap around the way you do has no right to claim any credibility. And then you behave as if you're somehow entitled to it! Wow...that's impressive.

Fixed that for you: …oh, I see, Moorjani. You’re God so logical fallacies just don’t work the same for you. Sorry dude, anyone who flings crap around the way you do has no right to claim any credibility. And then you behave as if you're somehow entitled to it! Wow...that's impressive.

Like I said earlier…there are lots of facts. You folks are very selective in which ones you listen to. My experience has been that skeptics are just as prone to BS as the folks who make and believe these claims.

Here you go.