By William M. London
Part 3 of the review of “The Quest for Cures…Continues” highlights the promoters of “alternative medicine” who present themselves with eyebrow-raising credentials. Please link to these JREF pieces anywhere you see this documentary series being promoted. It is extremely important to promote evidence-based and science-based critique to counteract the alternative and questionable information.
“The Quest for Cures…Continues” is an eleven-episode video documentary series made available intermittently online at thetruthaboutcancer.com to promote dubious cancer treatments euphemistically labeled “alternative medicine.” A “replay marathon” is began November 27th and run for five days.
In Part 1, I discussed the marketing of the documentary and the background of its host, Ty Bollinger.
In Part 2, I began my discussion of the 68-minute Episode 1. I introduced the commentators interviewed in the video, provided a list of ten types of deceptive ploys that commentators make to shift viewers’ trust away from standard treatment methods and toward so-called “alternative” methods, discussed the activities of some of the commentators, and described details about the first three types of deceptive ploys: #1 The Passionate Personal Ploy, #2 The Doctors-Don’t-Know-About-Nutrition Ploy, and #3 The Oncologists-Wouldn’t-Give-Themselves-Chemotherapy Ploy.
My critique continues by discussing two more ploys in Episode 1 and much more than I expected on two commentators pitching one of the ploys. The unusual qualifications of the commentators pitching Ploy #5 turned out to be more interesting than I had realized.
Part 3 of the review of “The Quest for Cures…Continues” highlights the promoters of “alternative medicine” who present themselves with eyebrow-raising credentials. Please link to these JREF pieces anywhere you see this documentary series being promoted. It is extremely important to promote evidence-based and science-based critique to counteract the alternative and questionable information.
“The Quest for Cures…Continues” is an eleven-episode video documentary series made available intermittently online at thetruthaboutcancer.com to promote dubious cancer treatments euphemistically labeled “alternative medicine.” A “replay marathon” is began November 27th and run for five days.
In Part 1, I discussed the marketing of the documentary and the background of its host, Ty Bollinger.
In Part 2, I began my discussion of the 68-minute Episode 1. I introduced the commentators interviewed in the video, provided a list of ten types of deceptive ploys that commentators make to shift viewers’ trust away from standard treatment methods and toward so-called “alternative” methods, discussed the activities of some of the commentators, and described details about the first three types of deceptive ploys: #1 The Passionate Personal Ploy, #2 The Doctors-Don’t-Know-About-Nutrition Ploy, and #3 The Oncologists-Wouldn’t-Give-Themselves-Chemotherapy Ploy.
My critique continues by discussing two more ploys in Episode 1 and much more than I expected on two commentators pitching one of the ploys. The unusual qualifications of the commentators pitching Ploy #5 turned out to be more interesting than I had realized.
A video has surfaced of a reported exorcism as it was taking place last February behind the closed doors of a Roman Catholic church in Vranov nad Dyji, Czech Republic. A 26 year old visitor heard screams and filmed through the keyhole of the door. Not much is visible; there is plenty of screaming and obscenity (in another language) but nothing supernatural happens from this perspective. The drama that unfolded is what we would expect an exorcism to look like from our familiarity with sensational news reports. Only in the movies, in fiction, are there visions of horror that break the bounds of physics or human capabilities. In reality, exorcisms at their most basic, are an interaction between the victim in some disturbed state and the people who are enacting the ritual. Some might say the ritual enables the victim, encouraging the expression of possession. For some afflicted people, they may benefit psychologically from the process.