That vitamin movie

[Passion4Truth]

A lot of "ifs" in that opinion piece.

Maybe you can address the facts in the article instead of screaming you saw an "if" or a "maybe". With nonsensical comments like that, it is easy to see why your post count is so high.

[the truth]

thats for sure

[Fancy]

Maybe you can address the facts in the article instead of screaming you saw an "if" or a "maybe". With nonsensical comments like that, it is easy to see why your post count is so high.

Didn't mention any "maybe" and Instead of concentrating on my post count, you could actually have read the study I DID post and maybe post something that is of value instead of someone's opinion with zero facts to back it up (no references or studies).

Much independent research has shown opposite results

Where in that article is any independent research that contradicts the study I posted? Would really like to see the results.

Here is a little tidbit that might be of interest:

The assets of the Linus Pauling Institute of Science and Medicine were used to establish the Linus Pauling Institute as a research institute at OSU in 1996 to investigate the function and role of micronutrients, phytochemicals and microconstituents of food in maintaining human health and preventing and treating disease; and to advance the knowledge in areas which were of interest to Linus Pauling through research and education. LPI continues to function as a working tribute to a great scientist, Linus Pauling.

Pauling was certainly an accomplished person and a valued member of the medical community. I hope his work is continued.
http://lpi.oregonstate.edu/linus-pauling-biography
And another link that actually may be of interest to some:
http://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/trea ... amin-c-pdq

[Passion4Truth]

Nice to see that you are googling Linus Pauling and agree with all his studies, as opposed to the huge smear campaign he had to deal with during his excellent work on vitamins. And I did read the previous study you posted that opposed his findings. Funny how you posted that study, then turn around and give Dr. Pauling praise, then post another study opposing his findings. Get that post count up girl! lol

[Fancy]

Nice to see that you are googling Linus Pauling and agree with all his studies

Since you can't get what I post correct, it's obvious you're mistaken again. Ah well - that is to be expected.

[Passion4Truth]

It's hard to really understand what you are posting when you flip-flop so often. You give Linus Pauling the praise he deserves then post studies that show opposite results of Dr. Paulings. Post, post, post. lol

[Fancy]

It's hard to really understand what you are posting when you flip-flop so often. You give Linus Pauling the praise he deserves then post studies that show opposite results of Dr. Paulings. Post, post, post. lol

So can't comment on the facts at all? I haven't flip-flopped. I don't know his work and you certainly haven't posted anything about it. By all means, post his work that refutes the study.

[Passion4Truth]

Yes, it is obvious you are not familiar with his work and are just blindly posting. Google is your friend.

[Fancy]

So just blinding posting "Much independent research has shown opposite results" ? Figured.

[Passion4Truth]

No, I don't blindly post like you.

Much independent research HAS shown opposite results. Since you are too lazy too look yourself, here is a link (and there are many many more) to a study where vitamin C was successfully used:

The results clearly indicate that this simple and safe form of medication is of definite value in the treatment of patients with advanced cancer.

http://www.pnas.org/content/73/10/3685.full.pdf

.....as opposed to your link:

Failure of High-Dose Vitamin C (Ascorbic Acid) Therapy to Benefit Patients with Advanced Cancer — A Controlled Trial

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM197909273011303

[oneh2obabe]

Get back on topic NOW and everybody stop with the insults. Got it? Good!

[Fancy]

The results clearly indicate that this simple and safe form of medication is of definite value in the treatment of patients with advanced cancer.

The study I posted referred to the study submitted by Pauling. There is a difference between the two as noted in the controlled trial study: "Since bias is possible in non-randomized studies including selected controls, we conducted a randomized, controlled double-blind trial"....

[the truth]

http://www.sitejabber.com/reviews/www.quackwatch.com quackwatch is a quack
http://www.raysahelian.com/quackwatch.html http://anhinternational.org/2008/01/18/ ... home-town/ would you like more links fingers just another guy paid by big pharma ,to spread bs so people keep on taking there poison meds and millions like you fall for it

ya but you say nothing about bs links like -quackwatch lol lol says it all

[Fancy]

I have no idea how that is relevant to what I was stating (losing a defamation suit (and who cares?) is irrelevant in this case). Never mind a site that only has 38 reviews and, again, who cares? I posted a study that has particular results - feel free to comment.

[Passion4Truth]

The study I posted referred to the study submitted by Pauling. There is a difference between the two as noted in the controlled trial study: "Since bias is possible in non-randomized studies including selected controls, we conducted a randomized, controlled double-blind trial"....

A couple notable differences between those two particular studies are that Dr. Pauling’s study involved 1100 patients and a protocol of both oral AND IV vitamin C, where as the other study involved just 150 patients and oral vitamin c only. And it is the smaller study that used oral vitamin C only that is taken as gospel, go figure.