Topic: King Charles truly is a Medieval English king!
Anonymous A started this discussion 2 years ago #116,046
He is refusing modern cancer treatment, choosing instead to use herbs and potions.
Anonymous B joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 14 minutes later[^] [v] #1,281,977
Chemo kills more people than cancer does. Seems like a no brainer to me.
Anonymous C joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 57 seconds later, 15 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,978
He's not even the King of anything. Unserious illegal fraud/scam King.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug3lnqb0028
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ug3lnqb0028
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 3 seconds later, 15 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,979
Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 6 minutes later, 22 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,980
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 5 minutes later, 27 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,981
Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 28 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,982
@1,281,977 (B)
People don't seem to realise that chemo therapy is not a cure-all. Depending on the type of cancer, it may not add much or any to your life expectancy, especially if you are of advanced age and are just as or even more likely to die of heart failure in the next few years than a slow-growing cancer. Most doctors do not recommend treating prostate cancer at all in men over a certain age.
Not sure what type of cancer he has, but I could easily see it making the most sense to not have chemo and then to just try a bunch of, likely benign, herbs and potions, cause why the fuck not? They'd sure as shit have to be pretty toxic to be anywhere as close to as destructive as chemo is on the body.
People don't seem to realise that chemo therapy is not a cure-all. Depending on the type of cancer, it may not add much or any to your life expectancy, especially if you are of advanced age and are just as or even more likely to die of heart failure in the next few years than a slow-growing cancer. Most doctors do not recommend treating prostate cancer at all in men over a certain age.
Not sure what type of cancer he has, but I could easily see it making the most sense to not have chemo and then to just try a bunch of, likely benign, herbs and potions, cause why the fuck not? They'd sure as shit have to be pretty toxic to be anywhere as close to as destructive as chemo is on the body.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 53 seconds later, 29 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,983
Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 40 seconds later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,984
@1,281,981 (A)
Not sure about that exact claim, but the general feel of what he's saying is correct.
Look up "watchful waiting". Read about how prostate cancer is treated and how that highly depends on one's age.
Not sure about that exact claim, but the general feel of what he's saying is correct.
Look up "watchful waiting". Read about how prostate cancer is treated and how that highly depends on one's age.
Anonymous C double-posted this 2 years ago, 20 seconds later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,985
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 20 seconds later, 30 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,986
Anonymous A (OP) double-posted this 2 years ago, 20 seconds later, 31 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,987
@1,281,984 (C)
Do you really think that cancer treatment has a higher death rate than just keeping the cancer untreated? That's absurd.
Do you really think that cancer treatment has a higher death rate than just keeping the cancer untreated? That's absurd.
Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 33 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,988
@previous (A)
In certain circumstances, I can easily see that.
In highly aggressive cancers attacking young patients? No, obviously not.
It's so context dependent and one of the reasons why they don't just blast 80+ year old men to the moon with radiation and chemo.
In certain circumstances, I can easily see that.
In highly aggressive cancers attacking young patients? No, obviously not.
It's so context dependent and one of the reasons why they don't just blast 80+ year old men to the moon with radiation and chemo.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 56 seconds later, 34 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,989
@previous (C)
Magical potions should work much better. Double, double, toil and trouble! Fire burn, and cauldron bubble!
Magical potions should work much better. Double, double, toil and trouble! Fire burn, and cauldron bubble!
Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 37 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,990
@previous (A)
Yes, they really could. Similarly, prayer, for many, can be much better. Because the choice between causing known harm with little chance of benefit and doing what amounts to nothing, well, I think as Anon B said, it's a no brainer. Maybe not for you. But it is for the rest of us!
Yes, they really could. Similarly, prayer, for many, can be much better. Because the choice between causing known harm with little chance of benefit and doing what amounts to nothing, well, I think as Anon B said, it's a no brainer. Maybe not for you. But it is for the rest of us!
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 39 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,991
Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 4 minutes later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,995
@1,281,981 (A)
> You made the claim. Please provide a link to a reliable, medical source.
Fuck off you condescending fuck. "You're" the one claiming I'm wrong. You fucking prove me wrong or STFU
> You made the claim. Please provide a link to a reliable, medical source.
Fuck off you condescending fuck. "You're" the one claiming I'm wrong. You fucking prove me wrong or STFU
Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 10 seconds later, 44 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,996
@1,281,991 (A)
Do you have a citation for that?
That it would affect untreated cancer in any appreciable way seems... hard to believe.
Do you have a citation for that?
That it would affect untreated cancer in any appreciable way seems... hard to believe.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 35 seconds later, 45 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,997
Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 4 minutes later, 50 minutes after the original post[^] [v] #1,281,998
@previous (A)
> That's not the way burden of proof works.
Oh yes it is! You are the one who jumped in there claiming I am wrong and then laughed. Now you prove me wrong. Ball is in your court. That is the way the burden of proof works. Put up or shut up.
> That's not the way burden of proof works.
Oh yes it is! You are the one who jumped in there claiming I am wrong and then laughed. Now you prove me wrong. Ball is in your court. That is the way the burden of proof works. Put up or shut up.
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 11 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,282,002
@previous (B)
The person making the affirmative claim has the burden of proof. This is basic knowledge. Stop embarrassing yourself.
The person making the affirmative claim has the burden of proof. This is basic knowledge. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Anonymous B replied with this 2 years ago, 22 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,282,008
@previous (A)
Quit making rules up. Either prove your claim that I am wrong or move on. You sound like a child now.
Quit making rules up. Either prove your claim that I am wrong or move on. You sound like a child now.
Anonymous D joined in and replied with this 2 years ago, 2 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,282,010
@1,282,002 (A)
> The person making the affirmative claim has the burden of proof. This is basic knowledge. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Basic knowledge? You just made an affirmative claim as to how burden of proof works. Now you have the burden, if that's even how it works, which you have yet to prove
> The person making the affirmative claim has the burden of proof. This is basic knowledge. Stop embarrassing yourself.
Basic knowledge? You just made an affirmative claim as to how burden of proof works. Now you have the burden, if that's even how it works, which you have yet to prove
(Edited 1 minute later.)
Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 1 minute later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,282,014
@1,282,002 (A)
I agree. So, can you please provide a citation for your claim, as I've previously asked you here: @1,281,996 (C)
I agree. So, can you please provide a citation for your claim, as I've previously asked you here: @1,281,996 (C)
Anonymous A (OP) replied with this 2 years ago, 32 seconds later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,282,015
Anonymous C replied with this 2 years ago, 6 minutes later, 1 hour after the original post[^] [v] #1,282,024
@previous (A)
I didn't make the claim, you did. Where's the citation for the study that "proves" this? By the way, science doesn't work by proof.
I didn't make the claim, you did. Where's the citation for the study that "proves" this? By the way, science doesn't work by proof.
Anonymous E joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 3 months later, 3 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,297,109
Meta !Sober//iZs joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 5 hours later, 3 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,297,123
Is it possible that he knows the cancer is metastasized and terminal, and he thus wants to take a course of treatment with the least side effects?
Kook !!rcSrAtaAC joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 6 minutes later, 3 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,297,124
@1,297,109 (E)
This portrait is so amazing. I'd like to get a similar one of my cats
This portrait is so amazing. I'd like to get a similar one of my cats
(Edited 14 seconds later.)
Anonymous H joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 22 hours later, 3 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,297,283
@1,297,123 (Meta !Sober//iZs)
One also has to consider the dignity of the monarchy, you can't have the King going around all bald and skeletal especially if there's not particularly much point in eradicating the cancer in such an old man. Besides which there's no evidence that he is using "herbs and potions" because they don't go into detail about what his treatments are.
One also has to consider the dignity of the monarchy, you can't have the King going around all bald and skeletal especially if there's not particularly much point in eradicating the cancer in such an old man. Besides which there's no evidence that he is using "herbs and potions" because they don't go into detail about what his treatments are.
Anonymous I joined in and replied with this 1 year ago, 1 hour later, 3 months after the original post[^] [v] #1,297,291
@1,281,982 (C)
> People don't seem to realise that chemo therapy is not a cure-all. Depending on the type of cancer, it may not add much or any to your life expectancy, especially if you are of advanced age and are just as or even more likely to die of heart failure in the next few years than a slow-growing cancer. Most doctors do not recommend treating prostate cancer at all in men over a certain age.
>
> Not sure what type of cancer he has, but I could easily see it making the most sense to not have chemo and then to just try a bunch of, likely benign, herbs and potions, cause why the fuck not? They'd sure as shit have to be pretty toxic to be anywhere as close to as destructive as chemo is on the body.
Cite your sources or shut the fuck up
> People don't seem to realise that chemo therapy is not a cure-all. Depending on the type of cancer, it may not add much or any to your life expectancy, especially if you are of advanced age and are just as or even more likely to die of heart failure in the next few years than a slow-growing cancer. Most doctors do not recommend treating prostate cancer at all in men over a certain age.
>
> Not sure what type of cancer he has, but I could easily see it making the most sense to not have chemo and then to just try a bunch of, likely benign, herbs and potions, cause why the fuck not? They'd sure as shit have to be pretty toxic to be anywhere as close to as destructive as chemo is on the body.
Cite your sources or shut the fuck up