health4ni wrote:^^ sure.

Without trying to be too conspiracy theoryist (word?), most studies, esp with drugs/supps etc, as we unfortunately know are funded by drugs companies with vested interests. I'm not sure you can patent Ozone and Hydrogen Peroxide.

Thus, it's not really in the western world's medical & drug industrys' interests to fund studies into such products for human health benefits. If, and I'm playing devil's advocate here, they did and they found that this stuff when used correctly produced amazing results, then they'd lose so much money from sales of their own synthetic drugs.

Jeez, fish oil and guggul are two prime examples of non-patentable "foods" that lower cholesterol nearly as much statins.... without the nasty side-effects (namely lowered CoQ10 then will start a landslide of other immune disorders to occur). Plus, fish oil etc... in fact simply eating healthy real foods... will create a healthier & preferable lipid profile.

We speak from the same book on this Scott - and I know it does take the conspriacy route - but anyone who has the time - just do this - look at the key chemo drugs today?...No reverse engineer the actions of what they do and then tell me where they got the idea from. Green Tea and Pomegranete a PRIME example........they found out which mechanism and enzymes they impact and then made a artificial one for it. Its there in black and white.

health4ni wrote:^^ sure.

Without trying to be too conspiracy theoryist (word?), most studies, esp with drugs/supps etc, as we unfortunately know are funded by drugs companies with vested interests. I'm not sure you can patent Ozone and Hydrogen Peroxide.

Thus, it's not really in the western world's medical & drug industrys' interests to fund studies into such products for human health benefits. If, and I'm playing devil's advocate here, they did and they found that this stuff when used correctly produced amazing results, then they'd lose so much money from sales of their own synthetic drugs.

Jeez, fish oil and guggul are two prime examples of non-patentable "foods" that lower cholesterol nearly as much statins.... without the nasty side-effects (namely lowered CoQ10 then will start a landslide of other immune disorders to occur). Plus, fish oil etc... in fact simply eating healthy real foods... will create a healthier & preferable lipid profile.

Agree completely - and don't think you are taking a devils advocate position at all, you speaketh the truth! With no ability for pharmaceutical companies to patent, things normally gets buried. I used to compile study data on behalf of pharam companies as a job and used to get so pissed off with how they would selectively cherry pick what they'd publish - quality of data and results are irrelevant, they only ever want data that supports their products.

Continuing that point though but turning it the other way, many of the alternative medicine experts do seem to have god complexes, and seem to present their opinions as if they have discovered the ultimate secrets of the human body (and are totally certain about it - which in itself is a non scientific position) but that the world is ignorant and consipring to crucify them. In the same way as I don't trust the pharma companies I don't trust many of the alternative health gurus either.

My approach is to always look for the raw data and see what can be found from that.

I also think if something is speculated by the scientific community as a whole as a good line of investigation then you can normally find at least some independent university or hospital reasearch done somewhere... am sure there's some out there on this, just might take a while to find it.

Some of the research my university do is incredibly interesting. The antibody engineering and drug targeting stuff they do is one of the few things that temps me into full time academia. I've got a feeling that within the next 10-20 years cancer treatments will be incredibly effective and nowhere near as toxic. Mainstream medicine is not intrinsically bad, it's just still relatively primitive.

Dtlv74 wrote:Continuing that point though but turning it the other way, many of the alternative medicine experts do seem to have god complexes, and seem to present their opinions as if they have discovered the ultimate secrets of the human body (and are totally certain about it - which in itself is a non scientific position) but that the world is ignorant and consipring to crucify them. In the same way as I don't trust the pharma companies I don't trust many of the alternative health gurus either.
My approach is to always look for the raw data and see what can be found from that.

I also think if something is speculated by the scientific community as a whole as a good line of investigation then you can normally find at least some independent university or hospital reasearch done somewhere... am sure there's some out there on this, just might take a while to find it.

I think what you're getting at is vested interests as wherever there is one, there is misinformation.

As well educated, questionning inviduals we can all make sensible judgements based upon our own research, but strangely the internet makes this somewhat more difficult as there is too much misinformation on line, although I think pubmed is a better source than Wiki.

Does anyone have any "good" on line sources of info? Should we have a trusted "experts" page?

health4ni wrote: How many die a year from reactions to over the counter drugs like asprin, paracetomol etc? More than one! Let alone those that luckily don't die. FFS some people die from eating peanuts.

Adults & children can probably die from too much of any freely available drug if too much is ingested.

You've gotta put this into perspective. If used correctly in precise ratios from what I've read it's very useful & safe (not withstanding the strong detoxification phase that will happen making you feel like poo). The % of hydrogen peroxide will be very small.
Yes, let's put this in perspective. With over the counter drugs, true there are fatalities, but all these drugs have recommended dosages that have been clinically trialed and tested. If someone takes an OD we can, in some cases, treat them as we know what effects they have on the body. Likewise, peanut allergies, epipens can counteract an attack and if someone ends up in hospital, again medical staff know what the symptoms are and how to treat them.

What do we know about ingestion of hydrogen peroxide? We know when administed to the site of a cancer there can be a beneficial effect. But ingestion? Oral ingestion?

wrt cancer usage etc: I'd rather have a pop at almost anything than the extremely poisonous chemo drugs. I don't want this turn into a cancer topic again; just commenting on it since it was mentioned.

Ozone therapy has been in use in Germany for a long time and in experienced hands seems to be very safe and powerful at helping reverse diseases. afaik same for hydrogen peroxide.

WHERE???? Please give me some examples. I cannot find anything in peer-reviewed literature, no studies, nowt? I've found a website taking about breathing ozonated air but nothing on oral ingestion of H2O2 - which is what the thread was initially discussing

You'll always find arguments for and against almost anything, esp with the internet.Agreed.

health4ni wrote:^^ sure.

Without trying to be too conspiracy theoryist (word?), most studies, esp with drugs/supps etc, as we unfortunately know are funded by drugs companies with vested interests. I'm not sure you can patent Ozone and Hydrogen Peroxide.

I do agree to a certain extent on this, but medical research, is not, that tends to be funded by the good ol tax payer and thus studies falling under such a remit must show application and relevance for the wider community. A proposal goes through several rounds of judging and if your initial proposal does not stand up to scrutiny you won't get funded.

Thus, it's not really in the western world's medical & drug industrys' interests to fund studies into such products for human health benefits. If, and I'm playing devil's advocate here, they did and they found that this stuff when used correctly produced amazing results, then they'd lose so much money from sales of their own synthetic drugs.

See my above point.

Jeez, fish oil and guggul are two prime examples of non-patentable "foods" that lower cholesterol nearly as much statins.... without the nasty side-effects (namely lowered CoQ10 then will start a landslide of other immune disorders to occur). Plus, fish oil etc... in fact simply eating healthy real foods... will create a healthier & preferable lipid profile.

Of course, but that's not really comparable in this instance. Eating healthy, fresh food is undeniably better than eating prepackaged but drinking H2O2 to clear out your gut? Not the same league me thinks.

Actually I'm extremely glad you posted this second post. Being all conspiracy-theorist myself.....you mention funding of drug trials by companies with a vested interest. Every single website I found and looked at yesterday and supported by a "Dr" was in fact selling said treatment. Can we say "vested interest" anyone? That is the curse and beauty of the internet, anyone can say and promote anything.

Again I say, that while there have been studies on the use of hydrogen peroxide I have yet to find any promoting ingestion of it. As to your statement "you feel poo due to toxins being released" anyone who has that kind of exothermic reaction going on in their stomach and gut would feel poo.

I think I'll start a thread (as soon as I get the time) to fully explain the peer-review process and quantitative thinking behind scientific studies, so people can see why I am so sceptical about second and third hand anecdotal testimonies

An example: if I had an ozone machine &/or was practised in using H2O2 (assuming it all works well and safe results are achieved), then my website would promote it in the hope of getting people to invest with me in the therapy. It would be my job; a way to make money. So saying that all these "Doctors" have vested interests is kind of mute since well that's how they earn a living; private "health care".

In the same way doctors make mistakes (Michael Jackson's doctor is a good recent example) so do health care practitioners and therapists. Some are bad and out just to make money, while many do it as they love helping, "curing", "healing" etc people.

RoB wrote:Some of the research my university do is incredibly interesting. The antibody engineering and drug targeting stuff they do is one of the few things that temps me into full time academia. I've got a feeling that within the next 10-20 years cancer treatments will be incredibly effective and nowhere near as toxic. Mainstream medicine is not intrinsically bad, it's just still relatively primitive.

I've been lucky enough to have a couple of members of my close family involved in phd and post phd research at Bristol Uni, as well as having a few friends who are doing phd stuff like our own GymBunny. Am also honored that they seem happy to chat to me about it and consider me smart enough to have a valid opinion. Fully agree there's some great research going on in university labs, but it does take a long time to filter through - some amazing stuff has been done in the last decade at Bristol advancing treatment of MS, but it's still years away from becoming fully applied. In the next few years watch out for stories of drugs that have great effect coming out of research done there.

simon m wrote:

Dtlv74 wrote:Continuing that point though but turning it the other way, many of the alternative medicine experts do seem to have god complexes, and seem to present their opinions as if they have discovered the ultimate secrets of the human body (and are totally certain about it - which in itself is a non scientific position) but that the world is ignorant and consipring to crucify them. In the same way as I don't trust the pharma companies I don't trust many of the alternative health gurus either.
My approach is to always look for the raw data and see what can be found from that.

I also think if something is speculated by the scientific community as a whole as a good line of investigation then you can normally find at least some independent university or hospital reasearch done somewhere... am sure there's some out there on this, just might take a while to find it.

I think what you're getting at is vested interests as wherever there is one, there is misinformation.

As well educated, questionning inviduals we can all make sensible judgements based upon our own research, but strangely the internet makes this somewhat more difficult as there is too much misinformation on line, although I think pubmed is a better source than Wiki.

Does anyone have any "good" on line sources of info? Should we have a trusted "experts" page?

I agree and good points. I am now subscribed to about thirty medical journals I think, and start most of any research i do from them. I always check the sponsor of the research too, and if the researchers seem to be employed by a pharmaceutical or sports supplement company I always am a little more skeptical of anything I find. I also always look for multiple sources of information/studies and try to do my own mini 'meta analysis' if the info is out there.

I can certianly post links to the journals that I trust, and also the online 'experts' who I think are realtively trustworthy.

GymBunny wrote:Actually I'm extremely glad you posted this second post. Being all conspiracy-theorist myself.....you mention funding of drug trials by companies with a vested interest. Every single website I found and looked at yesterday and supported by a "Dr" was in fact selling said treatment. Can we say "vested interest" anyone? That is the curse and beauty of the internet, anyone can say and promote anything.

Again I say, that while there have been studies on the use of hydrogen peroxide I have yet to find any promoting ingestion of it. As to your statement "you feel poo due to toxins being released" anyone who has that kind of exothermic reaction going on in their stomach and gut would feel poo.

I think I'll start a thread (as soon as I get the time) to fully explain the peer-review process and quantitative thinking behind scientific studies, so people can see why I am so sceptical about second and third hand anecdotal testimonies

Great post - and definitely when you are able please do put up a post/thread on research methods and the peer review process. I have a good idea of it i think, and have worked with research in a few ways myself in previous jobs, but my view has always been from the outside - your first hand experience would be really valuable.

...

During the breaks between sets on my workout was thinking more about the comments that came up here about H2O2 being unpatentable (word?) therefore not profitable by the pharamceutical companies - this is true, but other things they can't patent, if they are effective they find ways around it... such as with insulin and the marketing of a whole range of different 'injector pens' or 'applicators'... if something is studied and effective they normally find a way to make money from it.