Minutus

Must disagree with you that Barrett is "a skilled writer." He's good at casting aspersions; not good at conveying facts. (Don't think the man would recognize the truth if it bit him.) For a failed physician, he's not doing too badly by styling himself an expert on matters medical.
My latest encounter with his website was a few months ago when I was researching Insulin Potentiation Therapy for cancer treatment. Foreseeably, Barrett is against it -- but on the most laughable grounds. He claims it may result in cancer cells becoming resistant to conventional chemo therapy. That's specious analogizing from bacterial becoming resistant to antibiotics that are overused, whereas the whole point of IPT is that it permits the administration of doses of chemo so low that they cause no noxious side effects.
And this idiot claims to be a scientist...
Peace,
Dale

I have to agree with you Dale. The

I have to agree with you Dale. Barrett seems to ride on his arrogance as an md. That kind of arrogance
acts as if they can do anything and get away with it. Despite all his failures as a trial witness, he still persists.
You know the drill: tell your lies often enough with enough sense of power and entitlement, and eventually
the dummies will believe you.
As for chemo--I have to question the use of it as so many doctors and researchers point to its abject failure
in 95% of cancer cases and its destruction of quality of life and shortening of life. While it is true that some
people will heal despite this poisoning, why add that toxic burden to an already burdened body.
tanya

And I agree with you, Tanya, about chemo. But IPT is not traditional chemo -- it can use microdoses of chemo, but usually it uses laetrile.
Peace,
Dale

i am o bviously not familiar with IPT, however, my distrust of chemo is strong. That being said,
less is more, even in allopathy it seems.
tanya