Who is Afraid of Suzanne Somers

Before we discontinued cable TV I saw her quite often, mostly on QVC or some other shopping network.  Then she was on Oprah show describing her anti-aging regimen.  The camera had shown a battery of plastic cups filled with pills that she took regularly and sworn by.  It looked slightly odd but I deeply sympathize with a cancer survivor on her journey to sustaining health. 

Suzanne Somers on the Oprah show

Lately I saw Somers again in “60 minutes” that was dedicated to her book ‘Knockout’ about doctors providing alternative cancer cures. Though being not a fan or follower, I was still struck by the attermost rejection of it by conventional medicine.

Our praised political correctness was nowhere in sight.

The representatives of the mainstream medical science interviewed in the episode explained that no success story can prove effectiveness of the treatment or approach, because all these successes are subjective, and could’ve been resulted from other factors (misdiagnosis, other treatments taken in parallel, etc.) Personal success stories are usually called anecdotes and are not admitted as scientific evidence. Only clinical studies can be admitted as such.

Not trusting my amateur understanding I checked the term in several dictionaries and on relevant Internet sites. According to them a clinical study (trial or protocol) is a thoroughly documented testing provided on a group of volunteers. The results are obtained via monitoring certain measurable parameters and comparing them to similar parameters in the group taking placebo.

It looks like such an approach excludes subjective judgment and coincidental reactions. But does it really?

Is the possibility of misdiagnosis not applicable to participants in a clinical study, or a possibility of alternative (or other) treatment taken in parallel clandestinely or unconsciously?

 We know that emotional support can be a powerful weapon against despair and thus, - a contributor to successful healing. But is it possible to make all the participants in a trial getting such support in equal (measurable) portions?  How about different lifestyles and medical history that are also difficult to reliably measure? Besides, there are multiple evidences of placebo being as effective as the tested drug.

And to make things worse we hear all too often of drugs thoroughly tested and FDA approved yet shown in years of application no sizable benefits (though caused dangerous side-effects.)

All these weaknesses of even the most unbiased medical trials are well known, still the representatives of mainstream science  demonstrate unshakable superiority. They are science. Others are charlatans.  

...The actress who usually projects a rather gregarious and flamboyant personality this time was uncommonly reserved. In response to accusations in incompetency she did not mention any of the issues above, just asked:

‘Why then so little success is gained against cancer in almost a century of research?’ 

Somers’ opponents were not intimidated by the question. They looked confident and comfortable replying that some progress had been made, in particular, not all (?!) the drugs of the 70s are still in use today. 

Indeed with no goals or timelines ever been set and no real competition to mind such a progress may qualify as totally fine.

And feeling so, the major scholarly concern is not about lack of their achievements but rather with the possibility of people being misguided by the books like Somers’. They worry that some of her readers might decide against conventional treatment and that would be detrimental to their health. 

Here I would like some help to check the logic. Please, tell me where I make a mistake:

      Cancer is one of the deadliest diseases in our part of the world.

      Success of modern science against it is still modest, which means that MANY PATIENTS DIE AFTER CONVENTIONAL TREATMENTS.

 Why then the decision to do something else is considered fatal?

Mrs. Somers did what all of us do when we straggled for a solution (medical, or other) for a long time, and finally found it – we rush to share the good news with our family and friends. By doing so we expect no other rewards than seeing someone else benefited from it. Today with the advantages of the Internet we can share our little victories with virtually the entire world.

There must be something good in this!

Of course, no health-related information should be trusted without questioning. And Somers’ book is no exception from this rule.  But nowadays we all need to learn processing information and taking the responsibility for our decisions.

Because, frankly, no one else would.

So here is the link to another information  regarding healing cancer naturally:

http://greensmoothiesblog.com/cancer/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+GreenSmoothiesBlog+%28Green+Smoothies+Blog+by+Victoria+Boutenko%29

It is from the blog that I follow. Check it if you know someone who may need it.