where is the respect in the sugar discussion

Dont let us scare you away, we need as many people as possible on this discussion board.  I learn so much on this board.  Everyone has to do what they feel comfortable with.  I just try to keep weight on my husband and give him a healthy diet and I have him drink protein drinks.   I try not to worry to much about all these diets and stuff.   I say do what works for you.   Having said that, we need eveyones comments.

WE NEED YOU HERE PETE

tachilders said:

There is pretty good data

There is pretty good data that diet can affect the chance of getting some cancers but less data is available on how diet can help cure cancer. Now a study of cancer patients with diabetes vs non-diabetics may shed some light on how higher blood sugar might affect tumor progression or survival. A functioning pancreas should keep blood glucose within normal range even with sugar consumption. I think reducing refined sugar in the diet is likely good for everyone but to be honest I haven't committed to it. I want to live the time I have left and I'm not convinced diet changes make a life and death difference in many cases as evidenced by some stories here. Cutting sugar and carbs will also affect many juicers as fruit has lots of fructose which is a sugar that contains sucrose and glucose. I'm not attacking your post in any way just stating my opinion and as I said diet is ppossibly something that can affect outcomes. 

Tedd

www.coloradocancerblogs.org/a-diet-of-resistant-starch-helps-the-body-resist-colorectal-cancer/

I don't understand your issues Pete.  Do you feel that only those who agree with what you post should reply?  That isn't how it works.  Everyone is entitled to reply, as long as they remain in the guidelines.  It is not a sign of disrespect to disagree.

You said:  the selfish debaters have stolen the magic of the post and the information.  No one stole anything, just expressed a differing opinion.  For those in agreement with you, they can bypass the other opinions.  It is not selfish to add a differing opinion to a post, but it is selfish to thnk that only those who agree can respond to it.

Posting a link to a video or information on the net is fine.  It is an invitation to those interested to see more information.  It is not "required viewing or reading". 

You asked:  why does someone expressing a contrary view always have to get attacked here.  If you look back on your posts you will find that you as well as most of us have at times been the attacker.  But attacking an issue (i.e. disagreeing) is not the same as attacking the person.  Each person is entitled to their opinion and to express it within the bounds of CSN guidelines.

You said:   I think its fair to flag all the non supportive replies. they completely side track the discussion.  Again that may be your opinion, however I don't beleive that flagging non supportive replies will get you anywhere, unless the replies are not within te bounds of CSN guidelines.  Being non supportive is not unto itself reason enough to get a post removed.

You said:  they say a few rotten apples, spoil the barrel. i guess thats so on internet forums.  Now that statement is just unkind.  Calling those who do not beleive as you do and express their opinion "bad apples" in inappropriate to say the least.

Pete, I beleive you have had support, on a personal level even from those who have differing views on treatments.  It is only when you insist that your research, opinion or personal treatments are the only right way to go that gets these things started.  When someone disagrees with something you post you get all bent out of shape.  Sharing your treatment plans is fine, but you can't expect everyone to get on the band wagon with you...it just won't happen. 

I wish you well in your quest for health, but I an not one to follow blindly, nor follow the masses.  I make up my own mind since it is my life that is effected by my decisions.

Marie who loves kitties

wolfen said:

I Luv Ya, Pete

But, I'm with Marie on this one. You are coming on too strong.

Actually this board is quite a bit more tolerant than some of the others on CSN regarding alternative treatments and ideas. On the H&N board which applies to my hubby's cancer, alternatives are rather taboo, so just not discussed, and I accept that. I have learned some interesting things from you and other alternative users just as I have learned mainstream things from many. So discussion is good. Dissension and name calling is not.

On the other post, I asked a legitimate question regarding diabetic patients who have cancer. I wasn't trying to make fun of or disregard the importance your post. I am just seeking information from those who may have an idea. Perhaps my question got lost in the shuffle, so if anyone cares to, please read my reply and the question.

Luv,

Wolfen

But I don't have an answer for you, so silence remained.

I think of you and your family every darn day girl.

Winter Marie

Lovekitties said:

My 2 cents on the whole mess

I don't understand your issues Pete.  Do you feel that only those who agree with what you post should reply?  That isn't how it works.  Everyone is entitled to reply, as long as they remain in the guidelines.  It is not a sign of disrespect to disagree.

You said:  the selfish debaters have stolen the magic of the post and the information.  No one stole anything, just expressed a differing opinion.  For those in agreement with you, they can bypass the other opinions.  It is not selfish to add a differing opinion to a post, but it is selfish to thnk that only those who agree can respond to it.

Posting a link to a video or information on the net is fine.  It is an invitation to those interested to see more information.  It is not "required viewing or reading". 

You asked:  why does someone expressing a contrary view always have to get attacked here.  If you look back on your posts you will find that you as well as most of us have at times been the attacker.  But attacking an issue (i.e. disagreeing) is not the same as attacking the person.  Each person is entitled to their opinion and to express it within the bounds of CSN guidelines.

You said:   I think its fair to flag all the non supportive replies. they completely side track the discussion.  Again that may be your opinion, however I don't beleive that flagging non supportive replies will get you anywhere, unless the replies are not within te bounds of CSN guidelines.  Being non supportive is not unto itself reason enough to get a post removed.

You said:  they say a few rotten apples, spoil the barrel. i guess thats so on internet forums.  Now that statement is just unkind.  Calling those who do not beleive as you do and express their opinion "bad apples" in inappropriate to say the least.

Pete, I beleive you have had support, on a personal level even from those who have differing views on treatments.  It is only when you insist that your research, opinion or personal treatments are the only right way to go that gets these things started.  When someone disagrees with something you post you get all bent out of shape.  Sharing your treatment plans is fine, but you can't expect everyone to get on the band wagon with you...it just won't happen. 

I wish you well in your quest for health, but I an not one to follow blindly, nor follow the masses.  I make up my own mind since it is my life that is effected by my decisions.

Marie who loves kitties

You said it more eloquently than I ever could have...

PhillieG said:

Are you only doing monologues?

Pete, you're on an open forum here not a private blog so one has to expect (or should expect) some comments and views that don't just parrot what you say. Personally, I feel that this site has given you plenty of latitude when it comes to the content of many of your posts. I feel I've been given some latitude at times too...

I can appreciate your passion even if I question your path. But it's your path just like my path is my path and so-so's path is their own. It's not a question of right or wrong here either because there's no right or wrong way to deal with this. You often post controversial topics so I'd think you'd expect some controversy.

If you only want harumphs and comments that agree with everything you post, you won't find it here. You (should) know that. If you DO want only agreeable comments then have a Wordpress type blog where you can approve every comment. I'm not suggesting at all that you leave, I'm just pointing out the realities of Public Forums.

well said Phil....I have been waiting to see if you would join the fray.  There are a few old timers here like us Phil...it seems to me that the forum ebbs and flows.  It often boils over.....

Pete it is beyond me how you could ever imply that you have not received support here.  I have watched you from the very beginning and in my humble opinion you have received a great deal of support.  At times your path and your methods must have seemed quite strange to people here but still they have supported you. It would seem to me that a great deal of energy is being spent at this time. I wonder how much of that energy has to do with ego. This forum consists of many many individuals.....some of them may not be in a position to waste precious energy at this moment in their lives. Some are grieving, some are fighting, some are supporting and many are just trying to come to grips with the overwhelming news that cancer has just delivered.

I worry that these explosions absorb too much energy that could be put to better use ...supporting one another and particularly lending a hand and an ear to all the new people who arrive almost daily....

maggie

Lovekitties said:

My 2 cents on the whole mess

I don't understand your issues Pete.  Do you feel that only those who agree with what you post should reply?  That isn't how it works.  Everyone is entitled to reply, as long as they remain in the guidelines.  It is not a sign of disrespect to disagree.

You said:  the selfish debaters have stolen the magic of the post and the information.  No one stole anything, just expressed a differing opinion.  For those in agreement with you, they can bypass the other opinions.  It is not selfish to add a differing opinion to a post, but it is selfish to thnk that only those who agree can respond to it.

Posting a link to a video or information on the net is fine.  It is an invitation to those interested to see more information.  It is not "required viewing or reading". 

You asked:  why does someone expressing a contrary view always have to get attacked here.  If you look back on your posts you will find that you as well as most of us have at times been the attacker.  But attacking an issue (i.e. disagreeing) is not the same as attacking the person.  Each person is entitled to their opinion and to express it within the bounds of CSN guidelines.

You said:   I think its fair to flag all the non supportive replies. they completely side track the discussion.  Again that may be your opinion, however I don't beleive that flagging non supportive replies will get you anywhere, unless the replies are not within te bounds of CSN guidelines.  Being non supportive is not unto itself reason enough to get a post removed.

You said:  they say a few rotten apples, spoil the barrel. i guess thats so on internet forums.  Now that statement is just unkind.  Calling those who do not beleive as you do and express their opinion "bad apples" in inappropriate to say the least.

Pete, I beleive you have had support, on a personal level even from those who have differing views on treatments.  It is only when you insist that your research, opinion or personal treatments are the only right way to go that gets these things started.  When someone disagrees with something you post you get all bent out of shape.  Sharing your treatment plans is fine, but you can't expect everyone to get on the band wagon with you...it just won't happen. 

I wish you well in your quest for health, but I an not one to follow blindly, nor follow the masses.  I make up my own mind since it is my life that is effected by my decisions.

Marie who loves kitties

Well put my friend. Also, flagging a post doesn't mean it will be deleted. It's just brought under review as I've understood the policy. If it's deemed to be within the T&C then it can stay.

Phil who loves kittens too but I know they'll get their revenge when the time is right

Don't you DARE think of leaving here!  Your understanding of human nature, especially in the context of cancer, is too important to lose.  I'll come right down to Texas if I have to.  Don't make me show up on your doorstep.  AA

annalexandria said:

Holy heck, Craig!

Don't you DARE think of leaving here!  Your understanding of human nature, especially in the context of cancer, is too important to lose.  I'll come right down to Texas if I have to.  Don't make me show up on your doorstep.  AA

WOW!!!   I've been doing a bit of travelling and haven't been able to read this board much lately....obviously I missed something......

maglets said:

well said

well said Phil....I have been waiting to see if you would join the fray.  There are a few old timers here like us Phil...it seems to me that the forum ebbs and flows.  It often boils over.....

Pete it is beyond me how you could ever imply that you have not received support here.  I have watched you from the very beginning and in my humble opinion you have received a great deal of support.  At times your path and your methods must have seemed quite strange to people here but still they have supported you. It would seem to me that a great deal of energy is being spent at this time. I wonder how much of that energy has to do with ego. This forum consists of many many individuals.....some of them may not be in a position to waste precious energy at this moment in their lives. Some are grieving, some are fighting, some are supporting and many are just trying to come to grips with the overwhelming news that cancer has just delivered.

I worry that these explosions absorb too much energy that could be put to better use ...supporting one another and particularly lending a hand and an ear to all the new people who arrive almost daily....

 

maggie

 

You told me the other day that you didn't have any thing wise to say:)

I think that this is one of the SMARTEST posts that you've ever written!  I truly mean that with all my heart! 

Here's the ones that registered home with me...

"I wonder how much of that energy has to do with ego?"

Does the word NARCISSIST come to mind here?

"This forum consists of many many individuals.....some of them may not be in a position to waste precious energy at this moment in their lives. Some are grieving, some are fighting, some are supporting and many are just trying to come to grips with the overwhelming news that cancer has just delivered."

That’s a very important distinction to know and understand on this board.  I’ve found that at different times in our lives, people are On and Off the board all the time with cancer and life events.  Everyone is not always available to stroke someone’s fragile ego all the time on demand. 

A narcissist doesn’t understand human empathy, because the focus is always on themselves – the individual. Nothing else really matters to them.   They lack the innate capacity that the majority of us have to look beyond themselves and seek only to expand their own agenda. 

You and I and Phil have been around long enough to know of plenty of our friends who have passed away with a difficult cancer.  The constant insinuation that one is harder or more important than the others is an insult to new and old alike. 

 "I worry that these explosions absorb too much energy that could be put to better use ...supporting one another and particularly lending a hand and an ear to all the new people who arrive almost daily...."

A narcissistic personality does not recognize new folks and offer support and understanding – they can only see them as abstract objects that can be swayed and influenced to their way of thinking without ever considering another persons needs – in the old country they called this BRAINWASHING. 

Because the message is hammered home everyday – all day long. 

New folks are especially sensitive and indoctrination in the manner being presented might dissuade them from joining the conversation...seeing others called sheep from a modality that has proven successful might also hurt their feelings. I've seen a new poster confirm that thought I read.

Supposedly, it is in the form of ‘helping’ others – but it comes across as needing more than some of us can give...

I know narcissism...I grew up on my own with 2 narcissistic  parents - so I know what they look like - and what they sound like - and who they stand for...

Like most equations, you can do many things right – and then a wrong can undo all of that right.  Which is what we've got here right now. Folks are adult and can make up their own minds...so redundancy is not needed...we get it the first time.

And the verdict is out on whether this is right or will even work…any of it...so to wave it around like it's the gospel before results can be determined on a long-term basis and demand folks to convert or else... is sending the wrong message to everyone here. 

This could be construed as proselytizing...

It’s way too early to tell on many levels but the insistence that this is a 1-way road is part of the problem...I'm showing another way too, bit I don't suggest it's the way - just another way to reach the same goal.

There are too many cases like mine that dispute the current theories being that are being propagated on this forum too. I continue to do better than I ever have - by doing less and less.

Moderation allows you to sample life...if sugar was the killer...I'd have been dead before I ever got started...dead in treatment too...

Have a pbj sometimes too...insulin spikes haven't gotten me either...

Had a drink with liver cancer too...couple of days before surgery...I push my own bounds so I can answer my own cancer questions about all of the myths I've been told...only to show myself what the real truth is...

And that's enough for me anymore...

Great thoughts and post, Maggie!