Archer wrote:
Wayne Stollings wrote:
I suppose you could take that view, it might result in children being abused without such interventions but that is not important to anyone.
If we were talking about abuse, I could understand that. I just don't see how they are abusing this boy.
It is not abusive to allow him to die from a treatable disease?
Quote:
Quote:
His diet IS a major part of the "treatment" just as is the supposed vegan diet for other ailments.
After Abraham chose to go on the sugar-free, organic diet and take liquid herbal supplements under the supervision of a Mexican clinic,
I understand that. We know the vegan diet to be very unbalanced. From what I understand of this boy's diet, they are adding some things and taking out some things, but it's still somewhat balanced. What I've read doesn't say anything about a vegan diet.
No, but it is not a treatment for the disease any more than a vegan diet is a recognized treatment for some of the other diseases. If it is abusive in one case it must be abusive in all cases.
Quote:
Quote:
He did nothing of which I am aware, what did he do to bring on the need to eat every day or so?
Last I checked, eating was a pleasant experience. I've yet to hear the same about chemo. Eating is 100% necessary for life. Chemo is not. Not to mention, he is on alternative treatments.
Just because it is called an "alternative treatment" does not make it so. The basis for the treatment is diet and a substance whose sale has been banned in the US for years.
Quote:
Chemo is not always the answer.
No, and the agreement allows for valid alternative treatments such as radiation.
Quote:
Quote:
Yes, they are. The chemo will not kill him directly although it is rough. The cancer will most likely kill him without a treatment. There is little chance a vegan diet will kill a child but it will endanger their health.
The way you put that makes a vegan diet sound just like chemo. Neither will kill you, but they are bad for your health. I know what you mean, though. The cancer, I'm sure, would most likely kill him without treatment. But they are treating it. Do you know much about their alternative treatment? I haven't researched it too much myself, but it didn't sound that bad. If I were in his shoes, I'd probably be willing to give it a shot.
I believe most of the "alternative treatments" provided from these Mexican clinics are less effective than simple prayer from the various references. This particular treatment has not been covered sufficiently in the media, but the evidence presented to the courts was not sufficient for it to be an allowed alternative.
Quote:
Quote:
No, the best decision according to those who are knowledgeable on the subject.
Are they not dealing with a doctor that is just that? Seriously, I hadn't thought about that before. Do you know?
The original doctors made the suggested treatment plan and the later more intensive plan, but were not accepted. The treatment from the Mexican clinic is not by a recognized expert in the field by any means. The new final decision on treatment has to be agreed to by a board certified oncologist of their choice, from what I have read. So any doctor in the US with those credentials can sign off on the treatment plan, which places the doctor in a position to ensure it is a valid medical treatment or open himself up to litigation.
Login
Register
FAQ
" X-Black
