![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
These articles should remain separate, but linked. Entelev, although the original product, has a slightly different history. Cancell was the same product for most of its history, but then marketed as a transparent and ineffective version for some years, before returning to the original formula (the one supported by abundant testimonials and the NCIs own suppressed information).
The Category "Health fraud" is subjective and pejorative. "Fraud" isn't quite the right word for this particular entry. Why isn't Homeopathy also marked with this tag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.186.1.189 ( talk) 00:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
In the spirit of a more balanced article & the Alternative Medicine WikiProject, I would like to propose a small edit to address some of the points regarding NCI's statement and the results from their tests. These points have been attempted in previous edits but I'd like to take a more verifiable and prudent approach.
My proposed edit would add to the 2nd paragraph of the Formulation and Efficacy section, my additions in italics:
For the first sentence added, one source sited would be NCI's test results from 1990 which can be found on http://alternativecancer.us/testr.htm at the bottom of the page & (summarized in graph form) in Tanya Harter Pierce's book "Outsmart Your Cancer" (ISBN-10: 0972886788). The results compare the performance of Cancell vs Perillyl Alcohol (control) vs Taxol (an approved chemotherapy drug). The results show a significant reduction in tumor mass through Cancell for all cancer types tested. When taken as a whole, the results are better than Taxol, although Taxol has more 100% reductions (complete cell death).
This brings us to the second sentence added, which is added for clarification and can site both alternativecancer.us & Pierce's book. These are the proponents that make this point.
Please let me know your comments on this proposed edit. Thanks. Gtg926y ( talk) 19:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
![]() | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
|
These articles should remain separate, but linked. Entelev, although the original product, has a slightly different history. Cancell was the same product for most of its history, but then marketed as a transparent and ineffective version for some years, before returning to the original formula (the one supported by abundant testimonials and the NCIs own suppressed information).
The Category "Health fraud" is subjective and pejorative. "Fraud" isn't quite the right word for this particular entry. Why isn't Homeopathy also marked with this tag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.186.1.189 ( talk) 00:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
In the spirit of a more balanced article & the Alternative Medicine WikiProject, I would like to propose a small edit to address some of the points regarding NCI's statement and the results from their tests. These points have been attempted in previous edits but I'd like to take a more verifiable and prudent approach.
My proposed edit would add to the 2nd paragraph of the Formulation and Efficacy section, my additions in italics:
For the first sentence added, one source sited would be NCI's test results from 1990 which can be found on http://alternativecancer.us/testr.htm at the bottom of the page & (summarized in graph form) in Tanya Harter Pierce's book "Outsmart Your Cancer" (ISBN-10: 0972886788). The results compare the performance of Cancell vs Perillyl Alcohol (control) vs Taxol (an approved chemotherapy drug). The results show a significant reduction in tumor mass through Cancell for all cancer types tested. When taken as a whole, the results are better than Taxol, although Taxol has more 100% reductions (complete cell death).
This brings us to the second sentence added, which is added for clarification and can site both alternativecancer.us & Pierce's book. These are the proponents that make this point.
Please let me know your comments on this proposed edit. Thanks. Gtg926y ( talk) 19:56, 21 April 2016 (UTC)