God you're either so set in your viewpoint or massively stupid. Drug companies have to cover themselves, especially in this litigious society. Every pill and drug go through up to 10 years of testing. Along the way a large number of side-effects appear. Drug companies are obliged to warn people of every possible side-effects. A huge number of them are rare, idiopathic occurences, even side-effects described as common are usually only around 1% prevalence.
Drug companies still miss or under-report side effects. It's a business interested merely in profit, so they are more concerned with what doesn't directly kill you, not what doesn't contribute to your overall health. Edit: In fact, as their medicines spin you into worse health (but feeling good as long as you are drugged up), this improves their business. Drug companies do not make money making you better, but by making you feel better, as long as you are on their drug.
Alternative medicines are massively under-regulated in comparison to drug companies.
As it should be, but the WHO is trying to change that. Look at info I have posted elsewhere regarding Codex Alimentarius.
A big issue in this is dosage. With something like Digoxin, it has a narrow therapeutic window where it is useful, but not toxic. The GSK drug, Digoxin, has been throughly tested and dosage levels have been found. With the foxglove you get from your natural supplier you have no idea about the dosage - far more likely you get under dosed and recieve only placebo, or overdosed and go into heart failure. This is just one example.
Drugs are refined from natural equivalents in lots of cases. In a normal pill there's usually only a bit of sugar coating and calcium carbonate - or something to aid drug absorption to improve effectiveness.
I think foxglove is an ironic choice of argument considering the entire plant is poisonous and is used for "healing" just because they found a dose that does something without killing you immediately. Not exactly a prime "herbalist" or "natural healer" choice for anything. Just because someone has found something that can be used when poked and prodded and twisted doesn't mean it should be.
With natural remedies you really don't know what you're getting.
That is such a generalized statement it can't help but be generally wrong.
Stop hiding under your Tin-foil hat. Show me some analysed, peer-reviewed evidence that Mobile phones and power lines cause a statistically relevant cancer risk then I'll believe you. Also, I don't quite see how this has to do with Medicine not treating Cancer. It does - its hardly under a doctor's remit to decide where a power line is placed...
Do your own research, most of what I have read is coming out of Europe right now (which is a lot further ahead in banning most toxins than the US is), but scientific studies need money to back them, and money does not generally flow to studies that attack the some of the largest and most entrenched sectors of the communication age.
While obviously a doctor doesn't have a choice in the lifestyle his/her patient's lead, that doesn't absolve him of making recommendations. Chemo and Radiation kill cells period, cancerous and normal. This can be life pro-longing, but creates all kinds of other health issues.
As for Chemotherapy, its success rate does vary but with certain things like Hodgkin's lymphoma, its extremely effective, and even in Breast cancer (especially certain forms)
http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/health-news/dramatic-improvement-in-chemotherapy-success-rate-400248.html
The article you posted would be laughable if it weren't sadly being touted as a "breakthrough". They aren't increasing the effectiveness of Chemo, they have found a way to narrow down the patient list to the only ones it works on. It's like saying you increased your FG percentage by kicking only from the 10 yard line. You didn't improve your skill, you just made it much easier. It also doesn't talk about the high risk of cancer returning after radiation and chemo treatments.
