Under the rules of science and federal law , proponents who make health claims bear the burden of proof. It is their responsibility to conduct suitable studies and report them in sufficient detail to permit evaluation and confirmation by others. The ACS evaluates cancer methods by asking three questions: Has the method been objectively demonstrated in the peer-reviewed scientific literature to be effective? Has the method shown potential for benefit that clearly exceeds the potential β¦.
The ACS evaluates cancer methods by asking three questions:. Janssen has noted that in every decade since , a questionable cancer remedy has attracted a large following and become a national issue [2]. It was Koch Antitoxins in the s, Hoxsey treatment in the s, Krebiozen in the s [3], laetrile in the s, and immuno-augmentative therapy in the s.
Many promoters combine methods to make themselves more marketable. The dangers of using questionable treatments include delay in getting appropriate treatment, decreased quality of life, direct physical harm, interference with proven treatment, waste of valuable time, financial harm, and psychological damage [5]. Americans who believe they have been victims of wire fraud should report what happened to the FBI. Proponents of questionable methods typically claim that marketplace demand and testimonials from satisfied customers are proof that their remedies work.
However, proponents almost never keep score or reveal what percentage of their cases end in failure. Cancer cures attributed to questionable methods usually fall into one or more of five categories:. Experimental alternatives are unproven but have a plausible rationale and are undergoing responsible investigation.
When referring to the latter, we use quotation marks because they are not true alternatives. Questionable therapies are portrayed as natural and nontoxic, while standard responsible therapies are portrayed as highly dangerous.
