You didn't answer my questions. You claim that these wells cure diseases. You said these claims about radioactive springs and vitamin C and all that are "absolutely true." Can you prove that? How do you know that these stories are true? How do you know that they aren't fabrications?
I've seen these people post on the health forums I frequent. There are stories littered all around the internet about these things, from multiple sources. News organizations have reported on this spring over the last 150 years, and Vitamin C over the last 60. Corroboration from multiple unconnected sources constitutes evidence.
That doesn't answer my question. I asked how you know these stories to be true and not fabrications. How can you verify them? How have you confirmed that these reports are true? This seems important given how easy it would be for a multi-billion-dollar industry to generate a bunch of fake websites and testimonials to sell their products. And since those firms have a demonstrable track record as thieves, frauds, and liars, this point isn't irrelevant.
You appear to be saying that there stories must be true because there are a lot of them on the internet. There are lots of Yeti and UFO stories on the internet. Do you believe in those? What about all of the multiple sources and testimony on the internet that disputes your vitamin C claims? Don't those count as evidence?
Let's talk about Linus Pauling. Let's also talk about Hoffman-La Roche, the pharmaceutical company that used to dominate the vitamin C market until being convicted of leading a price-fixing cartel in the largest anti-trust case ever decided in the US. Guess what? They funded and reviewed Pauling work. Whoops.
So what? They may have thought that there was a chance that Vitamin C would become a standard treatment at the time and their domination of the Vitamin C market would become extremely valuable. That's good on them for supporting a natural substance.
So what? Are you serious? Maybe that would be a reasonable way to think about it if the very same company that funded the studies hadn't been
convicted of fraud. Not just fraud. Price fixing. They have overtly displayed a willingness to be deceptive in order to make more money. Nothing that comes from the Linus Pauling Institute or any affiliated institution can be trusted. They are proven frauds.
And aren't you the one that says that big pharma never spends money to research "natural" cures because they can't make any money off of it? Isn't that what your whole narrative against traditional medicine? They "can't patent nature" or whatever, so they suppress natural cures?
The Mayo clinic used low oral doses in an attempt to refute Pauling's work, when the work clearly called for high dose Intravenous Vitamin C.
See this article: Vitamin C, Linus Pauling was right all along. A doctor's opinion
So if I found peer-reviewed medical literature refuting the efficacy of high dose, intravenous vitamin c, would you take it seriously? Why or why not?
There's nothing wrong with buying natural substances from a pharmaceutical company running a supplement company on the side. Good on them. They need to refrain from fixing prices, however, and move more towards healthier natural solutions.
I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with it. I'm talking about its implications. You're missing my point completely. Let me try and better explain:
To my knowledge, your indictment of traditional medicine begins and ends with "Big pharma can't patent the natural things that make you better, so they make unnatural things they
can patent to make their money; to that end, they suppress knowledge of natural cures and maybe even go as far as trying to make you sick to keep you in the system." Correct me if I'm wrong.
The problem is that this doesn't explain the facts. Big pharma funds the research on natural cures. Big pharma has a near-monopoly on the sale of natural cures. It's so lucrative, and their monopoly is so thorough, that they were even able to run a price-fixing vitamin cartel. It didn't even break up. It just moved to China. You're a sucker and a shill.
Big pharma doesn't need to suppress anything. They're selling the things you say they don't sell and are trying to suppress. If vitamin C cured cancer, big pharma would be all over that. As I've demonstrated,
big pharma already tried and succeeded to convince people that vitamin C cures cancer. You're one of those people. They are not trying to suppress vitamin C research. They're the ones doing the research.