What applies for conventional diagnosis also applies for non-conventional diagnosis. Until we know what cancer is, we are incapable of 100% sure diagnosis. However in contrast to the usual blood tests there are three serious differences:
- Fees for all of the following examinations will not be paid by any health insurance company because they are not scientifically recognized. What this really means, we now know.
- The reputations of these examinations are much worse than those of the usual examinations, although there are many practitioners who have often demonstrated with these examinations that they can diagnose much more precisely.
- The principle of many examinations is different. They involve, detection of cancer or tumors before they occur. Because conventional oncologists can only detect cancer in a very advanced stage, (when a tumor is already larger than 6 mm), they naturally maintain, that all of these examinations are nonsense.
I always find it interesting that those therapists stating an opinion about a diagnostic process, are usually the ones who have never worked intensively with the process in question. At the same time in my opinion, they are using processes, when it has already been proven a thousand times over, just how wrong those processes can be. Please do not misunderstand me. This is no advertisement for non-conventional diagnostic processes, but I am simply upset when I hear from “experts” for the hundredth time, that dark-field diagnoses, or the thermography diagnoses are the same as a lottery, while the same therapists rely 100% on the statement of every pathologist or laboratory. I ask myself in this case who is the greater gambler.