This type of quackery has nothing to do with Finasteride nor a place on this forum. These types of postings are the #1 reason this site gets labelled by others as full of nutjobs and hypochondriacs. Popo, please refrain from posting this type of nonsense on this site.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hulda_Regehr_Clark
Hulda Clark has been criticized because her claims lack scientific validity and consist of anecdotal evidence
Hulda Regehr Clark (18 October 1928 – 3 September 2009)[1] was a naturopath, author, and practitioner of alternative medicine. Clark claimed that all human disease was related to parasitic infection, and also claimed to be able to cure all diseases, including cancer and HIV/AIDS, by destroying these parasites by “zapping” them with electrical devices which she marketed.[2] Clark wrote several books describing her methods and operated clinics in the US. Following a string of legal difficulties and actions by the Federal Trade Commission, she relocated to Tijuana, Mexico where she ran the Century Nutrition clinic.
Clark’s claims and devices have been dismissed by authorities ranging from the US Federal Trade Commission and Food and Drug Administration to alternative medicine figures such as Andrew Weil as scientifically unfounded, “bizarre”,[3] and potentially fraudulent.[4] Clark died 3 September 2009 of multiple myeloma (a blood and bone cancer).[5][6][7]
Investigation, flight, arrest and legal issues
[edit] Federal Trade Commission and Food and Drug Administration action
The Federal Trade Commission brought a complaint against the Dr. Clark Research Foundation because of the foundation’s claims about the effectiveness of the Syncrometer, the Super-Zapper Deluxe and “Dr. Clark’s New 21 Day Program for Advanced Cancers.”[18] In November 2004, the case reached stipulated judgment, wherein the case’s judge ordered the foundation’s operators to offer refunds to the purchasers of these devices and to refrain from making a number of claims about those devices.[19] The Director of Enforcement at the Food and Drug Administration has stated that Clark’s devices seem to be “fraudulent.” [4]
[edit] Indiana
In 1993, while Clark lived and practiced in Indiana, a former patient complained to the Indiana attorney general. An investigator for the Indiana Department of Health and a deputy attorney general visited her office incognito as part of a sting operation. Clark proceeded to test the investigator and “told him he had the HIV virus [sic], but said that he did not have cancer.” She told the investigator that she could cure his HIV in 3 minutes, but that he would “get it back” unless he committed to returning for six more appointments. She then ordered blood tests from a laboratory. Upon learning of the undercover investigators’ status, Clark stated that everything she had told them had been a “mistake”. Two days later she had vacated the premises and disappeared.[20][21][22]
Six years later, in September 1999, Clark was located and arrested in San Diego, California, based on a fugitive warrant from Indiana. According to Clark, this was the first time she learned about the charge. Her lawyer protested the long delay before her arrest, but a prosecutor implied that she fled Indiana "when she learned that she was being investigated by the state," and that the local police department had limited resources to devote to finding her.[21] She was returned to Indiana to stand trial, where she was charged with practicing medicine without a license. The charge was later dismissed for failure to provide her with a speedy trial. The judge’s verdict did not address the merits of the charges but only the issue of whether the delay had compromised Clark’s ability to mount a defense and her right to a speedy trial.[4]
[edit] Mexico
In February 2001, Mexican authorities inspected Clark’s Century Nutrition clinic and ordered it shut down, as the clinic had never registered and was operating without a license. In June 2001, the Mexican authorities announced that the clinic would be permitted to reopen, but was prohibited from offering “alternative” treatments. The clinic was also fined 160,000 pesos (about $18,000), and Clark was barred from working in Mexico, even as a consultant; however, the San Diego Union-Tribune reported in 2003 that there was evidence that Clark continued to work at the clinic.[18]
[edit] Evaluation of claims and criticism
Hulda Clark has been criticized because her claims lack scientific validity and consist of anecdotal evidence. Joseph Pizzorno, a prominent naturopathic physician, evaluated Clark’s claims and found that her books mixed patients with conventionally diagnosed cancer with those whose cancer diagnosis was based solely on her use of the “Syncrometer”. The patients with medically diagnosed cancer did not respond to Clark’s treatment, while those she had diagnosed using the “Syncrometer” were “cured”. Pizzorno concluded that Clark’s treatments were ineffective and that treatments based on Clark’s recommendations “pose a substantive public health danger”.[23][24][25]
The Swiss Study Group for Complementary and Alternative Methods in Cancer (SCAC) issued a strong warning to cancer patients considering Clark’s methods:[26]
“ There is no scientific basis for Hulda Clark’s hypotheses and recommendations, including her suggested treatments. The parasite Fasciolopsis buskii does in fact exist, but only in Asian countries, so that an infection in our country is ruled out. Consequently, this parasite does not enter into consideration as a cause of the numerous cases of cancer in the Western countries; at most, it might be one of several causes of liver cancer (and only for this type of cancer) in the Asian countries. As a whole, Clark’s thesis cannot be comprehended, nor is it proven. In individual cases, her advice can be very extensive and costly. Hence if patients do not apply her method consistently and their disease continues to progress, they run the risk of attempting to blame themselves for this, rather than Clark’s treatment which is ineffective, as viewed at present. ”
Prominent alternative medicine proponent Andrew Weil has written, “No studies have backed up [Clark’s] bizarre claims, and it’s unclear whether the cancer patients she’s supposedly cured ever had cancer to begin with.”[3]