Saturday, April 25, 2015

Does Jessica Tancred of The Today Show Fact Check?

Well, I simply must ask because she produced a segment about Candice-Marie Fox where she very baldly reported that Candice-Marie cured her terminal (given five years to live) cancer using pineapples. You can find the segment here.  This is an incredibly serious thing to report on without confirming if it is indeed true.  So, Jessica Tancred, what sort of proof did Candice-Marie Fox offer you to back up her story?

82 comments:

  1. Well I just watched the video you linked too, and yes, Jessica Tancred did come across as credulous and ill-informed. She didn't question CFM's dodgy claims of "5 years to live" or declining chemotherapy and then amazing doctors with her cancer-free state.

    However, a few good things did come of it. When the fluff on CFM was over and the compere was interviewing the cancer specialist, CFM was obviously put in the same category as Belle Gibson by the compere; she was just another snake-oil salesperson pushing dodgy 'cures' on to vulnerable people. She didn't come out of it well.

    The other good thing is that she's just not appealing; she doesn't have the charm of say, Jessica Ainscough, Food Babe or a Dr Oz type. Her presentation skills may improve, but I can't see she's capable of generating that much of a following.

    Anyway, I hope Candice is reading your blog. I think she's chosen exactly the wrong time to try and start a wellness business off the back of her fantastical pineapple cure. Too many people are on the lookout for shysters atm. Perhaps the tide has turned.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes it was good that they had a real medical professional on there, but just because they showed "the other side" does not mean that they forfeit their professional responsibility to fact-check. They STILL gave CMF a platform to spread her misleading story about her cancer without demanding any proof of it. It is unacceptable and it needs to change.

      And I agree that she does not present herself very well. She does not talk with the level of sophistication a person needs to successfully pull off the wellness warrior persona.

      Delete
    2. Hi Violet,

      Yes I agree that the interview with Jess Tancred was abysmal and I would have been incensed if that was all there was to the segment. I don't know how a lot of so-called journalists could be so stupid as to accept a story like CFM's at face value. What happened to common sense and rationality?

      Anyway, I was somewhat cheered by the sceptical tenor of the second half of the interview. And having now just looked at CFM's Facebook, she's not at all happy with the way the interview has been edited!

      Delete

    3. Healthycandy.me
      2 hrs · Edited ·
      THIS is precisely what I am talking about!! I was contacted by a lovely tv reporter who wanted to show my message in a good and positive light she said....so I agreed and noticed that the line of questioning in the interview had changed from what was discussed on the phone. In light of the "Belle Gibson scandal" (which could also be tv propaganda to suit conventional methods) I totally understood why she was asking these questions and I was more than happy to answer them BUT I was not expecting this outcome and I really need you all to see what is going on!!!! They have made me out to be an absolute joke, editing out all the science behind what I did and simplifying my answers to again be all about the pineapple...and that alone!! frown emoticon
      I am so saddened by this and I'm not blaming the beautiful reporter Jessica Tancred, after all she is just a cog in the wheel of deceit, and I'd like to believe that she had no say in the overall outcome, as leading someone into such a trap can only be described as the devils work and I happen to think that she has more beauty than that! I even messaged her a couple of days ago and asked if they could show my medical records and vouch for me, especially because of the bad press alternative medicine's been getting of late......I never heard back!! These people clearly do not want the truth and this is what upsets me and the whole reason I do not watch television!! frown emoticon
      I am going to stop publicising my story for now as I fear it is doing more harm then good given the current situation, and I feel like anything I say I am feeding into their hands as they have the power to edit/twist the facts!! I'll certainly be more selective who I share it with in the future that's for sure smile emoticon
      I know the truth and so do the people who are awake!! heart emoticon
      Take a look for yourselves.....

      Delete
    4. She should be happy that her science was edited out. If it was left in she would have come across as even more whacky than she is.

      All the comments from her supporters is concerning. All these people saying that urged cancer with diet. They are either lying or being disingenuous about their diagnosis, deluded as to what their idea of a cure is, or sadly have been told that they have been "cured" as an alternative health practitioner.

      Delete
    5. ROFL, a "cog in the wheel of deceit."

      "I know the truth and so do the people who are awake!!"

      Ah yes, that great awakening that is reportedly happening, in which oncologists and radiologists who have studied and trained for years are peacefully superceded by hippies and juice-merchants. Wake up, sheeple!

      Delete
    6. I dont think its good they showed the other side at all!!!!

      A cancer specialist and quack who claims fruit cured her is NOT a5050 proposition and its false equity to suggest it, not to mention worrying..it signals to paitents 'oh now youve heard both equally valid sides now choose one'.

      Quacks should not b on morning tv, you dont see the 911 truthers or moon landing deniers there do you?

      Delete
    7. Yes I agree. The media pretends like this is "fair and balanced". Fair and balanced would be to have two equally qualified oncologists give their side. I am still irked that Jessica Tancred reported all of Candice's nonsense like it was a fact. Naturally, neither she nor The Today Show has responded. I guess they both think that cancer patients deserve the middle finger from them? Again, I am a bit confused. Do they not take this seriously? Do they think that by having an oncologist on the show that it gets them off the hook?

      Delete
    8. They really need to add things like "Candice claims that she..." before they say "cured her cancer with pineapple". Saying these things as absolute statements makes people think that due diligence has been carried out, when of course it has not.

      And they didn't even see her medical records, so how do they even know she had cancer? That is still undocumented.

      On the bright side, I'm thrilled to see she's not happy with the coverage.

      Delete
    9. The best part is that she claims she offered to show them her medical records, when she told all of us that they were being shipped via raft from Siberia and that it would take two months to get them.

      What they need to say is, "Candice claims she was given five years to live but has offered absolutely no proof of this claim."

      Delete
  2. I just don't understand - why couldn't they at least say that Candice only claims to have been terminal or allegedly was given 5 years and that she is not presenting any proof. Why did they not mention having surgery and radiation that perfectly explains her remission? Why give these people platform? It is just the same as giving anti-vaxxers and flat world theorists a platform.

    When Candice announced on FB that she got interviewed, I sent an e-mail to this TV show as well as to 9channel, where I gave information about why her claims cannot be true with links to this blog. After Belle, Jessica being in the public eye, such lack of fact-checking is simply unbelievable.

    I am glad though that at least there was the skeptical counter point.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I cannot believe it either. My question for Jessica Tancred is this: if you are just going to report what people tell you without doing any fact-checking whatsoever, then how are you truly a journalist? Surely any person can do that. Aren't journalists supposed to have a professional and ethical approach to all their stories? No?

      Delete
    2. Violet, is there any place we can comment on that interview (that might be seen by the producers and/or reporter)?

      Delete
    3. I tweeted to them a few times. Honestly it does not seem like they care.

      Delete
  3. Candice has crossed the line from ignorance to wilfully misleading the public. She has still failed to grasp how serious this is. In the simplest terms, if someone eschews medical treatment because they believe she cured her cancer without it, she could be held partially responsible. People could die, and she could be sued.

    She keeps insisting that media outlets are twisting her words, and that she can't be held responsible for what is reported. If that is the case, then she does need to step out of the public eye altogether. If I was promoting a personal cancer story that was repeatedly being perverted by the media in such a way as to jeopardise seriously ill people and put me at risk of litigation, I would set the record straight and then stop promoting my personal cancer story altogether.

    But she herself is still peddling the errors with which her story has been littered from the beginning. She has failed to demonstrate satisfactorily that she was ever given a prognosis of five years, and she is still implying that her dietary changes were responsible for her recovery, and not the surgery and radiation she had.

    This "Today" feature erroneously states that "Bromelain is thought to eat away at cancer," and whether that is Candice's claim or not, she must publicly distance herself from such claims.

    Ian Haines is doing a fantastic job of critiquing the ridiculous claims surfacing in the media lately, but wouldn't it be great if he didn't have to? Oncologists shouldn't have to debate the Candice-Marie Foxes of the world.

    I haven't visited her Facebook page since she had me banned. Is there any update on the verification she keeps promising?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think so. The latest post is about "pineapple power" ...no seriously...

      http://blogs.naturalnews.com/amazing-cancer-fighting-properties-pineapple/

      It's a shame that the last line of the article is actually relatively reasonable.
      "In the future, these studies may translate into treatments which eliminate cancerous tumors while leaving healthy tissue intact, and give survivors of this disease a better quality of life than what traditional medicine has been able to provide so far."

      Shame that in some minds that translates into pineapples will fix my cancer if I eat it - as opposed to the isolated bromelain processed from pineapple stems that was injected intraperitoneally (into the abdomen) into mice had some antitumoural effects, therefore this might be worth doing more research.

      Delete
    2. Here's the original planta medica paper mentioned in the article
      https://www.thieme-connect.com/products/ejournals/abstract/10.1055/s-2007-990221?device=mobile&innerWidth=980&offsetWidth=980

      Delete
    3. I agree Prof Ian Haines did an excellent job, without specific reference to Candice-Marie, which might be his choice and may well be appropriate. Bromelain is a protein, so it is digested by the gut into fragments and amino acids, not absorbed whole. If it was absorbed whole, you'd probably become allergic to it very quickly.
      That shows typical alternate medicine logic - it has actions in-vitro, so eating it must help, ignoring the whole digestion process and required concentrations.

      Delete
    4. Although the clip, and Prof Haines contribution, was nicely critical of the overall issue I would have liked to see a few concise examples of how CMF's self promotion is misleading to the reality of her disease process. The problem is such general criticism is not going to change the minds of her supporters (I understand little will). Seeing the some of the responses on her FB page it almost seems like it further galvanizes the pack support around her. The most ardent of her supporters will not be budged in their beliefs, but there will be some vulnerable individuals that will be interested in the possibility that she is onto something and may seek out more (Unfortunately misleading) information - that is the group that the harm can be minimized.

      Delete
    5. One of the difficulties with someone like Candice is this paranoid belief in a mass conspiracy suppressing the truth about the efficacy of natural medicine.

      She swings from courteous affirmations of the professionalism of journalists ("the beautiful reporter Jessica Tancred") and the integrity of the medical profession ("and I definitely don’t want to go against the medical world, because they are amazing") to bizarre, emotionally-driven rants about secret plots and hidden agendas:

      "the wheel of deceit...the devils work...in light of the 'Belle Gibson scandal' (which could also be tv propaganda to suit conventional methods)...I really need you all to see what is going on!!!!...I know the truth and so do the people who are awake!!"

      It makes her impossible to reason with, because any form of opposition is dismissed as part of the imagined conspiracy. For example, she still seems to believe all her detractors are the same insidious person, employed by "big pharma," while presuming that all her supporters are authentic. She's just not playing with a full deck.

      Delete
    6. Yes she is a very odd person in this way. On the one hand, she is sending love and light, and on the other hand, people are disgusting trolls who work for big pharma.

      What I cannot get over is that, according to her, the media constantly gets her story wrong. She has a facebook page where she could tell her entire story from start to finish in minute detail and set the whole thing straight but she never does.

      After reading your transcript of her Statera podcast it was obvious to me that CMF has very hard time expressing herself. My guess is that the reason the media gets her story wrong all the time is because there is a massive disconnect between what she thinks she told them and what she actually told them.

      Delete
    7. Exactly. If she really didn't want them to play up the pineapple thing, she probably should never have given them a soundbyte about how many pineapples she ate a day, not to mention that juicy, bromain-rich quote: " life just got so much better thanks to the pineapple!"

      Delete
    8. Yeah, she is not entirely clear on facey as to what exactly is was she told them that was all sciency and stuff. Based upon the Statera podcast and this segment, I am convinced that she thinks she said a lot of things that she did not say. Just my opinion of course, but she clearly has a hard time both processing information and giving out information. Like somehow everyone is just supposed to completely understand what she is trying to say even when her words are very jumbled and do not follow any sort of logical progression, such as this gem: "Well, putting any number on anyone's life, no matter what is it - five, ten - you know, just having that death sentence in your head, playing over and over, it just plays havoc." What is that supposed to mean? What is she really saying here? It appears to me that she is under the impression that what she has to say about all this is really profound, but it just comes across as a complete breakdown on the way from the brain to the mouth. Now that we have seen this in action on several occasions, I am starting to suspect that she honestly believes that the media just keeps getting her story wrong. She believes she says a lot of things that she really does not say, because she does a very poor job of expressing what she is thinking.

      Delete
  4. Okay, here's a mini-transcript for you (my response in the next comment):

    CANDICE: "Well, putting any number on anyone's life, no matter what is it - five, ten - you know, just having that death sentence in your head, playing over and over, it just plays havoc."

    TANCRED: "The former model was diagnosed with thyroid cancer, but went against her doctors' advice to have chemotherapy."

    CANDICE: "My best friend and cousin, they went down the chemo route, and it didn't work out for them, and they're no longer with us...Instantly I just thought, 'I've got six months to prove to myself and prove to them that I can get rid of this."

    CANDICE: "In the morning I would have pineapple, then I'd have an apple, then I'd have a banana, then I'd have some dates to get my calories up, and I would just work my way through that, just whole fruits. I found that my digestive system worked so much better, I was happier, I was losing unnecessary fat and toxins that were clinging onto me, life just got so much better thanks to the pineapple."

    TANCRED: "[…] Within six months, her cancer was almost gone. And now doctors have confirmed she's completely free of tumours...Candice says she's not trying to change minds, just tell the world what worked for her."

    CANDICE: "I just want to be an advocate for just living a healthier lifestyle, and I definitely don’t want to go against the medical world, because they are amazing, like, I know that. They do do amazing things. Like, I just feel that sometimes it doesn't work for everybody, nothing works for everybody, and that's all I'm trying to say, is if it doesn't work for you, then there are other options, you don't have to just sit there and wait to die."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now here's me, summing up (I can't do a bold font):

      1. She uses the word “instantly” a lot to describe her thought processes. She does it 10 times in the Snary podcast. Maybe she needs to stop reacting “instantly” to serious issues and start thinking things through rationally and systematically.

      2. Nobody's disputing that her intake of pineapple, apples, bananas and dates (which pretty much describes the lunchbox of your average Australian child) resulted in weight loss and improved mood and digestion (although I do dispute the "toxins" woo). And nobody's trying to stop her from being "an advocate for just living a healthier lifestyle." Lots of people do that. Doctors do that. But that is not actually what she's doing.

      3. Even if we give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that the Today show left out the part about how she had surgery and radiation, she’s still complicit in giving the public the impression that she cured her own cancer with dietary and lifestyle changes in the “six month” period after that treatment.

      4. Though Tancredi says Candice is “not trying to change minds,” and Candice herself says, “I don't want to go against the medical world,” she also says, “nothing works for everybody…if it doesn't work for you, then there are other options, you don't have to just sit there and wait to die.”

      Isn’t this “trying to change minds?” Isn’t she still implying that conventional treatment “didn’t work” for her? Isn’t she trying to tell people with cancer who need surgery, radiation or chemo that “there are other options?” If not, I’d love to hear what she means by these comments.

      In her own words, in the Statera Podcast (http://realitybasedmedicine.blogspot.com.au/2015/04/candice-on-cancer-part-v.html), she plainly stated that she wanted to advise cancer patients to try alternative treatments BEFORE conventional ones. She also claimed – 7 times, no less – that she cured her own cancer.

      Stop playing games, Candice. You keep claiming that media outlets “edit/twist the facts” to make you look like “absolute joke,” but you’ve failed to acknowledge the errors for which you yourself are responsible.

      She said, “They have made me out to be an absolute joke, editing out all the science BEHIND WHAT I DID.” [Emphasis added].

      Candice, if you’re reading this: what DID you do? Did you or did you not cure your own cancer?

      Delete
    2. Why doesn't she write a paper where she explains the science behind what she did complete with citations? So far, I have not seen a thorough explanation from her of the science behind what she did. She desperately wants people to know about it, so what is stopping her from putting out a complete explanation?

      Delete
  5. Her FB comments are music to my ears

    "I am going to stop publicising my story for now as I fear it is doing more harm then good given the current situation..."

    Maybe we have something to thank Belle for after all :)

    I find it odd that every time she talks to the media, they get her story sooo terribly wrong.

    But she won't even admit on her own FB page that she had surgery and chemo/radiation, the very things she claims are "the devil's work"

    Same as that nut-case friend of her's ChrisBeatCancer (with surgery FFS)

    Geoffrey Clarence

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes it seems that when the media dishes out just a dash of incredulity, it leads to a complete wellness blogger meltdown, and they question whether or not it is a good idea to go public with their story. Gee, who would've thunk? The reason these people have been so bold over the years is because the media gives them a free pass, and actually encourages them to continue on with what they are doing.

      Delete
  6. On my posts to her FB questioning the science behind the Pineapple et al cure, the only come back she has is that she will gladly put me into contact with (pseudo) Oncologist Mark Simon from NORI. I politely declined.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. But it only costs $6000, Rose! And that's for a "lifetime" of Simon's advice!

      Delete
    2. Haha Ella. I would gladly donate $6,000 to have all those stingy fruit flies swarm NORI and bite Dr Simon in his nether region. Then he can use the black salve to treat the discomfort. I'll keep dreaming!

      Delete
  7. I just saw a post from someone on CFM Facebook claiming that she cured her own self diagnosed skin cancers with black salve. Not even diagnosed with biopsy!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ugh, black salve. Apart from the fact that's obviously extremely dangerous, why would you buy a product that burns away tissue when a doctor would essentially do the same thing but with microscopically-controlled surgically? I can understand the delusion of pineapples as an alternative to chemo, because people are scared of pain. But black salve is just injury in a jar!

      Delete
    2. This is a recurring theme in natural remedies: a period of suffering before the healing. I remember reading Jess Ainscough's account of her tumors being "expelled" from her body. (Which must be unbelievably painful.) And homeopaths talk about patients "proving the remedy" when their symptoms worsen, which is compared to healing the body the way a fever does. I wonder if there is an element of masochistic virtue to some of these mind sets; I personally see no value in suffering needlessly.

      Delete
    3. I am familiar with the poster making those claims. She actually sent me a friend request and sent me a private message about the Food Cure movie that is on another thread. I wonder if she has me pro or anti quackery...Lol

      Delete
    4. This self-diagnosis, self-prescription and self-treatment I find truly bizarre.

      Last year I developed a Thing on my forearm. Picture here: https://twitter.com/kcIMT122/status/540283529783803905

      The Thing wasn't painful, just annoying. But I was a bit concerned in case it was skin cancer. As you can see from the Twitter pic, I have very fair skin. I never tan, I just burn if I don't use sunscreen, and I live in Australia which has one of the highest rates of skin cancer in the world.

      Did I diagnose myself as having skin cancer, and reach for the black salve? HELL, NO! Well, I might have, if I were a wellness blogger. But fortunately I'm not, and I have some common sense.

      I did what a sensible person does. I was already seeing a skin specialist about an unrelated problem, but if I hadn't, I would have asked my GP for a referral to one. The specialist thought the Thing was harmless, but couldn't be 100% sure. So he removed it under local anaesthetic, sent it off to the pathology lab, and nine days later reassured me that the Thing was just a dermatofibroma and nothing at all to worry about.

      Cost to me: the procedure, nine days of inconvenience and itching while the bandage was on, and a 1.5cm scar which is now fading: https://twitter.com/kcIMT122/status/543261211672866816
      Benefit: having it safely removed by a professional, and the peace of mind in knowing it wasn't cancer.

      If I'd gone down the self-prescribed black salve route, I'd have a hole in my arm by now, and I'd still have the nagging worry at the back of my mind that it might be cancer. And that's the best I could hope for. If it really HAD been cancer? *shudder* Actor Tony Barry ended up losing a leg because he tried to treat his skin cancer with black salve. Unfortunately for him, he really did have skin cancer. The treatment was at best useless and allowed his cancer to grow unchecked.

      HOW can people diagnose and/or treat themselves when it comes to things as serious as cancer? *shakes head in bewilderment*

      But hey, folks, black salve is natural, and something that's natural can't possibly be bad for you.

      Delete
    5. Interesting comments, guys. Karen, my dad just went though something similar. The procedure for removing melanomas in Australia is so streamlined and so effective, I don't know why anyone would refuse it. The Tony Barry story is a cautionary tale.

      Last I heard he was still pro-black-salve despite the amputation. He narrated a "documentary" I reckon you should vote for Nature's Scalpel rather than the doctor's scalpel. Called "One Answer to Cancer." (The one "they don't want you to known about").

      Speaking about Black Salve, naturopath Adrian Jones says, "I reckon you should vote for Nature's Scalpel rather than the doctor's scalpel." "Nature's Scalpel," is he kidding me? And why does "Nature's Scalpel" get capital letters while a "doctor's scalpel" doesn't? Is he trademarking it?

      M, you make a good point about "suffering before the healing." I had acupuncture once (years ago - long story), and after about two months of weekly treatments, resulting in an overwhelming sensation of absolutely nothing, I had a sharp pain in my ankle after the needle had been removed. The whole week I had this pain, like an extremely mild bee-sting. When I told the acupuncturist about it, he was really excited because it demonstrated that I was a "responsive" patient. I responded by never giving him any more of my money.

      Delete
    6. Sorry, I don't know how the quote "I reckon you should vote for Nature's Scalpel rather than the doctor's scalpel" got in there after the word "documentary."

      I must have got over-excited with the copy and paste function. I must have got over-excited with the copy and paste function. I must have got over-excited with the copy and paste function.

      Delete
    7. My stepmom's boyfriend went the natural route with a small, slow-growing skin cancer on his shoulder (he was an old dude, with a deep distrust of doctors). Used a salve of some sort for years, while the cancer grew and ate up his arm and shoulder. Finally killed him, about ten years after it first appeared. An ugly way to go.

      BTW, I finally got the ban hammer on Candice's page! I'm shocked it took her this long. She deleted all my comments too. Oh well...I hope the BGU people do start another page for examining more of these cases.

      Delete
    8. My brother in law was in outback ER on the ABC, he had a man come in completely blue from taking silver to ward of cancer and infection (they are the same thing according nobel prize winning scientists Mark Simon and Candeeece Marie Fox). He ended up being diagnosed with renal cancer.

      Delete
    9. The ban hammer swung for me on BGU and I don't know why. I have never been rude, used profanity or bullied.. My comments were often replied to and liked so beats me why :-( I can't even send a message asking why. Wish that had happened on Healthycandy's page and not BGU. Can someone ask for me? My name here is same on FB and my profile is real. Thanks

      Delete
    10. Hey rose, do you know what comment set it off? That is kind of weird. Did you send a message to the admins and ask? Or maybe you can't do that if banned...want me to do it?

      Delete
    11. Hi Ann. Thanks, another poster messaged them and I see that I now can post. I didn't even post often so I don't know what set it off, perhaps an error. I doubt anyone will have the same luck on healthycandy's page. It looks like we all have had the ban hammer!

      Delete
  8. Interesting she has just posted a link to a video from The Onion. The video is a satirical take on the crap that 24-hour news networks cover. She post the video as an example as to why she doesn't watch mainstream television.

    Yet she happily appears on mainstream television spruiking her own bullshit. She has missed so many levels on irony.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Don't forget she also plans to make a "sit-com style" show about her detox workshop in Ibiza.

      Delete
  9. "it just comes across as a complete breakdown on the way from the brain to the mouth."
    That is hilarious Violet, I love your way with words.

    It seems a lot of us have noticed some really strange behavior by Candice, some days it appears the penny has dropped and she is starting to understand our concerns only to be shortly followed by hysterical rants and pure nastiness.
    I have suspected several times that it may not be only her answering some of these posts because it really seems like they are being answered by different people, maybe even her BF ? so much of what is said is contradictory and she is often quick to dismiss her own story even when we quote her own words.
    It's clear she believes her entire story is as clear as day and that all of us are just plain stupid for not understanding it.
    I swear it would be easier to translate the whistles of down syndrome kid !
    We just have to face it Candice really isn't blessed with enough intelligence to grasp even basic concepts, let alone comprehend the consequences of her delusional message on genuine cancer sufferers.

    ReplyDelete
  10. And now she has a posted an anti-vaccine link that is so filled with conspiracy theories that even Fox Mulder would think it was over the top

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I know these things do the rounds but its horrific to read... and hard to know where to start in terms of providing counter points. Just don't like that link potentially being distributed to the 4000+ people that 'liked' her page.

      Delete
    2. ...could not resist.

      Delete
    3. You know she had over three thousand likes and only her mother, sister and one friend defending her for a very long time. I'm thinking most of those likes were purchased.

      Delete
    4. True. But at least there is some counter argument if it pops up on someone's newsfeed...

      Delete
    5. She deleted your second comment, Jared, about the difference between facts and opinions. :/

      Delete
    6. Well done Jared. A very well thought out, persuasive, level headed post. I hope you don't get banned too as a result!

      Delete
  11. Why is that when someone believes in something non mainstream they happily adopt "Every Other" conspiracy theory, quack remedy and mystical bullshit? Candice will believe in and support absolutely anything, she is dead set fruitloop!

    "The mainstream media is largely funded by drug companies and vaccine manufacturers" what a classic would love to see the financial links they use to verify this huge conspiracy., seriously these people may not believe in main stream medicine but at some have obviously ingested more than the recommended doses of mercury.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well this is explains why I spotted the silhouette of Rupert Murdoch behind a screen laughing manically and counting money when I got my last tetanus shot.

      Delete
    2. Did you see that to Ella? I thought it was my pineal gland playing tricks on me !

      Delete
    3. It's a phenomenon which those in the business of debunking woo term "Crank Magnetism"
      http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/11/30/the-vindication-of-all-kooks-corollary-t/

      Delete
  12. I got banned! I feel peeved but slightly proud that I annoyed her enough to get the chop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. me too Amy ... I just couldn't hold my tongue any longer
      R

      Delete
    2. https://www.facebook.com/pages/Banned-by-Healthy-Candy/1582806451970264?sk=timeline

      Delete
    3. Great idea - but how do we join if we got banned?

      Delete
    4. Not quite banned yet. Have had my first deleted post though!

      Delete
    5. I can see the page but have been banned from commenting.

      Delete
    6. Oh okay. I literally had my whole account suspended, but it was under a pseudonym, which is technically against the rules now. I just figured no one would be petty enough to actually report me, especially considering I was always very civil. Candice just can't take criticism, obviously.

      Delete
    7. At least we're in good company.

      I noticed she gave Jared a nice reply. Maybe hoping to win a doctor over to her side?

      Delete
    8. I'm a big pharma employee (Doctor) too and I didn't get any nice replies from Candeeeece. I even tried to communicate with her in her natural flaky mother tongue. Love and light.

      Delete
  13. Great blog, Violet! Someone has to shine some light on this phenomenon!

    Is there already a thread on Ella Woodward? Whenever I see an interview with her, she she gives strange, sometimes incorrect information about her illness PTS (a close friend of mine has it). In this interview she even talks about people who cured themselves of cancer by changing their diet. And how she healed herself. Is there any medical proof it wasn't simply a remission, which does happen quite often in her age?

    http://www.tv3.ie/entertainment_article.php?locID=1.803.1098&article=164454

    ReplyDelete
  14. Oooh I got banned from commenting on her page! And I was heaps nice to her also. Literally all I would say would be asking her to prove her claim. So goes to show she isn't banning people because of rudeness, she just doesn't want to be challenged anymore. To be honest though, I am not too concerned that she is going to convert people to her beliefs as she isn't really marketing herself well, unlike Belle Gibson did, she is more just attracting like-minded people to her page. She is promoting quite kooky things that are not going to appeal to many people.
    Also, she barely gets any comments or likes on the things she posts.
    ALSO, she changed her status from ' I will no longer be promoting my story' to 'for now I won't be promoting my story.

    Sarah W

    ReplyDelete
  15. I take it back. I too have been banned!

    ReplyDelete
  16. She's now posted that she is reported banned commenters to police based on a so-called bullying message she received. She really seems to live in her own peculiar world

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There is no CRIME in going to someone's public page and asking them questions. She may not like it, but it is not a CRIME. She is a public figure who is getting a criticism from the public. She lives in a fantasy world where anything that upsets her is harassment, bullying or a crime. Good grief is the woman out of it. Also, since this has come up with her and others, let me just come out and say it: there is no CRIME of "bullying". There is not one jurisdiction in the entire world that has a "bullying" statute on the books. (BTW, no one was bullying her) She would have to show that an actual crime took place before the police would waste any time or energy investigating it.

      Candice: why don't you post the police report?

      Delete
    2. Oh I hope they put her straight through to their Department of Facebook Etiquette Breaches.

      Delete
    3. Actually, Violet, there is at least one jurisdiction which has a bullying statute on the books: Victoria, Australia.

      The law is called "Brodie's Law", named after Brodie Panlock, who took her own life after serious workplace bullying. http://www.justice.vic.gov.au/home/safer+communities/crime+prevention/bullying+-+brodies+law

      That law even covers cyberbullying, such as on Facebook. But it has to be REAL bullying. As you rightly say, asking questions and demanding proof of claims is not bullying.

      Delete
    4. Well what do you know....I just assumed that there were actual criminal statutes on the books which covered anything that would take bullying to a criminal level. My issue with laws like that is that they give people the impression that anything that hurts their feelings or upsets them is now criminal in nature.

      Delete
    5. I wouldn't worry. Brodie's Law has been in existence here for almost four years now, and the courts haven't had an influx of people claiming that their poor little feelings were hurt. It's for the upper end of offences.

      Brodie's inquest was told that her tormentors' behaviour included "''putting fish oil in her bag, covering her with chocolate sauce, telling her that she was worthless and didn't deserve to be there …They would just grab her and hold her down and put oil over her so she couldn't get away." Brodie made an unsuccessful suicide attempt, and they told her "If you are going to do it, do it properly''.

      THAT'S what bullying is. Being asked to prove your extraordinary and potentially harmful claims is not.

      As long as CMF's challengers remain civil, as long as they do not threaten her with physical harm, they have little to fear, in my (admittedly non-expert) opinion. The anti-bullying law was never meant to shut down reasonable online debate, even if it's robust debate. What I've seen on CMF's page so far is no worse than I've seen on the page of practically anyone, anywhere, who blogs on controversial matters, and an awful lot more polite than some. If you can't handle debate, if you don't ever want to be contradicted, get off the internet.

      It's important to keep in mind the implication of Brodie's Law being a criminal law rather than a civil one. It means the bar for proof is high - beyond reasonable doubt - and you would have to convince the police and the prosecution that the case is winnable before it would see the light of day in court. Assuming there aren't any death threats or seriously abusive posts that I'm unaware of, then if CMF goes to the police with what I've seen so far on her FB page - well, they may not actually laugh in her face, but they may politely convey to her something along the lines of "toughen up, princess".

      Even a civil action would be difficult to launch here. You'd have to prove harm beyond mere hurt feelings. CMF could try - the defamation laws might cover it, depending on the content of the posts she objects to - but it would be an awfully expensive gamble.

      Delete
    6. Coincidentally, I just went to The Age website to see today's news, and this is the lead story:
      http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/investigations-look-into-bullying-claims-in-suicide-of-gay-former-officer-michael-maynes-20150430-1mx1zh.html

      That poor man. THIS is the sort of behaviour that Brodie's Law was intended to deal with. Not hurt feelings because someone took issue with the claims on your blog.

      Delete
  17. http://www.naturopathicdiaries.com/food-as-medicine/

    Interesting blog from a former naturopath currently doing a masters in biomedical science.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I appreciate you and I would like to read your next post.
    We will help you for finding any important News that you need for
    every information.
    Bangladesh online news
    Live bangladesh
    BD News
    News

    ReplyDelete
  19. I appreciate you and I would like to read your next post.
    We will help you for finding any important News that you need for
    every information.
    Bangladesh online news
    Live bangladesh
    BD News
    News

    ReplyDelete