American Cancer Advocates
                                              
 Investing in your health,...not your disease!

The Peirce Postulate

           
Benjamin Ozgood Peirce- Harvard professor who solved the grey areas
in early Calculus. He published his theorums and explanations and his book is still used today as more variations of Calculus are added to it. He resolved the missing links and completed the very foundation of this purely mathematical science. He was a co-founder of Calculus.


        
"No one can change math, argue against math, nor re-invent math."

 _____________________________________________________________________________________

               
 ABOUT THE "PEIRCE POSTULATE"
         
                                                                                By Bret Lowell Peirce


We all can acknowledge that math is the basic order of the universe. Math implies through probability, math describes through results, math rules out, math proves.  Math is the law that provides order to chaos and connects matter with energy. Mathematical structure and theory are used in chemistry, psychology, engineering, electronics, astronomy, biology,medicine, geometry, athletics, and physics.
Math is alway objective, never lies, and doesn't
 change ever.

 

The Pierce Postulate indentified and validates a very specific disease scenario using probability to demonstrate effectiveness of treatments.
Here is that scenario.

  • WHAT ARE THE ODDS THAT  DIFFERENT, "UNPROVEN"  SUBSTANCES AGAINST A DISEASE CAN ALL  END UP HAVING THE SAME EXACT ACTIVE INGREDIENT, (BY ACCIDENT)

  • WHAT IS THE SIGNIFICANCE OF DISCOVERING AN IDENTICAL "ACTIVE," ELEMENT IN ALL OF THE POPULAR ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS  USED FOR DISEASE?

 

Don't You see?
 

PROOVING
 effectiveness of treatments is just a basic probability question!              



WHY?

  • THERE IS NO WAY EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THESE TREATMENTS FEATURE A HIGH AMOUNT OF THE SAME ACTIVE INGREDIENT BY MERE COINCIDENT OR ACCIDENT.

  • THERE IS NOW AMPLE RESEARCH TO SUPPORT THE PROBABILITY THAT THIS MAIN INGREDIENT HAS THERAPEUTIC BENIFITS !
   
      
     {Take this little test. Be honest with yourself!}


          How does a common ingredient in vastly
            different therapies prove anything?



 
  • What would you say if some guy told you he could cure breast cancer with just an industrial solvent?  What would you think?

 

  • What would you say if this guy claimed he could cure all cancers with this solvent? How would you feel?

 

  • What would say if he claimed he could treat autoimmunes, HIV, Hepatitis C, and cancer with this solvent?

 

  • Now, what if it were not one guy but ten different guys claiming to cure all these major scurges of the planet earth?

 

  • What if all ten had a different substance or herb yet each claimed their particular substance could cure almost any terrible illness?

 

  • What if one guy had a vitamin, another an industrial oxidizer, another had an amino acid, another had a mineral, another had bark extract, and one had plant toxin, another had a type of grass, and yet another guy had chlorophyll,  and  another a solvent, and so on, etc.?

 

*What would you think/... How would you feel about these ten different men?  "Quacks?... Rip-offs?... Misguided?... Mistaken people most of them?"              ......Continue.....


                    Now, what if:

  •  What if these ten guys were not selling anything?

 

  • What if these ten guys didn't even know each other?

 

  • What if you found out through basic biology that each one of their treatments contained an identical substance believed to be the therapeutic molecule?

 

  • What if these guys didn't even know about this common ingredient?

 

  • What would you say or think discovering that all these vastly different treatments all ended up having an identicle substance in high quantities?

                         

          Really!   Now what would you think?


   

  • Would you think... "Hmmm! What a coincidence?... How curious?" 

 

  •  Would you feel that, at the very least, somebody should tell these people about the common ingredient they all are promoting, (not selling?)

  • What if  you wife, son, daughter, or  parent had 3 months to live with cancer?

 

  • Would you be a little curious about that one special  substance found in every single one of the most popular alternative treatments for cancer?

 

  • Would you talk about it or research it?

 

  • What if your dearly beloved died and you never spoke a word about that one common ingredient in all these different therapies? Would you feel guilty about not at least researching this common ingredient?

 

                          
STOP!!!

 

What the heck just happened? 

Many, many of you went from sheer and total skepticism to
 curious, interested!

You changed your position!

You did it in a matter of seconds!

You did so without a doctor's opinion or A.M.A. endorsement! 

What just happened? 

How did a common ingredient become so relevant?

AND NOW YOU UNDERSTAND!
 
A COMMON INGREDIENT SUGGESTS THAT THESE THERAPIES MUST HAVE VALIDITY, (TO SOME DEGREE!)

 

 

ACCORDING TO THE POSTULATE, THE NEW FDA STANDARDS IN DETERMINING THE VALIDITY OF CLAIMS FOR TREATMENT EFFICACY SHOULD BE AS FOLLOWS. 


THE PEIRCE POSTULATE:
ALTERNATIVE FOODS/SUPPLEMENTS/SUBSTANCES ARE PROVEN TO HAVE MEDICAL EFFICACY BY THE FOLLOWING VARIABLES.

Low Probability of efficacy

1) Three claims of efficacy to a disease

2) Three different substances

3) One common ingredient ( suspected as active)

4) Claims can’t be made by people who are connected or know each other in any way.

5) Claims can’t be made by anybody directly selling a product

6) Claims should be by either researcher, patient, or practitioner

7) Any two invitro or animal studies supporting efficacy of the active ingredient

 

Moderate Probability of efficacy

1) Four claims of efficacy to a disease

2) Four different substances

3) One common ingredient (suspected as active)

4) Claims can’t be made by connected parties

5) Claims can’t be made by people directly profiting from a product

6) Claims should be by either researcher, patient, or practitioner

7) Any two invitro or animal studies supporting efficacy of active ingredient.

 High Probability of Efficacy

1) Five claims of efficacy to a disease

2) Five different substances

3) One common ingredient,…and 4) through 7)

Very High Probability of Efficacy              

                1) Six claims of efficacy to a disease

                2) Six different substances

                3) One common ingredient,…and 4) through 7)


Absolute Proof of Efficacy 

1) Seven or more claims of efficacy to a disease

2) Seven or more different substances

3) One common ingredient, …and 4) through 7)

(And in reality, it's more like a dozen different people touting a dozen vastly different therapies and still every single therapy has an identicle molecule or element.)

*Toxicity concerns would then be the only limiting factor for full FDA support. Toxicity studies are so much cheaper and easier to do than double blind placebo studies, however seeing that they are food substances toxicity requirements needed to classify a substance as therapeutic should be changed.

However, for cancer, one thing is certain,... nothing can be more toxic than cancer!