Of Rashid Buttar and Stephen Hawking

23 Apr

I was recently sent the following link (thank you JNB ;o) ) which announces the creation of the ‘Cutler Hawking Project’. At first I suspected the formation of some soft rock combo but a quick glance at the site in question soon alleviated my doubts.

The majority of people need very strong evidence before they start believing in non-mainstream treatments, and this is the reason why we decided to contact Stephen Hawking to convince him to try Andy Cutler’s chelation protocol – so he can serve as an example. Confining him to a wheelchair since his mid 20′s, Mr. Hawking is a brilliant and famous English physicist who is suffering tragically from Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, a disease caused by chronic mercury poisoning. Now 63, he can only speak with the help of a computer voice synthesizer.

Oh, it gets better.

The reason why we selected Mr. Hawking is because of his very unique situation. If we convince a man of his mega-stature in the scientific community to try Andy Cutler’s protocol and he subsequently recovers from such debility, that would convince even the biggest of skeptics. Because Mr. Hawking has been confined to a wheelchair for such a long time, and since he is so famous, no doctor could come up with another reasonable excuse for his recovery, and no doctor could write it off as a faked illness, as it would be too obvious that the mercury amalgam & vaccine issue is real and that Andy Cutler’s mercury chelation protocol really works. Mr. Hawking would be living proof! There is no other person in the world that could make a stronger case! It makes a dynamic difference when you see a celebrity talk about a certain treatment, and see that person get out of the wheelchair after 35 years and walk again, and we believe that news channels would report on this “miracle” worldwide!

OK, so here’s a group of people who believe first and foremost that a whole range of things are caused by mercury poisoning – autism, bad backs, and apparently Motor Neurone Disease has now joined that elite group. Lucky lucky Professor Hawking. Why lucky? Because chelation will cure him!!! Yay!!!!!

Except…neither Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, nor indeed any other forum of neurone disease is caused by mercury poisoning. The official line is:

The cause of ALS is not known, and scientists do not yet know why ALS strikes some people and not others…in searching for the cause of ALS, researchers have also studied environmental factors such as exposure to toxic or infectious agents. Other research has examined the possible role of dietary deficiency or trauma. However, as of yet, there is insufficient evidence to implicate these factors as causes of ALS…Future research may show that many factors, including a genetic predisposition, are involved in the development of ALS.

Sounds strangely familiar doesn’t it?

And so we’re presented with the mental picture of some fairly odd people attempting to bother a sick old man just so they can try and persuade him to undergo some therapy. Nice.

And yet, it’s still not as bad as another treatment I heard about. Apparently Dr Rashid Buttar, adored by mercury boys and girls all over the world, the man who can cure cancer and reverse old age as well as cure autism with skin cream recommends another intriguing treatment for young kids – and this time, he’s not confining it to autistic kids: oh no, this ones good for _everyone_ :

Have any of your tried, or even heard anything about, doing urine shots to help the immune system? I don’t know much about it yet, but I know you use your child’s own urine, and filter it with special filters, before injecting it into their hip. I’ve heard really good things about it from a friend who tried it.

No, its not a joke. The answers came thick and fast:

I only know this was described to me to be a procedure used by Dr. Buttar about a year ago when my son was his patient, but the nurse said it would require an extended stay near the clinic and we live in Texas. We never tried it and moved on to another doctor.

Leslie, Chelatingkids2.

I’ll bet you did Leslie.

This was recommended by Dr. Buttar’s office for my NT son who has tons of allergies. I believe Dr. Imam in NY does it. It sounded too “out there” for us so we are currently sticking with justchelation for him.

Sangeeta, Chelatingkids2

Yeah, just chelation. That’s not ‘out there’ at all.

My grandson went through this beginning in October. It was a once a week treatment for 10 weeks. Before he began, he had lots of allergy problems that would often advance into sinus infection and ear infections. It’s almost April and he has not had one problem since. The only thing that I see is an occasional stuffy nose that lasts only a very short time.

andreagrammy.

Just in case you think you read it wrong, you didn’t. Rashid Buttar and others recommend taking some of the childs urine, filtering it and then injecting it back into them. This is apparently good for the immune system. Yummy.

About these ads

231 Responses to “Of Rashid Buttar and Stephen Hawking”

  1. Sue M. May 2, 2006 at 23:32 #

    Hey Dad,

    We may not be at the point of scientific certainty but when you listen to him speak (have you done that yet) than you will see what he KNOWS and what you WILL KNOW eventually. Cute spelling exercise. I will note that the two people who had a grasp on spelling in your above post were myself and Dr. Deth. Not surprising.

  2. Dad Of Cameron May 3, 2006 at 00:11 #

    It’s clear and proven that I’ve got a grasp on nothing then. I’m so glad you understood that.

    Is what he speaks different than what he writes?

    I don’t understand “see what he KNOWS”. Yes, I don’t have a grasp on that, can you clarify your point?

  3. clone3g May 3, 2006 at 00:16 #

    Sue, why don’t you see if you can get a few of your respected scientists to pop in here and explain the junk science they like to publish? Deth could reach a much broader audience if he explained how his experiments advance our understanding of autism in any way.

    Ask the Geiers to tell us about their sheety theories about testosterone.

    Maybe Buttar can help to clarify the urine thing.

    Bradstreet can lead us in prayer and explain oxidative stress between amens.

    Erik has all of the contacts, right Erik. Can you get one of these brilliant scientists over for a little Q&A or is there always a fee involved?

  4. Sue M. May 3, 2006 at 00:36 #

    Clone wrote:

    “Sue, why don’t you see if you can get a few of your respected scientists to pop in here and explain the junk science they like to publish?

    - To be tortured by the ND’s? I’m not sure that they would want to do that…. You guys are like a group of about 10-20 people maybe, right? I’m pretty sure that they might be too busy….

  5. Sue M. May 3, 2006 at 00:39 #

    Daddy wrote:

    “I don’t understand “see what he KNOWS”.

    - If you go to Autism Media, you can “see” the video and hear what he knows that you don’t. Sorry to be so confusing.

  6. clone3g May 3, 2006 at 00:48 #

    No Sue,
    The audience is much, much larger than 20 and certainly more than Deth would reach through door to door evangelism.

  7. Dad Of Cameron May 3, 2006 at 02:04 #

    “I’m pretty sure that they might be too busy…”

    Hey some reality.
    I wish that ASU chemist or MD out here would have just come out and said that, instead of continuously communicating non-scientific conjecture, emtional appeals, and nonsense in all our communications. I was really hoping they were on to something, and really focused on getting the science right (published with real peer-review, etc.) to learn or prove something one way or the other that would stand up scientifically. It would have been nice, if one of them would have just come out and said, “look, we really don’t have time for this, if we engage in this conversation, you’re not likely to find much real science, so we’re gonna have to cover a lot of material that may not be relevant, a lot that’s been refuted already, and it’s not going to real peer-reviewed publication anyway, but it’s all we’ve got. So if you really want to do this, we will, even though we really don’t have the time”.

    I would have said, nah, that’s okay, let’s both save the time.

  8. Dad Of Cameron May 3, 2006 at 02:09 #

    “Maybe Buttar can help to clarify the urine thing.”

    Clarified Buttar?

  9. Sue M. May 3, 2006 at 02:16 #

    Mouse wrote:

    “If you can’t see the irony in claiming that type 1 diabetes is caused by vaccines yet that same type of diabetes has risen substantially (and is endemic) in a population that hasn’t used thimerosal-containing vaccines for decades, then I don’t know what else I can do to convince you”.

    - If you are trying to convince me, this certainly won’t do it. This study is not even about vaccinations. It’s about the rate of DKA and hospitalizations for type 1 diabetes in another country. Ok, so the rates have continued to rise. What’s going on there which could cause that? Maybe it’s environmental, maybe its another vaccine ingredient? Maybe it’s ice cream eating… What does that have to do with the rate of type 1 diabetes in US children over the course of the past 20 years? That’s what I’m interested in.

    I do want to point out something to you. Previously, you wrote in regards to me:

    “You really are a true believer, aren’t you”?

    Previous to that you had posted the following comment:

    “And type 1 diabetes is not caused (in part or whole) by vaccines”.

    - That was a pretty strong and emphatic comment. So, how is believing that vaccines may play a role in autism/type 1 diabetes and looking for better research into the topic any different from your obviously strong and unwavering position that they don’t? I guess your just a true believer that everything the CDC says or your doctor says is the ultimate truth? How’s that working for you?

  10. clone3g May 3, 2006 at 02:58 #

    Sue M. That was a pretty strong and emphatic comment. So, how is believing that vaccines may play a role in autism/type 1 diabetes and looking for better research into the topic any different from your obviously strong and unwavering position that they don’t?

    Your bleeving is based on a desire to bleev even in the absence of evidence.
    Faith based.

    Any one of us is willing and prepared to be convinced of a relationship once evidence of a relationship is presented.
    Evidence based.

    The difference? You believe without reason, we see no reason to believe.

  11. Dad Of Cameron May 3, 2006 at 05:41 #

    Transdermal Gheelation
    Now that’s a dosha pun.

  12. Kevin Champagne May 3, 2006 at 05:56 #

    Who is Brian Romdalvik?

    Brian Romdalvik was another one of Camille Clark’s pseudonyms 9 months ago that claimed to have been ripped off by Dr. Buttar.

    If Brian Romdalvik was real, all of you would have been tripping over yourselves to keep him talking, but instead we got this one comment from him passing through the night.

    Dr Buttar believed in this alternative medicine back in 1997 just when he opened his new practice and bought his big horse farm. Lo and behold his son born soon after is autistic by his own testimony. Miraculously cured by him with buttar cream and now plays chess at college level.

    That’s classic Camille!

    Where is Brian Romdalvik?

    If Dr. Buttar is such a quack, and if he’s ripping people off… where are they?

    Wouldn’t they have a blog by now?

    Where are they all?

    Quackbusters?

  13. Kev May 3, 2006 at 06:15 #

    _”You and Kev are especially interested in hearing what I (little old unscientific me) have to say about all of these studies. Why? Why don’t you listen to what the experts who did the studies have to say?”_

    I know what the experts say, I know (having read the paper in its entirety) what Hornig/Burbacher/Deth et al say: what I want to hear is what _your_ understanding of these papers is and how you believe they support your position.

    You do understand that at the moment its clear that you don’t understand these papers or their conclusions don’t you? I think if you cite something you should be prepared to say why – don’t you?

  14. Kev May 3, 2006 at 06:17 #

    Brian Romdalvik is German Kevin.

  15. Kevin Champagne May 3, 2006 at 06:27 #

    Obviously a german name but who is he? Do you physically know of him?

  16. Kev May 3, 2006 at 06:40 #

    His IP address resolves to a city in Germany. I _think_ I swapped a few emails with him but can’t recall for definite. I can’t find anything in my archives but that doesn’t mean much – I empty them out periodically anyway.

    It would be _very_ difficult for anyone from the States to pick up an IP that resolved to a German city. It just doesn’t work that way. Proxies can disguise only in-country.

  17. Ms Clark May 3, 2006 at 08:13 #

    Kevin Champagne,

    Why do you *LIE* like that? Aren’t you ashamed? I’m not Brian anybody and never have been.

    Now just stop lying about me, ok? And ask Buttar about those clarified urine injections. Does he pasteurize the urine to kill the germs before he injects it into the kid? Wouldn’t that make it lose some of it uriney “goodness”?

  18. Ms Clark May 3, 2006 at 08:42 #

    Kathleen isn’t technically “neurodiverse” but Deth was wanting to hang out with her at her home and convince her face to face… why can’t he hang out with us all here? What’s he got against the neurodiversity folks?

    Maybe Dr, Deth was just lonely…
    He doesn’t come across as a very bright guy, he didn”t know he was on the list of lawyers for the autism omnibus procedings until Kathleen pointed it out. He might actually learn something from hanging with the home-boys here. Though you don’t seem to have learned any science from hanging with the scientists here.

    If you aren’t scientifically literate enough to begin to explain why you think your scientists are right–after the extreme flaws in their reasonings are pointed out in simple language, then you aren’t scientifically literate enough to have an informed opinion. You have an uninformed opinion based on your intution only. You don’t even have an autistic child. You don’t know what we are talking about when we talk about our kids. Just like I don’t know what it is to be the mom of a diabetic kid.

    Can’t you find someone who actually can talk polymerase chain reaction and cytokines and chi-squares from the mercury parents to come here and *not debate* but discuss the finer points of the Hornig study, the Deth petri dish experiments, HBOT, urine injections.. chemical castrators for autism, IVIG, vitamin A… B12… someone who knows more than conspiracy theory.

    BC and Clone can whup any of your Farside Media website scientists with one arm each tied behind their individual backs. The cool thing about discussions in print is that you can go back and quote people on what they say. Even Andrew Hall Cutler found his way here, but then amscrayed.

    I want to know what happened to the study Buttar said he was going to publish on td-dmps(tm). You know Pat pat said Buttar never really got a trademark on his td-dmps don’t you? That means either Buttar or Pat pat is lying. :-)

  19. Sue M. May 3, 2006 at 13:46 #

    Clone wrote:

    “Your bleeving is based on a desire to bleev even in the absence of evidence.
    Faith based”.

    - I would disagree. I have evidence (anecdotal and scientific) which leads me to my beliefs. If more evidence is presented which shows me that I am wrong … I will follow it. Do you have any? You are similiar to the people holding out during the cigarrette smoking/cancer controversy. They waited for the “real” so-called scientists to tell them what so many others already knew.

    Again, if I saw some information which explained certain things, it would help. Even silly non-scientific things like a retraction of the Danish studies, better explanation of what the CDC did and what in regards to the issue (not much from what I can tell), etc. Of course opening up of what’s left of the VSD data would help. All this would at least give us something…. you have nothing but lies, discrepancies, and Offit…

  20. JAAG May 3, 2006 at 14:00 #

    Obviously a german name but who is he? Do you physically know of him?

    who cares? got some schlobben zee knobben on the mind?

    -just another angry german

  21. Sue M. May 3, 2006 at 14:00 #

    Kev wrote:

    “what I want to hear is what your understanding of these papers is and how you believe they support your position”.

    - The point is you shouldn’t care about what my understanding is of these papers. We are beyond that. Five years ago maybe that would be important because there was such a small amount of “evidence” or “science”. I would have to defend my position, etc. Not any more. Now, I can just parrot what other more scientific minded people say :) I have seen comments from you such as… I’m going to let Jonathan take over on this statistical analysis of the autism numbers… Or, I’ll let Orac take this on since he’s a doctor or whatever the case may be… Let people do what they do best. I have seen many people come and go here Kev, who have tried (some very calmly) to debate here about the science. Somehow it always gets back to something foolish like some “autistic mice” comment or some crack about Wakefield’s integrity or someone’s vast wealth or whatever… it’s never about the science. Ever. Certainly, I could give you my understanding of the papers but where would it get us? Be honest.

  22. Kev May 3, 2006 at 14:20 #

    _”The point is you shouldn’t care about what my understanding is of these papers. We are beyond that. Five years ago maybe that would be important because there was such a small amount of “evidence” or “science”. I would have to defend my position, etc. Not any more.”_

    I’m not asking you to defend your position Sue. I’m trying to get a sense of whether you actually _have_ a position to begin with. And seeing as none of those papers were published 5 years ago, I fail to see how they could possibly _not_ be up for debate.

    _”I have seen many people come and go here Kev, who have tried (some very calmly) to debate here about the science. Somehow it always gets back to something foolish like some “autistic mice” comment or some crack about Wakefield’s integrity or someone’s vast wealth or whatever… it’s never about the science. Ever.”_

    On the contrary Sue – if we’re talking about what is essentially a science based question (is there an autism epidemic, does thiomersal cause autism, etc) then its _always_ about science. I’m sitting here right now asking you to debate the science with me. I’ve asked you to do this so many times I’ve actually lost count. You never do.

    Its my position that neither teh Deth, Burbacher or Hornig papers support ther thiomersal/autism connection in the way _I assume_ you think they do. So remove my assumption – tell me how you believe they
    support your position. I can’t debate you without knowing where you stand on the issues can I?

    _”Certainly, I could give you my understanding of the papers but where would it get us? Be honest.”_

    Because I don’t get you Sue. I don’t think you’re stupid despite our ocassional cat fights but I really think you’re reading much more into these papers than is actually there. I want to understand what it is you believe, or think you know.

  23. Sue M. May 3, 2006 at 14:22 #

    Ms. Clark wrote:

    “What’s he got against the neurodiversity folks”?

    - I imagine that he has nothing against you. Could it be possible that these people wouldn’t want to come into a situation like this where they get attacked left and right? Called a wacky PhD, called a threat? Come on. Could it be possible that Dr. Deth would rather sit face to face with Kathleen Seidel so he wouldn’t have his personal e-mail exchanges plastered over the internet?

    Ms. Clark wrote:

    “You don’t even have an autistic child. You don’t know what we are talking about when we talk about our kids”.

    - Now, that is interesting Ms. Clark. We have already gone over (with as much detail as I care to give you) that my son improved greatly from the biomedical approach for “treating” his Sensory Integration Disorder (cough, cough)… SID which some may have considered PDD. It is ok, though, Ms. Clark if you want to make that an issue. I will say this, I don’t know anything about your child but I guarantee you that I know as much if not more of the physical medical issues (comordities if you will) of many autistic children as you do. It is wonderful that you don’t (if you don’t) have these problems with your child(ren) but of course many do and those are the ones I relate to the best… due to my own personal experiences.

    Ms. Clark wrote:

    “Can’t you find someone who actually can talk polymerase chain reaction and cytokines and chi-squares from the mercury parents to come here and not debate but discuss the finer points of the Hornig study, the Deth petri dish experiments, HBOT, urine injections.. chemical castrators for autism, IVIG, vitamin A… B12… someone who knows more than conspiracy theory”.

    - A few months back there was someone on here posting who I have reason to believe was a particular DAN! practioner in my local area (One with a great reputation who has helped many children). He may have been able to help answer some of these questions for you (probably not all, but at least give you his personal experiences). Unfortunately the foolishness of this group drove him off… I include myself in the foolishness by the way. You say you want people to come here to post, but would you take time out of your day to be called a baby killer, a quack, a wacky PhD or whatever else may be thrown about? I wouldn’t.

  24. Sue M. May 3, 2006 at 14:32 #

    Kev wrote:

    “On the contrary Sue – if we’re talking about what is essentially a science based question (is there an autism epidemic, does thiomersal cause autism, etc) then its always about science”.

    - Right. Exactly my point. You guys always find a way to make it about how much money someone has, little baby autistic mice and other such nonsense. I don’t have time to debate you on the science, because I know where it will go. Why don’t you engage Maria with her science? Oops. Because you can’t. As for reading too much into the papers, Kev. I really don’t think that I am. I have said MANY times that none of them PROVE anything but what can we learn from them? Where do we go from there?

  25. Kev May 3, 2006 at 14:54 #

    _”Right. Exactly my point. You guys always find a way to make it about how much money someone has, little baby autistic mice and other such nonsense.”_

    Sometimes it _is_ about those things too Sue. Especially the ‘mice’ thing. That’s pretty important.

    _”I don’t have time to debate you on the science, because I know where it will go.”_

    That’s a cop-out. I specifically provided a science forum free from the heated atmosphere this blog generates. You were invited to come over and participate on numerous ocassions but never did.

    _”Why don’t you engage Maria with her science? Oops. Because you can’t.”_

    Maria _has_ participated in the science forum and we regularly email each other back and forth. We are, in my opinion, on very good terms. This is _because_ she engages in the science.

    Maria has very good reasons for not always wanting to participate in this blog and so I make a point of not engaging her on here. If we want to take something further we do it via email, as she can readily attest if she wants to.

    _”As for reading too much into the papers, Kev. I really don’t think that I am. I have said MANY times that none of them PROVE anything but what can we learn from them? Where do we go from there?”_

    OK, good. Thats a start. I’m not asking that you _prove_ anything or disprove anything. I’m simply asking you how you believe they support your theory that thiomersal can cause or lead to autism.

  26. clone3g May 3, 2006 at 15:23 #

    Sue M. I have evidence (anecdotal and scientific) which leads me to my beliefs.

    Well if it is at all convincing you won’t mind presenting it. Just because it leads you to believe doesn’t mean it has universal merit. I’m afraid you don’t set the bar very high.

    If more evidence is presented which shows me that I am wrong … I will follow it. Do you have any?

    Tell me the evidence you require to change your beliefs? Is there any? No one should have to show you that you are wrong. Assume you are.

    You are only interested in things that help you to believe whereas I go out of my way to prove myself wrong. I’ll go with a hypothesis as long as it holds up but I am constantly looking for ways to dismiss everything I am tempted to believe. Just my nature, sorry.

    I am willing to acknowledge the possibility that thimerosal triggered autism in some individuals but I can’t just believe because it makes sense to some people with a desire to believe. I need convincing. I need proof and I need evidence. Do you have any?

  27. clone3g May 3, 2006 at 15:54 #

    Sue M: Why don’t you engage Maria with her science? Oops. Because you can’t.

    No Sue, no one attempts to debate Maria because she doesn’t make claims that she can’t support. She is the first to admit that she is open to infinite possibilities and always willing to provide infinite volumes of literature to prove it.

    On the rare occasion when Maria narrows her energy and makes a single claim she has and will be challenged.

    Maria can think and fend for herself and she would probably prefer that you don’t drag her in to your mission or fight.

    When you are able to understand and interpret the science and spend as much time scouring the literature as Maria, you won’t need to shift attention from your beliefs. You’ll be equipped to discuss the science in a civil and rational manner.

    Expect to invest more than a year or two.

  28. anonimouse May 3, 2006 at 17:37 #

    Actually, Maria and I aren’t terribly far off in our base position. Like her, I think it is certainly plausible that some environmental trigger or triggers play a role in certain flavors of autism. Susceptibility to these triggers may be genetic. I tend to lean towards these triggers being in utero rather than post-natal and think that vaccines or heavy metals are rather implausible triggers unto themselves, but that’s a little bit more about the subtlety of one’s position.

    I respect Maria for trying to stick to the science, even if I don’t always agree with her references or her conclusions. It is perfectly acceptable to have an alternative viewpoint if you try to back it up with something other than “well, I believe it because this guy says so” or “I know that drug companies and the CDC are doing this” or “Paul Offit is a bad guy”.

  29. Kassiane May 3, 2006 at 23:18 #

    Did no one else catch that apparently the pancreas and intestine are in the brain?

    I mean, Sue even said that she’s only picky about spelling when it involves poisoning babies’ brains.

    And her whole Issue is that vaccines caused her child’s celiac disease and type 1 diabetes. Incidentally, those have been around for centuries, they just KILLED people more back then.

    Glad to see such an…interesting…view of anatomy.

  30. David N. Andrews BA-status, PgCertSpEd (pending) May 4, 2006 at 06:32 #

    SueM: “I don’t have time to debate you on the science, because I know where it will go.”

    Um… you want the science from us, but you ‘don’t have time’ to debate any of us on it?

    You can’t be bothered, you mean.

    That’s just lazy.

  31. David N. Andrews BA-status, PgCertSpEd (pending) May 4, 2006 at 06:36 #

    SueM: “Dr. Deth was a respected researcher who was published peer-reviewed science about the topic,”

    But he *isn’t* that….

Comments are closed.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 1,150 other followers

%d bloggers like this: