Talk:Cancell

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Merger

These articles should remain separate, but linked. Entelev, although the original product, has a slightly different history. Cancell was the same product for most of its history, but then marketed as a transparent and ineffective version for some years, before returning to the original formula (the one supported by abundant testimonials and the NCIs own suppressed information).

If you've got sources for the history of the formulation, it could go into the appropriate section (Cancell#Formulation) of this article. It seems that if Cancell and Entelev have been essentially identical for most of their histories, there's no need to duplicate the material across two articles.

If there is suppressed NCI information, reliable sources should be included to that effect in the Cancell#Efficacy section. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 16:21, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Health fraud

The Category "Health fraud" is subjective and pejorative. "Fraud" isn't quite the right word for this particular entry. Why isn't Homeopathy also marked with this tag? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 136.186.1.189 (talk) 00:21, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

Good point 136.186.1.189. I have added category Health fraud to Homeopathy. Promoting or selling a product as a cancer treatment while knowing that it has been proven ineffective is a fraud. There is nothing subjective about it. PS, my addition of Category:Health fraud to Homeopathy has been speedily deleted by the twinkle bot with the comment that Homeopathic promoters may be delusional, but I don't think they're intentionally defrauding anyone..using TW. Maybe we should create a category called Health delusions. I will work on that one.--Kenneth Cooke (talk) 03:24, 12 May 2008 (UTC)

True-believer syndrome is much more accurate for these types of cases, I think.136.186.1.187 (talk) 00:20, 14 May 2008 (UTC)