NEO-BALLISTOL

**ady** · 19-02-2015, 13:40

I had severe lacerations to my right leg and Ballistol sorted it out. My GP at the time suggested i try it. He was testing it on burn victims at the local hospital.

**Skaaphaas** · 19-02-2015, 14:01

Originally Posted by apocza

I don't want to be rude, but please urge your father to use registered medical doctors and registered medical products for something as serious as skin cancer. It's dangerous and irresponsible, the efficacy (and safety) of these "natural" products have not been determined, in fact, the efficacy of homoeopathy has overwhelmingly been disproven.

We can argue all day about "natural" medicine and I am not going to generalize and say it's all bad or ineffective, but homoeopathy specifically is snake oil.

I'm a strong supporter for the use of Ballistol for medicinal purposes. I use it as disinfectant, "bio-oil" and it works exceedingly well on burn wounds, but not sunburn.

Saying that, I have to agree with you, skin cancer is a whole different ball game.

Ballistol can only do so much, it is not a miracle fluid.

**killzone** · 19-02-2015, 14:18

Originally Posted by apocza

I don't want to be rude, but please urge your father to use registered medical doctors and registered medical products for something as serious as skin cancer. It's dangerous and irresponsible, the efficacy (and safety) of these "natural" products have not been determined, in fact, the efficacy of homoeopathy has overwhelmingly been disproven.We can argue all day about "natural" medicine and I am not going to generalize and say it's all bad or ineffective, but homoeopathy specifically is snake oil.

Thank you for the reply and concern. My father had been consulting with his GP for quite some time before seeking alternative treatments. He was also referred to a specialist in Newcastle. He received a variety and very expensive types of treatments for his BCC. Some of the treatments he can't use due to the fact that some of the BCC spots are very close to his one eye. The specialist also surgically removed one on his left arm. After about a year the spot returned at the edges of the healed wound. So he started using the tincture of mirror on the parts he could not use the treatment prescribed by the specialist. The mirror seems to help a bit.

**KK20** · 19-02-2015, 14:26

Just a note:

It is illegal to make any claim to heal cancer other than what is registered via the appropriate channels.

Not to derail the thread. Many registered medicines started out as homeopathy.
EU fighter pilots are allowed to take a homeopathic preparation for nausea but if others are taken they are grounded.

**apocza** · 19-02-2015, 14:55

Originally Posted by KK20

Just a note:

It is illegal to make any claim to heal cancer other than what is registered via the appropriate channels.

Not to derail the thread. Many registered medicines started out as homeopathy.
EU fighter pilots are allowed to take a homeopathic preparation for nausea but if others are taken they are grounded.

Homoeopathy by definition is liquid with trace amounts of a substance, at most. A clear distinction needs to be made between homoeopathic remedies in the strict sense of the term and natural remedies which are often potent herbal/plant based treatments which are quite different from the highly diluted homoeopathic remedies. The placebo effect is a very well documented and powerful phenomenon and it's effective, really it is. However, we should not rely on medicine that's primary mechanism of function is via the placebo effect, as we could be denying ourselves far more effective medicine.

It gets confusing because "homoeopaths" often sell natural remedies that are not strictly homoeopathic in origin. In this sense I completely agree, natural medicine often becomes a registered product after rigorous trials, safety testing and peer review. This is the standard by which medical treatment needs to be judged, else we expose ourselves to danger, whether it be direct - medicine that is bad for us - or indirectly - effective medicine we avoid because we are using ineffective or less effective medicine.

That said, I don't mean to lead anyone to think modern clinical medicine is without flaw, there are often medicines which turn out to be bad, the industry is corrupt and greed sometimes dominates. We live in interesting times and we need to keep our wits about us, we need to apply scepticism to everything and educate ourselves as best we can. We only have one lift on earth, one body and one set of organs - it's not worth risking it by remaining ignorant.

More towards the topic, Ballistol is fantastic for minor wounds and for the healing process with more severe wounds. I wouldn't use it on cancer or serious ailments though other than supportive use.

**atunguyd** · 19-02-2015, 16:44

Originally Posted by KK20

Not to derail the thread. Many registered medicines started out as homeopathy.

That is rubbish. Homeopathy is based odds the belief that like chess like. You got a cough so give you something that causes coughs and it will cure you. Problem is that it just made it worse, so the homeopaths diluted the 'drug' down to absurd levels (where scientifically it is not molecularly present) and claim that he essence is still there and it will now cure your cough.

If modern drugs are based on this they would be giving you nuclear waste to cure your cancer. To even suggest such a thing is a insult to medical doctors.

**flyinggun** · 19-02-2015, 16:51

Been using it for close to 20 years. Very happy with it for the purpose that I use it for.

**Rick Pascoe** · 19-02-2015, 17:41

I would say that some of our so called modern cancer cures are tantamount to nuclear waste.

**KK20** · 19-02-2015, 19:04

Originally Posted by atunguyd

That is rubbish. Homeopathy is based odds the belief that like chess like. You got a cough so give you something that causes coughs and it will cure you. Problem is that it just made it worse, so the homeopaths diluted the 'drug' down to absurd levels (where scientifically it is not molecularly present) and claim that he essence is still there and it will now cure your cough.

If modern drugs are based on this they would be giving you nuclear waste to cure your cancer. To even suggest such a thing is a insult to medical doctors.

I keep an open mind about these things. I would like references. It is always good to keep abreast.
I have seen many things go full circle. What was punted 10 years ago is now wrong etc. These too went through rigorous test, peer review , trials etc

Modern medicines also uses the concept of actives diluted to levels not to cause disease state and successful in still iliciting a response from the body.

References would be appreciated.

**Kreefstert** · 19-02-2015, 19:08

Originally Posted by KK20

I keep an open mind about these things. I would like references. It is always good to keep abreast.
I have seen many things go full circle. What was punted 10 years ago is now wrong etc. These too went through rigorous test, peer review , trials etc

Modern medicines also uses the concept of actives diluted to levels not to cause disease state and successful in still iliciting a response from the body.

References would be appreciated.

if I didnt k ow better I could have sworn you are a pharmacist