Talk:List of unproven and disproven cancer treatments

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the List of unproven and disproven cancer treatments article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find medical sources: Source guidelines · PubMed · Cochrane · DOAJ · Gale · OpenMD · ScienceDirect · Springer · Trip · Wiley · TWL

Archives: Index, 1, 2: 3 months

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to pseudoscience and fringe science, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

Arbitration Ruling on the Treatment of Pseudoscience

In December of 2006 the Arbitration Committee ruled on guidelines for the presentation of topics as pseudoscience in Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience. The final decision was as follows:

Neutral point of view as applied to science: Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, a fundamental policy, requires fair representation of significant alternatives to scientific orthodoxy. Significant alternatives, in this case, refers to legitimate scientific disagreement, as opposed to pseudoscience.
Serious encyclopedias: Serious and respected encyclopedias and reference works are generally expected to provide overviews of scientific topics that are in line with respected scientific thought. Wikipedia aspires to be such a respected work.
Obvious pseudoscience: Theories which, while purporting to be scientific, are obviously bogus, such as Time Cube, may be so labeled and categorized as such without more justification.
Generally considered pseudoscience: Theories which have a following, such as astrology, but which are generally considered pseudoscience by the scientific community may properly contain that information and may be categorized as pseudoscience.
Questionable science: Theories which have a substantial following, such as psychoanalysis, but which some critics allege to be pseudoscience, may contain information to that effect, but generally should not be so characterized.
Alternative theoretical formulations: Alternative theoretical formulations which have a following within the scientific community are not pseudoscience, but part of the scientific process.

Medicine: Hematology-oncology Mid‑importance

	Medicine portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that medicine-related articles follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and that biomedical information in any article use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.MedicineWikipedia:WikiProject MedicineTemplate:WikiProject Medicinemedicine
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Hematology-oncology task force.

Alternative medicine

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Alternative medicine, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Alternative medicine related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Alternative medicineWikipedia:WikiProject Alternative medicineTemplate:WikiProject Alternative medicineAlternative medicine

Skepticism Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Skepticism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science, pseudoscience, pseudohistory and skepticism related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SkepticismWikipedia:WikiProject SkepticismTemplate:WikiProject SkepticismSkepticism
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chiropractic Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chiropractic, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Chiropractic on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChiropracticWikipedia:WikiProject ChiropracticTemplate:WikiProject ChiropracticChiropractic
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Lists Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article was nominated for merging with Alternative cancer treatments on 10 October 2013. The result of the discussion was merge.

List of unproven and disproven cancer treatments received a peer review by Wikipedia editors, which is now archived. It may contain ideas you can use to improve this article.

Tip: Anchors are case-sensitive in most browsers.

This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.

[[Nicholas Gonzalez (physician)#Gonzalez protocol|Gonzalez protocol]] The anchor (#Gonzalez protocol) is no longer available because it was deleted by a user before.

Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors

Quercetin - Science has changed - update needed

This page uses a outdated reference (2008), one that is no longer available, to suggest that Quercetin is unproven. Here are several sources from quality journals showing studies to the contrary.

Quercetin and cancer: new insights into its therapeutic effects on ovarian cancer cells

Dietary quercetin intake and risk of gastric cancer: results from a population-based study in Sweden

Quercetin and Cancer Chemoprevention

There are plenty more resources available, but this should demonstrate that this reference on this page needs to be removed. Dr Douglas Rice (talk) 23:55, 23 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources (medicine). AndyTheGrump (talk) 00:09, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

All suggested sources are unreliable and unusable, answered here. Zefr (talk) 00:29, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a list article in WP:SYNC with the articles it lists; so for something to change here it would need first to change in the listed article. Bon courage (talk) 03:55, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And where is the miraculous chemotherapy?

Where the wonderful chemistry.? Why were conventional methods omitted? As far as we know, they do not cure cancer or kill cancer cells, but also the patient, unless they are young and strong, will struggle with side effects. There's no research, no evidence, because it's either natural remedies or genetic drugs, so there's no patent, so it's a simple thing, no one is going to spend money on researching whether it helps or not, because there's no patent benefit. I can even understand it, but if not private companies, then maybe 85.221.157.71 (talk) 18:48, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but you don't seem to understand how modern medecine works at all. I suggest that you read a few articles to at least not say things that are flatly false such as "they do not cure cancer or kill cancer cells". Maybe start with chemotherapy. Also, talk pages are not forums. If you have a specific change to the article in mind, please propose it in the form "Change X to Y" or "Insert X between Y and Z". --McSly (talk) 23:05, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And does it heal? It's hard to name something That it heals like Since the list of side effects is huge, how to say that rundap cures, it can kill cancer cells, but it is also toxic to the body, read about 10 years of survival after chemo, because if after chemo someone dies of liver disease in 2 years, then of course he can be counted as cured of cancer 😑 BTW This is a comment section, so deleting my comments is discrimination, racism and an attack on freedom of speech. 85.221.157.71 (talk) 00:02, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This page exists for talking about how to improve this specific article.

It does not exist for talking about anyone's personal beliefs about chemotherapy.

Off-topic comments can be removed. WhatamIdoing (talk) 07:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The term chemotherapy currently means non-specific use of intracellular poison, you have a quote from the first few sentences of the text you encourage 85.221.157.71 (talk) 00:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Has the Gerson Therapy been added before?

The Gerson Therapy is an anti-cancer (and other illnesses) that is based on organic juices and soups, along with coffee enemas and vitamin & mineral supplements. There are no peer reviewed clinical studies.

I don't want to duplicate any efforts if it has already been submitted and removed.

Here is more information from the National Cancer Institute.

https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/treatment/cam/hp/gerson-pdq Edgewise (talk) 23:53, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It's on the list, under "hybrid". Sumanuil. _{(talk to me)} 23:58, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]