Cancer Cover-Up: The Neal Deoul Story | HOME PAGE

Click here to order

Home Page
Cesium & Cancer
  Cesium Science  
  Defeating Cancer  
  Dr. Keith Brewer's Paper  
  Neal's Story  
  Neal's Dosage  
Frequently Asked Questions
Monthly Newsletter
Subscribe to our FREE Newsletter
Enter Your Email Address
 
Success Stories
Horror Stories
Who is the REAL
Snake Oil Salesman?
 
Hypocrisy & Deceit in the
U.S. Senate
 
Neal's Legal Battles

You Can Help! Take Action!

 
 

 
 
 
 

Closing Argument (3)

1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9

With respect to the State's claims in the Statement of Charges regarding the safety and efficacy of cesium chloride, the State has failed to meet its burden of proof. The State did not present testimony by a single qualified expert witness that cesium chloride was either unsafe or ineffective in treating cancer.2 As a result, the Court must find against the State on all of its charges concerning T-Up's representations relating to cesium chloride.

The State bases its entire case upon its experts' opinions that the scientific articles contained in State Exhibit 56 do not constitute the kind of FDA-approved double blind, placebo clinical trials required for the approval of a new drug. Their testimony is meaningless. No one ever represented that State Exhibit 56, in and of itself, provided the basis for T-Up's claims about its products in its marketing materials. State Exhibit 56 is a miscellaneous accumulation of research papers, newspaper articles and promotional materials that the company had available when requested to produce documents.3 Therefore, the fact that these documents do or do not satisfy the State created criteria of FDA Phase I-III studies is meaningless. Besides, the existence of FDA Phase I-III studies is not the standard imposed by law.

What matters is whether or not the Respondents had a reasonable basis for their efficacy claims. Respondents had a right to rely upon the case histories, medical literature, research results and the scientific conclusions of authoritative scientists in making their efficacy claims. Deoul presented expert testimony by Dr. Heggers, an immunologist, microbiologist, and pharmacologist with extensive experience testing and researching aloe vera. Dr. Heggers testified that based on his review of the scientific literature, as well as his knowledge of the active ingredients of aloe vera, the functioning of the immune system, and his personal experience, aloe vera stimulates the immune system, increases healthy T-cells in the body, and is capable of effectively fighting a number of diseases, including HIV, AIDS and cancer.
Dr. Pearce, a well trained and experienced physician and neurologist, testified that based on his study and review of scientific literature concerning aloe vera, as well as his use of T-Up and other aloe vera products in treating patients in his medical practice for a number of years, T-Up was an effective treatment for auto-immune disorders such as multiple sclerosis, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis and Sjogren's Disease. Dr. Pearce studied and researched aloe vera for a number of years before he was engaged as a witness in this case. He also reviewed State Exhibit 56 and various books containing information regarding aloe vera which were provided to him in connection with his engagement.

He based his opinion that T-Up was a safe and effective treatment for both immune and autoimmune disorders on his knowledge concerning aloe vera which he acquired from all of the above-referenced sources, his medical background, as well as his years of experience using aloe vera and T-Up in his medical practice with favorable results. He also testified that aloe vera was a potent stimulator of the immune system. Dr. Pearce was the only expert who could testify from the perspective of a physician who had recommended T-Up to his patients and had concluded T-Up was a beneficial treatment for his patients who had auto-immune illnesses.

Dr. Winters was the sole expert produced by the State who testified that aloe vera was a weak stimulator of the immune system. Dr. Winters was impeached by various lectures he had given where he had described aloe vera as a potent immune stimulant. Dr. Winters was offered the opportunity to review all of his lectures to determine if he had ever indicated in any lecture that aloe vera was a weak immune stimulator. When Dr. Winters returned to complete his testimony, he was forced to acknowledge that he had never indicated in any of his lectures at any time that aloe vera was an ineffective or weak stimulator of the immune system.

1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9

Continue continue

 
to top of page
Disclaimer

An STI Site
Copyright © 2001 Cancer-CoverUp.com | All Rights Reserved | Reproduction in whole or in part in any form or medium without the expressed written permission of Cancer-CoverUp.com is prohibited.
Privacy Policy | Please read the MEDICAL DISCLAIMER