I recently read an article, yet another claim to a cancer cure. It stated that this product was 10,000 times more effective than chemo. That statement alone should clue you in.

It claims that pharmaceutical companies could not come up with a synthetic version so they covered up the evidence of studies done some decades ago that proved this was a cancer cure. Are you serious?

Why does this article not name or quote any of these studies? Did the author have access to these studies, if they exist?

If you find an article like this, go ahead and try the “cure” if it sounds safe enough to you. But, about the article itself, use the following check list. The more questions to which you answer yes, the less likely it is reliable information.

1. Does it sound sensationalistic? Does it go on and on making claims and repeating itself instead of stating simple facts?

2. Does it exaggerate claims?

3. Are the claims expressed in vague, unscientific terms?

4. Does it lack supportive evidence? Are the names of the people and institutions who carried out the studies mysteriously missing? Are actual quotes of the results of these studies not to be found in the article? Are quotes partial or taken out of context? Is there really not a single shred of actual “evidence” in the article?

5. Does it sound like an attack on another institution or commonly held belief?

You might ask why the author of this article would go to the effort. For attention maybe? Maybe he/she gets some kind of pleasure out of duping people? Maybe to exploit people’s vulnerabilities, or their gullibility? Your guess is as good as mine.

So, the next time you read an article, use your discretion.