maybe he didnt fast long enough? maybe he had other things besides the cancer that were going on unbeknownst to him that the body was trying to heal.
the thing about fasting is that you cant ever say whether it failed or not, because you dont know what else was going on with any certainty, and because you dont know what would've happened if the person had only gone an extra week. there's another video i've seen of a woman who did a 41 day fast at the true north health centre. she went there because she had had an extreme constant headache for 16 years due to a car accident that caused the dura mater over her cervical vertebrae to become torn. i think it was something like the 35th day of her fast that she woke up and after 16 years of constant pain, the headache was gone. now, not having seen any results until that time, a person may have gotten very discouraged--say around 3 or 4 weeks--and decided that that was enough--obviously the fast wasnt doing any good--and broken the fast, firmly convinced that the fast had failed, never knowing that if only they had continued on a few more days their pain would've been relieved. (that doesnt mean however that it took her body 35 days to heal a headache. she might have had something else going on that she didnt know about, that was put at the top of the list of priorities).
if we can admit that fasting cured this womans headache (for surely we're not going to chalk that up to unexplainable coincidence are we?), than we have to admit that fasting can heal certain ailments. if we can admit that if can heal certain ailments, then why not cancer? because cancer is a big scary disease? does the body recognize it as such? does it literally shrink in fear of cancer and, while fasting, avoid addressing it, instead going around healing simpler ailments--like headaches and varicose veins--because thinking it could actually heal something so indomitable and so fear inducing and so resistant to medical treatment would just be way too nervy of it? when it comes to healing ailments the body has three considerations: time and energy and available stores. does it have the time and energy and the available stores? and as far as energy goes, fasting is the only way to ensure it has as much energy as possible to devote to healing. and you can be sure that the fasting body has a wonderful economy and knows what it's top priorities are. so long as a person has cancer it's not going to be devoting any of it's extra energy to more trivial matters like skin or vein issues. the body is not so ridiculous as all that.
again i was just throwing it out there. and again, i dont know what i would do if i were diagnosed with cancer. im certainly not judging anyone who goes the traditional route. and im not asking anyone to believe what i say without doing their own research. but i do think it's worthy of consideration, and even worthy of people trying for themselves (because every fasting experience is different and because it's really not as dangerous as people like ol' skinners would have us believe. done properly, it's not dangerous at all), and i do find the offense people take to just the word 'fasting' to be a bit odd. i realize i probably came off as offensive in my initial post--sorry about that. i dont understand the touchiness though... i really dont.
(anyway, dont worry, good folks of the forum, that's the last long drawn out post i will make on the matter
even im bored of the subject now, and would really rather prefer investing my energies in talking about the allure of brooding greasy haired germans and my hatred of summer and other very important things plaguing my being)