I never put it as a cure all for all diseases. But it will help save lives or improve quality of lives in just about all cases of disease with MOST people, to varying degrees, with neurological diseases and later stages of cancer that have metastasized being notable exceptions. There is no cancer "cure" in either western medicine or in the naturopathic world, and I have been quite careful to say that changing ones diet only increases their chances. And it does, almost in every case, if maybe not every single time. One thing is for sure, it can not do any harm, unlike chemo does, or radiation.
I also never said or implied that diet was there only hope. But I have said outright it can increase their chances, and in some cases be the main reason, sometimes the only reason, why some people have gotten better.
I also never said that one specific diet is geared toward every single illness. Why do you imply I have said that? But there also is not as much variation as you would think.
If I asked you why that was so, I doubt you even know why. But if you do, tell me why.
Do you know that one general diet WILL improve a healthy persons health, and can aide a person who has disease?
It is not a false hope. That is where you really don't understand this whole paradigm. There are people with chronic and acute diseases. A diet closer to the one our creator designed for us will, in more then a few instances, improve quality of life with people who have chronic disease, even to the point where some people can completely eliminate their meds.
And with acute conditions, the lifestyle/diet can be a factor, and sometimes be the main reason, in saving or prolonging lives.
I am not shoving a diet onto anyone. I put it out there, and state, to the best of the my knowledge, using as a resource my friends knowledge, and the scientific/holistic communities knowledge, as to what the chances of this or that is concerning diet and health and healing. There are variables unknown to us that make this an inexact science, but the same goes for western medicine. If there were no variables, a lot more people would be getting cured with either science. So anyway, it is my hope that whoever reads the posts can make a decision with the information I put forth regarding an alternative treatment that is usually more sustainable and is a gentler and safer way to a cure or improve their ailment.
Quite frankly, I think that it is okay, even good to challenge what some may see as unorthodox information, but again, quite frankly judging by your statements I think you probably don't have enough knowledge, education and experience about this to be speaking about this in a way that that is constructive to furthering a conversation that is enlightening or instructive to others, except in maybe the most general sense, and even that, the generalities you have stated to me are not even always correct. And trust me, I don't mean that in any demeaning manner.
You just keep making generalizations, often about things I have not even said or neither implied. Or about that diet can't do this, or do that. And no offense, but so far, from everything you have said about it, you seem to have a dim and narrow view on this subject.
Again, I mean no disrespect, but I think you are misguided. I am confident you mean well, but you just don't understand this.
Read my post from yesterday that had the word title typology in the title to maybe try and get a handle on the bigger picture.
I can tell you with almost near certainty, the guidelines for biological healing, to do a diet that will provoke that is not what you think it is.
If they see benefits, good. If it eases their symptoms, then that's even better. 
