I've even done a bit of welding and cutting myself, though I've probably done much more cutting than welding.
Sometimes when you are welding, your mask doesn't drop into place quite quickly enough.
When you are cutting, often times you forgo the mask altogether, especially if you happen to wear glasses that would deflect spatter.
What can happens in these situations is that you get something called "flashburn".
You don't feel it right away. In fact, you usually don't feel it until the day is over and you are home from work.
But, when it kicks in, it is very painful. A simple trick an old welder taught me is to cut slices of raw potatoes and put them on your closed eyelids. There is nothing magical in raw potatoes. They simply seem to hold a cool temperature which soothes the pain in the eyes. I think this is much like the ice pack accounts that have been stated.
Long story short, this is the result of over exposure to infra-red light. (Think "hot" when you think of infra-red.)
Flashburn is short lived. It will usually correct itself within 24 hours. There is also a long term effect from multiple flashburns.
Any time the metabolism of the lens inside the eye is disrupted, there is potential for cataract formation.
There is even a particular type of cataract that is called "welder's cataract" though you don't have to be a welder to develop it. Chronic exposure to IR (infra red light), of any origin, is the primary cause. This type of problem is not usually associated with cancers because UV is the villain in those scenarios.
Could VPW have gotten "flashburn" from improper use of studio lights?
I think he could have. But would this translate into a causitive factor for his ocular melanoma?
It's not very likely based on current information.
I don't have any problem accepting that he experienced flashburn from the filming process.
I find it to be a real stretch, though, to link the filming to his malady.
this is the first place i ever heard the fish hook story
twink, you have such a way with words, you're great
----
uhm i have not done any research nor have i read much of the research carefully presented here
but i wanted to add my own personal experience, since that's all that matters --
the UV rays -- i think when my dermatologist wanted to treat me for a skin problem -- he said something about how he usually recommends the patient goes under those lights? but he didn't want me to do that because of my fair skin (i almost typed my "scare fin")
I don't see other actors or musicians that had to put ice packs on their eyes after the light they were exposed to. it seems he did some damage ... but was able to see OK later. Still, it is firmly in the category of "we don't KNOW".
It does fit the pattern of gas on the snow pumps ... so sure, he likely attributed it to something noble sounding. But since we don't know, why try to make some big fat claim that "we" do?
As Linda said, it is rare for cancer to move into the eye from other places, apparently ... so we don't have much to go on. The fishhook story seems fishy, but hey... fishing on Drambuie is a tricky endeavor ...
Everything I read indicates that cancer in the liver and other places tends to go TO the liver FROM the other
places, since the liver is part of the body's filtration system. It would be neater for my theory if it wasn't so, but
I'm hardly going to cook the data to match my preferences. I had enough of that in twi for a lifetime.]
WW said
"Has anyone heard that lots of the local farmers ended up getting eye cancer?
If someone can produce some studies on that, my position suddenly looks a lot weaker.
Sadly, I can't use the absence of such a study as proof it didn't happen- you can't prove a negative."
Why is that sad?
It's sad because you can't PROVE a negative, which means a lot of ideas stay on the table because
there's no "smoking gun" that proves they're 100% impossible.
If we had a "smoking gun" either way, the discussion would essentially be over-
I mentioned one strong possibility right there-farmers all getting eye cancer.
That would help settle the issue-even if it settled it where I didn't think it's going.
... I perceive bias .. WW is looking for a certain result... After all the scientific quotes, it ends with surmising about anecdotal evidence.
Actually, I have an OPINION.
I was unable to find a strong case for the "he was staring into lights that gave him cancer over 14 days that
came up a decade later", and I wasn't able to find an unassailable case for "his smoking and drinking gave
him cancer and killed him." I was able to find a STRONGER case for the latter- which is why my OPINION
is for the LATTER and not the FORMER. The latter proceeds from what we know
(he smoked and drank a LOT for DECADES) while the former proceeds from what we speculate
(the specific lamps used for 14 days were exactly the type that give cancer).
If I found either result, I would go with the evidence.
Please don't ignore all the scientific quotes simply because I formed an opinion that matches them....
And I didn't ask for "anecdotal evidence", I asked for "studies" to be produced.
If someone had heard something that POINTED to a study, that would help find a completed study.
Has anyone heard of farmers that have to put ice packs on their eyes after coming in from farming? I knew lotsa old farmers with very red necks .. never ice packs on the eyes ... agree with WW's results if you want, he is looking for a desired result and is sad if he can't find it ... that is not the scientific method.
Linda mentioned a couple pertinent bits of data. Increased occurrence near the equator, for example.
It seems possible to me there was some trauma to vp's eyes from the filming ... no idea if that left any permanent scarring that may have been a "weak area" for later cancer. Quite possibly smoking and alcohol were contributing weakening factors ... it is inconclusive. Most likely vp did not know "THE cause".
Yet he claimed to have it, spread that story, and someone's claimed the evidence supports it.
I don't think the evidence supports it.
Still, why pretend to have scientific evidence when there is none ... that seems needy .. or something. Is there really a need to have all results fit the mission at GSC?
Why pretend there's NO scientific information, and that no conclusions can be drawn as to likelihood of causes?
Nobody's said "this is absolutely 100% guaranteed to be exactly what happened",
but conclusions can be drawn as to what is MORE likely and LESS likely.
Why is this a problem?
I think both Linda and I are quite done with this at the moment-we're agreeing to disagree.
Why is this so particular with you?
The evidence is vp died pretty young, from something he claimed was caused by devil spirits, sometimes at least. It seems he tried to cover for the cancer ... he died mostly alone and alienated ... but he had a lot of years where the way world was his oyster ... I guess ...
As Linda pointed out, ocular melanoma is very rare ... and it is not known what causes cancer ...
I agree with all of this.
except here at GSC
But I disagree with the cheap-shot that just HAD to be indulged here.
to me the bright light from filming story seems possible, though given vp's character,the made up version seems to fit better. But this need to have to come up with evidence where none exists only dilutes the many valid arguments against the cult stuff.
Now I see states relevant points ... regardless of the real cause, we know he was self absorbed to the end. Her statements seem to indicate maybe he was "clinically delusional" .. or whatever the real term would be. Why else the need to show how he was sold out by his inner sanctum?
The moral of the story ... don't be a cult leader ...
I agree about 'Now I See's points, and about cult-leading being bad.
Well, this probably has nothing to do with anything. But as far as where the cancer began and why....I just remembered something.
I had a horse that within 6 months of symptoms of minor irritation appearing, had an eye removed. She never showed any symptoms otherwise, and was ok for about a year, and then swelling began below the affected area....and within a month, a fat, sleek, healthy pony withered away to skeletal nothing.
It appears that the problem began with the eye. It seems to me if the cancer had begun anywhere else and moved to the eye, she would have shown symptoms earlier.
I suppose VP`s cancer could have followed that route, having had nothing to do with the unhealthy, amoral lifestyle that he led.
All I DO know, is that it is a horrible way to die.
That this was used as a propaganda tool to shame, and cause grief to the innocent believers who were accused of breaking his heart.....that it was used as a tool for Geere to seize power and accuse the corpes of all being possessed.......and FINALLY and probably the most disappointing and saddening of all is ..... that even in the very end, Wierwille couldn`t show his weakness, refused to be honest with the people whom dearly loved and prayed for him daily...who had supported and believed fully in him....
He felt he had to play the invincible mog till the very end, not wanting people to know of his vulnerability, not wanting people to know that he had been mistaken in his doctrine concerning devil spirits and believing,, unable to trust people to love and pray for him :(
Flashburn is short lived. It will usually correct itself within 24 hours. There is also a long term effect from multiple flashburns.
Any time the metabolism of the lens inside the eye is disrupted, there is potential for cataract formation.
There is even a particular type of cataract that is called "welder's cataract" though you don't have to be a welder to develop it. Chronic exposure to IR (infra red light), of any origin, is the primary cause. This type of problem is not usually associated with cancers because UV is the villain in those scenarios.
Thanks Waysider ...
I did find this ... not sure how well researched it is ... but it doesn't seem too much of a stretch to think his repeated "flashburns" or whatever, did some longer term damage.
we've also included information on factors that might affect risk as well as factors where there is enough evidence to say there is almost certainly increased risk.
The possible risk factors for eye melanoma include
It seems VP had several factors against him. Add on smoking and alcohol ... he was a sitting duck.
WW, besides the part about the liver going against your theory, there IS some evidence that increased sun exposure is a factor. So there are factors against your theory, but you hold to it based on thin air.
What we know is we don't know the cause ... his repeated exposure to the extreme flashburn or whatever would be more likely to cause longer term damage ... maybe like getting sunburn after sunburn on many successive days ... wouldn't that be worse than an occasional burn? I'm not interested in making VP a hero, but it sure seems in the realm of possibility that the repated damage was a factor.
It was not a cheap shot, I am thinking back to another theory you held against evidence, evidence you did not even have but I did. Your troll theory held what must have been in emails I had ... so you proposed I was the troll's tool ... you tried to make the evidence fit the claim, even when you didn't have the evidence. Get it?
I can understand how long term exposure to UV can contribute to cancer but this is garden variety flashburn, for gosh sakes.
And, it wasn't long term. It was for a couple weeks or so. I don't doubt that he may have experienced discomfort from corneal burns or even that his exposure might have accelerated potential cataract development, but cancer from a couple weeks in a film studio?
Well we don't know how many treatments he had or when it started ... there are so many things we don't know, that we can only surmise that his claim to have gotten cancer as a martyr like act of the filming ... seems to line up with his claims that he stood in the gap. Everything about had to grandiose.
But since we are looking at real causes of a rare cancer, it seems there is some evidence that his 14 days of repeated flashburns (we don't even know that exactly) may have caused some deeper trauma. Apparently in certain rapid healing situations, errors are made in the healing ...
Trauma and injury:
some cancers seem to grow at the sites of injuries ranging from major trauma to the sites of bruises. This would be consistent with a cancer occurring from an error during the rapid-growth phase of healing. Some examples that have been examined include: head trauma, gallbladder cancer from gallstones, bone sarcomas (in old scars).
In this case the healing was interrupted on a daily basis with more trauma. To me that would be a perfect setup for a future cancer ... I'm just saying from the data, it would be a possibility, especially given the other factors (tobacco, alcohol, predisposition).
I couldn't remember--did he still have the eye patch on that afternoon?
I remember they got us all up in the middle of the night "to pray" after he died in '85. We all gathered in the Ambassador Room. That was different.
WB, I remember him looking bad for the last couple years of his life. I don't remember if he was wearing the eye patch that day. Too long ago for my old brain.
Yes, when he died, the word of his death went out through the "Way tree," with a request to pray for his family and for the ministry. I got the call in the middle of the night from my BC and had to call the local [nonstaff] people who came to my fellowship.
Rascal said (with my comments in bold):
I had a horse that within 6 months of symptoms of minor irritation appearing, had an eye removed. She never showed any symptoms otherwise, and was ok for about a year, and then swelling began below the affected area....and within a month, a fat, sleek, healthy pony withered away to skeletal nothing.
It appears that the problem began with the eye. It seems to me if the cancer had begun anywhere else and moved to the eye, she would have shown symptoms earlier.
That's a good point, Rascal.
I suppose VP`s cancer could have followed that route, having had nothing to do with the unhealthy, amoral lifestyle that he led.
Although I believe it did follow that route, of course his lifestyle certainly couldn't have helped anything.
All I DO know, is that it is a horrible way to die.
That this was used as a propaganda tool to shame, and cause grief to the innocent believers who were accused of breaking his heart.....that it was used as a tool for Geere to seize power and accuse the corpes of all being possessed.......and FINALLY and probably the most disappointing and saddening of all is ..... that even in the very end, Wierwille couldn`t show his weakness, refused to be honest with the people whom dearly loved and prayed for him daily...who had supported and believed fully in him....
I'm sure what we were told varied according to where we were and who our twi "leaders" were. I only heard the BOT accused of breaking his heart, and I don't recall hearing anyone say that all the Corps were possessed, but of course we were all to blame! I agree, that was a shame. Most people were already grief-stricken by VPW's death at the time, and feeling like we might be responsible for it in some way only magnified the hurt.
He felt he had to play the invincible mog till the very end, not wanting people to know of his vulnerability, not wanting people to know that he had been mistaken in his doctrine concerning devil spirits and believing,, unable to trust people to love and pray for him
I was at HQ and around VPW for the last 3 years of his life. Maybe he put on his "game face" for the ROA and other events after his eye was removed, but on a day-to-day basis, there was no longer anything in his bearing that would indicate he thought he was "the invincible MOG." I agree with you that he might well have been ashamed about his vulnerability and ashamed that his disease ran counter to everything he'd taught about the "law of believing."
I don't think it was a matter of his not trusting people to love and pray for him, though. As I said earlier, I think he wanted to die and be done with it. He looked like a beaten man, not just physically but emotionally. He was tired, he was dying, and he certainly seemed depressed. Of course I can't know what was in his heart and mind, but he sure looked like someone who had given up.
Generally speaking, there are four ways the body will heal itself from injury.
The first type is called primary healing. In this type of healing, a damaged cell is replaced with an exact duplicate. Superficial damage to the outer layer of the corner (there are 5 total) takes place in this manner. This is the kind of injury that contact lens wearers experience when they have abrasions. It is also the type that happens in response to flashburn. There is no scarring or evidence left in its wake.("Welders Cataracts" are not a form of healing per se, but merely a response to interrupted metabolic processes.)
The second type is called, of course, secondary healing. This is the kind you experience when you do something like cut your finger on a sharp piece of glass. The cells that replace the damaged ones are quite functional but are not duplicates of the originals. The result is what we call a scar.
The third type is called tertiary. Some people, such as myself, experience this as a result of surgical incision.
In this type of healing, not only does a scar form, but extra tissue, called keloid, develops at the site as well.
It's like a scar "on steroids". They itch like the dickens from time to time.
The fourth type, called quaternary, is the result of traumatized tissue being replaced with cancerous tissue.
There is no way of determining whether his cancer was related to the insults from bright lights without first having knowledge of the specific location of the cancer's origin. The eye is a mighty complex place. Stating that "the cancer was in the eye" is simply not specific enough to draw conclusions. It would seem unlikely though that the cancer was a response to trauma if, in fact, it originated in a region not associated with the original insults.
Or maybe the cancer - whether eye or liver - was not the cause of his death. Maybe it was just present and he died of something else entirely. The death certificate lists cancer as the cause of death, but maybe that was an easy answer to get the paper work done and move on to the next body since it was well known that VP had liver cancer.
I was around HQ and occasionally saw VP the last few months of his life. I thought there were a few things that didn't add up:
I heard, first hand, a member of VP's immediate family say she didn't believe he died of liver cancer, that according to his doctors, he should have lived at least another year or two. She was fairly adamant about it. I don't claim to be an oncologist, just stating what I heard and found very odd at the time considering events that occurred immediately before VPs death (i.e. Gartmore trip and VP's Gartmore friend's reports of VP'S energy level, etc)
Most people I have seen in the last days of their life before succumbing to cancer are very, very thin compared to their former selves. I have lost my mother, her sister and her brother to cancer. All were skeletal by the time they died. They had stopped eating all together a couple of weeks before they died. I saw VP several times within a few months of his death and the night before he left for Gartmore which would have been a couple of weeks before he died. He didn't appear to have lost much if any weight. In POP, VP's Gartmore friend mentions how he cooked for VP and that it was a very demanding task - that he was the only one in the land that was up to doing the job. If VP wasn't eating, how could it be such an overwhelming chore to cook for him?
A couple of weeks before he died, VP felt well enough to travel to Gartmore. I heard a Wierwille family member speak of phone calls from VP's Gartmore friend during VPs visit to Gartmore. That person said that VP was very active and was "running him (VP's Gartmore friend) ragged". Seems odd that a person on the verge of death from cancer would have enough energy and strength to take on international travel and "run ragged" a much younger man.
VP landing in Boston on his return from Gartmore was the beginning of his end. I heard from HQ staff and Wierwille family members that VP was too ill to fly from Boston to an airport near New Knoxville and that his motorcoach had to be sent from HQ to Boston to pick him up and bring him back. He never got off his motorcoach from what I heard. They just parked it in the "courtyard" by the Wierwille home and the death vigil began. People went in to look at him or watch him die. From what I recall, it was several days or a week or more of drama... waiting for the MOG to die.
Maybe he did die of cancer, maybe not. I don't know, but his death "from cancer" was very, very different from the cancer deaths of family members and others I have seen or read about. Combining those inconsistencies with a visit to a man (who cleared out the kitchen of all the incompetent staff so he alone could prepare food fit for the "king") who may have believed he had something to gain from VP's death seems to make the death from cancer conclusion less matter of fact. A guy has liver cancer, his liver is not at the top of its game for filtering out poisons. This other guy wants to be the only one that cooks for him the last week or so of his life. A year later, this same other guy does other things that look like the actions of a guy that wants to take over an organization.
I am not accusing anyone of anything, just continuing to wonder... in writing... what I have wondered about for the last 20 + years.
Didn't mean to derail...just throwing out some other happenings from the spring of '85 that weren't previously mentioned. Carry on with the eye vs. liver discussion.
Not certain that it is a red herring, but am far from certain that it is not. I remember hearing John Lynn's description of VP's Gartmore friend's behavior 20 years ago and thought "what a frightening man". Ralph D's described Gartmore Man's behavior during POP era on the radio interview posted somewhere on this site. His description was very similar to JAL's. In my opinion, it makes the whole cancer cause of death less of a forgone conclusion than it would have been. Things sometimes aren't as clearcut as we want them to be or as some may have wanted them to appear.
You do wonder about those death certificates at times ... what really happened at the very end? I have no problem with someone choosing an alternative to a slow death by cancer. It seems certainly the cancer was there ... maybe not the final cause.
waysider said
It would seem unlikely though that the cancer was a response to trauma if, in fact, it originated in a region not associated with the original insults.
WW, besides the part about the liver going against your theory, there IS some evidence that increased sun exposure is a factor.
Technically, it does not ADVANCE my theory, but it doesn't contradict it.
If it went the other way, I would have an unbroken chain of evidence. Considering
I'm doing this from my chair, decades later, with no expert witnesses, I think I
got pretty far.
And a lot of things are "a factor", but increased sun exposure has not been PROVEN
in this "case"-it's being SUPPOSED, SPECULATED. And by "increased", I mean
"more than the average similar person who WASN'T getting cancer."
Lacking medical records or professional surveys of the locals, we can only
SUPPOSE or SPECULATE as to whether there WAS or WASN'T "increased"
sun exposure. As such, I didn't bring it up. Pure speculation with nothing to
hang it on doesn't get very far.
So there are factors against your theory, but you hold to it based on thin air.
I'd hardly call it "thin air." You seemed to have skipped all the professional
information which I linked to and quoted, which went neatly in line with what
most of us knew about smoking and drinking- they're really bad.
Smoking damages all organs, and causes all sorts of cancers.
Drinking damages lots of organs, including the liver, and renders one's immune
system more vulnerable to cancer.
The only thing I'm missing is a professional statement:
"this specific cancer has been known to be caused completely by chronic smoking."
Since ocular cancer is rare, I don't expect there's a definitive statement of any
kind on it. (Linda pointed that out, too.)
That's hardly "thin air."
And I'm disappointed you interpreted it so.
What we know is we don't know the cause ... his repeated exposure to the extreme flashburn or whatever would be more likely to cause longer term damage ... maybe like getting sunburn after sunburn on many successive days ... wouldn't that be worse than an occasional burn? I'm not interested in making VP a hero, but it sure seems in the realm of possibility that the repated damage was a factor.
Is it possible that he succeeded in giving himself "flashburn" for the 14 days of shooting?
Since he was able to open his eyes each day of shooting, I'd say he had less of an
exposure than someone suffering from "snow-blindness." A La Prochaine posted about
that once, and said you can't open your eyes in light for a while after that, since
your eyes are sensitized. Perhaps if she's posting lately, she can chime in again.
(Then again, I can see what I can find on "snow blindness".)
Ok, if I understand correctly, we're currently off the track of "it was UV lights that gave him cancer"
and now on "it was very strong conventional lights over 14 days that gave him cancer".
Is there any evidence that exposure to bright lights over long periods of time ever leads to
cancer? Please link to anything you can find on the subject-it would be news to me so far.
What I've been able to find is that people who work with bright lights for months at a time
for hours at a time (actors in theaters, crew in theaters) haven't come up as getting ocular
cancer. Welding tools are much BRIGHTER, and much CLOSER than any conventional light,
and THOSE are risks-that's been indicated by professionals.
So far, there's no actual "evidence" saying "the lights did it",
and no actual "evidence" saying "the smoking and drinking did it."
Professionals seem to agree the smoking MIGHT do it-but haven't actually addressed
the question "does smoking cause ocular cancer?"
Whether or not professionals might say "bright lights MIGHT cause cancer",
we haven't seen yet. So far, that's mostly been ideas on posts here.
So, I'm not posting against "evidence" because there hasn't BEEN any-
but what I've found so far can make a decent "case."
I think that's REASONABLE-proceed from the general to the specific
by what is known scientifically.
It was not a cheap shot, I am thinking back to another theory you held against evidence, evidence you did not even have but I did. Your troll theory held what must have been in emails I had ... so you proposed I was the troll's tool ... you tried to make the evidence fit the claim, even when you didn't have the evidence. Get it?
Yes. I get that-to this day-we fundamentally disagree on something from months ago,
and I thought we'd gone on with our lives like adults,
but instead you're going to hold onto it forever and attack my posts in discussions
for an indefinite period of time over it.
It was a MUCH cheaper shot than I originally thought.
You do wonder about those death certificates at times ... what really happened at the very end? I have no problem with someone choosing an alternative to a slow death by cancer. It seems certainly the cancer was there ... maybe not the final cause.
waysider said
It would seem unlikely though that the cancer was a response to trauma if, in fact, it originated in a region not associated with the original insults.
But do we know those details?
As to what the Dr who signed the death certificate knew, I will say this much:
The last time I posted, wondering about actions that particular Dr might have
taken concerning vpw's final weeks, one of the posters-who considered him a
friend or whatever- went after me rather vociferously, saying that he was
far above the slightest HINT of inappropriate behavior.
I don't know that for certain for myself, nor do I know for sure that any further
speculation in that department will get another set of posts championing the
reputation of that Dr, but I thought I'd mention that in case anyone would want
Or maybe the cancer - whether eye or liver - was not the cause of his death. Maybe it was just present and he died of something else entirely. The death certificate lists cancer as the cause of death, but maybe that was an easy answer to get the paper work done and move on to the next body since it was well known that VP had liver cancer.
I was around HQ and occasionally saw VP the last few months of his life. I thought there were a few things that didn't add up:
I heard, first hand, a member of VP's immediate family say she didn't believe he died of liver cancer, that according to his doctors, he should have lived at least another year or two. She was fairly adamant about it. I don't claim to be an oncologist, just stating what I heard and found very odd at the time considering events that occurred immediately before VPs death (i.e. Gartmore trip and VP's Gartmore friend's reports of VP'S energy level, etc)
Most people I have seen in the last days of their life before succumbing to cancer are very, very thin compared to their former selves. I have lost my mother, her sister and her brother to cancer. All were skeletal by the time they died. They had stopped eating all together a couple of weeks before they died. I saw VP several times within a few months of his death and the night before he left for Gartmore which would have been a couple of weeks before he died. He didn't appear to have lost much if any weight. In POP, VP's Gartmore friend mentions how he cooked for VP and that it was a very demanding task - that he was the only one in the land that was up to doing the job. If VP wasn't eating, how could it be such an overwhelming chore to cook for him?
A couple of weeks before he died, VP felt well enough to travel to Gartmore. I heard a Wierwille family member speak of phone calls from VP's Gartmore friend during VPs visit to Gartmore. That person said that VP was very active and was "running him (VP's Gartmore friend) ragged". Seems odd that a person on the verge of death from cancer would have enough energy and strength to take on international travel and "run ragged" a much younger man.
VP landing in Boston on his return from Gartmore was the beginning of his end. I heard from HQ staff and Wierwille family members that VP was too ill to fly from Boston to an airport near New Knoxville and that his motorcoach had to be sent from HQ to Boston to pick him up and bring him back. He never got off his motorcoach from what I heard. They just parked it in the "courtyard" by the Wierwille home and the death vigil began. People went in to look at him or watch him die. From what I recall, it was several days or a week or more of drama... waiting for the MOG to die.
Maybe he did die of cancer, maybe not. I don't know, but his death "from cancer" was very, very different from the cancer deaths of family members and others I have seen or read about. Combining those inconsistencies with a visit to a man (who cleared out the kitchen of all the incompetent staff so he alone could prepare food fit for the "king") who may have believed he had something to gain from VP's death seems to make the death from cancer conclusion less matter of fact. A guy has liver cancer, his liver is not at the top of its game for filtering out poisons. This other guy wants to be the only one that cooks for him the last week or so of his life. A year later, this same other guy does other things that look like the actions of a guy that wants to take over an organization.
I am not accusing anyone of anything, just continuing to wonder... in writing... what I have wondered about for the last 20 + years.
Didn't mean to derail...just throwing out some other happenings from the spring of '85 that weren't previously mentioned. Carry on with the eye vs. liver discussion.
This is very interesting, and brings up whole new avenues we haven't even considered.
There's a few things I CAN say to this.
A) A poster here said they'd seen vpw not long before the end, and was offended that they
hadn't even bothered to make sure he had decently-fitting clothes. He'd lost a lot of
weight in recent months, so his clothes no longer fit him.
I don't know HOW thin MOST cancer patients get before the end, but he DID lose some weight.
Perhaps it was a tiny amount by comparison to most-I wouldn't know.
B) The business about cooking for vpw being such an overwhelming chore had nothing to do
with vpw being a demanding diner. (Very little to do with it, anyway.) The thrust of that
whole paper was that there wasn't anyone around who was in any way capable of doing
ANYTHING right-so cg had to do it himself or it didn't get done. Therefore, he was the
"only" one who could cook for vpw.
On the other hand, cg had catered to vpw's whims before when he was vpw's driver,
so maybe a lot of it really WAS "he knew exactly which parts of his buttocks that vpw
wanted smooched and in which order" more than actually cooking a meal.
As to the rest, I'm interested in hearing what our medical posters have to say on
the subject, and possibly those who observrd him during this timeframe.
My oh my, haven't we moved on a long way from a fish hook...
Now there seems to be speculation that he was poisoned and the doctor certifying the death faked the cause of death.
And the next conspiracy theory? Hah, one of the Kennedy enemies did it !
This thread has brought some interesting ideas to light, however.
Frankly, CG was such an egotistical ** (insert own expletive), and nothing done by anyone was ever good enough for him, so of course he would have to do the cooking, caring and other a$$-wiping. That was his "service," doncha know, like JC washing the feet of the disciples, except that CG probably never saw it in those terms, only in terms of any kudos that might accrue to him.
But the topic of CG's behavior has been discussed on a number of other threads, and this is not the place for it.
People can die of cancer before they look completely emaciated, fluid retention is a part of some cancer conditions, the person is actually bloated from it. Â Most I've known of have died pretty emaciated though. Â
Morphine is a critical component in hospice dealing with terminal cancer. Â The amount of pain some cancers produce is unbearable for the patient and for the family and loved ones to witness. Â And if the person cannot eat or swallow the end is not pretty. Â With some cancers it would be very easy for the patient to overdose on morphene.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
11
10
13
11
Popular Days
Aug 16
26
Aug 17
15
Aug 22
12
Aug 18
12
Top Posters In This Topic
Linda Z 11 posts
rhino 10 posts
Twinky 13 posts
waysider 11 posts
Popular Days
Aug 16 2008
26 posts
Aug 17 2008
15 posts
Aug 22 2008
12 posts
Aug 18 2008
12 posts
Popular Posts
dabobbada
I remember a similiar thread from back in the early 2000's. I felt compelled to add a new medical report that said that every adult human being generates an average of 250,000 new cancer cells a day t
waysider
Yes, you are.
waysider
I've known a few welders in my time.
I've even done a bit of welding and cutting myself, though I've probably done much more cutting than welding.
Sometimes when you are welding, your mask doesn't drop into place quite quickly enough.
When you are cutting, often times you forgo the mask altogether, especially if you happen to wear glasses that would deflect spatter.
What can happens in these situations is that you get something called "flashburn".
You don't feel it right away. In fact, you usually don't feel it until the day is over and you are home from work.
But, when it kicks in, it is very painful. A simple trick an old welder taught me is to cut slices of raw potatoes and put them on your closed eyelids. There is nothing magical in raw potatoes. They simply seem to hold a cool temperature which soothes the pain in the eyes. I think this is much like the ice pack accounts that have been stated.
Long story short, this is the result of over exposure to infra-red light. (Think "hot" when you think of infra-red.)
Flashburn is short lived. It will usually correct itself within 24 hours. There is also a long term effect from multiple flashburns.
Any time the metabolism of the lens inside the eye is disrupted, there is potential for cataract formation.
There is even a particular type of cataract that is called "welder's cataract" though you don't have to be a welder to develop it. Chronic exposure to IR (infra red light), of any origin, is the primary cause. This type of problem is not usually associated with cancers because UV is the villain in those scenarios.
Could VPW have gotten "flashburn" from improper use of studio lights?
I think he could have. But would this translate into a causitive factor for his ocular melanoma?
It's not very likely based on current information.
I don't have any problem accepting that he experienced flashburn from the filming process.
I find it to be a real stretch, though, to link the filming to his malady.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waterbuffalo
Linda, he looked pretty bad that day, didn't he?
I couldn't remember--did he still have the eye patch on that afternoon?
I remember they got us all up in the middle of the night "to pray" after he died in '85. We all gathered in the Ambassador Room. That was different.
Don't remember that he did.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
this is the first place i ever heard the fish hook story
twink, you have such a way with words, you're great
----
uhm i have not done any research nor have i read much of the research carefully presented here
but i wanted to add my own personal experience, since that's all that matters --
the UV rays -- i think when my dermatologist wanted to treat me for a skin problem -- he said something about how he usually recommends the patient goes under those lights? but he didn't want me to do that because of my fair skin (i almost typed my "scare fin")
so thank you for letting me contribute
Link to comment
Share on other sites
RumRunner
Well stated
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Everything I read indicates that cancer in the liver and other places tends to go TO the liver FROM the other
places, since the liver is part of the body's filtration system. It would be neater for my theory if it wasn't so, but
I'm hardly going to cook the data to match my preferences. I had enough of that in twi for a lifetime.]
It's sad because you can't PROVE a negative, which means a lot of ideas stay on the table becausethere's no "smoking gun" that proves they're 100% impossible.
If we had a "smoking gun" either way, the discussion would essentially be over-
I mentioned one strong possibility right there-farmers all getting eye cancer.
That would help settle the issue-even if it settled it where I didn't think it's going.
Actually, I have an OPINION.
I was unable to find a strong case for the "he was staring into lights that gave him cancer over 14 days that
came up a decade later", and I wasn't able to find an unassailable case for "his smoking and drinking gave
him cancer and killed him." I was able to find a STRONGER case for the latter- which is why my OPINION
is for the LATTER and not the FORMER. The latter proceeds from what we know
(he smoked and drank a LOT for DECADES) while the former proceeds from what we speculate
(the specific lamps used for 14 days were exactly the type that give cancer).
If I found either result, I would go with the evidence.
Please don't ignore all the scientific quotes simply because I formed an opinion that matches them....
And I didn't ask for "anecdotal evidence", I asked for "studies" to be produced.
If someone had heard something that POINTED to a study, that would help find a completed study.
Yet he claimed to have it, spread that story, and someone's claimed the evidence supports it.I don't think the evidence supports it.
Why pretend there's NO scientific information, and that no conclusions can be drawn as to likelihood of causes?
Nobody's said "this is absolutely 100% guaranteed to be exactly what happened",
but conclusions can be drawn as to what is MORE likely and LESS likely.
Why is this a problem?
I think both Linda and I are quite done with this at the moment-we're agreeing to disagree.
Why is this so particular with you?
I agree with all of this.But I disagree with the cheap-shot that just HAD to be indulged here.
I agree about 'Now I See's points, and about cult-leading being bad.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rascal
Well, this probably has nothing to do with anything. But as far as where the cancer began and why....I just remembered something.
I had a horse that within 6 months of symptoms of minor irritation appearing, had an eye removed. She never showed any symptoms otherwise, and was ok for about a year, and then swelling began below the affected area....and within a month, a fat, sleek, healthy pony withered away to skeletal nothing.
It appears that the problem began with the eye. It seems to me if the cancer had begun anywhere else and moved to the eye, she would have shown symptoms earlier.
I suppose VP`s cancer could have followed that route, having had nothing to do with the unhealthy, amoral lifestyle that he led.
All I DO know, is that it is a horrible way to die.
That this was used as a propaganda tool to shame, and cause grief to the innocent believers who were accused of breaking his heart.....that it was used as a tool for Geere to seize power and accuse the corpes of all being possessed.......and FINALLY and probably the most disappointing and saddening of all is ..... that even in the very end, Wierwille couldn`t show his weakness, refused to be honest with the people whom dearly loved and prayed for him daily...who had supported and believed fully in him....
He felt he had to play the invincible mog till the very end, not wanting people to know of his vulnerability, not wanting people to know that he had been mistaken in his doctrine concerning devil spirits and believing,, unable to trust people to love and pray for him :(
Edited by rascalLink to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Thanks Waysider ...
I did find this ... not sure how well researched it is ... but it doesn't seem too much of a stretch to think his repeated "flashburns" or whatever, did some longer term damage.
It seems VP had several factors against him. Add on smoking and alcohol ... he was a sitting duck.
WW, besides the part about the liver going against your theory, there IS some evidence that increased sun exposure is a factor. So there are factors against your theory, but you hold to it based on thin air.
What we know is we don't know the cause ... his repeated exposure to the extreme flashburn or whatever would be more likely to cause longer term damage ... maybe like getting sunburn after sunburn on many successive days ... wouldn't that be worse than an occasional burn? I'm not interested in making VP a hero, but it sure seems in the realm of possibility that the repated damage was a factor.
It was not a cheap shot, I am thinking back to another theory you held against evidence, evidence you did not even have but I did. Your troll theory held what must have been in emails I had ... so you proposed I was the troll's tool ... you tried to make the evidence fit the claim, even when you didn't have the evidence. Get it?
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
I can understand how long term exposure to UV can contribute to cancer but this is garden variety flashburn, for gosh sakes.
And, it wasn't long term. It was for a couple weeks or so. I don't doubt that he may have experienced discomfort from corneal burns or even that his exposure might have accelerated potential cataract development, but cancer from a couple weeks in a film studio?
I ain't buying it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Well we don't know how many treatments he had or when it started ... there are so many things we don't know, that we can only surmise that his claim to have gotten cancer as a martyr like act of the filming ... seems to line up with his claims that he stood in the gap. Everything about had to grandiose.
But since we are looking at real causes of a rare cancer, it seems there is some evidence that his 14 days of repeated flashburns (we don't even know that exactly) may have caused some deeper trauma. Apparently in certain rapid healing situations, errors are made in the healing ...
In this case the healing was interrupted on a daily basis with more trauma. To me that would be a perfect setup for a future cancer ... I'm just saying from the data, it would be a possibility, especially given the other factors (tobacco, alcohol, predisposition).
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ham
plus an aversion to garlic, henbane, and crosses. The vicster did have an aversion to crosses, did he not?
Coincidence maybe..
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Linda Z
WB said:
WB, I remember him looking bad for the last couple years of his life. I don't remember if he was wearing the eye patch that day. Too long ago for my old brain.Yes, when he died, the word of his death went out through the "Way tree," with a request to pray for his family and for the ministry. I got the call in the middle of the night from my BC and had to call the local [nonstaff] people who came to my fellowship.
Rascal said (with my comments in bold):
I was at HQ and around VPW for the last 3 years of his life. Maybe he put on his "game face" for the ROA and other events after his eye was removed, but on a day-to-day basis, there was no longer anything in his bearing that would indicate he thought he was "the invincible MOG." I agree with you that he might well have been ashamed about his vulnerability and ashamed that his disease ran counter to everything he'd taught about the "law of believing."
I don't think it was a matter of his not trusting people to love and pray for him, though. As I said earlier, I think he wanted to die and be done with it. He looked like a beaten man, not just physically but emotionally. He was tired, he was dying, and he certainly seemed depressed. Of course I can't know what was in his heart and mind, but he sure looked like someone who had given up.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Generally speaking, there are four ways the body will heal itself from injury.
The first type is called primary healing. In this type of healing, a damaged cell is replaced with an exact duplicate. Superficial damage to the outer layer of the corner (there are 5 total) takes place in this manner. This is the kind of injury that contact lens wearers experience when they have abrasions. It is also the type that happens in response to flashburn. There is no scarring or evidence left in its wake.("Welders Cataracts" are not a form of healing per se, but merely a response to interrupted metabolic processes.)
The second type is called, of course, secondary healing. This is the kind you experience when you do something like cut your finger on a sharp piece of glass. The cells that replace the damaged ones are quite functional but are not duplicates of the originals. The result is what we call a scar.
The third type is called tertiary. Some people, such as myself, experience this as a result of surgical incision.
In this type of healing, not only does a scar form, but extra tissue, called keloid, develops at the site as well.
It's like a scar "on steroids". They itch like the dickens from time to time.
The fourth type, called quaternary, is the result of traumatized tissue being replaced with cancerous tissue.
There is no way of determining whether his cancer was related to the insults from bright lights without first having knowledge of the specific location of the cancer's origin. The eye is a mighty complex place. Stating that "the cancer was in the eye" is simply not specific enough to draw conclusions. It would seem unlikely though that the cancer was a response to trauma if, in fact, it originated in a region not associated with the original insults.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scout Finch02
Or maybe the cancer - whether eye or liver - was not the cause of his death. Maybe it was just present and he died of something else entirely. The death certificate lists cancer as the cause of death, but maybe that was an easy answer to get the paper work done and move on to the next body since it was well known that VP had liver cancer.
I was around HQ and occasionally saw VP the last few months of his life. I thought there were a few things that didn't add up:
I heard, first hand, a member of VP's immediate family say she didn't believe he died of liver cancer, that according to his doctors, he should have lived at least another year or two. She was fairly adamant about it. I don't claim to be an oncologist, just stating what I heard and found very odd at the time considering events that occurred immediately before VPs death (i.e. Gartmore trip and VP's Gartmore friend's reports of VP'S energy level, etc)
Most people I have seen in the last days of their life before succumbing to cancer are very, very thin compared to their former selves. I have lost my mother, her sister and her brother to cancer. All were skeletal by the time they died. They had stopped eating all together a couple of weeks before they died. I saw VP several times within a few months of his death and the night before he left for Gartmore which would have been a couple of weeks before he died. He didn't appear to have lost much if any weight. In POP, VP's Gartmore friend mentions how he cooked for VP and that it was a very demanding task - that he was the only one in the land that was up to doing the job. If VP wasn't eating, how could it be such an overwhelming chore to cook for him?
A couple of weeks before he died, VP felt well enough to travel to Gartmore. I heard a Wierwille family member speak of phone calls from VP's Gartmore friend during VPs visit to Gartmore. That person said that VP was very active and was "running him (VP's Gartmore friend) ragged". Seems odd that a person on the verge of death from cancer would have enough energy and strength to take on international travel and "run ragged" a much younger man.
VP landing in Boston on his return from Gartmore was the beginning of his end. I heard from HQ staff and Wierwille family members that VP was too ill to fly from Boston to an airport near New Knoxville and that his motorcoach had to be sent from HQ to Boston to pick him up and bring him back. He never got off his motorcoach from what I heard. They just parked it in the "courtyard" by the Wierwille home and the death vigil began. People went in to look at him or watch him die. From what I recall, it was several days or a week or more of drama... waiting for the MOG to die.
Maybe he did die of cancer, maybe not. I don't know, but his death "from cancer" was very, very different from the cancer deaths of family members and others I have seen or read about. Combining those inconsistencies with a visit to a man (who cleared out the kitchen of all the incompetent staff so he alone could prepare food fit for the "king") who may have believed he had something to gain from VP's death seems to make the death from cancer conclusion less matter of fact. A guy has liver cancer, his liver is not at the top of its game for filtering out poisons. This other guy wants to be the only one that cooks for him the last week or so of his life. A year later, this same other guy does other things that look like the actions of a guy that wants to take over an organization.
I am not accusing anyone of anything, just continuing to wonder... in writing... what I have wondered about for the last 20 + years.
Didn't mean to derail...just throwing out some other happenings from the spring of '85 that weren't previously mentioned. Carry on with the eye vs. liver discussion.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
So then, the whole eye and liver thing could possibly be a red herring?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scout Finch02
Not certain that it is a red herring, but am far from certain that it is not. I remember hearing John Lynn's description of VP's Gartmore friend's behavior 20 years ago and thought "what a frightening man". Ralph D's described Gartmore Man's behavior during POP era on the radio interview posted somewhere on this site. His description was very similar to JAL's. In my opinion, it makes the whole cancer cause of death less of a forgone conclusion than it would have been. Things sometimes aren't as clearcut as we want them to be or as some may have wanted them to appear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Or was geeer or someone his Dr. Kervorkian ... ?
You do wonder about those death certificates at times ... what really happened at the very end? I have no problem with someone choosing an alternative to a slow death by cancer. It seems certainly the cancer was there ... maybe not the final cause.
waysider said
But do we know those details?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
waysider
Those are the types of things that would have been recorded in the patient's "jacket" but guarded by an oath of confidentiality.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
excathedra
did that gutmoregit poison him !!!!!!!!!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
Technically, it does not ADVANCE my theory, but it doesn't contradict it.
If it went the other way, I would have an unbroken chain of evidence. Considering
I'm doing this from my chair, decades later, with no expert witnesses, I think I
got pretty far.
And a lot of things are "a factor", but increased sun exposure has not been PROVEN
in this "case"-it's being SUPPOSED, SPECULATED. And by "increased", I mean
"more than the average similar person who WASN'T getting cancer."
Lacking medical records or professional surveys of the locals, we can only
SUPPOSE or SPECULATE as to whether there WAS or WASN'T "increased"
sun exposure. As such, I didn't bring it up. Pure speculation with nothing to
hang it on doesn't get very far.
I'd hardly call it "thin air." You seemed to have skipped all the professionalinformation which I linked to and quoted, which went neatly in line with what
most of us knew about smoking and drinking- they're really bad.
Smoking damages all organs, and causes all sorts of cancers.
Drinking damages lots of organs, including the liver, and renders one's immune
system more vulnerable to cancer.
The only thing I'm missing is a professional statement:
"this specific cancer has been known to be caused completely by chronic smoking."
Since ocular cancer is rare, I don't expect there's a definitive statement of any
kind on it. (Linda pointed that out, too.)
That's hardly "thin air."
And I'm disappointed you interpreted it so.
Is it possible that he succeeded in giving himself "flashburn" for the 14 days of shooting?
Since he was able to open his eyes each day of shooting, I'd say he had less of an
exposure than someone suffering from "snow-blindness." A La Prochaine posted about
that once, and said you can't open your eyes in light for a while after that, since
your eyes are sensitized. Perhaps if she's posting lately, she can chime in again.
(Then again, I can see what I can find on "snow blindness".)
Ok, if I understand correctly, we're currently off the track of "it was UV lights that gave him cancer"
and now on "it was very strong conventional lights over 14 days that gave him cancer".
Is there any evidence that exposure to bright lights over long periods of time ever leads to
cancer? Please link to anything you can find on the subject-it would be news to me so far.
What I've been able to find is that people who work with bright lights for months at a time
for hours at a time (actors in theaters, crew in theaters) haven't come up as getting ocular
cancer. Welding tools are much BRIGHTER, and much CLOSER than any conventional light,
and THOSE are risks-that's been indicated by professionals.
So far, there's no actual "evidence" saying "the lights did it",
and no actual "evidence" saying "the smoking and drinking did it."
Professionals seem to agree the smoking MIGHT do it-but haven't actually addressed
the question "does smoking cause ocular cancer?"
Whether or not professionals might say "bright lights MIGHT cause cancer",
we haven't seen yet. So far, that's mostly been ideas on posts here.
So, I'm not posting against "evidence" because there hasn't BEEN any-
but what I've found so far can make a decent "case."
I think that's REASONABLE-proceed from the general to the specific
by what is known scientifically.
Yes. I get that-to this day-we fundamentally disagree on something from months ago,
and I thought we'd gone on with our lives like adults,
but instead you're going to hold onto it forever and attack my posts in discussions
for an indefinite period of time over it.
It was a MUCH cheaper shot than I originally thought.
I REALLY thought better of you than this.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
As to what the Dr who signed the death certificate knew, I will say this much:
The last time I posted, wondering about actions that particular Dr might have
taken concerning vpw's final weeks, one of the posters-who considered him a
friend or whatever- went after me rather vociferously, saying that he was
far above the slightest HINT of inappropriate behavior.
I don't know that for certain for myself, nor do I know for sure that any further
speculation in that department will get another set of posts championing the
reputation of that Dr, but I thought I'd mention that in case anyone would want
to know.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WordWolf
This is very interesting, and brings up whole new avenues we haven't even considered.
There's a few things I CAN say to this.
A) A poster here said they'd seen vpw not long before the end, and was offended that they
hadn't even bothered to make sure he had decently-fitting clothes. He'd lost a lot of
weight in recent months, so his clothes no longer fit him.
I don't know HOW thin MOST cancer patients get before the end, but he DID lose some weight.
Perhaps it was a tiny amount by comparison to most-I wouldn't know.
B) The business about cooking for vpw being such an overwhelming chore had nothing to do
with vpw being a demanding diner. (Very little to do with it, anyway.) The thrust of that
whole paper was that there wasn't anyone around who was in any way capable of doing
ANYTHING right-so cg had to do it himself or it didn't get done. Therefore, he was the
"only" one who could cook for vpw.
On the other hand, cg had catered to vpw's whims before when he was vpw's driver,
so maybe a lot of it really WAS "he knew exactly which parts of his buttocks that vpw
wanted smooched and in which order" more than actually cooking a meal.
As to the rest, I'm interested in hearing what our medical posters have to say on
the subject, and possibly those who observrd him during this timeframe.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
WhiteDove
Mark this day in history someone actually wants proof ,hard facts not someones word. Interesting!!!!!
Edited by WhiteDoveLink to comment
Share on other sites
Twinky
My oh my, haven't we moved on a long way from a fish hook...
Now there seems to be speculation that he was poisoned and the doctor certifying the death faked the cause of death.
And the next conspiracy theory? Hah, one of the Kennedy enemies did it !
This thread has brought some interesting ideas to light, however.
Frankly, CG was such an egotistical ** (insert own expletive), and nothing done by anyone was ever good enough for him, so of course he would have to do the cooking, caring and other a$$-wiping. That was his "service," doncha know, like JC washing the feet of the disciples, except that CG probably never saw it in those terms, only in terms of any kudos that might accrue to him.
But the topic of CG's behavior has been discussed on a number of other threads, and this is not the place for it.
Now back to the fish hook. Perhaps.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
now I see
People can die of cancer before they look completely emaciated, fluid retention is a part of some cancer conditions, the person is actually bloated from it. Â Most I've known of have died pretty emaciated though. Â
Morphine is a critical component in hospice dealing with terminal cancer. Â The amount of pain some cancers produce is unbearable for the patient and for the family and loved ones to witness. Â And if the person cannot eat or swallow the end is not pretty. Â With some cancers it would be very easy for the patient to overdose on morphene.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.