16 August 2008
A Follow up on Andrew McKellar
Originally Published in August 2008
Do you ever get that ‘dirty’ feeling when you see something? I don’t mean dirty as in naughty, I’m talking about dirty as in ‘unclean’ and ‘violated
Anyway, on another note, I thought I would check in on Andrew McKellar…. the ‘healer’. "andrewmckellar.com"
If you remember I had had a look at McKellar some time ago following his complete disregard of The Cancer Act 1939 by claiming he can cure cancer.. Not only did he claim to cure cancer but he also had a ‘Testimonial’ from one of his ‘patients’ on his site whom he claimed to have cured. I found, with a little research, that this particular patient had actually died shortly after, of cancer. Yet McKellar still used this gentlemans ‘testimonial’ to peddle his services.
A complaint was made to Trading Standards about his website and his claims to cure cancer.
The testimonial from the dead man has since been removed, but the smell of disgust, and death, lingers on.
There is a testimonial, or ’tribute’ as McKellar likes to call them, from a rather uniquely named ‘Gale Angel’ who was diagnosed with a tumour on her lung ‘the size of a walnut’. She tells us:
“Four weeks after seeing Andrew, I had another scan and the tumour had gone. The Specialists were astounded”
The name ‘Gale Angel’ is not a common one, I did a search for her. What I found was a heartbreaking site dedicated to a Gale Angel, who sadly died of cancer. Coincidence? Too much of one for my liking.
McKellar’s website Homepage is now taken up with a large sign saying:
Perhaps it’s an apology to the family of Mr Phil Hurst, the man who died of cancer and whose testimonial McKellar was using to sell his ‘cancer cures’? You think? No, me neither.
The ‘important notice' is a pathetic attempt to justify his ‘work’. It reads as follows:
There’s no ‘trying’ involved McKellar, we DO expose it. Ridiculing it is the easy part.
Firstly, why are you talking about yourself in the third person? Secondly I’m not sure which definition of ‘unfounded’ you’re using. I’ve always understood ‘unfounded’ to mean without evidence and groundless. I previously accused you in my other article of contravening The Cancer Act 1939:
(1) No person shall take any part in the publication of any advertisement—
(a) containing an offer to treat any person for cancer, or to prescribe any remedy therefor, or to give any advice in connection with the treatment thereof;
You and your website did EXACTLY that. Groundless? Without evidence? I think not.
I also accused you of using a ‘Tribute’ from a Mr Phil Hurst praising you for curing his cancer. A man who later died from cancer. Tributes and Testimonials are used as a method of advertising your ‘services’ and ‘abilities’. I said you made ‘disgusting claims’. I stand by that remark, using the comments from a man who of cancer to your cure for cancer is nothing less than disgusting. I could think of much, much stronger words to convey my feelings about it.
‘Unfounded accusations’? Really McKellar? Really?
Yes, it has been attacked, by myself. As for ‘no good reason’, the sheer fact that you contravened The Cancer Act is enough for me, not to mention your dead clients testimonies.
You have absolutely NO idea how much knowledge, experience or understanding I have of it. But what if ‘Joe Public’ understands The Cancer Act and sees that you have broken it? Are you saying that you haven’t broken it if that person has no ‘knowledge of Spiritual Healing’?
If you break a law, you break a law, regardless of anyone’s understanding of ‘Healing’.
Should I send my friends on a Spiritual Healers Course so they can understand your use of a dead clients testimonial for your own financial gain, or do you think they could just possibly scrape by using common sense?
Faceless attention seeking people? That’s a bit of an oxymoron isn’t it? If I was seeking attention, surely I would not be ‘faceless’? You don’t really think I’m a Meercat do you? No, surely not...
Vacuous nonsense? As I have already stated, my accusations were factual.
I have no interest in making a name for myself, hence writing under the name ‘Meercat’. What I DO have an interest in is people making a financial gain by claiming to cure cancer.
Which is it? Total ignorance or very little understanding? I can’t speak for anyone else but my research into Spiritual Healing has been pretty in-depth, and after that research I STILL think that claiming to cure cancer by ‘laying on of hands’ is bulls*it.
Perhaps if I spent more time researching the Tooth Fairy I may start to believe in that again? I’m now concerned that I may have shrugged off Father Christmas a little too casually. Perhaps if I just researched the whole ‘elves and toys’ thing a little deeper…..
Studying fiction does not turn it into fact.
Well, I suppose even 000.1 is a percentage if you want to look at it that way…
A classic ‘Woo’ appeal to authority argument. Aside from failing to mention who these ‘Doctors, Specialists and Scientists are, it makes little difference as to what trade they belong to. Is there a difference between a brick layer and a Doctor believing in something? What if you have a practising Muslim Doctor and a practising Christian Doctor? Whose choice of Fairy Tale is the right one, after all, they’re both Doctors….
ANYONE can be gullible or credulous.
There you go again talking about yourself in the third person. You realise that talking like that is number one in the WTN News ‘ten signs you’re taking yourself too seriously’ list don’t you?
You were caught red-handed McKellar, you claim, against the law, to cure cancer, you used a dead mans testimony to make yourself money. This has nothing to do with being open or closed minded, just facts, but being a ‘healer’ I’m sure ‘facts’ don’t matter too much to you.
It’s a poor state of affairs if your only argument against people who don’t believe the woo that you’re peddling to the gullible, credulous and desperate, is that they are ’closed minded’.
Genius, absolute Genius. Obviously University educated….
A fantastic bit of mindless rambling, you’ve really opened my eyes to the whole life/death issue. I seem to be missing the point here, was there one?
Is this a poor attempt at explaining your use of certain ‘tributes’? Had Mr Hurst, and, if it’s the same person on your site, Gale Angel, died in a car accident or of a heart attack then you might start to make some sense. You see the issue here, and it’s a big one, is that you claim to have CURED them of cancer, and they DIED of cancer. You see where I’m coming from? It’s not exactly the best, and most sensitive way, of peddling your wares is it?
Oh for the love of Bejeebus and Jaffa Cakes, you make it sound like you’re a volunteer in a war zone or running an orphanage in Sri Lanka using your own money! I’ve seen the videos of you ‘working’. You touch someone, and then make a profit from it. Not bad work if you can get it, good hours and no heavy lifting. No doubt you’ll tell us that it ‘physically and mentally drains you’ or you ‘get scuff marks on your aura’….
Tim Minchin says “If you open your mind too much your brain will fall out”
Let me give you a huge amount of pleasure if it floats your boat to do things that people say you cannot.
A curious choice of quotes. The first from Benjamin Disraeli, one of those figures we have come to trust and believe, a British politician, and the second from Elbert Hubbard. Perhaps a more fitting Hubbard quotation would be:
“If you can't answer a man's arguments, all is not lost; you can still call him vile names”
Small minded, puerile, ignorant,… ring any bells Andrew?
Finally, at the bottom of this ‘Statement’ there is a link to a ‘news’ article. One of McKellar’s clients, 81 year old (or at least he was in 2000) Harry Mowbray. Harry tells us that he has had 55 operations in 26 years to remove kidney stones, apparently he has had 450 stones removed. That’s 2.1 operations a year… call me sceptical but this man appears to be some sort of walking quarry….
McKellar ‘cured’ him! In just a few sessions so it seems. Not only did McKellar stop this man creating a natural rockery, he also cured his prostate cancer.
Harry tells us that his prostate cancer was detected by x-ray. Curious… Although I’m no Doctor, I’m of that age where prostate cancer is obviously of some concern and I have done a little research into it... so to speak... Better to be safe than sorry I say. What I find curious is that as far as I’m aware, prostate cancer is not diagnosed by x-ray.
An x-ray is only used AFTER the cancer has been diagnosed to see if it has spread to the surrounding bones.
Harry tells us:
Again, I’m not a Doctor and claim limited medical knowledge, but I know that an x-ray cannot show if something is cancerous or not. Even if Harry had been given an ultrasound and not an x-ray, it would still not show if cancer was present. Only a biopsy would show this. IF he had been given an ultrasound and it had shown ‘dark patches’ on his prostate, without a biopsy the dark patch could very well be a cyst of the prostate, a region of inflammation, or it could even be a large blood vessel.
It was only AFTER Harry had seen McKellar that his GP gave him a blood test for prostate cancer and was told he didn’t have it. My point being is that Harry is claiming McKellar cured his cancer without actually being diagnosed with it in the first place. You can’t cure something that isn’t there….
Yours, desperately seeking attention and sensationalism,