The trouble is, having gone through cancer I thought I had a reasonable understanding of the disease. In fact more than one medical professional who I have come into contact with during my time in the NHS has commented that I sound "clued up" or had a medical background. However, in one of the abstracts you posted there was an enormous amount of medical abbreviations and jargon that I've never come across. It means absolutely nothing to me. Completely pointless in the average man on the street (internet football forum) reading it. If you understand it then fair fucks to you (although I have my doubts that it is all second nature to you). However, I can completely understand why some people will rile against it, and maybe those people just need to ignore it or put you on ignore. I'm sure it's no skin off of your nose anyway. I think it falls somewhere completely different to quackery, but I also think it's not nearly as revelatory or revolutionary as you think / suspect or hope.
It's come from years of reading about various aspects on nutrition (decades sadly!), like you say I'm not some genius with this stuff (well maybe just a little bit deep I guess), mostly the Cancer terms familiarity comes from researching Flax for several years (and minerals, ionisation, pH balancing stuff) so have become very conversant with white papers and taking in terms which put others off, plus my own colon/digestive issues which have led to researching foods and their qualities/issues.
The wording comes from Scientists (related to Blueberry), not me, please try to pull those things apart, I understand the feeling of 'why wasn't I told' but I started the thread posts by saying this is new data in medical terms (the studies started in 2010, meaningfully), it was never meant to suggest that it should replace traditional treatment (if the studies made that impression then that was bullishness I don't adhere to either).
However, we are in an age where many people know a set of nutritional factors which are very important to cancer in various ways (most people know about Fructose, or Otto Warburgs Nobel research, for example). Personally I don't have Blueberries, they are acidic (so personally think they may cause other issues more prevalent if not taken in a broader context which is beyond the scope of this discussion) and not in my outlook, but I think the studies are very promising (and if I was diagnosed I would research the shit out of it myself).
None of it is ever meant to offend or upset anyone, please be clear, Cancer affects us all.