Ok..Let Me Blow Your Mind About Cancer

Posted by Abaco 1 week, 1 day ago to Culture
48 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

When I watch a little tv lately I see advertisements for fund raising - ads that show several children who are ill with cancer or other things, spending their time in the medical facility that's asking for funding, struggling with their condition. These sadden and bother me for several reasons. First - I love kids. As some here probably noticed, I have a big soft spot for kids in my heart. When I see these ads it's not unusual for me to have to dry my eyes to get back to what I was watching (usually golf). But, there's another things in the back of my mind that I'd like to mention here. Based on things I've seen I've come to realize that it's very easy for a child to get a diagnosis of cancer when they don't have it. This is the "mind blowing" part. It's my understanding that, officially, childhood cancers are on the rise. Based on something that friends of ours went through it also occurred to me that it's very possible for kids to get a diagnosis, and be subjected to chemo when they never had cancer. So, would you ever think our society could/would do that? It's a multi-faceted question. It's disturbing to think about. However...I can't see children in those ads and not think back about what we've seen with our friends.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by  $  DrZarkov99 6 days, 21 hours ago
    Now that genetic engineering is becoming more promising, I've tried volunteering to give gene samples to a number of research programs. The reason I wanted to do this is because at 73 I have a very robust immune system, and have had no significant illness in over 30 years. Also, in researching my family history I can find no incidence of cancer or significant heart disease going back about 200 years. I figure if someone can find out what combination of genes has created this condition, they might be able to develop a method replicating it. The result would be a tremendous reduction in medical expense due to most people being able to live a long, healthy, productive life.

    Here's the punch line: every one of the centers that supposedly were studying ways to have people live healthier, longer life had no interest in my offer. One doctor told me "We don't study healthy people." It appears pharmaceutical companies fund these centers to generate vaguely promising results from the latest "wonder drug" to keep the grants and taxpayer money flowing. One doctor was honest enough to tell me that if they really did find a genetic fix for most health issues, it would be hard to get it approved, as it would have a devastating negative effect on the cash flow to the medical business world and the economy in general.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 6 days, 1 hour ago
      Thanks for sharing. It is ALL about the money. The administration of medicine as it is done to day is set in stone. Will not be changed.

      I have been involved in a few studies. I remember when I was involved in one study that was targeting potential environmental causes of an illness. When I asked a few of the PhDs involved in carrying out the research if they were going to look at couple obvious ones they just stayed silent...and refused to look at them. Guess who was funding the study.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by STEVEDUNN46 6 days, 23 hours ago
    Many of these cancer charities are flush with cash conned from gullible donors. They have so much they have to figure out ways to spend it. In Tucson they spent millions on making Latino females feel better about having cancer
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 5 days, 1 hour ago
      " In Tucson they spent millions on making Latino females feel better about having cancer"...good gawd. But...I see those kinds of messages all the time in the media...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 1 week, 1 day ago
    To add to this discussion....Let's say you discovered a true cure for cancer - and it's something simple. What do you think would happen next?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  straightlinelogic 1 week ago
      Big Pharma would enlist legions of lobbyists, bureaucrats, legislators, and the media to have it declared unsafe and banned.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  allosaur 1 week ago
        Me dino suddenly envisions a panicked RINO stampede all ducking behind the closing doors of Jackass Party barns.
        There our more than equal elite shall come together in collusion for the rescue of the status quo continued flow of big money campaign contributions from Big Pharma.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 week ago
      "What do you think would happen next?"
      Scientists would start studying the mechanism of action to learn about other age-related diseases and possibly find way to slow aging. The treatment could make long-term space missions easier because the treatment could compensate for less radiation shielding. There would also be also be hundreds of weird discoveries related to understanding life processes that we can't even imagine.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 5 days, 3 hours ago
      You would be prosecuted as practicing medicine without a license and driven into the black market, unsupported by any insurance policy - unless you already sold out to the pharma industry, but then the cure would be suppressed unless it was converted to a patented (expensive and very profitable) medicine that must be taken every day for the rest of your life.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 6 days, 11 hours ago
      A new method would have to be proved as effective or probable, with known side-effects and their frequency and causal factors. It isn't a matter of a "simple cure" somehow "discovered". Aside from legitimate scientific inquiry expanding knowledge, the FDA would conservatively block people from trying it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Susanne 6 days, 21 hours ago
      Simple and cheap? Some company would buy the patent from you, figure out the cheapest way to produce it, jack the price up stratospherically, then tell patients "You want to live? Pay up".

      Hey, it worked for AZT and the Epi-Pen...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by CircuitGuy 6 days, 20 hours ago
        "it worked for AZT and the Epi-Pen..."
        Yes. This is one of the motivations for people to put time and resources into it: They know people will willingly pay for it.

        Epi-pen is a little different because users could draw the epinephrine into a syringe. Both the drug and the syringe are cheap. But someone worked out a convenient way to put it in a ready-to-administer container. That convenience could mean getting the drug seconds faster, which could save a life, so people are willing to pay. If I had that problem, I might save my money and count on being able to draw the drug into a syringe fast enough. I'm not sure if that decision to go cheap would be rational, but I'm free to make it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 1 week, 1 day ago
    It's become a business. A business not to cure but to profit. That has been my observation.
    The people heading these business are either stupid or lack a conscience in order to do such a thing. The workers that actually do these deeds are unaware of the allopathic ruse.

    That is what I have observed and I am sticking to it,... especially when I have witnessed people cured by more natural means.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by 1 day, 1 hour ago
    Recently I was discussing this topic with a friend. I pointed out that, with mammograms, they mash and radiate the tissue over and over to find cancer. Then, after decades of that it becomes cancerous and they say, "Look at how smart we are. Our process finds cancer!"
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 19 hours, 43 minutes ago
      Many lives have been saved by finding it that way without causing it. The imaging and tests are constantly becoming less intrusive as technology improves.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DeanStriker 6 days, 22 hours ago
    A few weeks back Dr Mercola re-published a most important article which stated very absolutely that cancer requires an acid environment to survive and continue it's horrid habits. Sorry, I seem to have lost the link to the article and searching didn't find it.

    I'm an old fella 79 now, and had visited my government-edicted primary doctor about hard-to-control leaking, so received the finger-test and a PSA test, and was referred to a urologist and ditto. Both PSA tests were way too high; and so exploratory surgery was a possible option, but I opted out of that.

    About then the above article appeared, whereupon I bought a PH tester, reading high acidity, and began a daily dose of baking soda. Seemed strange, but the PH readings improved to where now I'm taking less than half of the backing soda, Somehow the leaking problem has diminished, so I'm feeling that's won the battle. Got another PSA test and have another appointment with the urologist next week. So then we'll see.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CaptainKirk 6 days, 23 hours ago
    First, I would NEVER assume big Pharma has the interest in patients as their goal.
    Second, the FDA is funded by drug companies. As Stan Burzynski found out... When he got close to going into trials, the DRUG COMPANIES voted to RAISE the cost of starting a cancer therapy drug trial to insane MILLIONS of dollars (like 76 Million) to stop him from Drug testing. (This guy has a Non-Toxic treatment for cancers, and has the ONLY 10+yr Geoblastoma (Brain tumor) survivors).

    Thid, an Italian doctor researched Cancers in children, and found most died of the treatment, not the cancers! And he was amazed to see that in autopsy, the cancers looked WHITE (not black), and that they seemed like "Mushrooms"... he wrote a book "Cancer is Fungus"... Some conculsions he draws because of this are SCARY REAL. Like biopsying a tumor can lead to spreading.

    Fourth, Royal Raymond Rife had treated and cured cancers at the turn of the century using frequencies, and the early version of the AMA shut him down. (Now I am not sure I buy into all of this, but his microscope was a thing of pure intellect).

    Finally, I should mention I lost my mom to Bone Cancer (she lasted 5 weeks after diagnosis), and my brother to systemic cancer (he would not go on the plane to see Dr. B).
    I have sent 2 people to see Dr. Burzynski. Dr. B told one "I cannot help you, because my treatment doesn't work for your type of cancer!" They were surprised at the honesty, he shared the numbers he had from other patients. The other patient could not afford his treatment. OTHER referrals were scared away from even talking to them by their "Mainstream doctors".

    I know ONE THING: If given the diagnosis... I will NEVER take Chemo, and I will probably find an alternative approach.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 1 week ago
    I too love kids. I love the sound of them playing outside my home office window. Unfortunately, when you live in one place long enough, they grow up and the sounds disappear. Diagnosing cancer in kids when they don't have it? Ugh. What could be worse besides what ISIS does? There are hospitals that do not accept government funding that have integrity and great doctors, which is one of my few charities called All Children Hospital. I haven't looked into them for quite a while so I hope they haven't changed their policy. NO! Don't research it for me - I'll do it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 week, 1 day ago
    My basic understanding is the key to cancer is catching it when the tumor is very small, before it has time to metastasize. I wonder if maybe in our effort to catch ever smaller tumors, we're getting false alarms and maybe cancer cells that the body would resolve on its own. An oncologist would be able to comment intelligently. I'm just guessing.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 6 days, 11 hours ago
      The causes and statistical frequency of false positives from all kinds of tests are and have been the subject of research. Current research is looking at detection methods from blood tests before a tumor develops. If you talk to knowledgeable doctors at respected medical centers who keep up with and contribute to the research you can learn a lot about what is and isn't known, what can and can't be done now, and what is being investigated but not yet practical. The are not quacks engaged in the various kinds of conspiracy being peddled. It is a very serious and difficult problem to be solved by objective methods.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by freedomforall 1 week, 1 day ago
      Total bullshit. Trust oncologists? F^&king witch doctors. Not when my life is in the balance. Do some research on data that doesn't come from those who have a vested interest in cancer never being cured. The Cancer Control Society is one good source for unbiased treatments that oncologists will pooh-pooh and pretend are quackery. Oncologists consider their treatment to be a success when the patient survives for 6 months- even if they die the next day from the same cancer that they treated by their cut, burn, and poison methods.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by ewv 6 days, 11 hours ago
        Survival for some period time, depending on the nature of the cancer, is considered successful when it represents progress over what is known to happen without it. No one pretends the patient didn't die of the disease. There is a good deal of serious research into detecting, slowing and curing cancer. No one should be denouncing it as "vested interests" favoring "cut, burn and poison".
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 1 week ago
    Abaco it is all about the money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    how many children were and as still subject the ridilin? it is all about the money!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo