One Of The Most Important Scientists In The World: “Most Cancer Research Is Largely A Fraud”

Very interesting. Combined with the other link about up to 50% of medical research being bunk this is a conspiracy I'm willing to entertain.
I think there is a lot more #ery going on in scientific research than the public thinks. I get the feeling it's rampant.

originally posted by: rickymouse
If you throw a lot of money at cancer research than they will invent better treatments and surgical procedures.

But they won't take action to stop people from getting cancer. There was hardly any prostate cancer fifty years ago. Breast cancer was not very common either. Most people died of heart attacks around here, not cancer.

They need to take the bad chemistry out of our food that is causing this, not half kill us after we get it.

The money is in treating cancer and doing cancer research, this will end when we do not get cancer much anymore.

Most people don't want to hear it, because most people just want to hear what they want to hear. But it doesn't alter the fact that the rising cancer rates, are exactly the same as the rising consumption of Dairy. Cut the Dairy and cut the risk, of heart disease, high blood pressure, stroke, and numerous other add on disease its causing.

a reply to: anonentity

For some people it could be dairy. For others it could be consumption of things that block the immune response to things, natural antihistamines and also ones that are added to foods. They do have chemicals that they add to food that makes it so people who are not tolerant to certain food chemistry do not get a reaction to the food. This reaction is the bodies way of saying not to eat it. If you block the response in the digestive system, the food can then create a problem in the rest of the body if it is consumed more than it should be. Now the blockers are not actually directly harmful, but the chemistry that they block our detection of can be.

So say your intolerant to milk, and they put an immune suppressant like caraggeenan in it to block a histamine response, then you consume more of it and the extra consumption of the milk product gives you a problem. So the chemistry of the additive is not actually what causes the sickness so it is considered safe. This is just one such chemistry, there are a lot of them with similar properties. We are being tricked into consuming foods that we shouldn't. Companion food chemistry is all right, but not if it just shields detection instead of actually neutralizing the toxins.

a reply to: rickymouse

Your post is very wise indeed. I saw a You Tube video by a Canadian doctor that was an anti vaccine guy and was heart attacked in his 40's, but one of the most profound things he was an advocate of was the very diverse individuality of each of our metabolisms and the fact the we are all a very complex formula of different variables where no one solution fits all. He was so right that each of us must find out what works for us and contour our intake and our diets and such to conform with what works for us. If your body doesn't like something then just don't put it in there, right?

Well aren't you just full of good news today? First we're all drinking T-Rex pee pee and now this!

a reply to: BennyHavensOh

That's right, but the problem is the food industry is blocking recognition or detection of things that our bodies can not metabolize correctly.

originally posted by: rickymouse
a reply to: BennyHavensOh

That's right, but the problem is the food industry is blocking recognition or detection of things that our bodies can not metabolize correctly.

Another problem when they test additives, its not as an acting long term toxin . Its only if it kills some poor thing over a short period of time.

originally posted by: rickymouse
If you throw a lot of money at cancer research than they will invent better treatments and surgical procedures.

But they won't take action to stop people from getting cancer. There was hardly any prostate cancer fifty years ago. Breast cancer was not very common either. Most people died of heart attacks around here, not cancer.

They need to take the bad chemistry out of our food that is causing this, not half kill us after we get it.

The money is in treating cancer and doing cancer research, this will end when we do not get cancer much anymore.

Pretty much all medical procedures and drugs have side effects that will kill you. The whole idea behind medicine is that they treat the thing that will kill you in 5 years while causing something that will kill you in 30. By doing so they've given you 25 more years of life. There is no such thing as a cure all wonder drug.

a reply to: Telos

Loved the last slide.

The presenter isn't alleging a conspiracy, just 'mission creep' and a lot of money down the drain.

His solutions to the problem are medical and procedural, not legislative and financial.

a reply to: Telos

So even some big wigs are waking up.

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: rickymouse
If you throw a lot of money at cancer research than they will invent better treatments and surgical procedures.

But they won't take action to stop people from getting cancer. There was hardly any prostate cancer fifty years ago. Breast cancer was not very common either. Most people died of heart attacks around here, not cancer.

They need to take the bad chemistry out of our food that is causing this, not half kill us after we get it.

The money is in treating cancer and doing cancer research, this will end when we do not get cancer much anymore.

Pretty much all medical procedures and drugs have side effects that will kill you. The whole idea behind medicine is that they treat the thing that will kill you in 5 years while causing something that will kill you in 30. By doing so they've given you 25 more years of life. There is no such thing as a cure all wonder drug.

I don't know about that, the epilepsy drugs I was taking would have killed me in under six years if the doctor would not have discontinued them after five years. I sure got messed up with those, they actually gave me constant mild seizure activity. I can control the epilepsy with diet, it is only TLE so I do not get grand mall seizures. I am still having problems because I had so much needed repairs from taking them so long, but I am slowly getting better every year since. eight years now, maybe in another two years my organs will be completely regenerated.

Coley's toxins - supposedly worked back at the end of the 19th Century, anecdotally confimed by cancer experts around the world, then "debunked" as quackery when the X ray machine (an uber expensive piece of kit) came along, and now what are some of the cancer treatment Pharma companies re-investigating?...

Coleys toxins.

I don't know if money is the root of ALL evil, but those who pursue it relentlessly at the cost of everything and everyone else definitely ARE evil.

And we seem to have an awful lot of them kicking around.

originally posted by: rickymouse



I don't know about that, the epilepsy drugs I was taking would have killed me in under six years if the doctor would not have discontinued them after five years. I sure got messed up with those, they actually gave me constant mild seizure activity. I can control the epilepsy with diet, it is only TLE so I do not get grand mall seizures. I am still having problems because I had so much needed repairs from taking them so long, but I am slowly getting better every year since. eight years now, maybe in another two years my organs will be completely regenerated.

I hope you're doing better. One of my best friends has some severe epilepsy attacks and has been taking for years some strong pills that help him with seizures but killed his stomach. Until he started smoking weed and all went smooth. Not only his seizures dropped down to almost none, but he also stopped taking the medication that was really destroying his stomach. So if you haven't tried yet, maybe is about time to give it a shot.

a reply to: Telos

I can control my epilepsy with diet. I smoked enough when I was young, I don't even want to do that anymore.

Your friend did not just screw up his stomach with the epilepsy meds, I have read how they work. They are hard on many organs in the body and will shorten just about everyone's lifespan. When they say people with epilepsy do not live as long, the reason is actually because of the treatments they use. But there are natural ways to treat mild epilepsy. Some of the major ones do need meds and weed is now recognized as a way to control it. The high is actually not the medicine, you can buy medical marijuana that does not give a buzz at all. It is in one of the other canibanoids. If there is no active THC in pot, it is actually not illegal. But without the police testing it if you are caught, it will still get you in trouble if you possess it.

originally posted by: yorkshirelad
Did a quick chceck and jumped onto the internet typed prostate cancer, breast cancer, remission rates etc and guess what. What you have stated is pure fiction. Why didn't you do this before replying ? or would this conflict with your incorrect belief system. Cancer death rates are decreasing at a rate of 1.8-2.3% per year depending on age and sex.

Did a quick check (google), and what you have stated is pure fiction.

There is a huge difference between remission and cure, and a very very large percentage of people who achieve the '5 year remission' milestone relapse soon thereafter and DIE. But their 'remission' is STILL COUNTED IN THE STATS FOR THOSE WHO ACHIEVED 5 YEAR REMISSION.

This is all a game of statistics to the cancer INDUSTRY.

The truth is the vast majority of people who die from cancer ... DON'T. They die from the cancer TREATMENT.

And there's also a big difference in cancer RATES! Which are increasing in all areas of the body. Regardless of cure rates, why is cancer rising?

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck
So we know Linus Pauling died of cancer, right? A long time ago as well...1994. I daresay things have changed a mite since his time anyway. Certainly my (successful) prostate cancer therapy was only just a blip on the horizon at that time.

Great to hear your treatment was successful JC, i mean that...but we have to remember that every lie, those that are enduring at any rate, are only successful in their believability, if elements of truth are present alongside and interwoven with the deceit.

Any massive medical fraud would surely follow the same premise..inasmuch as for the 'research' and progress 'just around the corner' to be believed and hold at least a shred of credibility, successes demonstrated by cases such as yours have to be evident for the fraud to continue.

Anyway, stay healthy and congratulations on your recovery mate...not everyone, and in increasing numbers are so fortunate.

a reply to: Telos

OK.... so where is the cure?

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck
So we know Linus Pauling died of cancer, right? A long time ago as well...1994. I daresay things have changed a mite since his time anyway. Certainly my (successful) prostate cancer therapy was only just a blip on the horizon at that time.

His parents died out early, and he lived until his late 80s. Just thought that needed to be brought up. He started taking large doses of vitamin c in his early 40s.

originally posted by: tanstaafl
The truth is the vast majority of people who die from cancer ... DON'T. They die from the cancer TREATMENT.

Some interesting comments about alternative therapies in this rather plain-jane website: Link
...and just out of curiosity, how many true believers here in this thread have had cancer, and had it cured by any means?

It all looks very different when the prognosis comes in. I would go so far as to say that until then...