It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Modern Medicine & the Cancer Pandemic

page: 1
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Warning: This video will make your blood boil.



Follow the money. There's no money in being healthy.

Doctors aren't making us healthy because their medical education was paid for by the pharmaceutical industry.

Chemo drugs cause cancer.

Cancer is a symptom of a sick body. We should be treating the cause, not the symptom. If you treat the symptom, the problem is still there; you've only covered it up.





posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 11:55 AM
link   
a reply to: ConnectDots


Chemo drugs cause cancer.

Environmental pollution is whats causing cancer, chemo is the response to that. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

But really, cancer comes first, then chemo. Chemo is actually more toxic than the cancer, typically therapy is designed to bring the host near to death as possible and kill the cancer without killing the host in the process.

So, devil or deep blue sea. Ingest the toxins, get the mutation, kill the cancer and ourselves over and over again…

twisted.

(ETA: Sorry, no I didn't watch the video.)
edit on 3-7-2015 by intrptr because: ETA:



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 11:56 AM
link   
a reply to: ConnectDots

I've heard that fasting (nothing but water), can fight cancer pretty effectively by enducing authophagy. The I dea is that your body can go into starvation mode to preserve energy, but cancer doesn't know how to. Of course, fasting for any longer than a day or two should be done under medical supervision.

I fasted for 3 days once, just to see how my body would react. It's not nearly as difficult as it sounds. I actually felt better and more energetic. Its easy as long as you maintain your electrolytes.



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 12:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots

Warning: This video will make your blood boil.



Follow the money. There's no money in being healthy.

Doctors aren't making us healthy because their medical education was paid for by the pharmaceutical industry.

Chemo drugs cause cancer.

Cancer is a symptom of a sick body. We should be treating the cause, not the symptom. If you treat the symptom, the problem is still there; you've only covered it up.













With leaking (peaceful) radiation at every turn, the cancer rates are going to skyrocket. A decent chant of "No Nukes" is in order for a starting place. But most of you don't really know about the health issues of leaking storage dumps, leaky pipes in existing nuke power plants or even know enough about what a terrible blow has been dealt to our world by Fukushima.

You don't know, because your news sources are filled with trivial # that are intended to keep your mind away from serious problems that admittedly, have few remedies. Maybe you don't want to know those truths, but you really don't have a choice as the nuclear industries and governments world wide don't want you to know either.


edit on 3-7-2015 by Aliensun because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 12:20 PM
link   
I would suggest that people set aside an hour to watch the video before replying.

I think you will find that the time is well spent.



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 12:28 PM
link   
a reply to: ConnectDots

I don't want to put too fine of a point on my words above, but for the thickheaded out there, all aspects of the cancer business treatment and medications are going to be forever a growth industry because of our "peaceful" use/misuse of nuclear power plants. So line your retirement nest-egg investments with the appropriate big pharms and you are sittin' pretty...unless you die of cancer before.



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 12:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots
I would suggest that people set aside an hour to watch the video before replying.

I think you will find that the time is well spent.



You never got round to answering my question in your other thread:


originally posted by: ConnectDots

I am not a healthcare provider I'm a layman



originally posted by: GetHyped
Then how exactly are you discerning sound medical information from dangerous quackery?



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 12:38 PM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

(not picking on you, just using your reply as an excuse for a reflection).

"Environmental pollution" is like saying "everything", food, drugs, water, air, soil, smog.
We know a lot of things that can lead to cancer, but in fact we don't know all the how-tos and since chemo is a business we must assume we don't know everything that is known behind the scene at highest level.

The body recovers from very serious illness by itself, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. It's because of this "sometimes" that we should try many other treatments, maybe even some kind of isolation from the pollutants rather than poison bombardment.
But do you believe that we would ever discover a cure that doesn't involve a lot of money and a dependance on some expert or specialist? Wheter this could be true or not we will never know until health is a business, and if not the most profitable, surely the most sensible (not sure if the therm is the right one for the situation).

I do have a big problem of people so sure something IS EXACTLY this or that, whether they are researchers or shamans.
I also am scared about the fact that some people think that lying to incourage trust in medical treatments is the way to go. The reality is that we have some treatments, they have some chance of success and terrible side effects, but also doing nothing (in medical therms) has some chance of success.
Pretending that everyone must go for the higher chance is ok from an institutional POV (since they have to deal with a lot of people) so I'd always expect a doctor to suggest treatments rather than just changes in lifestyle, but imho individuals should have the freedom to decide if they want to live some more years with the side effects or die with dignity without being judged.

Said this, I feel for everyone that is or has relatives or close friends with such a big problem and hope that whatever they decide is going to work. After all perspective changes quite a lot when your life is threatened so I am very cautious in taking a side given all the controversies in this field.



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 01:14 PM
link   
a reply to: Mastronaut

Over all well said. My sentiments too, and sorry for coming across with the know it all attitude.


so I'd always expect a doctor to suggest treatments rather than just changes in lifestyle, but imho individuals should have the freedom to decide if they want to live some more years with the side effects or die with dignity without being judged.


Hardest lines to draw these days. When to give up , give in? I don't know anymore. Many different illnesses and therapies, not just for cancer. My mom is going to have her third ablation for irregular heart, post stroke.

The meds, tests, preop, therapy, more tests and procedures, theres no end to it. Each time they implore this is the last one, and each time it doesn't "cure". What cure? She's approaching 80 and lived a long life. The doctors are extending life, but at what cost? I have no say in the process, either submit or refuse, sometimes I feel like a rowboat in a hurricane at sea.

Musing along with you…



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 03:55 PM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots

Warning: This video will make your blood boil.



Follow the money. There's no money in being healthy.

Doctors aren't making us healthy because their medical education was paid for by the pharmaceutical industry.

Chemo drugs cause cancer.

Cancer is a symptom of a sick body. We should be treating the cause, not the symptom. If you treat the symptom, the problem is still there; you've only covered it up.





I said this on another thread about something else but it's apt here.

If all of those seemingly wealthy "doctors" and healers really believed in what they did and were committed to curing cancer don't you think that they could band together and prove beyond all doubt that what they do, in any combination, can treat and/or cure cancer better than the gold standard treatments today?

Why haven't they done that?

No doubt the "big pharma/gubment are suppressing them" trope will appear at some point but if that's the case why are they on Youtube?



No doubt when you get schooled again on this thread you'll start another one bashing medicine that works in the quite bizarre hope that it makes what you believe in less nonsensical than it actually is.

Why don't you start a thread showing how what you believe in works and how it works better than the real treatments.
Using real facts and verifiable evidence.
Then and only then, I might take you seriously and change my easily formed opinion of you.



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: Pardon?

The internet: where journals are replaced by videos and impact factors are replaced by "likes"



posted on Jul, 3 2015 @ 05:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: GetHyped
a reply to: Pardon?

The internet: where journals are replaced by videos and impact factors are replaced by "likes"


Very true.

Although the internet does have reasonable articles like this one which tears the op's thread to pieces.

I'd really like him/her to go through each point individually and refute them using rationality only.

hatepseudoscience.com...


I double-dare him/her.



edit on 3/7/15 by Pardon? because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 05:52 AM
link   
a reply to: intrptr

In the case of stage 4 cancer, the survival rate is 2%.

The stage 4 cancer patient will live longer if they don't take the drugs, because the drugs will hasten their death.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 06:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots
a reply to: intrptr

In the case of stage 4 cancer, the survival rate is 2%.

The stage 4 cancer patient will live longer if they don't take the drugs, because the drugs will hasten their death.


Can you prove this please?
Some facts would be nice.
And is it applicable to all cancers?

From what I know, chemo is given in stage IV cancer to arrest the disease progression rather than to rid the body of it and the evidence shows that it legthens the life of a patient considerably.
It's not applicable to all cancers but it's very effective for some (which fits since cancer is an umbrella term for multiple diseases).
www.cancer.net...

The one thing about seeing a real doctor is that they will explain your options and chances properly.
They don't fill your head with unrealistic outcomes and that it will be easy.
Chemo's and cancer treatment is horrible.
But the cancer is far, far worse.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 07:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: ConnectDots

I've heard that fasting (nothing but water), can fight cancer pretty effectively by enducing authophagy.


I see also called "autophagia":



noun, Physiology
1.
controlled digestion of damaged organelles within a cell.
2.
the maintenance of bodily nutrition by the metabolic breakdown of some bodily tissues.

dictionary.reference.com...



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 07:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Aliensun
You don't know, because your news sources are filled with trivial # that are intended to keep your mind away from serious problems that admittedly, have few remedies. Maybe you don't want to know those truths, but you really don't have a choice as the nuclear industries and governments world wide don't want you to know either.

I don't watch any news on TV. I get all of my news on the internet. It is still hard to filter out the disinformation, but I think I'm better off not subjecting myself to mainstream television news.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 07:45 AM
link   
a reply to: ConnectDots

I agree.

Like antibiotics, "Chemo therapy" is also anti life. The older the patient or more advanced the cancer, the more risk to the patient.

Prolonging suffering isn't the same as curing the illness.



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 08:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ConnectDots
Prolonging suffering isn't the same as curing the illness.

I'm confused about what you mean there.

Can you rephrase it for me?



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 08:23 AM
link   
originally posted by: ConnectDots
originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ConnectDots

Prolonging suffering isn't the same as curing the illness.


I'm confused about what you mean there.

Can you rephrase it for me?


I've watched some friends and neighbors pass away, miserable. At the end they would get sick, be whisked to the hospital, patched up and returned home repeatedly. They weren't very happy during this period of their lives. Instead of passing on they were maintained by the modern industrial medicine complex. Imo, past their point of no return and willingness to continue.
edit on 4-7-2015 by intrptr because: bb code


ETA: In conclusion the prolonged (to prolong life) was not a cure, just prolonging suffering. Made worse even by medical intervention and "solutions".
edit on 4-7-2015 by intrptr because: ETA:



posted on Jul, 4 2015 @ 08:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: ConnectDots

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: ConnectDots
Prolonging suffering isn't the same as curing the illness.

I'm confused about what you mean there.

Can you rephrase it for me?


You seem to be confused on quite a lot.

Especially when you're asked to back up your claims with facts.




top topics



 
9
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join