Washington Politicians with Cancer... Disinformation or just plain stupidity?

Ok this whole ordeal about Washington politicians and their wives experiencing cancer for the second time... this is just stupid.

WASHINGTON - Presidential spokesman Tony Snow's malignant cancer has returned and spread to his liver and elsewhere in his body, shaken White House colleagues announced Tuesday. They said he told them he planned to fight the disease and return to work.

"He is not going to let this whip him, and he's upbeat," President Bush said of his press secretary. "And so my message to Tony is, 'Stay strong; a lot of people love you and care for you and will pray for you.'"

Snow, 51, had his colon removed in 2005 and underwent six months of chemotherapy after being diagnosed with colon cancer. He underwent surgery on Monday to remove a growth in his abdominal area, near the site of the original cancer.

Source: www.msnbc.msn.com...

If WE are just finding out that cancer has always been curable, then you know that these people have known it forever. So these stories must be some kind of disinformation plan. They are probably being cured of cancer with their herbs mixed in with their nightly lavish dinners, yet trying to convince the public of their terrible suffering. And If I'm wrong... and they really are suffering... then screw em all, because they must be too stupid to realize that cancer is curable and they're being played like puppets.

Source: TONS of articles that prove that cancer is curable:
NewsTarget Cancer Articles



[edit on 27-3-2007 by annestacey]

if they actually die from cancer, well, they are not initiated or simply being killed by their peers, if they just report having cancer, i'd say it's all PR. i doubt that your everday politician is more than an expendable sock puppet, though, so most of them are probably ignorant anyways.

You people are sick...

Even if you don't agree with someone's politics, the man has just suffered from a recurring cancer. Can you maybe not turn this into some proof-less, hairbrained "conspiracy"?

Originally posted by bsl4doc
You people are sick...

Even if you don't agree with someone's politics, the man has just suffered from a recurring cancer. Can you maybe not turn this into some proof-less, hairbrained "conspiracy"?

Um, it's not proofless, it's not a conspiracy, and it's not US that's sick. It's the FDA that's sick for covering up the facts. And this has nothing to do with the man's politics. It has to do with the fact that he's either using the "sick card" to gain sympathy or he's being played as a puppet. If he's lucky, he will wake up and smell the coffee before it's too late.

Conventional medicine remains clueless on cancer
So to say that there is a cure for cancer isn't even a stretch. In fact, the bewildering belief is the one held by conventional medicine, which insists that there is no cure for cancer. That is absolutely stunning in its ignorance, because every person alive has already cured cancer. And the body is preprogrammed with the ability to cure cancer on its own. (Drug companies, of course, don't want you to realize this. If people figure out they can already cure cancer, then anti-cancer drug sales might plummet!)

Source: Cures for cancer already exist, but not in the realm of chemical-based medicine, says holistic nutritionist


[edit on 28-3-2007 by annestacey]

Annestacy, you watch and see what I tell you. John Edwards and his wife have just announced that she has cancer again... You watch them ride this wave all the way into the White House. They will feed off of the sympathy of American voters, and John Edwards who most think has absolutely no chance at all, will be our next president. Watch and see what I tell you. Don't be surprised.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth
Annestacy, you watch and see what I tell you. John Edwards and his wife have just announced that she has cancer again... You watch them ride this wave all the way into the White House. They will feed off of the sympathy of American voters, and John Edwards who most think has absolutely no chance at all, will be our next president. Watch and see what I tell you. Don't be surprised.

Speaker,

I will most definitely be watching this. They will stoop to ANY low in order to get their agenda across. Am I going to be one of the sheeple that cries and sends my sympathies and votes to them... HELL no.

Originally posted by annestacey
[Speaker,

I will most definitely be watching this. They will stoop to ANY low in order to get their agenda across. Am I going to be one of the sheeple that cries and sends my sympathies and votes to them... HELL no.

Neither will I. I am sorry for Mrs.Edwards, I know the pain that her and her family is going through. Been there, done that one with both of my parents. However, I will not allow them to use it as a device to get me to vote in a direction that I cannot in good conscience.

Hmmmm.

1 in 2 American males will get cancer sometime in their lifetimes, and 1 in 3 American females.

It's no surprise that politicians and the wealthy are not immune.

FYI - cancer is multifactorial - and is linked to reactivated latent infections.

Hopefully, these guys will get motivated to start looking good and hard at our agricultural and food production industries as the source of low grade primary infection - and at OTC and prescription drugs and industrial pollution as reactivation triggers.


.

Originally posted by soficrow
Hmmmm.

1 in 2 American males will get cancer sometime in their lifetimes, and 1 in 3 American females.

Sofi, I have heard that 50% of the population contracts cancer. However, the other day I heard that only 10 million Americans have cancer. So the figuires aren't adding up somewhere.

[edit on 28-3-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

The 10 million figure was for a specific cancer, I'm sure. Sofi is right on the 50% mark.

Originally posted by SpeakerofTruth

Originally posted by soficrow
Hmmmm.

1 in 2 American males will get cancer sometime in their lifetimes, and 1 in 3 American females.

Sofi, I have heard that 50% of the population contracts cancer. However, the other day I heard that only 10 million Americans have cancer. So the figuires aren't adding up somewhere.

I suspect the figures don't add up because people who get cancer often die - so while 50% of the male population will get cancer, they won't all have it at the same time...

Cancer Survival and Incidence from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results (SEER) Program

The likelihood of developing cancer during one’s lifetime is 1 in 2 for males and 1 in 3 for females, based on 1998–2000 data. It is estimated that approximately 9.6 million people in the U.S. who have had a diagnosis of cancer are alive. Five-year relative survival varies greatly by cancer site and stage at diagnosis, and tends to increase with time since diagnosis. The median age at cancer diagnosis is 68 for men and 65 for women. The 5-year relative survival rate for persons diagnosed with cancer is 62.7%, with variation by cancer site and stage at diagnosis. For patients diagnosed with cancers of the prostate, female breast, corpus uteri, and urinary bladder, the relative survival rate at 8 years is over 75%.

.

Originally posted by soficrow
Hmmmm.

1 in 2 American males will get cancer sometime in their lifetimes, and 1 in 3 American females.

It's no surprise that politicians and the wealthy are not immune.

snip


.

you beat me to it.

anne, you first should compare statistically the amount of politicians and spouses with cancer vs the general population.

if there is a major discrepancy, report back

Originally posted by bsl4doc
The 10 million figure was for a specific cancer, I'm sure. Sofi is right on the 50% mark.

Actually, they stated it as if it was across the board. The AD said, there are 10 million Americans that have cancer. It didn't specify any certain type or anything. It seemed somewhat contrary to what I have always been told an thought,but, that is what the Ad said nonetheless.

[edit on 29-3-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by soficrow

I suspect the figures don't add up because people who get cancer often die - so while 50% of the male population will get cancer, they won't all have it at the same time...




.

Yeah, but even at that. I would think the numbers would be higher than 10 million. We have close to 400 million people in the United States. Something is askew when it comes to the numbers on cancer it seems to me. Either it is

(1) Overplayed and over-hyped

(2) The government is trying to start a campaign to make people think it's not as serious of a deal as we previously thought.

I personally think it's the latter rather than the former, but that is coming from someone who lost both of his parents to cancer, so, I guess you should consider the source.



[edit on 29-3-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Perhaps as more of our politicians get this terrible disease something good can come out of it, we can have more lobbying from them to get more money for research, because right now funding has been poor for many of this often terminal diseases.

Originally posted by marg6043
Perhaps as more of our politicians get this terrible disease something good can come out of it, we can have more lobbying from them to get more money for research, because right now funding has been poor for many of this often terminal diseases.

Yeah, it's just a shame that they don't do anything until "one of their own" becomes ill. It's ironic how much disregard they show for the general populace but when it comes to one or two of "their own" that's important.

[edit on 29-3-2007 by SpeakerofTruth]

Originally posted by marg6043
Perhaps as more of our politicians get this terrible disease something good can come out of it, we can have more lobbying from them to get more money for research, because right now funding has been poor for many of this often terminal diseases.

Why do we need more money for research when the cures for the disease are all natural food and herbs? Are you guys even reading the articles on the site that I posted?

Many cures for cancer exist right now
At last count, in my own research, I counted 18 cures for cancers -- 18 different cures. They cover all different kinds of cancer: multiple myeloma, brain tumors, leukemia, breast cancer, prostate cancer, cervical cancer, lung cancer and many others. Eighteen different cures for cancer. Now, the FDA says, "Oh no, you can't claim there's a cure for cancer." And organized medicine says, "Oh no, you can't claim there's a cure. There's no such thing as a cure." Then, if a patient is actually cured using some of these therapies, organized medicine still won't admit they're cured. They don't have the guts to stand up and say that maybe they were wrong, and maybe there is a cure for cancer. They think, "No, no, no, there is no such thing." I don't think any cancer center will admit there is a cure for cancer. They'll say, "No, it's just a permanent remission."

I'm here to tell you that there are cures for cancer. In fact, every day when I go running through the desert, I'm jogging by literally tons and tons of anti-cancer desert plants right outside my back yard. People are being cured of cancer every single day all over the world. They are curing themselves of cancer. It is just that it has been criminalized here in the United States. It has been outlawed because we live in the Dark Ages of modern medicine, in a system of oppression that tries to censor the truth and make curing cancer illegal. It's a system that tries to discredit all these alternative therapies and at the same time, tries to make a fortune managing all of these diseases that are easily preventable and curable if people just turn to therapies like a raw foods diet or the elimination of all animal products and processed foods from their diets.

Source: Beating cancer -- how to take charge of your cancer cure and outlive the lies of the cancer industry

hi Anne,
I worked with an oncology nurse one time who had worked in an alternative clinic in Chicago where they used herbs and diet to treat cancer. She told me they had some successes, but the clinical outcomes data didn't show any significant increase of success over traditional means.

She told me it amounted to a more comfortable way to spend the last years of your life, but there was no hard data that showed it was any better than the harsh drugs and chemo.

.02


BTW, have you had a chance to compare the gov't with the general population to see if there is a big difference ?

Originally posted by syrinx high priest
hi Anne,
I worked with an oncology nurse one time who had worked in an alternative clinic in Chicago where they used herbs and diet to treat cancer. She told me they had some successes, but the clinical outcomes data didn't show any significant increase of success over traditional means.

She told me it amounted to a more comfortable way to spend the last years of your life, but there was no hard data that showed it was any better than the harsh drugs and chemo.

.02

The thing you are missing is that pharmaceutical medicine is a business. Do you honestly think that Doctors or the big pharmaceutical companies are going to be honest about their findings, especially when they can't make a big buck off of what they have discovered? I highly doubt it. Highly doubt it.

Ann I am aware of the natural remedies and cures, I have to deal with high blood pressure and high cholesterol by natural means because I am allergy to any medications that deal with statins and manipulation of enzymes.

No everybody can take pills or medications to treat diseases.

If you look at cases of third world countries you do not find the same illnesses that plague us in modernized countries until they become more advance.

That is because most of their diet is natural.

In our nation we are inundated by manufactured everything, to find products that comes from natural environments is becoming a thing of the past.

Unless you move to a third world country and take the chance to die from a minor illness that has been eradicated in our modernized nation.