Cancer Cured in Canada, But Big Pharma Says NO WAY!

page: 5
96
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 08:45 PM
link   
I bet this gets swept under the rug, never to be brought up again...

Second.




posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by danielsil18
My point is that there are natural cures with no side effects that are not expensive that will cure cancer.


That's really, really great to hear. Please produce an ATS member that can personally attest to such a cure. Themselves.

Cuz talk is cheap.

And cancer kills.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:11 PM
link   
This isn't just stupid it's economically stupid.

Everyone will get cancer if they live long enough and Aspirin is giant profit maker.

Very short sighted in terms of loss and gain, Brand recognition is everything in the long haul, the company that picks it up and gets brand name recognition with it given no side effects could very easily one day be worth Billions yearly for this.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by juggalo77
chemotherapy and radiotherapy makes you die of cancer faster
yeh ive read this elsewhere too,so the treatments they actually do use kills us quicker!!!! and the one that says it can FIX us they dont use
hmmmm???? OMG people,they are trying to kill us!!!!!! like you aint worked that one out.

haha yep, it's really depressing, but there are hundreds of cures out there for diseases that get swept under the rug, or that the pharma companies buy out and keep forever, never selling it to the public, but keeping people sick. Sad but true. We're worth more to them sick and helpless than healthy and aware.


Originally posted by Chovy
They don't care about your health... They care about how much money you have. And how much they can take before you die, so a cure would be a bad thing for big pharma.


Yep! A cure would basically put the pharmaceutical industry out of work in whatever disease it cured. Think also of how many times for a single disease they can reissue, slightly modify, reissue drugs again and again. Try 100's of drugs out on a problem over many decades. To fix the symptoms, not the disease. Now with all those competing drugs, that makes so many billion of dollars, it's not even funny. And there is no way they will ever give that up.

So if you get cancer, they can cure you, but they won't, because why would they?



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by BaronVonGodzilla


So if you get cancer, they can cure you, but they won't, because why would they?


Bull.
I am living proof of the idiocy of that statement.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by BaronVonGodzilla
So if you get cancer, they can cure you, but they won't, because why would they?


Well they did, and it cost me $32 out of pocket, because that's how things work up here in Canada.

You can surf til the cows come home, and you'll find all kids of Bravo Sierra on the net...but anybody who turns down a shot at a cure for something they read on the net is...I repeat...a fool.

Been there, done that, got the tattoo.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Whether this claim is for real or not, it doesn't matter. I have heard rumors that cancer and aids have had a cure for years. Again, this is only words with no backing of evidence. However, the reason that it doesn't matter if they have cured any disease is simple and obvious. Money. I'm surprised that many posters here seem surprised that healthcare in the U.S is all a money scam for the most part. I was in the hospital for 8 hours once for something minor and that cost almost $2000. With the advancement of science and medicine, we should be able to cure anything, but where is the profit and population control in that? There are good doctors out there, for I have met them and there are more of them out there than you think. But, there is also a great deal many that could care less about healthcare or patients. Medicaid alone is handled by people who don't even practice medicine, which is one of the reason's it's so screwed up. Healthcare does need to be changed, but not in the b.s way that it's being pushed. We need something that cares about patients health, but maybe in the generation after next that will happen.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:36 PM
link   
Cool.
I haven't read the thread yet, but I would like to note that if this IS the cure to cancer and it is in fact an old drug, we can simply create it ourselves.

I suggest everyone on ATS start researching the drug. Figure out how to make it.
Shouldn't be that difficult. Especially considering how cheap it reportedly is.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by ChemBreather
There is a drug called Alka-V6 that suposedly is to fix cancer.
I say fix so I dont get jailed for spreading good news... (Sarcasm)..



haha i ordered some
Not to cure cancer but i have known for awhile that keeping keeping the body alkaline somewhat, can help help prevent many diseases.

The alternative was drinking a glass of water with 2 spoonfuls of Apple Cider Vinegar in it. Well that is just repulsive lol but you can get Alka-V6 in drops and lotions and sprays.

Thanks for the info Chembreather good stuff indeed



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:39 PM
link   
A friend of mine got throat cancer. Her medical bill totaled just over $500,000.

$500,000



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 09:44 PM
link   
reply to post by xEphon
 

No medical insurance? That's rough. I hope she's doing ok.

But do you suppose all the doctors and technicians who helped her should not be paid for their work? Do you think the equipment used should be manufactured for free? Or do you think the government should just pay for it all? (That might happen.). How much is her life worth?

BTW, Not all cancers are the same. The testing on rats which was done with DCA was not for throat cancer.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by cinny louwho
This is so wrong. Who cares if it costs pennies, it should come down to the fact that lives can be saved.
Who said money doesn't make the world go around?!?!


Hey, theres no reason a profit shouldn't be made off of this and still save lives at an astronomical fraction of the cost of traditional cancer treatments. I would have no problem with someone making a profit off of this, as long as competition and the market are allowed to set the prices. As long as there is competition and the government stays out of its manufacture, sale, and distribution, the price should be very affordable and profits could be made. Hell, most of our healthcare problems would be solved if government just got out of the way and let markets handle things.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by xEphon
 


And how much is her life worth? Well over 500,000. If anything, the fact that she paid that much proves cancer patients would pay even more for a sure cure and, in turn, that no financially responsible company would pass up a cure like this in reality.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Yes, she had insurance thank god.
Undoubtably, the doctors, nurses and everyone else involved in saving her life earned every bit that it cost them. You really can't attach a personal value to that. But, thats the rub.
From the top down, everyone knows that people will pay whatever it costs to "cure" their cancer.
$500,000 per patient is a pretty big incentive to leave well enough alone.

As far as free health care. I'm not advocating that; however, I do believe we should strive to make health care as inexpensive as possible. There is a gross amount of markup attached to medical supplies and equipment to the point of being immoral. Capitalism at its finest I suppose.

Example
Depending on the hospital we're paying up to 100% markup; yet they get to declare themselves as non-profit?

So yeah, unless these cheaper cures can generate as much profit as the current cures I don't expect them to be released anytime soon

[edit on 22-9-2009 by xEphon]



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by xEphon
reply to post by Phage
 


As far as free health care. I'm not advocating that; however, I do believe we should strive to make health care as inexpensive as possible.


Great insight. Healthcare's a product just like anything else. The cheaper we can make the existing system the better.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:35 PM
link   
I have often thought that if I developed cancer I would go for an alternative cure first but then I have never had cancer so that is much easier said than done.

I do have a daughter who was diagnosed with breast cancer at age 27. They thought she had probably had it at least 3 years. It involved 1/3 to 1/2 her breast and was in 1 lymph node. Surgery and 6 months of chemo and she has been cancer free for 16 years.

That said, late last year there was a report in the news that a study of patients who had mammograms every year vs those who had them every 5 years showed that the people who had mammo's every 5 years had 1/3 less breast cancer. The thinking on this was that the more frequent mammo's found the cancers earlier and that many of them can be resolved with the bodies own immune system.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by xEphon
 

But you see, you said it yourself. Everyone involved earned it. Yes it's expensive. The $500,000 didn't go to one company, it went all over the place (including paying the interest on the machines that cost millions of dollars). There is a lot of expensive stuff involved with saving lives.

Non-profit means does not mean at cost. It means that at the end of the year the balance sheet for the hospital shows the same number it showed the year before. There are administrative expenses (you have to pay the bookkeepers), there are unbelievable insurance premiums, there are equipment costs. Maybe you didn't use that PET scanner but the interest they're paying on it has to come from somewhere. Should the people that do use it have to cover the entire cost? Maybe. But if you want to see what a for profit hospital costs, you might be surprised at the difference between the two.
www.pnhp.org...



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage

Originally posted by BaronVonGodzilla


So if you get cancer, they can cure you, but they won't, because why would they?


Bull.
I am living proof of the idiocy of that statement.


Same here. Chemo so far has given me 9 years. 10 in December. Nasty, Nasty stuff that kills your body but kills cancer cells faster. It's primitive medicine in my opinion but it worked for me.

I really hope that the potion works and researched more before codex alimentarius kicks in at the end of this year and possibly blocked from production.

www.healthfreedomusa.org...
en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Phage
 


Oh no they should poison you with chemicals or microwave your tumors then insurance company will refuse to pay for your treatments even though you have payed them for many years. More then half the docrots in this county shouldnt even be in medicine field they only go into it for the money and the chance to be called....."DOCTOR" When someone comes up with the cure they make sure to sweep in under the rug. Here's a way to know if its a cure or not google anything that you'v read as a cure if something derogotive about it comes up as a first or second search item on the first page then it probably works. Things like vitamin c in mega doses or cannabis oil or hydrogen peroxide treatment or miracle mineral suplement.



posted on Sep, 22 2009 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Phage
reply to post by xEphon
 

saving lives? Who are you kidding





top topics
 
96
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join