It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Possible cancer cure found in blushwood shrub

page: 2
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 05:45 PM
That's a good thing Phage, You have educated many people on this forum alone

It is sad to think of the number of potentially miracle agents we have destroyed in the forests we have razed into extinction.

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 05:45 PM
*double post sorry*

[edit on 6/2/10 by Shere Khaan]

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 05:49 PM
post removed because the user has no concept of manners

Click here for more information.

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 05:59 PM

Originally posted by tothetenthpower
Well this is gonna get buried along with any other advance in the cancer cure.

They only keep up with the treatments since there's money to be made. I certainly hope more comes to this than what I stated above, but probably not.


That or it will be labeled as dangerous fringe medicine that educated people should stay away from.

+3 more 
posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 06:03 PM
Well, if everyone is so worried about this story blowing away in the wind like every other supposed cure for cancer...why don't we all try to spread this around as much as possible...people do care about this sort of thing, not just conspiracy's possible to get this story spreading like wildfire...hehe, wouldn't TPTB just love that?

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 06:07 PM
I've got a friend who was diagnosed with a melanoma. He got on the internet and decided to try bloodroot. He looked at the various concoctions, but decided upon creating his own. He successfully treated his cancer many years ago.

This last year he was again diagnosed with a melanoma after a biopsy, this time on his arm. He treated it until it fell off. It looked like an octopus, the tentacles were surprisingly long and I doubt would have been effectively removed using surgical procedures. This time the doctor requested that he give him a sample of his concoction.

There are many cures for many types of cancer, but they aren't all effective 100% of the time. The sad thing is that none of these cures are legal for treatment. The evil thing is that evidence is suppressed in favor of the more profitable ones which, while effective in the short term, are destructive to the individual and not really a cure at all.

It's a sad thing that people don't realize that they have a right to seek the treatment of their choice and demand the freedom to utilize alternative treatments, if they so desire. They constantly harp on the fact that a woman has a right over her own body to commit abortion, but if she has breast cancer she can't opt to use bloodroot because the government knows what is better for her??

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 06:21 PM
I doubt anything will come of this. I know not too long ago a cure for cancer was discovered in Canada, it was on the news there. Obviously it will never become public, the drug companies refuse to fund testing for it, due to the fact that they'll lose alot of money.

[edit on 6-2-2010 by trollz]

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 06:49 PM

I am working closely with 2 new potential "blockbuster" "cancer curing" technologies in the device / pharma area.

From where I sit, I don't believe there is a big conspiracy to suppress such "cancer curing" technologies.

Constant decisions have to be made as to to how to direct money, time, resources, etc...

There is only so much of that to go around.

It can be very difficult because if you go down the wrong path, huge amounts of time & money can easily be wasted.

That can make it look like things are being suppressed. That is particularly the case with one of the technologies with which I am currently involved. Some people who know a little about it are worrying it's being suppressed because progress seems to be so slow. However, that's not what's going on. The fact is, the development of this technology is extremely complex & expensive & it's all taking time to figure out.

Whilst decision-making in the medical device / pharma industry must encompass responsible financial management, I don't think the industry should be broadly accused of burying "cures" that would save millions of lives.

Kine regards
Maybe...maybe not

[edit on 6-2-2010 by Maybe...maybe not]

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 06:51 PM
For the record, Methotrexate (a common Chemotherapy drug) is derived from the leaves of the Madagascar Periwinkle.

Those who believe this will be stifled should make sure it's NOT. Pass the link to the story (or, to this thread) to everyone you know.


posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 07:22 PM
After reading this article I have been searching for blushwood seeds so I might grow the plant and eat the fruit myself. I can not find any! have had cancer twice and thought eating the fruit might help deter it coming back. Does anyone know if this bush/seeds are available in the USA?

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 07:23 PM
This in particular shows what a tragedy the Amazon rainforests are. It's been speculated that many species of plants are disappearing without even having known they existed. How many of them have properties that could cure tragic illnesses?

I hope this ends up being true and actually goes somewhere. I lost my mother to cancer when I was young, this is one hateful disease, I'd love to see it destroyed.

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 07:37 PM
reply to post by fleabit

Oh no doubt man, the Amazon is the most lush forest on the planet.
Marine Biologists find an estimated 1,500 new species of fish every year in the river.
The plants are researched endlessly for their cancer-curing properties.

Unfortunately, we are quickly destroying it. Something really needs to be done about it.

This is why I was arguing in another thread the other day that humans ARE PRECISELY a virus. We destroy that which gives us sustenance. We do so without a thought of the reprecussions(sp?) of the action.

It is a harsh place to visit, but it is vital to our planet.

My grandmother, 3/4 native american, used to harp on and on about the healing properties of plants in the wild.
As she used to say: "If there is something in the wild that causes you a problem (poison ivy, for example) you can find its cure within three feet of the plant that gave you the problem."
She used to make a savv that would cure poison ivy immediately.

Knowledge lost.

Long story short, we need to protect our rain-forests. It is vitally important.

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 07:39 PM
In the cited article, referring to Dr Gordon:

She said it was "immoral, illegal, and unscientific" to seek to be administered the drug before approval, likely to take up to seven years, by the Therapeutic Goods Administration.

I'm wondering what arguments she has for one seeking treatment to be immoral. I often see scientists making statements where they veer into areas completely outside of their expertise or study and yet still make those statements in a context that would indicate that they think of themselves as authorities on, and have the same sorts of epistemological backing for, as their statements about an empirical finding in their studies.

I would like to remind Dr Gordon that there is no, and there never will be, an empirical finding like an actual arrow pointing in the direction of where one morally ought to go, whether that be towards or away from seeking a given medical treatment or in any action in life.

Perhaps Dr Gordon views the Therapeutic Goods Administration as a sort of Holy See that must anoint as approved a treatment before it's sold. Otherwise any sale or use of the product would be considered heretical.

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 07:44 PM
reply to post by QtheQ

I'm assuming that she is speaking of the amount of time that is required to seek proper testing for side-effects and whatnot.

Also, they will be testing to figure out the most efficient means of delivering the drug in regards to effectiveness and longevity of supply.

Of course, it could also be taken as "illegal because it is too effective for the TPTB's plans"...
In which case, I agree, but I doubt that is what she is driving at.

It would suck to see everyone rush to get the "cure" only to find out that it has a fatal side-effect that is not so quick to show itself.
Like 100% chance of alzheimers, or something equally as crazy.

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 07:48 PM
reply to post by JayinAR

G'day JayinAR

I think you have expressed that well & I agree with you.

As per my previous post, you have to be extraordinarily careful about such things.

Kind regards
Maybe...maybe not

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 07:59 PM
reply to post by iforget

Nice find, I really hope this pans out

Dr Victoria Gardener interview (must watch)

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 07:59 PM
reply to post by Phage

Great! My son was cured of cancer 19 years ago. I would like to believe research is not "For the money" but for the patients.

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 08:03 PM

I don't doubt for a minute mother nature provides us with everything we need, we just need to know what to look for. Half our cures are probably sitting in the greenbelt behind the backyard!

I will be looking into this further as well to see what i can come up with. The indians knew the land well, and were in harmony with mother nature, unlike us white folk who came over here, got them drunk and took their land and life away. Worse in America of course cuz i think y'all just killed most of them didnt you? Not sure, correct me if i'm wrong plz.

We can no longer rely on the system to give us good health care. That has been proven over and over again, so there is no need to question it any further. We have to fend for ourselves and make sure we grow the right plants for food and healing. The more we can ween ourselves off the system, the better off we are

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 08:10 PM
Just another alternative treatment. If they can control and patent the cure they will allow it. And if they can it is a synthetic form that won't work as well.

posted on Feb, 6 2010 @ 08:11 PM
reply to post by JayinAR

I certainly would be a bummer if anyone rushed to take this herb for cancer and it turned out the herb had some horrible side effect some time after taking it. Nonetheless, what people put in their bodies, especially to treat a medical condition, is not the moral responsibility of any scientist or government administration. People should be allowed to make their own risk/benefit analysis for any given treatment and then take personal responsibility for the consequences, good or bad, of what they decide to treat themselves with.

As for this particular herb, while I have never studied it, in many cases some significant knowledge about the side effects, administration and benefits of a medicinal herb can be gleaned from the historical use, if any, by indigenous and local peoples that have lived near where the herb naturally grows.

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in