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.

 

We Need To Demand The Truth About Cancer Cures And Prevention!!

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
Hey guys this question keeps popping up in my mind,
why is it every week I read something about cancer cures only to see a few months later that it doesn't???,
surely by now they actually know what cures cancer and eradicates it and how to prevent the cancerous cell build up,
I'm fed up of seeing all this information then having it binned,
what is the truth?
why give us bite size hopes saying it has worked bla de bla bla but why keep us in the dark!?,

seriously they must know and we want the answers.

people are spending thousands on cures that do not work, when the real stuff is probably in the local boots pharmacy.

we need to demand the truth!!!

[edit on 7-7-2010 by jumpingbeanz]

Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 7/7/2010 by Mirthful Me]




posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 12:11 PM
link   
Because people are too afraid to open their mouths and demand action, people on here are wanting ufo disclosure.

So what about cancer disclosure, Boycott your David Cameron pilgrim.
Ever noticed how the royal family never get cancers or terrible diseases


Either they are reptilians or they have the cures!



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by prettygreeneyes26
 


That's an interesting point, why are people wanting ufo disclosure, when we could be wanting more like the cure to diseases!.
very valid point thankyou.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   
I have always maintained that higher levels of cancer in modern society are the result of nuclear testing in the middle of the last century. Declassified info shows that much of our atmosphere was filled with radioactive particles. When we breath these particles we increase our chances of getting cancer. A cover up of the effects from these tests is evident.
pursuitist.com...



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by earthdude
 


thank you another great point, damn there are some hot shots in here today!.
I actually haven't thought about that, so thanks for bringing that up

government 1

citizens 0

why are we letting these fools breach our humanity it makes me sick to my stomach.

on another note my personal belief is that all the toxins we take in via food/chemicals/lotions we need to expel them from our bodies regularly before they build into something nasty,

as of next week I am purchasing

Brita filter
hemp oil
eat more tomatoes
and more excercise

that's just a start.
It's scary to know we all have cancer cells inside us, but what wakes them up we will never know..........

[edit on 7-7-2010 by jumpingbeanz]



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by jumpingbeanz
Hey guys this question keeps popping up in my mind,
why is it every week I read something about cancer cures only to see a few months later that it doesn't???,
surely by now they actually know what cures cancer and eradicates it and how to prevent the cancerous cell build up,
I'm fed up of seeing all this information then having it binned,
what is the truth?
why give us bite size hopes saying it has worked bla de bla bla but why keep us in the dark!?,

seriously they must know and we want the answers.

people are spending thousands on cures that do not work, when the real stuff is probably in the local boots pharmacy.

we need to demand the truth!!!

[edit on 7-7-2010 by jumpingbeanz]

Mod Edit: All Caps – Please Review This Link.

[edit on 7/7/2010 by Mirthful Me]


Surely the cures for many of the illnesses and diseases that can directly be attributed to being created by them, exist. These cures will be released in time, but only as a scheme to gain the trust of people. As in, them giving us the cures to the very diseases they gave us in the first place, so that in turn we trust them. Well, I for one am not falling for that. If you think they actually want to cure illness and cancer and help people, I think you should reassess the situation. The truth is they could cure almost any disease or cancer, but they will only release the cure as part of a scheme for them to gain our trust imo.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 12:30 PM
link   
reply to post by thewheelturns
 


sorry you forgot money aswell.....


I wonder how much the government spends on curing compared to raking it in for the drugs, if I knew where to look I would want a pie chart about this, there are many holes our dollars fall into.

there's one thing I know about cancer and that is that everyone I know who has drunk white cider on a daily basis is dead or on their way. I'm guessing thats the high amount of sulfurs

we also need a way of breaking the cancer gene out of our genes, so maybe in the future we should be able to mate to non cancer genes also, worth a thought

[edit on 7-7-2010 by jumpingbeanz]



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   
reply to post by jumpingbeanz
 


As a molecular biologist who has studied cancer biology and genetics, I'm highly affronted that you would accuse people like me and my colleagues of hiding 'the cure for cancer'. Who benefits from scientists hiding data? No one can make any money off of chemical formulation drawings sitting in a drawer, so big pharma is out. 'TPTB' I'd assume would much rather have a population that's living and working at full capacity and not draining insurance monies. So, really, who benefits from this?
Here's what I know: The past twenty or so years have lead to breakthrough after breakthrough in terms of understanding different types of cancer; inherited genetic predispositions (think BRCA-1), genetic markers such as oncogenes (ras or myc), and simply that cancer goes a lot deeper than 'one cell on a suicide mission'. Every cancer has a genetic fingerprint, and the one-size-fits-all treatments of radiation and chemo isn't cutting it.
I believe that you first must understand a disease in order to conquer it, and the honest truth is is that we don't yet have a full understanding of the thousands of different cancers there are and that are presented in hospitals every day. Sure, we can tell you how they may progress, we can give you expected survival rates, but we can't currently go in and fix the real problem: A series of genes in a select subset of cells in your body have mutated. We need to be able to identify and fix those genes. While nanotechnology looks promising as a method of select drug delivery, it's still in its infancy, and we can't fully exploit the technology.
This isn't easy stuff we're dealing with here. It's not like there is going to be a one-size-fits-all cure, because every cancer is fundamentally different.
I know it's frustrating. Think of how it is for us! We get an amazing new compound that does exactly what we need it to do in cell culture, we publish that data, we try to move it into an animal model, and suddenly we get nothing. We're back at square one. Or, what if we do get great results in an animal model, now we have to convince a lot of people that this is something we should try with humans, we get halfway through a phase I clinical trial and learn that the cancer cells adapt in such away as to become immune to the drug. (It's happened, actually.) Or, even worse, the drug is having unforeseen negative, potentially harmful side effects on the rest of the body. Granted this has all happened over 8-15 years and every time a promising drug gets to a Phase I trial the MSM is all over it, touting its wonderdrug properties. Then it fails. So, we are, again, back at square one.
Again, there isn't going to be one wonderdrug. We're going to find a cure one day, but it may be for Glioblastoma Multiforme and may not be applicable to Hairy Cell Leukemia. Just remember that there is no silver bullet in the fight for cancer. We're not fighting one monster, we're fighting a very complicated, stubborn, and angry legion of monsters.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 01:00 PM
link   
reply to post by jumpingbeanz
 


Perhaps they really know nothing of worth
With trillions of dollars dedicated to research worldwide they may be painfully aware that if they don't release false hope 'research results' we will no longer wish to dedicate more federal budget and donations to what may be a lost cause within our current medical capabilities.


Tragic as it is we will never be able to eradicate disease in all forms.
I know that Cancer has caused a lot of pain to victims and loved ones the world over,however,
Who knows what the biological and evolutionary consequences of all disease eradication would be,
just a thought.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Inamorata
 


please don't think I was aiming at you, I think the government has to put their hands up to the facts of cancer not telling us what we can do to change our lifestyles, but they do say....this can help towards fighting cancer, but then they say nah it doesn't really work, it is highly confusing, perhaps you could be a good help in this thread and how cancer works and is awakened within the body,

I even read sun creams can cause dna damage that causes cancer yesterday and now I'm like what!?
isn't that supposed to protect us, so in theory we are buying into things not knowing that they don't work!,,



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 01:57 PM
link   
reply to post by jumpingbeanz
 


I'll be happy to address the sunscreen issue, as it seems to be a hot topic, and there are a lot of articles going both ways on it. (What you don't see in MSM print is how the studies are set up, which makes all the difference in the world.)
The thread that was posted discussing sunscreen and DNA damage I believe is referring to this study done at the National Center of Toxicological Research in 2005, which finds that when retinyl palmitate, a form of vitamin A found in many cosmetics sold in the US, is exposed to UV-A, it can cause DNA mutation. Here's the deal, many of these preparations are in OTC skin moisturizers, lip balms, and anti-aging creams, which come with a 'warning' of sorts that the person wearing it should avoid long-term exposure to the sun. However, in sunblocks and sunscreen, though this warning exists on the label, it's kind of counterintuitive, because you would think that if you are wearing some type of protection, you can spend excess amounts of time in the sun.
Also, and I think this is important to note, when chemists originally made these formulations, we either didn't know or didn't have the ability to test these compounds. For instance, there are many anti-cholesterol drugs on the market that are highly effective in reducing someone's overall cholesterol levels, but we are unsure (we're not in the dark, there are many great theories with great data to back each) as to how they work. However, they provide a needed, beneficial effect for a mass populous, so until the scientific community sees a detrimental effect, they will continue to be in use.
Back to sunscreen... Other studies that show a plausible link between sunscreen and cancer, like this study published in 2000, was widely misread. The data shows that people who wear sunscreen are more likely to get sun damage. But that goes against the very essence of sunscreen, you say! Here's how to break it down: When people wear a higher SPF, say 30-50, they are more likely to stay out longer in the sun without reapplication and proper covering (hats, sunglasses, etc.) than those who wear a lower SPF of 10. Those wearing the higher SPF's were lulled into a false sense of security because they didn't burn, but because sunscreens and blocks aren't 100% effective, they still more than doubled their exposure to UV-A and B rays. I hope I'm stating this in a way that is understandable...
Back to retinyl palmitate... Here's what you can do to help avoid exposure: Look at the ingredients on your skin products! If you do buy a skin care formulation with a form of vitamin A, avoid exposure to the sun. If you're buying sunscreen, opt for actual sunblock that doesn't have retinyl palmitate or oxybenzone. ('Sunblock' is different from 'sunscreen' in that it is formulated to actual scatter the sunlight when it hits your skin, so that it isn't absorbed nearly as much.)



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:01 PM
link   
reply to post by jumpingbeanz
 



In some ways i agree but it's so much more complex then the government
saying....this can help towards fighting cancer, but then they say nah it doesn't really work,

The problem i see is on Tuesday they release that eating 2 carrots a week help prevent breast cancer and on Wednesday they release that 2 carrots a week is linked to stomach cancer,it's a complicated web.

refer to my first post it may just be as much a part of life as ants, rocks and fingernails.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
Greetings,

There is a cure for cancer that has been available since the 1930's. It's based on a phenomenon first observed in to late 1800"s. It's called Rife technology after the scientist who perfected the means of using the technology.

The gov,thru the FDA is trying, a succeeding in keeping this technology from the public and health practitioners, Also involved is the drug companies, the AMA and oil companies. Most of these are controlled by the Rockafellers.

In the '30's Rife, the AMA and other physicians used this technology on 16 terminal cancer patients, 2 of which also had tuberculosis. They were all deemed cured after several weeks of treatment.

Search " rife.org @ zerozero.

I have been using one of these devices for over three years and can attest to their value.

More recently the FDA pulled KANGAROO Court scam on a Jim Folsm for selling these devices.



posted on Jul, 7 2010 @ 02:24 PM
link   
I hit the wrong key.

To complete my comments.

zerozerotwo.org for a 2 ps dvd on the life of Royal Rife and this technology.

The AMA also did every thing they could to suppress this technology and ruin Rifes creditability.

To see the FDA/Folsom which hunt results search, jimfolsom.net



new topics

top topics



 
5

log in

join