Pharmacists give themselves cancer from dispensing toxic chemotherapy chemicals!

page: 1
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+10 more 
posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 08:18 AM
link   

Pharmacists give themselves cancer from dispensing toxic chemotherapy chemicals!




One of the side effects of chemotherapy is, ironically, cancer. The cancer doctors don't say much about it, but it's printed right on the chemo drug warning labels (in small print, of course). If you go into a cancer treatment clinic with one type of cancer, and you allow yourself to be injected with chemotherapy chemicals, you will often develop a second type of cancer as a result. Your oncologist will often claim to have successfully treated your first cancer even while you develop a second or third cancer directly caused by the chemo used to treat the original cancer.

There's nothing like cancer-causing chemotherapy to boost repeat business, huh?

During all this, the pharmacists are peddling these toxic chemotherapy chemicals to their customers as if they were medicine (which they aren't). While preparing these toxic chemical prescriptions, it turns out that pharmacists are exposing themselves to cancer-causing chemotherapy agents in the process. And because of that, pharmacists are giving themselves cancer... and they're dying from it.

Why pharmacists are dying of cancer
People who live in glass houses should never throw stones, they say. And you might similarly say that pharmacists who deal in poison shouldn't be surprised to one day discover they are killing themselves with it.

Chemotherapy drugs are extremely toxic to the human body, and they are readily absorbed through the skin. The very idea that they are even used in modern medicine is almost laughable if it weren't so downright disturbing and sad that hundreds of thousands of people are killed each year around the world by chemotherapy drugs.

Now you can add pharmacists to that statistic. For decades, they simply looked the other way, pretending they were playing a valuable role in our system of "modern" medicine, not admitting they were actually doling out chemicals that killed people. Now, the sobering truth has struck them hard: They are in the business of death, and it is killing them off, one by one.

The Seattle Times now reports the story of Sue Crump, a veteran pharmacist of two decades who spent much of her time dispensing chemotherapy drugs. Sue died last September of pancreatic cancer, and one of her dying wishes was that the truth would be told about how her on-the-job exposure to chemotherapy chemicals contributed to her own cancer.

Secondhand chemo
The Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA), it turns out, does not regulate workplace exposure to toxic, cancer-causing chemotherapy chemicals. At first glance, that seems surprising, since OSHA regulates workplace exposure to far less harmful chemicals. Why not chemo?

The answer is because the toxicity of chemotherapy has long been ignored by virtually everyone in medicine and the federal government. It has always been assumed harmless or even "safe" just because it's used as a kind of far-fetched "medicine" to treat cancer. This, despite the fact that chemotherapy is a derivative of the mustard gas used against enemy soldiers in World War I. Truthfully, chemotherapy has more in common with chemicals weapons than any legitimate medicine.

So today, while workers are protected from secondhand smoke in offices across the country, pharmacists are still being exposed every single day to toxic, cancer-causing chemicals that OSHA seems to just ignore. The agency has only issued one citation in the last decade to a hospital for inadequate safety handling of toxic chemotherapy drugs.

As the Seattle Times reports, "A just-completed study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) -- 10 years in the making and the largest to date -- confirms that chemo continues to contaminate the work spaces where it's used and in some cases is still being found in the urine of those who handle it..."


Full article here.




posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:49 AM
link   
Oh yes, they're training us to accept their lies like good little sheep... Chemotherapy helps cure cancer. (Any cure therefrom is more likely the placebo effect, as people believe in its help.)

Thank you for bringing this up. They are trying in many ways to kill us slowly so that they can reap both from initial illness and the illness caused by the "medicine."

Do a search for "Run from the Cure" to get a good idea of the information on cancer cures that are being suppressed.

If we want to stop this evil we are enveloped in, we must have a clear path and move along it as one. To that end I have written many posts here, compiled along with my partner's work in a free ebook. It is on ATS Media and is linked in the opening post of my discussion thread linked in my sig.

We can wrest the power over ourselves from the evil F#s who are running the show on our planet at the moment.

S&F for you!



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Hey remember when Valiums were the most addicted to drug in America?
The side affects were the same as the conditions it was prescribed for.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 09:59 AM
link   
The problem with pharmacology, IMHO, is that it is not relational in nature. You have one pill to handle one symptom without considering the entire system.

It is similar to what ecologists have found happens when a dam is installed. The entire hydrological system is hampered and there are upstream and downstream systems.

If you have a headache, your body is telling you something. Throwing an aspirin at the alarm doesn't solve the root issue.

One of these days I hope people, as a whole, start looking across the entire playing field versus their narrow view of self, home, city, state, nation, continent....Earth........Solar System...........Galaxy.......Universe.

Peace



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 11:30 AM
link   
The problem with pharmacology is that the drug companies are totally corrupt and without conscience and have an agenda which is hidden from the public.

They use falsified information, research documents, etc, to get drugs passed by the FDA (often with FDA complicity) , in full knowledge that the drugs are toxic and will cause cancer or other diseases. In fact, they want to give toxic drugs to the population. Their objectives? Keep bringing in billions of dollars of profit - create more illness, sell more toxic drugs - and reduce the population through intentional murder vis toxic poisoning (all part of the NWO agenda).

The Government and the Media are also complicit in this.

See Monsanto Cancer Milk. Fox kills story.
www.youtube.com...



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 12:01 PM
link   
Most chemotherapy treatments last for fewer than 6 months, with the exception of testicle and leukemias (there may be few others, these are the only two I've seen in my experience that last longer, up to a year).

By contrast, a pharmacist who works for 40+ years may encounter these drugs on a daily basis.

Do you see why this isn't a fair comparison to make? The pharmacist in the article is merely calling for better oversight and protection, much like wehave for radiologists now (wearing a RadBadge that detetcs if you've been exposed to too much radiation, which causes a mandatory bit of time off).

[edit on 7/13/2010 by VneZonyDostupa]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 12:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Amaterasu
Oh yes, they're training us to accept their lies like good little sheep... Chemotherapy helps cure cancer. (Any cure therefrom is more likely the placebo effect, as people believe in its help.)

Thank you for bringing this up. They are trying in many ways to kill us slowly so that they can reap both from initial illness and the illness caused by the "medicine."

Do a search for "Run from the Cure" to get a good idea of the information on cancer cures that are being suppressed.

If we want to stop this evil we are enveloped in, we must have a clear path and move along it as one. To that end I have written many posts here, compiled along with my partner's work in a free ebook. It is on ATS Media and is linked in the opening post of my discussion thread linked in my sig.

We can wrest the power over ourselves from the evil F#s who are running the show on our planet at the moment.

S&F for you!


My mother found out she had cancer last year. It was all contained in some sack by her liver. Other than the cancer there was nothing wrong- she worked and played etc like everyone else. So the doctors put her on chemo. Three months later my sister called so i could tell mom I loved her while she lay in a hospital bed only able to moan as she died. # all doctors who don't look for actual viable alternatives to these murder drugs.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 12:32 PM
link   
You guys need to read what VneZonyDostupa wrote ... the only post in this thread which makes any sense.

@ SirTFiedSkeptic ... I have a feeling that your mother's cancer was not as localized as you were lead to believe because if it was as localized as you said then surgery alone would have been curative with no need to use chemotherapy drugs. The fact that chemo was used indicates to me that it was advanced stage and unfortunately advanced stage liver cancer usually does not have a happy ending. Sorry for your loss



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 12:50 PM
link   
Wow, someone needs to tell Lance Armstrong that he really didn't need any of that Bleomycin to cure his cancer.

Better hurry up, I hear he's entered for this year's Tour de France again.

Chemotherapy is dangerous, I have heard it described as the balance between killing a patient with the cure or letting the disease do it - chemo takes you to the edge of death to defeat the disease, just as with a high fever.

The chemicals are extremely toxic, and the section of the article relating to the potential harm it causes to Pharmacists is very valid.

But when the author attempts to leverage that into a personal agenda of promoting herbal remedies, and suggests that there is no therapeutic value to chemotherapy, it gets silly.

Cancer survival rates have been steadily increasing since the 1950s, and I can assure you that the reason for that has nothing to do with cups of blackberry tea and elderberry infusions.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 01:03 PM
link   
reply to post by Retseh
 


Nothing personal but people like you are also a huge part of the problem. The medical industry doesn't need your excuses. It needs reform. And if all you're good for is poo-poo'ing viable alternatives just because you want to hop on the FDA-sponsored bandwagon of big-money disinformation, then you're really being good for nothing at all.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 01:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by AquariusDescending
reply to post by Retseh
 


Nothing personal but people like you are also a huge part of the problem. The medical industry doesn't need your excuses. It needs reform. And if all you're good for is poo-poo'ing viable alternatives just because you want to hop on the FDA-sponsored bandwagon of big-money disinformation, then you're really being good for nothing at all.


Yes, rather than using logic, scientific studies, and obvious clinical results (we have the highest cancer remission rate now than in all of recorded medical history), let's instead revert to using herbs and tinctures. It worked SO well back in the 18th century, when people regularly died in their 30s and 40s.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 01:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by zroth


The problem with pharmacology, IMHO, is that it is not relational in nature. You have one pill to handle one symptom without considering the entire system.

It is similar to what ecologists have found happens when a dam is installed. The entire hydrological system is hampered and there are upstream and downstream systems.

If you have a headache, your body is telling you something. Throwing an aspirin at the alarm doesn't solve the root issue.

One of these days I hope people, as a whole, start looking across the entire playing field versus their narrow view of self, home, city, state, nation, continent....Earth........Solar System...........Galaxy.......Universe.

Peace


I agree. This is similar to seismology and meteorology and ecology and climatology. Science fails to see how all are related. The entire fabric of the universe is tied together. Everything is related to everything else. I mean like the yearly flu outbreaks. Maybe these are the result of solar energy which cause earthquakes in a certain area which release the virus? Just a theoretical example. Everything is tied together, and until science realizes that, much will remain a mystery.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 01:36 PM
link   
ALMOST EVERY drug is toxic, every drug has side-effect but the goal is to find a consensus between the results and the risks ...Off course there are chemotherapeutics that damage DNA and cause other cancers but if there are other viable options to take your doctor will surely advise those.

Don't say stuff like chemo is placebo, thats just rediculous, there has been more than enough research that proves chemo disrupts cell mitosis. Most people seem to forget that some chemotherapeutics come from plants (eg. taxol) so if you think your herbs work you might as well accept that the drugs work too.

If you ever get cancer be sure to take your herbs and give us a shout when the cancer is in remission.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by johnthebon]



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 01:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Retseh
 


I don't at all dispute the efficacy of chemotherapy. I do believe that pharmacology needs to find a better way.

The reason, just so everyone knows, that chemotherapy is toxic is because it is intended to kill living cells. It does not specifically target cancer cells, but it does target them as a majority. It still kills living, non-mutated cells, which is why it weakens the patients so much. The reason that cancer is a side effect, imo, is not a direct result of the toxicity of it but because it weakens the immume system. It is typically the immune system's job to kill mutated cells, such as cancer cells. All of us have cancer cells in our body. Besides the body's own immune system, there is nothing known that can target cancer cells as different.from healthy cells. The thing that evades scientific knowledge is why does the immune system kill most cancer cells and yet some of them slip by? These ones that slip by are the ones that become full blown cancer. Once science can determine what causes these cells to evade the immune system they will be able to find a workable cure.

I disagree with the medical system as a whole (as do I with a lot of things) because it is a for-profit industry. Health is not something that someone should be making a profit from. It should all be non-profit organizations that deliver medical care. That's just my two cents.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 01:58 PM
link   
reply to post by dbloch7986
 


Its just very hard for the immune system to recognize these cells because they aren't very alien to our body (like viruses or bacteria). If you are trying to toy with the immune system you could evoke an auto-immune response, its just not that simple ...



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


Maybe we have the highest remission rate ever because we have the highest infection/infliction rate ever.

Just a thought



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by TXRabbit
reply to post by VneZonyDostupa
 


Maybe we have the highest remission rate ever because we have the highest infection/infliction rate ever.

Just a thought


Rate is a percent measure, not a per capita measure. Whether you have 100 cases or 1,000,000,000 cases, a 52% (or whatever percent you'd like) remission rate means exactly the same thing. It is not affected by the number of cases.

This is basic statistics.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 02:26 PM
link   
reply to post by TXRabbit
 


I assume he meant percentages, which means the only bias a higher number of people would mean is more training leading to better efficiency.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 02:29 PM
link   
The doctors never told me that I should take calcium supplements because chemo can cause decrease in bone density. They didn't tell me that chemo can lead to neuropathy. They only told me I had an 80% chance of survival if I could survive the actual chemo. So is being alive worth the risks? My family thinks so. But then they aren't the ones with neuropathy and brittle bones.



posted on Jul, 13 2010 @ 02:34 PM
link   
My mother had been a cancer surviver for years, then one day she came out of remission, and had to start chemotherapy. She had developed a tumor in her liver, and at they end they needed to do a transplant. But because of the chemotherapy it had completely destroyed her immune system, and made her way more sick than she already was. Because of the chemotherapy they were unable to do a transplant due to the fact that if they opened her up, she would die. So she was left to die a slow, and very painful death. Why they allow this stuff to even be used astonishes me. Thanks for posting this OP S&F.






top topics



 
1
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join