Pharmacists give themselves cancer from dispensing toxic chemotherapy chemicals!

Originally posted by johnthebon
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 ...

My point was that the thing that oncology is searching for is why do some cancer cells in the body get eliminated and some don't. The immune system can take care of the majority of mutated cells but in a few instances it will miss some of them.

The key to a cure is to figure out what is it that makes those cells different fom healthy cells and use that to create a treatment to target that difference. Last I heard they were working on a virus to do it. But lord knows how that would turn out. Zombies anyone?

The thing that sometimes is forgotten is we all have cancerous or precancerous cells in our bodies at some point. The mutated cells are supposed to either self-destruct or get killed by the immune system, and they obviously do in a majority of cases because everyone does not have cancer. Once science figures out why they don't sometimes that is the first stepping stone to a cure.

My grandmother had lukemia and died from it. She endured months of chemo for naught. My grandad has had liver cancer and chemo three times and he is still alive and healthy. So I have seen both sides of the fence. Chemo is not a guaranteed cure, its just the best we have right now.

And by the way, drugs come from herbs. And herbs have side effects too. Herbs are modified molecularly to isolate and enhance the medicinal properties to make them more effective an this forms drugs. Unfortunately this also enhances the side effects.

I'm sure most of you have used anesthesia. Well that comes from venom of snakes and spiders. Anyone want to endure the side effects of a rattlesnake bite before surgery?

The only drugs I totally disagree with are psychotropic. Any drug that messes with your head has no place in medicine for me.

reply to post by Danbones


Of course, that is a blanket attack on all chemos. You would almost think that no one was ever saved from cancer by their use. But I personally know better.

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Aliensun]

There's also studies linking X-ray radiation to the metastasis of cancer. Meaning that type of radiation causes relatively inactive tumors to become agressive and begin spreading. Which is sick because cancer patients get more x-rays than nearly anyone.

It's the greatest evil of our time. And you notice how there's no talk at all of 'carcinogens' anymore in most news and medical studies? It's all about the genes now. Blame the victims.

So what do you people recommend? Do you have a cure for cancer? You don't even know for sure that anyone has a cure for cancer. If you would rather die than get chemo, then that's your choice. If you would rather your mom die than get chemo, well that's not your decision. You can take the chance of being killed by chemo or unchecked cancer, but I bet your survival chances are greater with chemo. No one is going to give you a cure for cancer right now. So take your pick, chemo or unchecked cancer. Those are your only options today. I've never met anyone cured of cancer by herbs. The day I do I will be sure to let you know.

[edit on 7/13/2010 by dbloch7986]

Let’s hear from a couple of physicians and doctors who have not yet succumb to the heavy hand of the cancer industry: "...as a chemist trained to interpret data, it is incomprehensible to me that physicians can ignore the clear evidence that chemotherapy does much, much more harm than good." - Alan C Nixon, PhD, former president of the American Chemical Society.

Walter Last, writing in The Ecologist, reported recently: “After analysing cancer survival statistics for several decades, Dr Hardin Jones, Professor at the University of California, concluded “...patients are as well, or better off untreated." Jones’ disturbing assessment has never been refuted.

Professor Charles Mathe declared: “If I contracted cancer, I would never go to a standard cancer treatment centre. Cancer victims who live far from such centres have a chance.”

“Many medical oncologists recommend chemotherapy for virtually any tumor, with a hopefulness undiscouraged by almost invariable failure,” Albert Braverman MD 1991

Lancet 1991 337 p901 “Medical Oncology in the 90s. “Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon, or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade, yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumors,”

Allen Levin, MD UCSF The Healing of Cancer. “Despite widespread use of chemotherapies, breast cancer mortality has not changed in the last 70 years,” Thomas Dao, MD NEJM Mar 1975 292 p 707.

www.mnwelldir.org...

It's a pretty messed up world when people are convinced that the man made chemicals and food additives that they consume everyday are helping their health, then later find themselves in bad health, and continue to be convinced that chemicals will be their salvation. Wake up people.

Too bad that people get poisoned at work by handling the items their masters tell them to.
I think I would find a new master or occupation.
On the brighter side Pharmacists make a bundle.
All of that and never a bead of sweat off your brow and bankers hours, not bad all in all.

reply to post by dbloch7986


I agree with everything you're saying and there is ongoing research into specific differences between cancerous and normal cells. They use this research to create specific antibodies that attach themselves to these tumor cells, these antibodies are in turn connected to another antibody that contains a chemotherapeutic. This method allows for more specific treatment (less side-effects). But they can't treat all tumors with this method and I can imagine its pretty expensive .. (it should be because the costs are very high too)

I can imagine this is pretty close to what you're hoping for is to become the standard?

reply to post by johnthebon


That's exactly what I am hoping one day to be available to everyone. Unfortunately due to insurance companies reluctantcy to pay for such experimental treatment it is difficult for the common man to get such care. I am aware that due to the uniqueness of cancers there is no "one size fits all" treatment. I have read of viruses being used to target the mutated dna of cancer cells and destroy them. But the risk of viral mutation is high and there is no way to stop a virus as of yet. Hopefully one day something like this becomes available but until then, chemo is all we have to even hope of defeating this deadly disease.

[edit on 7/13/2010 by dbloch7986]

i know about 10-12 people who either have cancer, or have lost to it. one of those people is my dad, he is a doctor and he started his own practice and built it up by himself. he's one of the few doctors i know (and i know quite a few) who makes house calls at no extra cost. his mother passed away from cancer, and it broke his heart. she had skin cancer from being irradiated as a youth (it was thought to cure acne) and she had lung cancer from asbestos (neither he nor his mother sought to sue for the asbestos or the acne treatments). believe me when i say that his only care was trying to save her, he put her on chemo. if someone starts on chemo, they're already down and out, but it does kill cancer cells. though it messes up your bowels, hair, and bone marrow. in the end, when it was clear she was going to die, he brought her home and treated her with love and morphine. she died in the night, and it broke his heart.

for those of you expecting chemotherepy to fix everything with no side effects, you are deluded. it is a last stand option. my mother's best friend died of breast cancer, she did chemo, and it caused the cancer to disappear for two years. thats two more years of happyness with her kids before she passed away, leaving a daughter, two sons, and a husband.

Originally posted by ReeVeeR

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.

Fearmongering. My son was diagnosed with cancer when he was 3, and I am in the medical field. Now on to your comments. Chemotherapy refers to and chemical used to treat cancer. Any chemical. There are only 9 chemo drugs which are known carcinogens. And they are heavy duty medications. Not all chemo drugs have the potential to cause cancer. And jsut because something is a carcinogen doesn't mean it will give you cancer, it simply increases your risk.

As far as saying that if you are treated with chemo you will often develop a 2nd or 3rd type of cancer because of the chemo is an outright lie.

Hundreds of thousands of people are not killed by chemo drugs each year. 500,000 people die a year from cancer in the US. And for the past several years that number has been dropping. The 5 yr survival rate from 96-2006 is 66% compared to 51% 30 years ago.

As far as OSHA not having guidelines:

HAZARD DEFINITION BASED ON PHARMACOLOGY/TOXICOLOGY.

Professional judgment by personnel trained in pharmacology/toxicology is essential in designating drugs as hazardous, and reference 65 provides information regarding the development of such a list at one institution. Some drugs, which have a long history of safe use in humans despite in vitro or animal evidence of toxicity, may be excluded by the institution's experts by considerations such as those used to formulate GRAS (Generally Regarded As Safe) lists by the FDA under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act. In contrast, investigational drugs are new chemicals for which there is often little information on potential toxicity. Structure or activity relationships with similar chemicals and in vitro data can be considered in determining potential toxic effects. Investigational drugs should be prudently handled as HD's unless adequate information becomes available to exclude them.

Some major considerations by professionals trained in pharmacology/toxicology65 in designating a drug as hazardous are:


Is the drug designated as Therapeutic Category 10:00 (Antineoplastic Agent) in the American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information?68
Does the manufacturer suggest the use of special isolation techniques in its handling, administration, or disposal?
Is the drug known to be a human mutagen, carcinogen, teratogen or reproductive toxicant?
Is the drug known to be carcinogenic or teratogenic in animals (drugs known to be mutagenic in multiple bacterial systems or animals should also be considered hazardous)?
Is the drug known to be acutely toxic to an organ system?
www.osha.gov...

And just for reference the study regarding contamination of pharmacists and medical professionals handling chemo meds was not completed. It was put on hold. Twice. So there are no statistics to validate your comments.

Most antichemo articles come from the alternative medicine crowd. WHy do they rip chemo? Because it works? Without chemo and radiation(and its derivatives) do you have any idea what the mortality rate for cancer would be?

Here is a list of all chemo drugs. Remember only 9 are known to be carcinogenic. And the people getting those heavy duty meds probably aren't expecting to live long enough for a secondary cancer to possibly develop 20 years later.

Educate yourself with something other than herbal remedy quacks.

www.chemocare.com...

All single constituent extracts, synthetic or otherwise pose significant risk as toxic elements on the body for a number of reasons. First DNA mutation occurs only with predominant single constituency elements, the best example is anti biotics. A single compound anti biotic presents a singular element that the bacteria can identify and respond to evolutionarily. Broad based antibiotic action as presented in a plant based medium creates an environment that cannot be responded to in the same way as a drug or standardized solvent extract.

Chemo therapy solutions like Taxol which is a derivitive of the English Yew tree is a chemical match for turpentine made from its cousin the White Pine. Turpentine is absolutely transdermal (meaning catalyzes through the skin into the blood stream) so its perfectly reasonable to conclude its causing adverse disease conditions to recipients as well as handlers.

Many people when stripping and refinishing furniture using chemically similiar properties to turpentine have been known to develop cirrhosis of the liver and other maladies from improperly protecting themselves while using the products.

There are many remedies for cancer that have been found over the past 60 years all of which have been bought and patented by Big Pharma and then hidden away in order to continue with longterm treatment rather then cure for monetary reasons.

The most recent example is Blushwood Fruit seeds found in Australia that has literally cured a number of different cancers including Melenomas etc...in dogs sheep etc...this year with complete recovery in 2 weeks! see this link: current.com...

Taking time i could present you with a number of these instances...Western Medicine is in cahoots with big oil....the pharmaceuticals are made through petroleum distillates for cryin out loud.

reply to post by DrJay1975


I retract statements as I deemed them unkind...I am sorry for your sons cancer and I am glad he is recovering. My family on the other hand...all of them except me...are not doing so well by the model you support. My herbal quackery as an acupuncturist/herbalist helped in all 5 cases to such an extent the Doctors actually asked for my protocol. It would be alot more righteous of you not to cast stones and refer to our 5000 year empirical history of cures as quackery...thank you

Oh and by the way....ONLY 9 carcinogenic chemo therapies...ONLY?

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Shadowfoot]

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Shadowfoot]

[edit on 13-7-2010 by Shadowfoot]

I worked in a pharm packaging plant, and the chemo room was hermetically sealed, and the workers had to wear breathing masks with filtered air and special gloves.

The problem I see with chemo is that it kills the immune system as well as well as cancer cells. Basically it kills all fast-growing cells.

I am a pharmacist and I have worked in a hospital making chemotherapy as requested by doctors. The article is pretty inaccurate. I used to make the drugs up in an air tight room in protective clothing, head to toe covered. The actual drugs themselves were then prepared in a sealed fume cupboard, my arms in those gloves you see attached to the front glass. There was an air flow coming out of the fume cupboard to take any vapors straight out.

No chemotherapy ever touched my skin, in fact it did not touch my two layers of gloves since I made it up using syringes to get precise quantities.

There is about 1000 times less chance I would come into contact with the drugs than the nurse who would administer them

reply to post by dbloch7986


There are many ways to cure cancer. The basic philosophy is to increase the body's immune system to make the body to fight cancer. The key mechanism of body immune system is to create the hydrogen peroxide in the body. Even the plants create hydrogen peroxide to fight for the germs that may infect them. That's how the fruits contain so much hydrogen peroxide in the form of the juice. The cancer cells are killed by the extra oxygen in the body. That's why the deep breathing habit is so important for good health.

To get to the point, some people also use oxygenated water to cure for cancer by drinking it. But the best and the simplest way to supplement oxygen in the body is to take one and half tea spoon of hydrogen peroxide of the drug store grade mixed with a cup of any kind of juice twice a day. No one in the medical field will suggest this method. But it is the most potent medicine for cancer. It is like taking a several gallons of fruit juice if you consider only for the amount of hydrogen peroxide intake.

Never take more than your body can handle. As you increase the amount of hydrogen peroxide by a half tea spoon, you will feel increased body heat and sweating which is a good sign that the toxic material is coming out of your body. You don't have to continue more than you need to. But you will soon realize that the extra oxygen in the body kills more germs and the cancer cells than any available medicine in the world.

After all, hydrogen peroxide is the byproduct of the body's immune system. What you are doing is just boosting the body's ability to produce the hydrogne peroxide from the external source so that body can take over the normal immune response.

When the immune system breaks down, it becomes the rapid spiral downward, and this is the time that you need the external boost of hydrogen peroxide intake. And you can feel how the body's immune system restores by itself each day as you take the mixed juice.

Also, when people are bitten by a poisonous snake, they put the patient in the high pressure oxygen chamber to neutralize the poison. Of course, they can use the hydrogen peroxide for the same purpose within the limit not to exceed the amount body can handle.

The best way to get more detailed information is to search for Google on the subject.

Originally posted by notsoperfect
reply to post by dbloch7986

 

There are many ways to cure cancer. The basic philosophy is to increase the body's immune system to make the body to fight cancer. The key mechanism of body immune system is to create the hydrogen peroxide in the body. Even the plants create hydrogen peroxide to fight for the germs that may infect them. That's how the fruits contain so much hydrogen peroxide in the form of the juice. The cancer cells are killed by the extra oxygen in the body. That's why the deep breathing habit is so important for good health.

To get to the point, some people also use oxygenated water to cure for cancer by drinking it. But the best and the simplest way to supplement oxygen in the body is to take one and half tea spoon of hydrogen peroxide of the drug store grade mixed with a cup of any kind of juice twice a day. No one in the medical field will suggest this method. But it is the most potent medicine for cancer. It is like taking a several gallons of fruit juice if you consider only for the amount of hydrogen peroxide intake.

Never take more than your body can handle. As you increase the amount of hydrogen peroxide by a half tea spoon, you will feel increased body heat and sweating which is a good sign that the toxic material is coming out of your body. You don't have to continue more than you need to. But you will soon realize that the extra oxygen in the body kills more germs and the cancer cells than any available medicine in the world.

After all, hydrogen peroxide is the byproduct of the body's immune system. What you are doing is just boosting the body's ability to produce the hydrogne peroxide from the external source so that body can take over the normal immune response.

When the immune system breaks down, it becomes the rapid spiral downward, and this is the time that you need the external boost of hydrogen peroxide intake. And you can feel how the body's immune system restores by itself each day as you take the mixed juice.

Also, when people are bitten by a poisonous snake, they put the patient in the high pressure oxygen chamber to neutralize the poison. Of course, they can use the hydrogen peroxide for the same purpose within the limit not to exceed the amount body can handle.

The best way to get more detailed information is to search for Google on the subject.

Hydrogen peroxide is interesting.

What is also interesting is that the body naturally produces sodium bicarbonate, or good old baking soda which kills cancer cells.

For those of you who choose to NOT use chemo, that is your choice. But the article was very biased and did not represent anything more than a personal opinion, from someone who is not a medical doctor or pharmacist. He also is involved with the sale of thing his article reccomends. IOW, he is doing some of the very things that the "big pharmas" are accused of doing.

Chemo is dangerous, it's toxic, it's chemicals.......and it's not offered to just anyone off the street, it is prescribed to people who have very little hope of cure of cancer by any other means. It was prescibed for my father, after the surgeon saw that the tumor was too widespread and of the wrong type to remove surgically. It is hoped that the tumors will shrink enough to then be operable. He's going to be going through an agressive protocol, as soon as possible, and as quickly as possible. It is our only hope of saving him from aggressive cancer.

Ask someone dealing with cancer if chemo is a good idea of not. Unless you have specific knowledge in the related fields, your views are only an opinion. An UNLEARNED opinion.
And to those who say herbs never caused harm (and similar) need to remember tobacco is an herb. Coca is an herb. Heroin is an herb. Digitalis is an herb. Belladonna is an herb. Hemlock is an herb. Poison ivy is an herb. There are many natural things that can cause fast and painful disease, injury and death.

reply to post by DrJay1975


So I could not find the source of your comment of only 9 carcinogenic therapies. Also, the website you referred us to is from the CLeveland Cancer Center, so I believe they are probably big buyers of the chemo approach. They do not seem to be selling anything herbal on that site, so they are biased, and not a great source alone in this debate.

As we all KNOW... chemo and cancer are BIG business. Anything natural and free is NOT going to work, becuase there is little money to be made.

It would be great to see some serious studies on cancer patients that only used more natural protocols, but sadly these are few and far between.

It is my opinion, that we really don't know what would happen if we treated cancer by more natural means becuase it simply is not even an option by most all doctors.

www.naturalnews.com...

This is the medication I'm currently on, and every day I find more and more down sides to it - personally I'm moved to stop taking it, I seem to suffer from the majority of the side effects and frankly I'd rather live a few short years feeling half way decent than 10 years feeling like hell.

I don't know how others under treatment feel, but that's just my opinion - it seems like these "cures" do just as much damage, if not worse, than what they are trying to treat.

- Fry



[edit on 13-7-2010 by Fryaga]

This is a very interesting find, OP'er.

My intuition tells me that during the years of training a Pharmacist receives; they'd be aware of these effects physiologically - both personally and to the patients.