Scientists suggest that cancer is purely man-made

reply to post by OnceReturned


I agree but don´t think its a modern disease.

every disease is man-made so I don't see anything new.

One thing I've always wondered about cancer, is that even if we did anything about the stuff that causes cancer, if it would be better if the human race were to evolve to a point where most will be immune to such things? I hope it's understood what I'm saying. The current problems with antibiotics for example: Overuse and they will cause the immune system to put down it's defenses while the the virus continues to mutate, making most treatments ineffective at a later point. To wipe out the things that cause cancer on this planet would be impossible, we might just have to wait until humans aren't susceptible to it any longer. I'm not so sure that cancer is man made, it is more likely triggered by the chemicals and elements that are more widely used these days.

reply to post by Michael Cecil

Oh, by the way, the use of micro-wave ovens, which destroy the very DNA structure of the proteins and vegetables which are cooked in them, are also implicated as a source of toxins. In other words, broccoli, for example, may very well be put into a micro-wave oven; but I would not even so much as hazard a guess as to what, precisely, comes out of the micro-wave oven after that broccoli has been cooked.

I'm glad you brought that up because I was gonna mention it myself. Recently, after much thought, we decided in my household to get rid of the microwave. As a society, we have yet to hear of the calamities that have been suffered by this highly suspect appliance. We decided it wasn't worth the potential risks.

Originally posted by predator0187

I was also reading a book where one of the world top astronomers said that the whole idea of staring at the sun makes you go blind is a myth as well, there has never been and proven accounts of this throughout history. I am just relaying the message so no yelling at me.

He said that yes if we try and stare for like 20 minutes it would do some damage but it would not be irreparable.

Pred...

I think you'll find that the damage is irreparable in most cases. I stared at the sun as a kid trying to see a partial eclipse, which actually caused a small burn on my right retina which has never gone away. This was at least 17 years ago now

reply to post by OnceReturned


Really interesting topic, and great study; not to mention this makes for a good discussion.

I wouldn't find it hard to believe cancer is man-made. We have ultimately set ourselves up for disasters, whether it be cancers and other diseases, or poisoning from contaminants etc...

We have produced a lot of toxins in this world, many of which are not disappearing over time, but rather erupting into larger quantities -- we've may have gotten better at waste disposal but we have not yet found a proper way of getting rid of it/recycling it for good.

And big pharma would rather see us sick then healthy; however I do know that some medicines have helped us live much longer, but in the long run, think about it... we live longer to get such much more which = $$$ for those who produce those medications which kept us alive longer in the first place.

I truly wish we used more alternative substances found naturally on this planet to help our needs but we have gone almost completely synthetic these days which is almost pitiful. To think cancer is not man-made would be close minded in my eyes because it's very possible if you look at the data, and do some research into the field of chemistry and pharmacology [which I have been doing for a long time].

Anyway, S&F -- I hope a lot of people take a look at this and think about all the pollution [all forms of it] that we cause each day in our own way and in a larger, global aspect.

reply to post by OnceReturned


The answer is actually more obvious than this.
WHy not compare the diaries of two people. One who has developed cancer and one who has not.
It wouldn't cost millions and millions to do.
It wouldn't need hundreds of chemists and engineers and scientist and statisticians.

It would just be a simple comparison, and it might actually give us something to work on.
YOu don't catch cancer through external environmental toxins, you don't even get it from food, drink or drugs.
You get it as a result of the way you think...end of story

While I think the poisons in the foods, water, soil, air, the posions in our plastics, our canned food, our cleaners IN A DELIBERATE ACT OF ATTEMPTED MURDER AND MURDER by the elites to thin the herd is ongoing, the diet is their corrupted one, and the pollutions are theirs.

This study is suspect, for its coming out with an angenda, to give them even more control over our food which is going to kill even more people.

It's unfair to blame mankind for the cause of cancer, when the obvious cultprit is the military industrial complex & biological warfare. Using parasites as the ultimate biological weapon.

The Forgotten Clue To The Bacterial Cause Of Cancer

The twentieth century was indeed the century of Modern Medicine with tremendous strides made in the understanding and control of infectious diseases, as well as the introduction of life-saving antibiotics and vaccines. Unfortunately, along with these advances came the perils of genetic engineering, the increasing threat of newly emerging viruses, biowarfare, and bioterrorism

Despite these scientific achievements, the cause of cancer remains a mystery. Scientists suspect genetic susceptibility, possible cancer-causing viruses, and environmental factors might play a role in some cancers, but none of these factors explain why millions of people die yearly from a variety of malignancies.

How could scientists put men on the moon, but remain so ignorant about cancer and its origin? How can the infectious causes of tuberculosis, leprosy, syphilis, smallpox, polio, malaria, and other viral and bacterial and parasitic diseases be understood, but the cause of cancer be unknown? Could the cause of cancer conceivably be an infectious agent that has been overlooked, ignored, or unrecognized by medical doctors in the twentieth century? Could the germ of cancer be hidden in the Russell body? - a large microscopic form known to every pathologist for over a century!

READ THE REST
www.rense.com...

www.zkea.com...

As far as the military industrial complex is concerned, we are all guinea pigs and that's all we are and we all live in a test tube.

admin edit: Please DO NOT quote more than 10% of an article in a copy/paste and ALWAYS use the "ex" tags.

Originally posted by patent98310
One thing I've always wondered about cancer, is that even if we did anything about the stuff that causes cancer, if it would be better if the human race were to evolve to a point where most will be immune to such things? I hope it's understood what I'm saying. The current problems with antibiotics for example: Overuse and they will cause the immune system to put down it's defenses while the the virus continues to mutate, making most treatments ineffective at a later point. To wipe out the things that cause cancer on this planet would be impossible, we might just have to wait until humans aren't susceptible to it any longer. I'm not so sure that cancer is man made, it is more likely triggered by the chemicals and elements that are more widely used these days.

No. Diseases are part of nature. Humans will never be immune to diseases.

Some diseases lead to death yes, but death is also part of nature.

creation/destruction, day/night, cold/warm, small/big things all exist in nature and so does the general concept of health/disease.

reply to post by auxxon


But you were staring at an eclipse. It went from one extreme to the other. It was caused by the pupil being dialated to night conditions to all of a sudden staring at the and unbelievably bright object. I was talking about just staring at it in the normal daytime.

Pred...

Originally posted by OnceReturned
All that being said, modernity has made humans healthier by almost any measure; we live longer and the infant mortality rate is drastically lower than it was even a couple hundred years ago. I don't think we should overreact to these findings and make a bee line for the stone age lifestyle, but I also don't think we should ignore the facts.

Funny you say the stone age lifestyle. Diet is the main cause of cancer, it was almost non-existent before the age of agriculture and animal husbandry. It still is nearly non-existent in the last remaining hunter gatherer tribes, along with other diseases of affluence, such as diabetes, asthma, etc.

en.wikipedia.org...

I believe there is a huge myth about the stone age lifestyle, that their lifespans were shorter than ours. If there is any truth at all to that, it is because they lived a much more violent life and had no access to modern medicine whatsoever. But, they did not die slowly of inflammatory diseases caused by a diet they were not evolved to eat, like we do today. The main culprits are highly processed foods, refined sugars and corn syrup, dairy, and grains with gluten like wheat. I cut those things from my diet, and adopted a paleolithic based diet, and my allergies and asthma are GONE, as well as my body fat. My cardio endurance skyrocketed as well. Anybody who wants to experience peak health, give it a shot.

There are races of people who are all slim, who are stronger and faster than us. They all have straight teeth and perfect eyesight. Arthritis, diabetes, hypertension, heart disease, stroke, depression, schizophrenia and cancer are absolute rarities for them. These people are the last 84 tribes of hunter-gatherers in the world. They share a secret that is over 2 million years old. Their secret is their diet- a diet that has changed little from that of the first humans 2 million years ago, and their predecessors up to 7 million years ago. Theirs is the diet that man evolved on, the diet that is coded for in our genes. It has some major differences to the diet of "civilization". You are in for a few big surprises.
www.earth360.com...

reply to post by OnceReturned


It's obvious that as we put more poisons into our environment, dioxin, DDT, aromatic hydrocarbons, EM fields etc, the incidence of cancers will increase. This is especially true since we are now all living much longer.

But don't forget our little microbial friends who can also screw us up, e.g.

Hepatitis viruses, including hepatitis B (HBV) and hepatitis C (HCV)
Human T-lymphotropic virus (HTLV)
Human papillomaviruses (HPV)
Kaposi’s sarcoma-associated herpesvirus
Merkel cell polyomavirus
Epstein–Barr virus (EBV)

So I wouldn't agree with the statement that "cancer is purely man-made"

I understand that most here may not have the access to read the article, but if you can’t read it then you should beware of drawing any conclusions.

Originally posted by OnceReturned
She concluded: “Yet again extensive ancient Egyptian data, along with other data from across the millennia, has given modern society a clear message – cancer is man-made and something that we can and should address.”

I believe the author was misquoted because nowhere in the article does she suggest cancer being man-made. Instead the authors clearly point out the evidence of cancer in ancient remains.

Besides making use of literary sources from early Greek and Egyptian societies, the authors decided to analyze cancer in both skeletal and soft tissue remains (from Egyptian mummies). To do this they have utilized several techniques to analyse the cancer, among them are macroscopic inspection, radiographic examinations, histological examinations, etc.

They note that the evidence of cancer in animal fossils (dinosaurs for example), non-human primates and early humans is scarce; and that some previous suggestions as to why that is, is the observation that ancient peoples simply had shorter life spans, and that ancient tumours might not preserve well over time.

They suggest that the rarity of cancer probably is the result of other factors. Also, they note that mummification preserves tumours because the societies lacked surgical interventions.

The authors “…propose that the minimal diagnostic evidence for cancer in ancient remains indicates the rarity of the disease in antiquity. Carcinogenic environmental factors have been linked to up to 75% of human cancers, and the rarity of cancer in antiquity suggests that such factors are limited to societies that are affected by modern lifestyle issues such as tobacco use and pollution resulting from industrialization.”

And concludes:
“It is hoped that research in palaeopathology will contribute to the elucidation of the pathogenesis of cancer. The publication of the first histological diagnosis of cancer in an Egyptian mummy is one step along the way. Despite the fact that other explanations, such as inadequate techniques of disease diagnosis, cannot be ruled out, the rarity of malignancies in antiquity is strongly suggested by the available palaeopathological and literary evidence. This might be related to the prevalence of carcinogens in modern societies.”

There's no reason to be afraid...

You know what i dont have any expertise to argue what these scientist say but if i heard or knew that there was a human factor into the causes of cancer i wont be very happy. Wednesday night, the day of disclosure (for those who are interested) my mum passed away due to cancer. So for now it maybe the way im thinking at this moment in time, but im not even going to agree with what the thread title is about, ill be honest i havent read the whole story but for now .. im sorry its all complete BS. Sorry if i upset anyone saying what i think and feel but yeh like is aid it couldd be the postion im in at the minute, to say cancer is human made .. naaa

reply to post by Michael Cecil


As soon as I saw this thread I though of Dr. Max Gerson, glad someone else out there has heard of it.

I hope more people start realising the truth of this research, though we will not be in a position to control it for sometime.
I believe that Cancer has been around for thousands of years, and this is well documented. We have seen an exponential acceleration however in our modern age, and this is down to a number of factors, mainly;

1. Stress
   
2. Diet
   
3. Toxins
   
4. Medication
   
5. Change in Our Physiology
   

We are BOMBARDING our body with toxins, literally with every breath. Our body is perfectly adapted to fight off most cancers, but once our immunity is lowered because of the above, the cancer is allowed to grow, which then deteriorates our body more, cumulatating in a very fast, downward spiral.

We drink, we smoke, our air is polluted, our water is poisoned, we genetically change the structure of our food due to modern farming and processing methods, our diet intake is completely wrong, consisting of mainly sodium as opposed to potassium.

We work long hours, we spend two much time unprotected in the sun, we eat at the wrong times of the day, when we get tired (or our body feels remotely lagging) we fill ourself with medication.

Modern medical science relies too heavily on foccusing on the parts rather than the whole, and every small change we make to our body has massive, unknown consequences. Hormones, the Lymphic system, Enzymes are literally what keep our body processing, and we are constantly turning the dial on this very sensitive machine, and we don't know what the result will be... Ecxept more cancer.

IF WE CANNOT MAINTAIN OUR BODY LIKE IT IS DESIGNED, THEN WE WILL DEVELOP CANCERS

Please look into the Gerson therapy, I made reference to it in the following thread and have been meaning to create a thread specific to it for a very long time; it will change your life.

The Beautiful Truth Documentary

Is cancer strictly limited to humans or are there cases of animals with cancer?

reply to post by allourep


Yes, animals develop cancer. It helps if you read the discussion thus far.

It's really important not to get caught up in the semantics of this article. The point is, lifestyles, environments and diets associated with industrialized modern society are toxic, with the latter being predominant. Of course there are genetic and viral components, but these influences don't explain observations made over the last 50 years or so.

reply to post by DevolutionEvolvd


Exactly. I can't believe this has not gotten more attention? Its probably because most people thrive off fear, and when they see a chance to change things for the better they shy away from it. Its a shame.