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.


Scientists Cure Cancer, But No One Takes Notice

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on May, 14 2011 @ 02:18 PM
Goverment Scientist have most likley known about this procedure for a very long time, Disease in there eyes is a population control tool as well as an economical asset. No need to rant or rave about this anymore, we ALL know the truth.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 02:19 PM
Cancer cured

More money can go to other diseases that actually require some kind of a new cure

More people live, more people will work on Earth, can undo the damage we've done

Less people dying, less depression seeing a family member suffer

Better morale, better work ethic

...etc; it should be a positive cycle really.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 02:27 PM
reply to post by tankbuster

everytime i turn round either you or your pal are rubbishing, bad mouthing or trying to derail valid threads. you sir are undeniably a shill and a troll

Alfa1 has posted factual statements with links to back them up. He is telling the truth, unlike the sensationalized and inaccurate article the OP posted. Is this your idea of what a shill or troll does?

Alfa1 has made a solid, positive and verifiable contribution to this thread. You, on the other hand, have produced nothing but gas and bluster.

This thread is not ‘valid’. This thread is misleading and dangerous. Already there are people promoting asparagus and gotukola as cancer cures on this thread. I wonder how many deaths ATS and its more irresponsible members are responsible for. Seriously.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 02:39 PM
reply to post by Astyanax

People like him seem to ignore it and continue on with their cries of troll etc without actually reading up on the drug. I had stated on first page an article release as of 2 days ago released on trials conducted TRIALS which others as well posted later again for the troll criers, again ignored. In fact if they had researched this drug proactively they would of found out there was fundraising when no funding could be acquired

It's no use fighting with people who don't read. And yes kudos to all that did research on the drug.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 02:45 PM
All the threads on ATS this is by far one of the most's even published by Hubpages....

S+F for you friend. Great find and I hope everyone sees this.

Already 96k FB likes and I just added another...let's spread this thing around folks!

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 02:51 PM
This isn't the first time a cure has been found and nor will it be the last because like it has already been stated,too much money is made from people having cancer.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 03:13 PM
I wish I knew about this sooner. Recently lost my mother to cancer, it really makes me sick how they can do such a thing to people...all for money, brings tears infact.

So yes, spread the word people, please ...


posted on May, 14 2011 @ 03:22 PM

Originally posted by dwmjr1985
Big Pharma is making too much money off of people having cancer.

your right....i've got at least 5 dead loved ones to prove it.

and their medical bills.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 03:37 PM
Scurvy which is caused by Vitamin C deficiency killed people, predominately sailors on the open seas until it was realized that Citrus Fruit, naturally abundant in Vitamin C prevented this deadly illness.

Cancer is really no different.
The only difference is the huge industry that makes their existence and finances their huge salaries on treating cancer patients.

If we all continue to keep our heads so deep in the sand, how long will it take before we all begin to succumb to cancer ?

If we don't begin to look at some of these albeit questionable "Cures" what are our alternatives at the moment ?
Financial bankruptcy and/or Death ?

There's an Oncologist from Europe by the name of Dr. Simoncini that says that Cancer is a form of fungus and can be cured by merely changing the body's pH from an overly acidic one as cancer seems to thrive in , to a more balanced alkaline pH as a normal body possesses. He has cured his patients with mere baking soda....

Yes, as in Arm and Hammer Baking Soda....not baking powder which contains aluminum ....but Arm & Hammer baking soda aka Bicarbonate of Soda....a couple of teaspoons in water with Molasses twice a day even cured this older guy of stage 4 Prostate cancer meaning your time is up, and his doctors had sent him home to die.
Here he is two years later alive and well...

If it comes down to living or dying ...

I know that I would at least try it beats the hell out of the alternatives as far as losing all of my hair due to radiation poisoning aka Chemotherapy and going financially bankrupt due to the massive expense incurred.

Live Free or Die
edit on 14-5-2011 by nh_ee because: Typos

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 03:45 PM
This was posted about a month ago

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 03:56 PM
This is old news. This idea was introduced several years ago.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 04:05 PM
I believe this is the abstract from the study that Phage referenced earlier...

Dichloroacetate causes toxic neuropathy in MELAS
A randomized, controlled clinical trial

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy of dichloroacetate (DCA) in the treatment of mitochondrial myopathy, encephalopathy, lactic acidosis and stroke-like episodes (MELAS).

Background: High levels of ventricular lactate, the brain spectroscopic signature of MELAS, correlate with more severe neurologic impairment. The authors hypothesized that chronic cerebral lactic acidosis exacerbates neuronal injury in MELAS and therefore, investigated DCA, a potent lactate-lowering agent, as potential treatment for MELAS.

Methods: The authors conducted a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, 3-year cross-over trial of DCA (25 mg/kg/day) in 30 patients (aged 10 to 60 years) with MELAS and the A3243G mutation. Primary outcome measure was a Global Assessment of Treatment Efficacy (GATE) score based on a health-related event inventory, and on neurologic, neuropsychological, and daily living functioning. Biologic outcome measures included venous, CSF, and 1H MRSI-estimated brain lactate. Blood tests and nerve conduction studies were performed to monitor safety.

Results: During the initial 24-month treatment period, 15 of 15 patients randomized to DCA were taken off study medication, compared to 4 of 15 patients randomized to placebo. Study medication was discontinued in 17 of 19 patients because of onset or worsening of peripheral neuropathy. The clinical trial was terminated early because of peripheral nerve toxicity. The mean GATE score was not significantly different between treatment arms.

Conclusion: DCA at 25 mg/kg/day is associated with peripheral nerve toxicity resulting in a high rate of medication discontinuation and early study termination. Under these experimental conditions, the authors were unable to detect any beneficial effect. The findings show that DCA-associated neuropathy overshadows the assessment of any potential benefit in MELAS.

Well, that's a double blind, placebo-controlled, randomized, 3-year trial. Hmmm...only thing that his left to consider's possible that the underlying diseases with which the study participants were inflicted were casuing neuropothy. (though it's unlikely considering the consistency and the observation of peripheral nerve toxicity)

Toxic effects of DCA on rodents

Trichloroacetate (TCA) and dichloroacetate (DCA) have been shown to be hepatocarcinogenic in mice when administered in drinking water. However, DCA produces pathological effects in the liver that are much more severe than those observed following TCA treatment in both rats and mice. To identify potential mechanisms involved in the liver pathology, the biotransformation of TCA and DCA was investigated in male Fischer 344 rats and B6C3F1 mice. Rodents were administered 5, 20, or 100 mg/kg [14C]TCA or [14C]DCA as a single oral dose in water. Elimination was examined by counting radioactivity in urine, feces, exhaled air, and carcass. Blood concentration over time curves were constructed for both TCA and DCA at the 20 and 100 mg/kg doses. Analysis of the data reveals two significant differences in the systemic clearance of TCA relative to DCA. First, DCA was much more extensively metabolized than TCA. More than 50% of any single dose of TCA was excreted unchanged in the urine of both rats and mice. In contrast, less than 2% of any dose of DCA was recovered in the urine as the parent compound. Second, while the blood concentration over time curves for TCA were similar in rats and mice, the blood concentrations of DCA were markedly greater in rats compared to those in mice, both when DCA was administered and when DCA resulted from metabolism of TCA. DCA was detected in the urine of TCA-treated animals and chloroacetate was found in the urine of DCA-treated animals. These metabolic products would be expected to arise from a free radical-generating, reductive dechlorination pathway. To evaluate the ability of acute doses of TCA and DCA to elicit a lipoperoxidative response, additional groups of mice were administered 0, 100, 300, 1000, and 2000 mg/kg TCA or DCA and thiobarbituric acid-reactive substances (TBARS) measured in liver homogenates. Both TCA and DCA enhanced the formation of TBARS in a dose-dependent manner, thereby providing further evidence of a reductive metabolic pathway. DCA was found to be the more potent of the chlorinated acetates in increasing TBARS formation in the livers of both rats and mice. In view of these data, it appears that the more extensive metabolism and rapid rate of elimination of DCA relative to TCA and the more potent lipoperoxidative activity of DCA may be important factors in the pathological effects associated with DCA treatment.

edit on 14-5-2011 by DevolutionEvolvd because: (no reason given)

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 04:22 PM
Food for thought....

The rod of Asclepius, a snake-entwined staff, remains a symbol of medicine today, although sometimes the caduceus, or staff with two snakes, is mistakenly used instead.

In Roman iconography the caduceus was often depicted being carried in the left hand of Mercury, the messenger of the gods, guide of the dead and protector of merchants, shepherds, gamblers, liars and thieves.

Very telling, huh...

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 04:30 PM
Can I get a woot woot for Canadian Media for reporting it

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 04:40 PM
reply to post by camaro68ss

Its actually about restoring function to the cells.

Cells work in simple cycles. This is how they maintain your form.. If you cells didn't work in cycles, your body would see constant over growths of cells. IE: Tumors. Normally your body catches cells when they do this, they are killed and then broken down to be remade into normal cells again. Cancer happens when your body doesn't catch it. But this drug seems to simply restore that mechanism and return it to a normal level. With any irregular parts being removed slowly and gradually.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 04:44 PM
Instead of spreading disinformation about this very promising treatment, get your credit cards out and donate to the institution studying it flat out.

As has been pointed out, quacks are destroying this drug's reputation before it even passes clinical trials, before the scientists figure out which cancers it can help with, before they figure out correct doses which do not have the neuropathy side-effects, before they can help people with this important discovery.

The thread title is totally misleading. This is not a cancer cure. In clinical trials *some* cancers either shrink or remain at the same size. It is also not being suppressed. It is still being studied intensively.

I am sick to death of the lies on ATS which really have terrible consequences for the lives of many people. There is no such thing as a completely safe drug which you can take in any quantity which cures all cancer (at the moment). That being the reality, it is criminal to suggest to people who have cancer that they should self-treat with something that is in fact known to cause severe problems if not taken at correct dosages for a disease it may not help with. Please consider the lives of other people before making pseudoscientific prescriptions of something you don't have a clue about.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 04:52 PM
reply to post by freakjive

What a shame to think of the millions that could be cured but will die at the hands of billionaires who wish to add just a little more to that bank account... The irony in it may be that 1 in 4 will get Cancer. You can pretty much guarantee a couple of those guys are going to come down with it and wish they would have decided differently..

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 05:25 PM
There are a lot of things that have to be double, or even triple, checked when it comes to drug development. For example: does this chemical disrupt other metabolic pathways in the body? Does this chemical have any hidden toxicity?

Has this been tested in vitro or in vivo? Have the laboratory tests been independently carried out and confirmed by other research groups and scientists? Just a few questions to throw around instead of the usual "hurrrr scientists are trying to kill us all"

I've posted many times that it takes on average 15 years for a drug to come from start to finish, this was only discovered in 2007 so I would imagine that it will still be quite a few years before we see this.

Great news if it turns out to be true though

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 05:31 PM
reply to post by Griffo

Exactly, in the alberta university trial it was 2 years. They just released results as of 2 days ago so its still very early, especially to all the media of the world and proclaim "CURE!". The fact that this is getting any attention at all so early is a good thing, but only if people don't go looking for conspiracy where there is none. Medicine and science is far from perfect when it has to intermingle with corporations and money, but its not evil and intent on seeing our demise. If we didnt take time to investigate these things and make sure things are safe with no adverse affects, before jumping to conclusions.

posted on May, 14 2011 @ 05:33 PM
reply to post by hypervalentiodine

The research was done in 2007, and the people who did the research have complaints that nobody is taking interest.

How is what you just wrote any sort of reflection of the truth of this situation, or any sort of adequate response to what I wrote? I'm not criticising anyone for not revealing research at this stage (if people are researching now, that's great)

I'm drawing attention to the fact that the people who conducted the original research are complaining that other researchers/ Big Pharma/ governments aren't taking this seriously.

Besides - most researchers will provide an outline of current projects via the administrative centres responsible for maintaining their research organisation? So again I say, your argument is more or less moot, and essentially another made-up nonsense which has no general basis in reality.

You constructed a false argument in a knee-jerk backlash. Probably over-sensitive that your made-up nonsense about the non-patentability of compounds had been called out.? Not best to counter such accusations with more made-up nonsense.

The only legitimacies for the premise and aims of research not being shared at the outset of the research involve situations where the topic being investigated might have something to do with national security, or a product/ process/ compound etc that can be used to make money at the end of it all. Corporate advantage and all that.

Or, if it is in some way Mengelian, and thus shameful/ politically or legally risky to reveal.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in