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.
Originally posted by VneZonyDostupa
If there is a cure, why do politicians seem to develop cancer at about the same rate as the general population? Why do the wealthy actually have HIGHER rates of cancer incidence (and thus cancer death) when it comes to certain cancers?
Don't you think the wealthy and politically connected would be the first to benefit if there were a cure?
Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by jude11
Wait I'm confused, are you saying it doesn't make sense to suppress a cancer cure because it would hurt those in charge economically in the long run? Because I think the money they rake in from all of the medical expenses more than makes up for that.edit on 11-6-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post
Originally posted by TupacShakur
reply to post by jude11
Ah I see, reduce the increasing population while making billions.
One question I have, since there are dozens, if not hundreds of cancer cures, many of them natural and organic, why are there cancer cure organizations? People donate millions of dollars to cure something that's already been cured, and where does it go? I would guess straight into the bank account of the man who keeps the cure a secret.edit on 11-6-2011 by TupacShakur because: To edit my post