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.

 

I'm not buying that; Men: Giving Oral Sex To Women Causes Cancer.,

page: 1
7

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:08 PM
link   
First of all the American Cancer Society is not to be trusted.

This is a field where, if they are successful and cure cancer they have put themselves out of a lucrative line of work. And how often do we see this happen in our Country?

Second the AMA is not to be trusted. It is controlled by the Rockefeller (=Rothschild) family, and has been teaching future doctors that we need lot's of operations - even unnecessary ones - and lot's of drugs prescribed. Huh, look at that, the Rockefeller interests doing things that help other Rockefeller interests - namely the pharmaceutical industry. (See, Jim Marrs - The Rise Of The Fourth Reich)

Also, anyone who has dealt with doctors in the US and seen how doctors operate in other countries knows all too well that something about dedication to money over the patient's health should be inserted into the Hippocratic Oath. Sure there are good doctors in the US, but they are hard to find and represents a doctors personally making a decision beyond what they "were taught to do."

Third, a thread that cannot be responded to? How does that work? Smells like a free advertisement for groups that are less than trustworthy. Besides some of us have been researching this sort of thing and have something serious to say.

Remember too that Jefferson admonished us to question everything, literally everything. Including medical sacred cows. To my mind these "sacred cows" need looked at closer than most of the other cattle because they are immune to criticism. But we don't do it because of programming. Yes, I remember the propaganda show Marcus Welby M.D.

There I got this off my chest.

One caution please though, let's be adults on this. This is actually a serious subject. I feel that this represents a bureaucratic entity trying to justify it's existence and explain how cancer has not subsided even though the majority of Americans have quit smoking cigarettes. Well there must be another cause... It couldn't be our polluting corporations and cell phone towers and unsafe corporate mega-farms because they are all profitable to their CEOs and share holders.

Okay ATS, what say you? I know I am not the only one who has run into these dots and connected them.

From the header of the Forum topic; "This forum is dedicated to the discussion of conspiracies" I am referring to the word discussion in this quote.
edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Ittabena
 


This is a duplicate topic of a thread that has been closed for staff review. Tread lightly. I would like to mention that a vast amount of the population has HPV, most of them just don't know it. 1 in 3 college women have it. Just FYI.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:16 PM
link   
reply to post by BIGPoJo
 





This is a duplicate topic of a thread that has been closed for staff review. Tread lightly. I would like to mention that a vast amount of the population has HPV, most of them just don't know it. 1 in 3 college women have it. Just FYI.


No this is a response to a thread which was closed because of juvenile behavior. Sorry but I do not know how to tread lightly when I am speaking about corruption, nor do I have any desire to learn how.



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:17 PM
link   
already posted, try using search

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:20 PM
link   
reply to post by HomerinNC
 





already posted, try using search


No, this is a response to that thread, try reading. Besides this thread can be discussed, in the other one discussion was not allowed because of juvenile behavior.

This one is about dirty dealings in the medical community. In the other... Well, I won't go there.
edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ittabena
Third, a thread that cannot be responded to? How does that work? Smells like a free advertisement for groups that are less than trustworthy. Besides some of us have been researching this sort of thing and have something serious to say.

Remember too that Jefferson admonished us to question everything, literally everything. Including medical sacred cows. To my mind these "sacred cows" need looked at closer than most of the other cattle because they are immune to criticism. But we don't do it because of programming. Yes, I remember the propaganda show Marcus Welby M.D.

There I got this off my chest.


edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)


It is only being reviewed because of people's inappropriate comments. Not because of the research.

You can look at the 2 sources I gave for the articles, along with the 4 papers and studies that were conducted.

If you even took the time to read the damned article you would see that the research shows tha...


Dr. Maura Gillison, the lead author and a researcher at Ohio State University, said the study “provides us some reassurance” that most people with oral HPV will not get oral cancer.


Now for the love of whatever imaginary being you find holy...

Stop spreading false truths...



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:26 PM
link   
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 





Stop spreading false truths...


Sorry you do not like the thread. But the truth you perceive about this thread has little or nothing to do with the subject of this thread.

I stand by my words as I always do.

Perhaps you can show me where I lied? Because I have not willingly done so for several decades.

The S+F seem to think I am about something here so far.

edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ittabena

Perhaps you can show me where I lied?

-I feel that this represents a bureaucratic entity trying to justify it's existence and explain how cancer has not subsided even though the majority of Americans have quit smoking cigarettes.-
edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)


There is one right there...

No majority has quit smoking, and yet you use that false info to justify your opinion.

Please don't make me point out everything...
edit on 26-1-2012 by YouAreLiedTo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:34 PM
link   
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 





No majority has quit smoking, and yet you use that false info to justify your opinion.


How old are you? In my lifetime I have seen a huge, massive reduction in smokers. The anti-smoking laws are a clear indication of that. Also in my small town there are two tobacco shops, one is on the verge of closing. The other keeps it's head above water by selling paraphanalia, and knives, and porn. Indeed at the store I work at cigarette sales are nothing like they were decades ago.

In all honesty I think you should turn this accusation on yourself, in this case.
edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:44 PM
link   
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 





Please don't make me point out everything...


I guess he really didn't want to...



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ittabena
reply to post by YouAreLiedTo
 





No majority has quit smoking, and yet you use that false info to justify your opinion.


How old are you? In my lifetime I have seen a huge, massive reduction in smokers. The anti-smoking laws are a clear indication of that. Also in my small town there are two tobacco shops, one is on the verge of closing. The other keeps it's head above water by selling paraphanalia, and knives, and porn. Indeed at the store I work at cigarette sales are nothing like they were decades ago.

In all honesty I think you should turn this accusation on yourself, in this case.
edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)

edit on 26-1-2012 by Ittabena because: (no reason given)


Guindon, G. Emmanuel; Boisclair, David (2003) (PDF). Past, current and future trends in tobacco use

"As of 2000, smoking was practised by around 1.22 billion people. At current rates of 'smoker replacement' and market growth, this may reach around 1.9 billion in 2025.[13]"

The number of smokers in the world is INCREASING my friend...

Do you do any research before posting "facts"?

Or do you just go by what you see in small town America?

Because if you only have 2 tobacco shops... you aren't in a metro...



posted on Jan, 26 2012 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by HomerinNC
already posted, try using search

www.abovetopsecret.com...


Closed.



new topics

top topics



 
7

log in

join