Originally posted by Urantia1111
reply to post by Lucid Lunacy

---

You're a long-time member. He's notorious for stuff like this.

In this case he seems to be rooting FOR the Medical-Industrial Complex to slightly alter what would be a nearly free cure for cancer then charging dying patients $1000/mg for it.

Sorry. I thought this was common knowledge.

Originally posted by OutonaLimb

Originally posted by Urantia1111
reply to post by Phage

---

Interesting how you always manage to put an immediate kibosh on any idea that dares to step outside the confines of 100% mainstream western medicine and/or science.

Why would the Chinese know anything? They're only one of the longest enduring cultures on the planet. No way they could have anything figured out with only thousands of years of experience.

Agreed. Phage is a very dangerous (IMO), no-conspiracy-anywhere-ever type of guy.
One has to wonder what the hell he is doing here at all.
*******************************
When 'Phage' speaks, people stop and listen, and in some cases, are brought back down to Earth. I for one find His comments worthwhile and of value. In a forum with many a 'fringe' participants, it's a much needed refrain from the paranoia frenzy. As I pointed out in another post reply, 'he's been absent' for too many days.
*******************************

edit on 20-10-2012 by Plotus because: (no reason given)

The Blushwood (Hylandia Dockrillii) is a naturally growing tree known to exhist in a small area of the Australian Rainforest. In recent years, the chemicals contained in the seed of the Blushwood's fruit have been researched for the potential of anti-cancer properties.

Originally posted by Phage

It's disgusting that these 'Big Pharma' can prevent mainstream science from looking into natural solutions that could help people all over the world.

Do you have any idea how many products of "Big Pharma" are synthesized versions of natural compounds?

Interesting that your highly biased source failed to mention that the study involved such a synthesized compound. Interesting that your highly biased source failed to mention that the natural compound is not really useful. Interesting that your highly biased source didn't mention that the impressive results were found with the synthesized compound.

However, triptolide is poorly soluble in water, limiting its clinical use. We therefore synthesized a water-soluble analog of triptolide, named Minnelide.

So, as in most cases, a natural compound found to be somewhat effective is used as the starting point to produce something that may be very effective.

Together, our results suggest that Minnelide shows promise as a potent chemotherapeutic agent against pancreatic cancer, and support the evaluation of Minnelide in clinical trials against this deadly disease.

stm.sciencemag.org...

edit on 10/19/2012 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by NeoVain
reply to post by Wonderer2012

---

The thing i find most interesting here is the part where they claim it is bad for fertility in men, the exact same claim they have for Borax, which is another extremely important and useful substance to fight fluoridation, which most people are subject too due to water fluoridation as well as absorbing it through the mouth when brushing teeth. As is now becoming more and more widely known, fluoridation is very damaging to humans, lowering IQ, making bones brittle, causing cancer, arthritis etc. for more dangers of fluoride go here (www.fluoridealert.org...)

Borax, even in small doses, will absorb the fluoride from your system and expel it over time by natural means. E285 is another name for Borax, when it is used as a conserving agent used in foods such as caviar. The funny thing though is that E285(a european definition), is banned for human consumption in four countries: the U.S, Ireland, Australia and New Zealand. The same countries which also fluoridate their water the most. Coincidence?

Why is it banned? They claim it "may hurt fertility in men", although they have no proof of this other than a singular mouse test performed in the 60:s which yielded fewer offspring in mice.

edit on 19-10-2012 by NeoVain because: (no reason given)