In a speech to health journalists, Dr. Brawley called the current system “a subtle form of corruption” and admitted that doctors routinely lie about the success rates of both screenings and treatments alike — including PSA exams, bone marrow transplants, and chemotherapy.
He even ‘fessed up to the dirtiest secret of the cancer industry (and yes, make no mistake it IS an industry): The system is set up to steer patients not toward the best or most effective treatments — just the most profitable ones.
“Twenty-five years after graduating from medical school, I concluded that a lot of doctors are out to make a buck and a lot of doctors are out making stuff up as they go along,” he admitted.
Tell me something I don’t know.
Originally posted by jondave
I have had chemo in 2006 and 2012 for a relapse. It was stage 4, and now I am in remission again. My advise is live every moment an fight every setback.
Originally posted by Northwarden
LOL. I looked at the first link. "Satanic racket?" I would humbly suggest that any site perporting itself to be an evaluation of the treatment that starts off by calling it a "Satanic racket" is not an objective, scientific, study of the issue.
Did anyone mention that it doesn't matter what I, or you, or anyone believes, it's about what they believe. Bilderbergers leave a chair open at their tables for Lucifier. You are unaware this happens, or that many support that ideology? I humbly submit that you need to do much, much more research then.
And, yes, I'm not going to bother citing thousands of studies of different agents that increase survival rates and quality of life because I know that if you are using a site as a reference that uses the term "satanic racket" there is no way that you will accept scientific data for an answer and you will disregard all such studies and data as part of the great "satanic" conspiracy.
You're being hysterical in your efforts to create smoke and mirrors. The site is full of facts, reports, and information that not only "suggests" corruption at work, it knocks the possibility of it being "on the level" out of the ballpark. It's heart-warming to see people educated, aware, and against your death sciences.
I only post in hope that some other reader will at least think before declining potentially lifesaving treatment.
It's barbaric and built on an industry of lies. It's criminal.
All treatments have risks and benefits. It is up to the end user to determine what is correct for them.
Allopathy : Fit the fear of their engineered cure against the fear of the disease for the sake of profit.edit on 16-11-2012 by Northwarden because: (no reason given)
You know me Boncho. I already found some of my better sources, and expect that anyone who wants to can research them. I provided what I stand behind as a decent expose on the matter, and could probably look into them for hours in debate format. But while debate is encouraged here, it is also not neccesary, especially when the emotional content is off the charts. I'll never side with the corrupt industry as my slant, by personal bias, that much is obvious - but it's not based on nothing. I want to clear up a few things here.
First, the questionaire was valid. That means, in the beginning, well over half of doctors would not take the same treatments they were proscribing, in the event they were sick with cancer. What does that say about the industry right there?
A doctor who is training with me to be an oncologist immediately realizes that this guy is getting a chemotherapy regimen for colon cancer that we stopped using about 15 years ago. His medical oncologist was practicing the best medicine of the late 1980s, but we were in 2006. The other drugs he was being prescribed were totally unnecessary. But the doctor could get a substantial markup and make a substantial amount of money by selling them. The oncologist had known just enough to be greedy and prescribe drugs he can make money off of, but he didn’t know enough to prescribe the chemotherapy that would have given the patient a much better chance of surviving his cancer.
I’ve seen that so many times, where doctors really have failed to evolve and failed to learn as the profession and the scientific evidence have changed over time.
None of what you said was true. "bIlderburgers? Chair of lucifer?" These are not scientific principles and must be rejected by thinking people out of hand.
Trust me, I've done much, much more reaserch, using objective science than you have obviously.
All this can be done but the MONEY is in CANCER TREATMENT NOT IN A CURE! It will be difficult to change a MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR INDUSTRY THAT WAITS FOR DEATH TO ARRIVE. Split Infinity
You crow loudly at me, but under-estimate what the abilities of research can incorporate above your head and out of your means to define. I've read about many a crumpled man, who later realizes his future was upended when he realized the depravity he supports was never worth his devotion. You will support your family, and friends, and every stranger under the hypocratic oath, under what - the hope - that those cash driven companies aren't creating massive side-effects to their tumours? You hope the FDA is properly regulating everything you have been proscribing to your patients?
The Sales Pitch
Moreover, such “skepticism” completely dismisses as worthless survival benefits of a few months, which certainly aren’t “worthless” to many patients. Such briefly lengthened survival times can mean the difference between seeing a child graduate from college or not, seeing a child get married or not, or seeing the birth of a grandchild or not. It must also be remembered that the measured improvements in survival due to chemotherapy are usually medians. Not uncommonly, buried in that median are “outliers” who derive a huge survival benefit from the chemotherapy and survive many more months than expected, sometimes many more years than expected.
The Hook and Closure
Moreover, it does patients no favor to try to use the observation that chemotherapy has at best relatively modest benefits in patients with advanced epithelial malignancies to try to imply that chemotherapy doesn’t work for all patients. In particular, patients have to remember that just because chemotherapy doesn’t do that well against advanced malignancies does not, as the quacks would have you believe, imply that “alternative medicine” can do better.
That's just plain rude Boncho, I think you missed the part about M.D. Douglas having peoples best interests in mind. He already helped build a good working map of understanding, by tying in exposure of corruption to techniques already in place, he draws up many a consumer report to guide decision-making by.
Originally posted by SplitInfinity
reply to post by boncho
The amount of Money that would be generated by a cure is NO WHERE NEAR the amount of Money spent on relief of symptoms. A cure would force many companies to loose money. Split Infinity