Cancer is finally Cured in Canada but Big Pharma has ‘No Interest’

Cancer is finally Cured in Canada but Big Pharma has ‘No Interest’

CTV News in Atlantic Canada reports that a Cure For Cancer is found and it has been censored just like Dr Buzinski’s Cure for Cancer from Houston, Texas. This report by CTV News covers Dr. Evangelos Michelakis at the University of Alberta and the drug called

DCA which has been found to reduce the size of cancerous tumors. Dr. Dario Alterieri from the University of Massachusetts agreed that the drug should be tested for its side effects and safety issues. However, there is no patent on this drug.

Since there is no patent on DCA and no pharmaceutical company owns this drug, CTV reported that drug companies will not want to bring this drug out on the market or conduct studies on this drug due to the fact that they can’t make a profit off a drug that can be inexpensively produced. CTV News also mentioned that it costs nearly $100 million dollars for testing to become completed on a new drug, so it looks like everything comes down to a matter of money. Of course, there is another case like Dr. Burzinski’s which is the only case I know of where a doctor received five court acquittals with a “Not Guilty Verdict” in Houston, Texas for coming out with his treatment for Cancer that has been hidden from us all since 1977.

Well no surprise here. Of course big pharma doesn't want cures for cancer because they are going to loose too much money from it. If people were always healthy, they wouldn't exist & they do not want that. U.S #1 goal of corporations is to make Money, doesn't matter if people get hurt/sick/die, so long as they make more money.

Sounds like a great opportunity for Kickstarter...

Kickstarter

One reason I never denate to Cancer Research. They never look into natural possibilities. Too many donations from big pharma.

Given all the testimonies regarding Bicarbonate of soda and raw veg CURING cancer, yet no one is willing to test.

Eat well, no preservatives (acid), raw veg, no processed sugars, no cooking at all and no meat. Many people are saying this can cure some cancers within just 3 months.

Cancer cure?

The bottom of this article states baking soda is more effective than DCA mentioned in the OP.


Google it, there are lots of testimonioes.

I am not a doctor, have not had cancer so do not know if this does work. Please see a doctor first.

if they reached out to the public for funding instead of trying to get it funded by big pharma i bet theyd have the money in a heartbeat.

all of the money normal people donate to cancer research, cancer 5k runs, cancer ribbons, cancer this and that. fu*k waiting for big pharma to pick up the cure. normal people can provide the funds. i'm sick of this never ending research and never ending "treatment" of disease that we have going on because cures aren't "profitable". it makes me absolutely furious i could burst at the seams.

100 million for drug testing is a drop in the bucket. People donate to cancer cures all the time, seems to me someone could start collecting for this.. at least you know exactly where the money is going unlike most other places you donate to.

The USA is the only country that has such an FDA, Big Pharma, Health Insurance, Hospitalization, revolving door money making scheme - so it is just a matter of time before another country comes out with a Real Cure that the FDA and Big Pharma cannot suppress. They have to be running scared knowing the world is changing and something like this could ruin them.

See, that revolving door above? It's a wonder in this Great Republic we belong to there is No way we have in Law to overturn that corrupt system that is doing more harm than good. America founding core principles should have had ways to protect against this from happening.

Hey folks.. after the Revolution, lets get it right this time so it doesn't happen again.

originally posted by: CallmeRaskolnikov
it makes me absolutely furious i could burst at the seams.

You mirror my feelings exactly.

a reply to: knoledgeispower

I don't get it.

The article title is 'Cancer is finally cured' and the text makes no mention of a 'cure.' Instead it cites DCA as being able to 'decrease' the size of tumours. Not 'cure,' just decrease. In cancer terms, decrease is fantastic enough and still way short of 'cure.'

The video is from 2011 and YouTube isn't the platform for peer-reviewing medical breakthroughs. We've all seen YT comments right? They can get pretty nasty and the credentials amount to an email address and no-holds-barred or way of judging ages. With this video, the comments have been disabled by the uploader.

The story goes back to 2007 and research continues into treating cancer with DCA.

a reply to: Kandinsky

I'm annoyed you've noticed all of this, but equally grateful.

This is when it's 'OK' to piss on my chips

a reply to: Kandinsky

You can't 'cure' cancer, people develop cancer everyday but the body destroys it or puts it into remission by not sending blood to the cells so they die off.
It's not like a virus, or an infection, it's something written within' the cells of the human body where cell replication goes wrong on the DNA level. So even if we do 'cure' it, it might come back. But the closest thing we can do curing cancer is to just simply kill off the bad cells or shrinking their size and starving them out. I just think the word cure was thrown around a little to loosely.

Another cure about to be hidden!
Another group of researchers about to receive hush money or death.

WAKE UP PEOPLE, YOU DONT HAVE TO DIE Of CANCER IF YOU'LL JUST WAKE UP!

This isn't exactly new news.

American Cancer Society

In 2007, a Canadian study found that rats with cancer that were given DCA in their drinking water had much slower tumor growth than those not given DCA. They also found that DCA killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, but not healthy cells, in tissue cultures (laboratory dishes).

Since that time, several studies have been done in the lab looking at the effects of DCA on cancer cells in a dish or in animals. Prostate cancer cells seemed to be easier to kill with radiation if they had been exposed to DCA. Breast cancer cells implanted into rats' tails spread into fewer areas if the rats were given DCA. Cancer cells from the endometrium (lining of the womb) were more likely to die with DCA exposure, although this only held true for the mildly to moderately invasive cancer cells. The very aggressive cancer cells were not affected by DCA.

This doesn't exactly fall under the category of suppressed. Same study is mentioned on Wikipedia Wikipedia:

A phase I study published in January 2007 by researchers at the University of Alberta, who had tested DCA on human cancer cells grown in mice,[15] found that DCA restored mitochondrial function, thus restoring apoptosis, allowing cancer cells to self-destruct and shrink the tumor.[16]

These results received extensive media attention, beginning with an article in New Scientist titled "Cheap, 'safe' drug kills most cancers".[15] Subsequently, the American Cancer Society and other medical organizations have received a large volume of public interest and questions regarding DCA.[17] Clinical trials in humans with cancer have not been conducted in the USA and are not yet final in Canada, emphasizing the need for caution in interpreting the preliminary results.[17][18]

One animal study does not prove that something is a cure for cancer. It sounds as though other trials have been underway/are underway now. While big pharma might not be interested, you can best bet that other researchers would be. It's Nobel Prize-name-goes-down-in-the-history-books s# if you cure cancer.

a reply to: knoledgeispower
a thread on DCA or Dichloroacetate was posted back in jan 2007

originally posted by: Kandinsky
a reply to: knoledgeispower

I don't get it.

The article title is 'Cancer is finally cured' and the text makes no mention of a 'cure.' Instead it cites DCA as being able to 'decrease' the size of tumours. Not 'cure,' just decrease. In cancer terms, decrease is fantastic enough and still way short of 'cure.'

The video is from 2011 and YouTube isn't the platform for peer-reviewing medical breakthroughs. We've all seen YT comments right? They can get pretty nasty and the credentials amount to an email address and no-holds-barred or way of judging ages. With this video, the comments have been disabled by the uploader.

The story goes back to 2007 and research continues into treating cancer with DCA.

This. Also "cancer" is comprised of over 50 different disease entities with just as many causes and treatments and there is no single "miracle cure". People forget about this. The youtube video is just some sensationalist "editorializing," not reporting. Blaming someone for not researching a drug is rather silly.

a reply to: OpenEars123

I'm the same in real life...always what? why? how? I piss on my own chips all the time...metaphorically and sometimes regrettably.

As soon as someone finds a treatment for cancer that fulfils the criteria of being less damaging to our bodies than current treatments and is (eventually) available to everyone, I think it'll be major news. Until then, we should squint our eyes at these internet stories.


a reply to: strongfp

True enough although you could be a little bit generous in describing the article's contention as 'loose.' You appear to have a better understanding than the writer of the article.

a reply to: knoledgeispower

There an article on it at the American Cancer societies Web page

Alway good to see why some of these Phrama co. dont want to do it.

Here is a snippet from the article:

Dichloroacetate (DCA) Other common name(s): dichloracetate Scientific/medical name(s): sodium dichloroacetate Description Dichloracetic acid and sodium dichloroacetate are man-made chemicals that have not been found in nature. The pure form, dichloracetic acid, is a strong acid that can burn the skin and injure tissues. It can cause spasms of the body's airways if it is inhaled. Dichloracetic acid is used in the process of making certain other chemicals, including some drugs. It has also been used as a medicine to remove warts or other skin growths. Sodium dichloroacetate is a different ("buffered") form of the same chemical. This form is not an acid, and can be taken by mouth without causing burning. The term "DCA" in this information refers to this form of the chemical. DCA can also be absorbed into the body through the skin.

originally posted by: ChesterJohn
a reply to: knoledgeispower

There an article on it at the American Cancer societies Web page

Alway good to see why some of these Phrama co. dont want to do it.

Here is a snippet from the article:

Dichloroacetate (DCA) Other common name(s): dichloracetate Scientific/medical name(s): sodium dichloroacetate Description Dichloracetic acid and sodium dichloroacetate are man-made chemicals that have not been found in nature. The pure form, dichloracetic acid, is a strong acid that can burn the skin and injure tissues. It can cause spasms of the body's airways if it is inhaled. Dichloracetic acid is used in the process of making certain other chemicals, including some drugs. It has also been used as a medicine to remove warts or other skin growths. Sodium dichloroacetate is a different ("buffered") form of the same chemical. This form is not an acid, and can be taken by mouth without causing burning. The term "DCA" in this information refers to this form of the chemical. DCA can also be absorbed into the body through the skin.

I was just going with a story the news had reported.

originally posted by: pennydrops
One reason I never denate to Cancer Research. They never look into natural possibilities. Too many donations from big pharma.

Given all the testimonies regarding Bicarbonate of soda and raw veg CURING cancer, yet no one is willing to test.

Eat well, no preservatives (acid), raw veg, no processed sugars, no cooking at all and no meat. Many people are saying this can cure some cancers within just 3 months.

Cancer cure?

The bottom of this article states baking soda is more effective than DCA mentioned in the OP.


Google it, there are lots of testimonioes.

I am not a doctor, have not had cancer so do not know if this does work. Please see a doctor first.

Apparently, cancer requires an acidic environment, a body chemistry with a pH of less than 7.2. However, the backing soda (which is an alkaline) treatment of I think it's 1 teaspoon a day for a week, then two teaspoons a day for a month and then 3 teaspoons a day for another month, followed by 1 teaspoon a day as maintenance, is supposed to increase your body pH to between 7.4 and 7.6 dependent on mass, metabolism and actual consumption. The maintenance period I think keeps you at 7.3 to 7.5. There's quite a bit of info on the internet.

Cheers - Dave

This should be world news. Guitarist Edward Van Halen claims that he cured his own cancer but will not say how because he says that he would be arrested.

Let's see:

* Burzynski gets around the FDA by running perpetual "clinical trials"
* Patients pay tens of thousands of dollars to enter these "clinical trials"
* In over 30 years, no results from these "clinical trials" have ever been published

This man is the worst of the worst. He preys on the desperate and fleeces them of their money, leaving them to die. How the hell can anyone defend this sicko!?

originally posted by: bobs_uruncle

originally posted by: pennydrops
One reason I never denate to Cancer Research. They never look into natural possibilities. Too many donations from big pharma.

Given all the testimonies regarding Bicarbonate of soda and raw veg CURING cancer, yet no one is willing to test.

Eat well, no preservatives (acid), raw veg, no processed sugars, no cooking at all and no meat. Many people are saying this can cure some cancers within just 3 months.

Cancer cure?

The bottom of this article states baking soda is more effective than DCA mentioned in the OP.


Google it, there are lots of testimonioes.

I am not a doctor, have not had cancer so do not know if this does work. Please see a doctor first.

Apparently, cancer requires an acidic environment, a body chemistry with a pH of less than 7.2. However, the backing soda (which is an alkaline) treatment of I think it's 1 teaspoon a day for a week, then two teaspoons a day for a month and then 3 teaspoons a day for another month, followed by 1 teaspoon a day as maintenance, is supposed to increase your body pH to between 7.4 and 7.6 dependent on mass, metabolism and actual consumption. The maintenance period I think keeps you at 7.3 to 7.5. There's quite a bit of info on the internet.

Cheers - Dave

When you take oral baking soda, your body's acid-base balancing system keeps the PH normal. You do not reduce your PH by taking baking soda orally and even IV bicarb reduces your PH for a short period.