DO YOU THINK THERE'S A CURE FOR CANCER?

by Mary 105 Replies latest watchtower medical

• 

  lonelysheep

  I will assume you meant to say I don't get it. You don't think the pharmeceutical industry and the FDA aren't in bed together? Of course they are. You think giants like Pfizer want to see a safe, non-patentable, cheap cure for cancer? If they weren't getting their palms greased, how the hell does a dangerous drug like Vioxx or Phentermine ever get approved? If there was any herb on the market that caused as many deaths as these two drugs did, it would have never been approved for for anything.

  To answer your questions:

  1) Conspiracies are not running the drug approval process. This thread has been suggesting otherwise.

  2) I don't nor have I ever worked for Pfizer, but I do know a cure would mean big bucks, so YES.

  3) Some drugs are obviously pushed for approval and onto the market without substantial research-not something I agree with.

  4) Herbs-why aren't they advertised? Where are the sales reps? I'm not against this, but I'm not one to take something into my body without knowing all the risks, including long-term.

  This thread is about asking the question: Do you think there's a cure they're not telling us about and that can cover a variety of areas such as the pharmeceutical industry, alternative medicine, the FDA. Many on here have raised some valid points but as per usual, those that scoff at anything outside the scientific laboratory, sneer at the thought of anything "natural" being able to cure someone.

  As far as anything natural goes, if it works, then it works and people will use it. I can't say I wouldn't if ever diagnosed with cancer!! There's no reason the medical profession in general would recommend those treatments unless an individual M.D. has looked into it and wouldn't be liable for those treatment suggestions. I'm not an oncologist, so perhaps one could give an answer to that.
• 

  AK - Jeff

  Let's face it - in 100 years from now, what is considered 'safe, effective, FDA approved', likely will be looked at the same way as bloodletting is now. Today's science becomes tomorrows quackery. Yet the adherants to the idea that science has all the answers [and I do not here assert that they have none of them, just not all of them], will excuse the F--- ups by the FDA and medical community now, yes the same screw ups that kill and maim and shorten life at times, as 'rocks on the pathway to success' - but will refuse to accept that anything the FDA might turn a blind eye to could have benefits.

  The FDA is in favor of conventional treatments, conventional medicine. Convention changes and so does the FDA. I knew a lady who went in for a bad cough - she was diagnosed with stage 4 lung cancer. With no treatments she prob had 6 to 8 months to live. They began chemo the next day - her remaining life was miserable, and she lost it within 3 months. It wasn't the cancer that killed her - though it would have eventually. It was the precious 'FDA approved formula' - the best they had to offer for her stage and condition.

  Was there anything in nature - an herb - a salt - a bi-product of natural fermentation that might have worked better? I don't know. But if she had never heard of modern miraculous medicine and the FDA, she would have lived a few months longer likely.

  The very idea that we should not investigate alternative care is ludricous. All drugs in the beginning came from nature. Many of them today are synthetic imitations of natural compounds. It is quite as likely that a natural, yet undiscovered compound is the cure, as it is that man-made chemical cocktails will ever do it.

  And such investigation - if it has any chance of producing a cure - needs to be taken from the pervue of a clearly biased FDA and into the hands of those who can reasonably assure double blind tests. The money for such research has it's purse strings tied to the FDA and it's proponents. That change might give natural cures a chance to show up. As it is all the money is going to the pharma industry - and they aren't getting the job done apparently.

  Jeff
• 

  Mary

  To answer your questions:

  1) Conspiracies are not running the drug approval process. This thread has been suggesting otherwise.

  Well then, why are drugs that have the potential to kill a person approved by the FDA?

  2) I don't nor have I ever worked for Pfizer, but I do know a cure would mean big bucks, so YES.

  As I said, not if it was a cheap, non-patentable drug that they wouldn't make a ton of money on.

  4) Herbs-why aren't they advertised? Where are the sales reps? I'm not against this, but I'm not one to take something into my body without knowing all the risks, including long-term.

  Um, herbs are advertised all the time, but usually in magazines and they're not allowed to make any claim whatsoever when it comes to a person's health. To do so will bring great repercussions from either the FDA, or Health Canada. I think both the States and Canada is moving to regulate alternative medicine, which I think would be an excellent idea.

  Jeff said: And such investigation - if it has any chance of producing a cure - needs to be taken from the pervue of a clearly biased FDA and into the hands of those who can reasonably assure double blind tests. The money for such research has it's purse strings tied to the FDA and it's proponents.

  I think Jeff summed it up pretty well. Unfortunately, the FDA is biased and has little, if any interest in alternative medicine as beneficial at all.
• 

  JeffT

  Well then, why are drugs that have the potential to kill a person approved by the FDA?

  Because otherwise there would be no drugs. Anything that alters the way your body operates has the potential to kill you. Table salt can kill you quickly with a whole bunch, or slowly over time (I'm watching my sodium because of blood pressure). If we banned everything with the potential to hurt us there would be on health care system at all.

  As I said, not if it was a cheap, non-patentable drug that they wouldn't make a ton of money on.

  Do you have any idea how business operate? A cheap cancer drug would be a gold mine. $.01 to manufacture and distrubute for sale at $1 times say ten million doses a day? Not to mention the ads, "Hi I'm the President of Gigantic Drug company, thanks to our researchers for less than the price of a cup of coffee we can cure your cancer."

  I think Jeff summed it up pretty well. Unfortunately, the FDA is biased and has little, if any interest in alternative medicine as beneficial at all.

  Yes, I know you were talking to the other Jeff, but I want to respond. See my comments above, the many of the alternate medicine people are their own worst enemies. If they would submit themselves to peer review this problem would to away. But they refuse to play by the rules and then get snippy when the system won't accept them.
• 

  Gill

  'They' would not spend millions and possibly billions on research if they already had the cure.

  'They' would simply find a way of marketing 'the cure' so that it cost them nothing to research and 'they' made millions upon billions selling it.

  I don't believe there is a secret cure to cancer. I believe they may just be looking in 'difficult directions' when the real cure may well be under their noses and still capable of making 'them' vast fortunes!

  I expect some form of immune boosting 'medicine' will be the answer to cancer. However, genetic cancers are another problem altogether.
• 

  Jim_TX

  " 4) Herbs-why aren't they advertised? Where are the sales reps? I'm not against this, but I'm not one to take something into my body without knowing all the risks, including long-term. "

  I find this somewhat humorous. Has anyone taken the time to listen (or try to) the 'disclaimers' that are required to be attached to the medicines that are advertised on TV? The list of side-effects is somewhat a long list, and the side-effects are sometimes worse than the illness that they are supposed to cure. (Also - has anyone read the paper that is included with the prescriptions medications? I have. The print is super-small, and has many many dangers listed for the person taking the medicine.)

  Plus. How does anyone 'know' the 'long-term' risks associated with taking a medication - when the doctors do not reveal them to their patients - or just dismiss them with a nonchalent wave of the hand?

  I find it ironic that one of the accepted treatments for cancer is radiation. The same radiation that killed (or caused cancer in) so many in Japan when the atomic bomb was detonated. (and yes, I am aware that many died from the fires that resulted afterwards.)

  It is just... beyond belief that radiation - is the best that science and medicine can do. We're talking 2007 folks. Not 1900. With all the labs and testing and science that is out there... we use radiation. (Of course, American doctors had many subjects to study for the effects of radiation after the bomb in WW2.)

  Of course... I suppose it is better than what the doctors considered an 'approved' method in the 60's. Back then it was 'cut it out' time. The patient would 'go under the knife' and the doctor would try to cut out all of the cancer. If they missed any... it spread, and the patient was toast. (Which happened more often than not.)

  R.I.P. Homer Belc*** (asterisks used to protect the name)

  Regards,

  Jim TX
• 

  needproof

  There is no doubt that they have had cures for Cancer, AIDS and suchlike but since their goal and aim is a 70% drop in population why should they care about us?
• 

  Warlock

  How much money would be lost?

  How many people would be unemployed if the major ailments that plague modern man were cured?

  Whether there is a secret cure for cancer that is being witheld, I do not know, but it wouldn't suprise me.

  It also wouldn't suprise me if there was actually fraud in science and medicine.

  Warlock
• 

  juni

  I've had the same concerns Mary for a long time..... I don't believe we'll ever know the answer to that question and a lot of others too.

  In my 58 years I've found that the bottom line to most decisions is money. So it wouldn't surprise me at all.

  Juni
• 

  needproof

  There can be no doubt. Do you think the people who decide to drop bombs on little kids in Iraq and elsewhere give a shit about anybody else? Don't fall for the double talk and lies - we are talking about a vicious bunch of evil crooks who worry only about power and money - the rest can go to hell