-
Comment
-
Yes, in his little fantasy world people get murdered all the time for knowing the truth. As always he won't be able to back this up though but that doesn't seem to bother him one bit.Comment
-
Comment
-
-
In the meantime 1000's of conspiracy imbeciles know the "truth" and can freely post it on Youtube
Yeah it all makes so much sense.Comment
-
Comment
-
According to the National Cancer Institute's own budgetary figures - they spend on average $4,900,000,000 ($4.9 billion) per year on cancer research.
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/f...search-fundingNCI?s budget for FY 2010 was $5.1* billion, excluding the additional $1.3* billion in American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funds received by the Institute for spending in FY 2009 and FY 2010. Overall, NCI?s budget has been relatively flat in recent years. During the period from 2005 through 2010, the NCI budget averaged $4.9* billion per year.Comment
-
Indeed...
"Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud and that the major cancer research organisations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them."
Linus Pauling PhD (Two-time Nobel Prize winner).
THE CHARITY AND CANCER RESEARCH RACKETS
http://www.whale.to/cancer/charities.html
"the purpose of cancer research is not to find a cure for cancer (these have all been found years ago) or other diseases but to perpetuate the cancer industry that in the US alone was turning over $107 Billion in 1994, or $400 Billion worldwide."Last edited by wehateporn; 03-13-2013, 09:08 AM.Comment
-
-
"There is not one, but many cures for cancer available. But they are all being systematically suppressed by the ACS, the NCI and the major oncology centres. They have too much of an interest in the status quo."
Dr Robert Atkins, M.D.
"A solution to cancer would mean the termination of research programs, the obsolescence of skills, the end of dreams of personal glory, triumph over cancer would dry up contributions to self-perpetuating charities....It would mortally threaten the present clinical establishments by rendering obsolete the expensive surgical, radiological and chemotherapeutic treatments in which so much money, training and equipment is invested....The new therapy must be disbelieved, denied, discouraged and disallowed at all costs, regardless of actual testing results, and preferably without any testing at all."
Robert Houston and Gary NullComment
-
I also found this interesting:
A large portion of money donated to cancer research by the public is spent on animal research which has, since its inception, been widely condemned as a waste of time and resources. For instance, consider the 1981 Congressional Testimony by Dr. Irwin Bross, former director of the Sloan-Kettering, the largest cancer research institute in the world, and then Director of Biostatistics at Roswell Park Memorial Institute for Cancer Research, Bufallo, NY: "The uselessness of most of the animal model studies is less well known. For example, the discovery of chemotherapeutic agents for the treatment of human cancer is widely-heralded as a triumph due to use of animal model systems. However, here again, these exaggerated claims are coming from or are endorsed by the same people who get the federal dollars for animal research. There is little, if any, factual evidence that would support these claims. Indeed, while conflicting animal results have often delayed and hampered advances in the war on cancer, they have never produced a single substantial advance either in the prevention or treatment of human cancer. For instance, practically all of the chemotherapeutic agents which are of value in the treatment of human cancer were found in a clinical context rather than in animal studies."
In fact, many substances which cause cancer in humans are marketed as "safe" on the basis of animal tests. As expressed by Dr. Werner Hartinger of Germany, in regard to cancer-causing products of the pharmaceutical-petro-chemical industry, "Their constant consumption is legalised on the basis of misleading animal experiments . . . which seduce the consumer into a false sense of security."Comment
-
-
Silentknight, now i have a question for you.
The 10's or maybe 100's of thousands of people worldwide who are working daily on finding a cure are all part of the conspiracy? They all know they really are not allowed to find one and are just messing around a bit? Just pretending to be working on something?
Please explain (in detail) how that works.Comment
-
Attaboy, good puppy. Pavlov approves of your obedience
Comment
-
No answer? Who would've thought. You're doing the conspiracy routine very well. You're learning fast.Comment
-
Silentidiot, do you realize the average age for conspiracy nutters is about 18-25. You're 50 man. Being a conspiracy nutter at 25 is sad but being one at 50...i can't even think of a word that would explain how pathetic it is.Comment
-
-
You can't be 50. Impossible.Comment
-
Oh and ofcourse the answer is because you can't back up any of your claims. Just like every other conspiracy theorist on this forum. Just like your 18 year old buddies you will avoid every question. Typicaly conspiracy behaviour.
50 years old.....
I just can't get over it.Comment
-
Comment
-
Maybe someone else can ask Silentknight to back up his claims. Let's see what his answer will be then.Comment
-
Is there any possibility you will back up your claims to me or anyone else in this thread? If not, why not?
Please, act like a 50 year old for just 30 seconds.Comment
-
Fuck me, you are one sad fucking idiot. Unbelievable.Comment
-
-
-
Comment
-
Love will cure anything and everything including cancer.Comment
-
If you had the cure for cancer, you would make more money in one lump sum, than you could make in your lifetime milking patients
everyone below you would then use it to milk patients. what im saying is the cure for cancer is not being with held in some sort of conspiracyComment
-
Read for more than 30 Seconds on this site if your ADHD will permit
http://www.whale.to/cancer/charities.htmlComment
-
Still no proof, as per usual. Just bullshit.Comment
-
Cancer is mostly a problem of genetics as we age. Most people get cancer when they are older and is probably caused by genetic mutation that occurs as a natural part of genetic replication.
Your genes copy themselves so many billions of times a day. I think it's trillions per year or something. Every time the DNA separates to make new copies there is a chance of a mistake. Most of these mistakes are harmless or at least they seem to be. As the mistakes add up however they materialize as various diseases.
In the case of children with cancer it is often a specific bad gene or serious of mutations passed on by the parent that mean the child will develop cancer early on.
It all comes down to DNA and it is very hard to fix. You are going to have to engineer a virus to replace these genes. We have done this with a few disease but it's very difficult. I expect when they have a breakthrough and find a fix it all type of virus delivery system this is when you will see real cancer cures.
While we wait a decade or 2 for this cancer vaccines may be the best bet or maybe treatments live we have for HIV where you are on lifetime meds. It sucks but it's not a scam. It's just that genetic engineering is not so easy.
Of course this means that when we really get permanent cures for cancer we are also going to have cures for hundreds of other things and we might even be changing our eye and hair color or how strong we want our bones to be.Comment
-
They don't track the risks, like Cot Death, MS, Diabetes Type 1, Epilepsy, Autism, Asthma, Eczema etc. Some of these are only observable 6 months or more after vaccination, they don't look for them as then they would have to pay out compensation and it would put people off vaccination. They are no doubt aware as when they send a new vaccine to a particular area they'll see the rate of a specific disease skyrocket shortly afterwards based on the treatments they sell. It's actually beneficial for their profits to cause us lifelong problems with their vaccines.Comment
-
Comment
-
That's what they'll have us believe, they don't want people taking preventative measures with their lifestyle, Cancer is big money, they don't want to help you avoid it. It's like if the adult industry told people how to avoid paying for porn, or to avoid being addicted to porn.
The grants given for Cancer research are to look for genetic problems, that's why we always hear this research. There aren't grants given to look at which vaccines caused Cancer, despite every vaccine insert warning that they're Carcinogenic. Whoever controls the flow of money controls the research.
Look back to when Merck's Polio vaccine was contaminated with Cancer virus SV40, it was the head of vaccines at Merck who discovered this. It also had Epstein-Barr. Both have since been found in patients of Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma, a type of Cancer which many thousands of Americans go down with every year. It causes the same Cancer in rodents. An accident? Seems unlikely given that Bayer's documents show they knowingly sold HIV-contaminated vaccines. This is about sowing the seeds of disease to boost profit.Comment
-
Comment
Comment