Cancer is curable

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • SilentKnight
    Megan Fox's fluffer
    • Oct 2005
    • 24818

    #61
    Originally posted by wehateporn
    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."
    "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 Null

    Comment

    • SilentKnight
      Megan Fox's fluffer
      • Oct 2005
      • 24818

      #62
      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

      • wehateporn
        Promoting Debate on GFY
        • Apr 2007
        • 27176

        #63
        Thanks for those SilentKnight, very interesting

        Comment

        • Dirty F
          Too lazy to set a custom title
          • Jul 2001
          • 59204

          #64
          Originally posted by SilentKnight
          "There is not one, but many cures for cancer available.
          Is this another "question"

          Can you name some of these cures?

          But let me guess, you really don't believe it. There is just no other possibility right?
          And you really are not a lunatic conspiracy theorist right? Just asking questions

          Comment

          • Dirty F
            Too lazy to set a custom title
            • Jul 2001
            • 59204

            #65
            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

            • SilentKnight
              Megan Fox's fluffer
              • Oct 2005
              • 24818

              #66
              Originally posted by Dirty F
              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.
              Originally posted by Dirty F
              Is this another "question"

              Can you name some of these cures?

              But let me guess, you really don't believe it. There is just no other possibility right?
              And you really are not a lunatic conspiracy theorist right? Just asking questions
              Attaboy, good puppy. Pavlov approves of your obedience

              Comment

              • Dirty F
                Too lazy to set a custom title
                • Jul 2001
                • 59204

                #67
                No answer? Who would've thought. You're doing the conspiracy routine very well. You're learning fast.

                Comment

                • Dirty F
                  Too lazy to set a custom title
                  • Jul 2001
                  • 59204

                  #68
                  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

                  • SilentKnight
                    Megan Fox's fluffer
                    • Oct 2005
                    • 24818

                    #69
                    Originally posted by Dirty F
                    No answer? Who would've thought. You're doing the conspiracy routine very well. You're learning fast.
                    Originally posted by Dirty F
                    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.
                    Such submissive obedience must be rewarded.

                    Another treat, 'atta boy.

                    Comment

                    • Dirty F
                      Too lazy to set a custom title
                      • Jul 2001
                      • 59204

                      #70
                      Originally posted by SilentKnight
                      Such submissive obedience must be rewarded.

                      Another treat, 'atta boy.

                      Why can't you just answer my simple question? Why do you refuse to?

                      Comment

                      • SilentKnight
                        Megan Fox's fluffer
                        • Oct 2005
                        • 24818

                        #71
                        Originally posted by Dirty F
                        Why can't you just answer my simple question? Why do you refuse to?
                        Oh, I dunno. Probably 'cuz survey says - you're an asshole?

                        But here's another treat anyway (for being such an obedient asshole).

                        Last edited by SilentKnight; 03-13-2013, 10:31 AM.

                        Comment

                        • Dirty F
                          Too lazy to set a custom title
                          • Jul 2001
                          • 59204

                          #72
                          You can't be 50. Impossible.

                          Comment

                          • Dirty F
                            Too lazy to set a custom title
                            • Jul 2001
                            • 59204

                            #73
                            Originally posted by SilentKnight
                            Oh, I dunno. Probably 'cuz survey says - you're an asshole?
                            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

                            • SilentKnight
                              Megan Fox's fluffer
                              • Oct 2005
                              • 24818

                              #74
                              Originally posted by Dirty F
                              You can't be 50. Impossible.


                              Comment

                              • SilentKnight
                                Megan Fox's fluffer
                                • Oct 2005
                                • 24818

                                #75
                                Originally posted by Dirty F
                                I just can't get over it.


                                There's a LOT you can't get over, pavlovian puppy.

                                Comment

                                Working...