anyone seen the documentary? Pretty good… Cut Poison Burn Official Trailer - YouTube
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?
[quote]anonym wrote:
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?[/quote]
It does mention the part about the money/industry side, but it follows a case of a husband/wife who have a 5 yr old with brain cancer. They’re threatnened to be put in jail if they don’t do chemo/radiation.
There’s more to it, so I wouldn’t say it’s solely “conspiracy theory”, but it asks the question why aren’t alternative methods allowed to progress?
Even Dr Barry Sears, the holder of over a dozen chemo patents, admits that fighting cancer with the tools we use is like going to war with a butter knife.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Even Dr Barry Sears, the holder of over a dozen chemo patents, admits that fighting cancer with the tools we use is like going to war with a butter knife.[/quote]
Just because he’s had 10 chemo patients doesn’t make him a good doctor…hehe
[quote]X-Factor wrote:
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
Even Dr Barry Sears, the holder of over a dozen chemo patents, admits that fighting cancer with the tools we use is like going to war with a butter knife.[/quote]
Just because he’s had 10 chemo patients doesn’t make him a good doctor…hehe[/quote]
Not PATIENTS… PATENTS!
lol
I have read some on there are different types of cancers, but in the way they are typically discussed. In other words, you can have the same type of cancer to manifest in different parts of the body. It’s not geography, as in all breast cancers are the same, but rather this type cancer Y reacts well to Z treatment regardless of where it is located in the body.
[quote]Tex Ag wrote:
I have read some on there are different types of cancers, but in the way they are typically discussed. In other words, you can have the same type of cancer to manifest in different parts of the body. It’s not geography, as in all breast cancers are the same, but rather this type cancer Y reacts well to Z treatment regardless of where it is located in the body.[/quote]
Cancer is a spectrum of disorders that primarily result from mutations in cellular machinery involved in cell cycle regulation resulting in uncontrolled proliferation (cell division). Depending upon the point(s) at which the mutation(s) occur different treatments will be better suited for that particular kind of cancer. This is why there will never be a “cure” for cancer per se, there could be a cure for a particular kind of cancer and I hope some day there will be a cure for all of them but a one shot deal to fix all is nothing but a pipe dream that the media likes to play up.
Edit: should mention you are totally correct in the above assessment, I was simply elaborating a bit.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?[/quote]
It does mention the part about the money/industry side, but it follows a case of a husband/wife who have a 5 yr old with brain cancer. They’re threatnened to be put in jail if they don’t do chemo/radiation.
There’s more to it, so I wouldn’t say it’s solely “conspiracy theory”, but it asks the question why aren’t alternative methods allowed to progress?[/quote]
Because there is a process to getting “alternative methods” actually into clinic trials to validate effectiveness.
Do people ignore the “criminal” element of people who will purposely give false treatment only to get money off a desperate/dying person?
My wife worked with a neuro oncologist and was involved with clinical trials for things that are alternative.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?[/quote]
It does mention the part about the money/industry side, but it follows a case of a husband/wife who have a 5 yr old with brain cancer. They’re threatnened to be put in jail if they don’t do chemo/radiation.
There’s more to it, so I wouldn’t say it’s solely “conspiracy theory”, but it asks the question why aren’t alternative methods allowed to progress?[/quote]
Because there is a process to getting “alternative methods” actually into clinic trials to validate effectiveness.
Do people ignore the “criminal” element of people who will purposely give false treatment only to get money off a desperate/dying person?
My wife worked with a neuro oncologist and was involved with clinical trials for things that are alternative. [/quote]
On the topic of alt. treatments, have you ever heard of the Novocure device? Apparently it can slow/stop progression of solid tumors using nothing but alternating electric fields.
Mind = blown.
[quote]ahu2468 wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?[/quote]
It does mention the part about the money/industry side, but it follows a case of a husband/wife who have a 5 yr old with brain cancer. They’re threatnened to be put in jail if they don’t do chemo/radiation.
There’s more to it, so I wouldn’t say it’s solely “conspiracy theory”, but it asks the question why aren’t alternative methods allowed to progress?[/quote]
Because there is a process to getting “alternative methods” actually into clinic trials to validate effectiveness.
Do people ignore the “criminal” element of people who will purposely give false treatment only to get money off a desperate/dying person?
My wife worked with a neuro oncologist and was involved with clinical trials for things that are alternative. [/quote]
On the topic of alt. treatments, have you ever heard of the Novocure device? Apparently it can slow/stop progression of solid tumors using nothing but alternating electric fields.
Mind = blown.
[/quote]
Funny you should say that, my wife actually was in on that study, she had a couple of patients that used it. She was very impressed with the results.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?[/quote]
It does mention the part about the money/industry side, but it follows a case of a husband/wife who have a 5 yr old with brain cancer. They’re threatnened to be put in jail if they don’t do chemo/radiation.
There’s more to it, so I wouldn’t say it’s solely “conspiracy theory”, but it asks the question why aren’t alternative methods allowed to progress?[/quote]
Because there is a process to getting “alternative methods” actually into clinic trials to validate effectiveness.
Do people ignore the “criminal” element of people who will purposely give false treatment only to get money off a desperate/dying person?
My wife worked with a neuro oncologist and was involved with clinical trials for things that are alternative. [/quote]
The problem is that most “alternative methods” are those of “be positive, drink soup, avoid chemo” and that’s why I don’t even want to watch the trailer or that movie if there’s any mention to that because it boils my blood. I lost two close people to cancer and I really go mad at the mention of those alternative methods mostly fueled by religious nutjobs.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]ahu2468 wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?[/quote]
It does mention the part about the money/industry side, but it follows a case of a husband/wife who have a 5 yr old with brain cancer. They’re threatnened to be put in jail if they don’t do chemo/radiation.
There’s more to it, so I wouldn’t say it’s solely “conspiracy theory”, but it asks the question why aren’t alternative methods allowed to progress?[/quote]
Because there is a process to getting “alternative methods” actually into clinic trials to validate effectiveness.
Do people ignore the “criminal” element of people who will purposely give false treatment only to get money off a desperate/dying person?
My wife worked with a neuro oncologist and was involved with clinical trials for things that are alternative. [/quote]
On the topic of alt. treatments, have you ever heard of the Novocure device? Apparently it can slow/stop progression of solid tumors using nothing but alternating electric fields.
Mind = blown.
[/quote]
Funny you should say that, my wife actually was in on that study, she had a couple of patients that used it. She was very impressed with the results.
[/quote]
Electric fields? Ironically, there are some people who think electric fields can bring on some cancers (i.e. living under high-tension wires or towers).
I guess it’s the same with the heart. A charge can stop it, a charge can start it.
[quote]Iron Dwarf wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]ahu2468 wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?[/quote]
It does mention the part about the money/industry side, but it follows a case of a husband/wife who have a 5 yr old with brain cancer. They’re threatnened to be put in jail if they don’t do chemo/radiation.
There’s more to it, so I wouldn’t say it’s solely “conspiracy theory”, but it asks the question why aren’t alternative methods allowed to progress?[/quote]
Because there is a process to getting “alternative methods” actually into clinic trials to validate effectiveness.
Do people ignore the “criminal” element of people who will purposely give false treatment only to get money off a desperate/dying person?
My wife worked with a neuro oncologist and was involved with clinical trials for things that are alternative. [/quote]
On the topic of alt. treatments, have you ever heard of the Novocure device? Apparently it can slow/stop progression of solid tumors using nothing but alternating electric fields.
Mind = blown.
[/quote]
Funny you should say that, my wife actually was in on that study, she had a couple of patients that used it. She was very impressed with the results.
[/quote]
Electric fields? Ironically, there are some people who think electric fields can bring on some cancers (i.e. living under high-tension wires or towers).
I guess it’s the same with the heart. A charge can stop it, a charge can start it.
[/quote]
Due to the nature of the diseases many things can effectively treat one form of cancer and may cause another. Lots of chemotherapeutics are like this and is why cancer treatment can be a bit of a grey area due to having to weigh the risk versus possible reward.
[quote]Edevus wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?[/quote]
It does mention the part about the money/industry side, but it follows a case of a husband/wife who have a 5 yr old with brain cancer. They’re threatnened to be put in jail if they don’t do chemo/radiation.
There’s more to it, so I wouldn’t say it’s solely “conspiracy theory”, but it asks the question why aren’t alternative methods allowed to progress?[/quote]
Because there is a process to getting “alternative methods” actually into clinic trials to validate effectiveness.
Do people ignore the “criminal” element of people who will purposely give false treatment only to get money off a desperate/dying person?
My wife worked with a neuro oncologist and was involved with clinical trials for things that are alternative. [/quote]
The problem is that most “alternative methods” are those of “be positive, drink soup, avoid chemo” and that’s why I don’t even want to watch the trailer or that movie if there’s any mention to that because it boils my blood. I lost two close people to cancer and I really go mad at the mention of those alternative methods mostly fueled by religious nutjobs.
[/quote]
And I lost a special dog to me (I know not a true comparison, but only pet/person I’ve ever lost).
anyways, just go into it and pick from what is useful. You may be surprised. They mention in there several times how diet and lifestyle are the real key, as in prevention and not so much finding a cure.
They also talk a bit about the cancer research societies that don’t really put their money to good use.
On top of that think of some of the products that market breast cancer awareness (Cheerios), yet processed grains like that along with the Acrylamide (from the baking process) which is a known carcinogen.
But, i guess that’s like someone telling me to watch a vegan nutritional docu, while there may be bits of good info, it would be clouded by a storm of anger.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]Edevus wrote:
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]anonym wrote:
Does this involve medical and pharmaceutical conspiracy theories?[/quote]
It does mention the part about the money/industry side, but it follows a case of a husband/wife who have a 5 yr old with brain cancer. They’re threatnened to be put in jail if they don’t do chemo/radiation.
There’s more to it, so I wouldn’t say it’s solely “conspiracy theory”, but it asks the question why aren’t alternative methods allowed to progress?[/quote]
Because there is a process to getting “alternative methods” actually into clinic trials to validate effectiveness.
Do people ignore the “criminal” element of people who will purposely give false treatment only to get money off a desperate/dying person?
My wife worked with a neuro oncologist and was involved with clinical trials for things that are alternative. [/quote]
The problem is that most “alternative methods” are those of “be positive, drink soup, avoid chemo” and that’s why I don’t even want to watch the trailer or that movie if there’s any mention to that because it boils my blood. I lost two close people to cancer and I really go mad at the mention of those alternative methods mostly fueled by religious nutjobs.
[/quote]
And I lost a special dog to me (I know not a true comparison, but only pet/person I’ve ever lost).
anyways, just go into it and pick from what is useful. You may be surprised. They mention in there several times how diet and lifestyle are the real key, as in prevention and not so much finding a cure.
They also talk a bit about the cancer research societies that don’t really put their money to good use.
On top of that think of some of the products that market breast cancer awareness (Cheerios), yet processed grains like that along with the Acrylamide (from the baking process) which is a known carcinogen.
But, i guess that’s like someone telling me to watch a vegan nutritional docu, while there may be bits of good info, it would be clouded by a storm of anger.
[/quote]
Good post, J.
I stopped donating money to the various cancer “charities” years ago. Where do all those dollars really go?
I just lost a friend to breast cancer last year, and earlier she said she was “tired of seeing all those stupid pink breast cancer awareness ribbons everywhere. EVERYONE’S aware of breast cancer, but what is anyone really doing about it?”
A lot of people are doing something about it ID, a lot of the support organizations are there for emotional support. There is a bell curve with everything, some organizations are going to be bad. Being fully informed like things in the video is not a problem, drinking the kool aid about one view is what can be wrong.
Also making a statement that Cheerios can cause cancer is a very blanket statement, that has not been substantiated by true studies.
We are living longer due to medicine in antibiotics, cardiovascular disease, is the reason that Cancer is on the rise first and foremost. Sorry but a big part of this is genetics and cellular development, yes there are environmental factors that “speed” the process.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
A lot of people are doing something about it ID, a lot of the support organizations are there for emotional support. There is a bell curve with everything, some organizations are going to be bad. Being fully informed like things in the video is not a problem, drinking the kool aid about one view is what can be wrong.
Also making a statement that Cheerios can cause cancer is a very blanket statement, that has not been substantiated by true studies.
We are living longer due to medicine in antibiotics, cardiovascular disease, is the reason that Cancer is on the rise first and foremost. Sorry but a big part of this is genetics and cellular development, yes there are environmental factors that “speed” the process. [/quote]
Well, I did continue supporting a charity where the money went directly to housing for families with cancer patients. But not any of the big ones.
As far as environmental factors, it’s a conundrum when you consider the healthcare debate along with the debate to cut “progress halting” environmental regulations.
Then again, like JehovasFItness said, much responsibility lies with risk factors that individuals can control (smoking being a HUGE one) and proper diet.
Exactly ID, you may have the cancer gene that you will get lung cancer (10% of people with lung cancer NEVER smoked) and if you do smoke instead of getting lung cancer at 80 you get it at 60. I had a great grandmother that smoked her whole life and died at 98 years old after breaking a hip, but her son died at 56 after smoking his whole life from Heart Attack. Had a doc friend of mine who lifted, ran, ate healthy, did not smoke etc. Died on a fucking treadmill at 52 years old.
[quote]Derek542 wrote:
Exactly ID, you may have the cancer gene that you will get lung cancer (10% of people with lung cancer NEVER smoked) and if you do smoke instead of getting lung cancer at 80 you get it at 60. I had a great grandmother that smoked her whole life and died at 98 years old after breaking a hip, but her son died at 56 after smoking his whole life from Heart Attack. Had a doc friend of mine who lifted, ran, ate healthy, did not smoke etc. Died on a fucking treadmill at 52 years old. [/quote]
52? Damn… that’s 2.5 years away from me!
Ima start smoking!
lol