RE: The Great Cancer Hoax:

RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Real0ne -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 10:49:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subfever quote: Oh BTW; You are welcome! Hey RO, where have you been lately? BTW... nice job... [:D] As you can see Ken and friends pretend anything that runs contrary to guv is not valid and as always other countries find people like burzinski to be correct in lab tests as in the case of your OP. I bore quickly with eyes closed agenda pushers and frankly there are several other boards where there is greater interest truth. A journey; "Truth"; where no government agency has gone before!

Real0ne -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 10:51:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: yeh I started to do just that until you successfully narrowed the "on topic" subject matter to a point forcing substantive opposing data out of your thread. No. I held the discussion to plans that could be put into action with demonstrable results. Outside of demonstrable is speculation, not "substantive opposing data." I do not feel the need to repeat myself. Have a nice day

Real0ne -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 10:53:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Louve00 You obviously haven't watched either video link posted. In subfever's link, not only was Burzynski's work patented, but the patent was stolen, changed and used in different doses, rendering not only an ineffective but dangerous outcome to the patient. His patients that did believe in him donated their own money to help him out with his legal fees, since the FDA repeatedly tried prosecuting him and he kept getting acquitted. And since I am not very good at defending or explaining scientific things, I am capable of understanding what I am being told. So if you watch the film Kirata posted ("A World Without Cancer - The Story of Vitamin B17") 23:30 minutes into the video to 25:30 minutes will tell you how a molecule of B17 breaks down in the body, along with what and where the cyanide is dangerous. And if you would want to go on to around the 40 minute mark of the link, it addresses the so called "quacks" that use Laetrile along with their credentials. Kirata, thanks for the link, too. I enjoyed watching it. I don't really like movies [8D], but I do like to learn and I did. Thanks again!! [:)] Agreed! and thanks for that film here too! and with that you all have a nice day, I have an awesome constitutional debate going on right now with a power poster that I really want to get back to.

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 11:07:09 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen the American Cancer Society, which is a nonprofit and is a very well respected organization. http://www.cancer.org/Treatment/TreatmentsandSideEffects/ComplementaryandAlternativeMedicine/PharmacologicalandBiologicalTreatment/antineoplaston-therapy That is certainly an interesting read, and one that warrents review for anyone condsidering this treatment for themselves, or a loved one. However, you do realize the SAME types of claims were made of Melatonin, St. John's Wort, Glucosamine, and so many other "alternatives" that have since proven these "respected organizations" and medical professionals COMPLETELY WRONG, don't you?!! As to your question regarding "double blind studies", maybe I missed it, but I didn't see a "refusal" to conduct such studies?!! I did read (from your ACS link), however, "The site visit team and, subsequently, the [NCI] Division of Cancer Treatment's Decision Network Committee believed that evidence of possible antitumor effect was demonstrated." NCI concluded that these results warranted further investigation through clinical trials at other medical centers. But because of disagreement between NCI researchers and Burzynski, the clinical trials were terminated in 1995". Additionally, via the video, the esimated for such trials is in the $300 million dollar range, which is not easy to raise. Also, recall that elan had agreed to funding clinical trials, but later backed out... that is, before trying to STEAL his Patent. And as to the issue of Patents, if FDA was so convinced of the ineffectiveness of Antineoplaston Therapy, then why did they themselves attempt to STEAL his Patent, not once... but ELEVEN times?!! Naturally, additional research is warranted, and it's certainly possible that Antineoplastons are EXACTLY as they've been thus far categorized -- as an alternative and complimentary (i.e., in addition to) therapy. Again, many remedies that are in use TODAY were initially reported in the SAME way as the ACS report reads -- once again, citing the example of Glucosame and what had been initially reported by both the FDA and the Arthritis Foundation, which one would also consider a "respected" organization. But don't fool yourself... if you honestly think organizations such as the American Cancer Society are completely objective, with no influence from either the FDA or the AMA, then you're sadly mistaken. There is a both a political and monetary motivator for such organizations to reflect the opinions of both. Another example... "Statin" drugs are prescibed for MILLIONS to help control Cholesteral -- and while generally recognized as safe, Statin drugs deplete the body of Coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), yet... where is the FDA or the AMA on widely supporting the use of Co10 as a complimentary therapy to Statin drugs?!! They're SILENT because there's no profit in it for them, as it's a natural, dietary supplement that they can't Patent. Anyway, yes... I'm very much in favor of "larger, well controlled trials", but I'm also not going label Antineoplaston Therapy as "fraudulent", as I've witnessed the garbage thats been reported on so many "alternative" remedies that later PROVED the naysayers 100% wrong. Oh, and the use of "Peptides" is not new or unproven in any way... some of the most successful anti-wrinkle creams, for example, utilize "Peptides" as RESTORATIVE THERAPY. I applaud anyone who does their research on any topic, but I'd also suggest there's certainly enough evidence here not to simply dismiss Antineoplastons. [:)]

DomKen -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 12:33:20 PM)
The government cannot steal a patent. That's how I know the film is bullshit without viewing a single frame. Only individuals can hold patents. Phase 2 clinical trials, randomized double blind trials, would only cost $300 million if the drug is incredibly expensive. A double blind study is done by recruiting people with the illness in question, preferably several hundred people at more than 2 sites. So Burzynski already has 1 clinic he could easily recruit a doctor or two at other clinics, if he is so confident his drug works. The patients all have to sign waivers so insurance premiums are not an issue so the only expenses are tracking patients and outcomes (involves a laptop and commercial DB software), paying for the drug and paying the support personel. There is simply no conceivable way that amounts to $300 million. As to statins causing coq10 defiency. There is copious medical research establishing that. If a M.D. prescribing statins isn't up on the research and who hasn't read the package insert, mandated by the FDA, then it isn't the fault of the FDA or of the AMA. http://www.cholesterol.co.za/professional/lipitor_package_insert.htm#Side-effects Note the section warning of myopathy, that's coQ10 defiency. The individual M.D. is responsible for making sure his patient's are eating properly, a much better source of coQ10 than supplements, and if not recommending a supplement. The FDA makes the manufacturer warn the M.D.'s. It is not the responsibility of the FDA to recommend a treatment unneeded by most people taking statins.

subfever -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 12:44:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: The monetary system itself, which you defend, is the underlying cause of most of the lies, half-truths, and noise that we have to sift through endlessly in search of the truth Absolute bullshit. You've yet to make ANY causal case for this. It's not a "defense," but pointing out there's no argument. Your thinking on this is like "We live in an oxygen based system. This allows criminals to breath the oxygen, thus causing crime." It's. The. Resources. The rest is just numbers. And no, I'm not trying to discredit you at all, merely to keep you on the earth. You start with a decent case about introducing new ideas into orthodoxy, and because that's difficult, you jump to an evil conspiracy suppressing hope, and blame it on your favorite demon, the monetary system, which again, only reflects, vs. causes. The reason this is an issue for me? I work with people all the time who shut off all their options by exactly this type of thinking. It's what I did when consulting too--it's why I could help them succeed, despite all the forces they had decided were against them. It's what I do for college juniors and seniors, who get jobs and internships while still in the class. Push all that crap aside, and look at the real resources, the real underlying causes, and you can achieve all sorts of seemingly unimaginable results. But unwittingly, you are hindering exactly that you (and I) would like to see flourish. That's why. I hope you understand. (You are, generally, good at not taking things personally.) I'm quick to agree that until we change the current system, we certainly need to exist within it. If in your line of work you help others exist within the current system, then that's great. We all have to exist within the system too. However, we don't have to emotionally and intellectually support the system if we don't believe in it. And if I'm understanding you correctly, you're saying that we both wish to see the scientific method flourish. If so, I'm glad we have that common ground. From what I've seen of you in the past, you seem to seek and value common ground, and I admire this. Now I can't quite put my finger on it, and please don't take this personally, but of all the people I have engaged with here on this board in the past, I have found you to be one of the most difficult to understand and therefore engage with. For example, when you said... "Absolute bullshit. You've yet to make ANY causal case for this. It's not a "defense," but pointing out there's no argument. Your thinking on this is like "We live in an oxygen based system. This allows criminals to breath the oxygen, thus causing crime." ... I'm not really certain if you're saying that you're not defending the monetary system because it's as obvious as the air we breath that it is the underlying cause, and therefore there isn't even any argument about this; or if you're staunchly supporting the system and there is nothing to defend because I haven't presented any valid evidence which supports my position that even warrants an argument; or if I had bridged the causal gap instead, by saying... "The monetary system that you support, which breeds corruption and greed, is the underlying cause of most of the lies, half-truths, and noise that we have to sift through endlessly in search of the truth." ... that you wouldn't have felt compelled to respond. I suspect that our disconnect has been frustrating for you as well.

subfever -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 12:50:36 PM)
quote: A journey; "Truth"; where no government agency has gone before! That's a good one... [:D]

Musicmystery -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 2:16:54 PM)
quote: "The monetary system that you support, which breeds corruption and greed And that's what's lacking a causal link. Are you under the impression that without a monetary system, no one would be corrupt or greedy? Plenty of people, most, actually, use this system without that ill effect. That's what I mean when you've made no case. You're simply assuming cause.

subfever -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 4:20:27 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: "The monetary system that you support, which breeds corruption and greed And that's what's lacking a causal link. Are you under the impression that without a monetary system, no one would be corrupt or greedy? Plenty of people, most, actually, use this system without that ill effect. That's what I mean when you've made no case. You're simply assuming cause. Thanks for the clarification. Yes, I'm under the impression that if we replace a monetary system with a system that provides for human needs without the requirement of money, barter, submission to employment, or any other coerced method of exchange; corruption and greed would vanish within a generation or two, possibly three. It may be difficult to condition those who have become too aberrated under the current system. However, educational adjustments to the new reality, and exposure to the healthier social environment will acclament future generations to the new system. Are you saying that except for a small percentage of folks, you don't believe our monetary system breeds greed and corruption?

Kirata -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 4:29:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subfever a system that provides for human needs without the requirement of money, barter, submission to employment, or any other coerced method of exchange... It may be difficult to condition those who have become too aberrated under the current system. However... Unh... would that be ALL human needs? Hey, I hadda ask. [:D] However, I wish to state for the record that I, for one, am fully prepared to have my needs met without submission to employment. K.

jlf1961 -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 5:21:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subfever Thanks for the clarification. Yes, I'm under the impression that if we replace a monetary system with a system that provides for human needs without the requirement of money, barter, submission to employment, or any other coerced method of exchange; corruption and greed would vanish within a generation or two, possibly three. It may be difficult to condition those who have become too aberrated under the current system. However, educational adjustments to the new reality, and exposure to the healthier social environment will acclament future generations to the new system. Are you saying that except for a small percentage of folks, you don't believe our monetary system breeds greed and corruption? Man, I dont know what drug or combination of drugs you are on, but either you are completely deluded or have been watching to much star trek. For one thing, there is no, repeat no, political system which cares for all an individuals needs WITHOUT some form of exchange, be it cash or barter. Secondly, want to explain why anyone would want to do any work IF all their needs are provided for, again no society can exist without work and services being done. A pure socialist system would provide for the needs of everyone but there is still the requirement for work and services, and some people will feel they deserve more simply because of the type of work or services they perform. It cant work.

MasterSlaveLA -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 8:49:17 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Obviously no point in any further discussion. You simply don't know what you're talking about... "steal" is the implication of filing 11 Patents on someone else's work (which the FDA did)... a couple hundred people doesn't/wouldn't cut mustard as a drug trial goes... and yeah, there's plenty of research on CoQ10, but they're silent on it. Believe what you want to believe... you couldn't be more wrong about soooooo many things. [8\|]

jlf1961 -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/12/2011 10:36:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Obviously no point in any further discussion. You simply don't know what you're talking about... "steal" is the implication of filing 11 Patents on someone else's work (which the FDA did)... a couple hundred people doesn't/wouldn't cut mustard as a drug trial goes... and yeah, there's plenty of research on CoQ10, but they're silent on it. Believe what you want to believe... you couldn't be more wrong about soooooo many things. [8\|] What part of "A government agency cannot hold a patent" do you not understand? Furthermore, the FDA by its very nature does no research, nor does anyone working for the FDA. When someone makes an invention, and does so as an employee of a company, usually the company owns the right to apply for a patent. The exception once again is the United States, where only natural persons may apply for a patent. In the USA, the employee will typically have a clause in his employment contract stating that he assigns all his patent rights to the company. The filing is then done on behalf of the employee, but the rights immediately go to the company. Please attempt to wrap your head around the part I put in bold, it will help you understand that there is no way, shape or form that an agency can apply for a patent.

SternSkipper -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 12:41:54 AM)
quote: quote: the corrupt system most of you support ???? = <we're all bad>/ <he saw Youtube, now he's good> What's next? Someone linking my contributions to the March OF Dimes to AZBM's presence on the internet?

Real0ne -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 1:27:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MasterSlaveLA quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Obviously no point in any further discussion. You simply don't know what you're talking about... "steal" is the implication of filing 11 Patents on someone else's work (which the FDA did)... a couple hundred people doesn't/wouldn't cut mustard as a drug trial goes... and yeah, there's plenty of research on CoQ10, but they're silent on it. Believe what you want to believe... you couldn't be more wrong about soooooo many things. [8\|] No no no! Not so fast. Not until you drive the big 12" schwantzola right up their asshelmet lawyer asses. [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/blacks/antiplas.jpg[/image] Oh and take note btw how jlf tells you it cant be done and in the next paragraph tells you exactly how they do it! You are correct there are 11 patents total this is only a snip of one of them. Have to post the pic otherwise they will pretend it does not exist. Incidently for those with cancer or who knows someone fighting vancer there is shitloads of great info in these 11 patents and also burzinskis patents. That video will be active until the end of june, I suggest watching it before its pay per view again. If the guv sees fit to steal his invention you know damn well it works and works good. Oh yah and before I forget also proving that the united states of america IS in FACT a CORPORATION! Not that those jokers will get it. LMAO. Truth the final frontier.....to boldly go where no guvmint has gone before. ~tata

flcouple2009 -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:45:01 AM)
FR File these claims right up there with the guy who had his patents stole because he could make cars get 90 mpg on water.

mnottertail -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 5:50:16 AM)
http://www.usuhs.mil/ Samid worked under contract for the US military. I believe the government owns it. They own thousands upon thousands of utility patents for shit made under their contracts. (please note 19 and 75 on your ticket as you collect your parting gifts on your way out) What the fuck could be simpler?

mnottertail -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 6:00:07 AM)
Check out Reagans Star Wars crap, most of that made with grants from NSF, NIH and so on, purpose scope and goal supplied by the Gubmint, money (and often resources) supplied by the Gubmint. FUCKIN' OWNED BY THE GUBMINT. We bought it, we paid for it, we OWN IT.

Real0ne -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 9:09:12 AM)
IF They provided a grant which according to him THEY DID NOT! IF the grant has full disclosure to the recipient informing him of any interest the guv may have, WHICH THEY DO NOT DO. You can bet that they invented out of thin air some new "CODE" using syntax terrorism to STEAL BY OPERATION OF "CODE" his invention. And who is right in there with them? Riddle me this: When is who them? [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/blacks/antioplastones03b.jpg[/image] They filed these patents while they had him locked up in jail on frivolous indictments, not after 1 but after 4 failed previous grand jury indictments! They steal his patents! Your wonderful guv at work cheerleaders ken and jlf! [image]http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o296/nine_one_one/stuff/smiley3949.gif[/image] Got more fucking rights in china for shit sake. Now its blue avatars turn to show up and make a snide remark pretending nothing had been discussed. "by the numbers". BUT its NOT a conspiracy because you can bet they codified a legal ability to steal it before they stole it. "sneeky wabbits" Truth the final frontier.....to boldly go where no gubmint has gone before.

mnottertail -> RE: The Great Cancer Hoax: (6/13/2011 9:12:30 AM)
LOL. Yeah, thats even more believable (without credible substantiation) than the other tinfoiling you proclaim.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.09375