10 Reasons Why Hidden Cancer Cure Conspiracy Theories Fail

So I was doing my usual trawl of various websites that come my way, and I came across this article. It's pretty spot on, and certainly gives more than adequate reason why companies suppressing a cure for cancer is extremely unlikely. I will only quote from a few of these ideas, in order to encourage readers to go to the original website to give credit where credit is due. I would encourage those who believe there is a conspiracy and a cancer cure exists to read the claims put forth before jumping in with complaints about evil 'big pharma'.

hatepseudoscience.com...

Medical researchers and their families are just as susceptible to cancer and other diseases as anyone else.

An obvious implication of a “hidden cure” conspiracy is that researchers and business owners are willing to put the company and shareholders ahead of the lives of themselves and their loved ones. It implies that the thousands of individuals involved in research are flawlessly obedient drones never giving in to the temptation to help someone they care for deeply, or to better the world. It means doctors and scientists must be willing to sit and watch their mothers, their daughters, and their spouses suffer and struggle with a disease they know themselves to be curable.

Pushback from insurance companies.

Again, if any conspiracy theorist with a computer can find evidence of a hidden cure, then insurance companies must also be aware of it. Why would big insurance companies continue paying for expensive yet inefficacious treatments when a cheap and effective cure is available? If hiding the cure brings in the big bucks, then insurance companies are the ones largely responsible for paying the bill. They’d have every incentive imaginable to uncover and expose the suppression of superior and cheap treatments. Why would they be motivated to keep quiet while forking over huge sums of money to something they know to be a fraud?

Actually, companies WOULD make a lot of money from cures.

In what universe would a treatment of such monumental efficacy not be marketable? If it could be patented, then the inventors would go down in history for their achievements (which to many scientists is more valuable than just being ridiculously rich but unrecognized for their accomplishments), and the company they worked for would make billions. Sometimes conspiracy theorists respond to this by claiming that the hidden cures might not be patentable, but that’s not a valid argument either (for two reasons).

In my opinion, the 'hidden cancer cure conspiracy' is just that, a conspiracy. I'm sure that many will argue vehemently against this, but I encourage those who disagree to read the article I have linked, and put forth logical rebuttals, rather than conspiratorial ramblings.



I am more inclined to believe that there is an entire industry dedicated to promoting 'natural' cures for cancer which are simply scams. Seeing that close to 40% of men and women have a lifetime risk of developing cancer, it seems ludicrous that a simple cure could be 'hidden'. The fact also exists that cancer is in fact not a 'disease', but rather, a category of highly diverse diseases. What may work for one cancer may be completely ineffective against a different type of cancer.

seer.cancer.gov...

More information about so called 'Miracle Cancer Cures' can be found at this link.

scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org...

Cognitive dissonance is not proof that big pharma doesn't suppress cures for cancer.
Just look at how many people have had success with cannabis oil. Why do you think the FDA is trying to patent these chemicals. CBD oil was poo pooed as a cure for epilepsy for decades. Now they are admitting it works.

I don't think theres a magic bullet either. If you consider that the medical industrial complex makes a ton of money from the 'treatment' of disease though, then why bother curing anything?

The money isn't in the cure, its in the medicine…

***Language Warning***

originally posted by: intrptr

I don't think theres a magic bullet either. If you consider that the medical industrial complex makes a ton of money from the 'treatment' of disease though, then why bother curing anything?

The money isn't in the cure, its in the medicine…

hatepseudoscience.com...

Companies are already choosing cure or prevention over profit.

There are already examples of inexpensive products which are very effective at eradicating a particular disease despite the fact that letting people get sick and then treating them would yield more profit per patient. However, companies still create them, which would seem to contradict the claim that companies are so ruthless they’d rather people suffer so they can milk a little more money out of them than to market a cure. Why haven’t vaccines and antibiotics been suppressed? Is there not more money to be made from tuberculosis by treating the symptoms instead of administering the cure? Would no one stand to profit if measles were rampant in America instead of rare? Why would companies be so selective about which cures to hide and which to utilize?

i do believe we have many natural remedies in nature, but not a cure.. They way it works with cancer is natures way of saying;" We tried and well you didnt fit in, did you give offspring, well if the other significant didnt offer the right DNA keys.. We will make sure to kill that to " Nature is hard, its harsh.. But never unjust and never unfair..
In Society maybe God can offer a solution, but in nature.. You die..

I don't think there is a conspiracy at all, I just don't think the possibility of a natural cure is taken seriously, and as such no funding is obtained to set up the required studies to clarify that argument.

There are a million and one natural substances out there that could be studied, but studying a man-made drug for its effectiveness has more of a ring to it.

I read that a student developed nano metal cages of some sort and that cancer is 100% curable with it based on experiments on test subjects. I never heard anything more.

Imagina a cure that is extremely cheap. How would companies earn money from something that costs 10 cents and cures cancer forever?

what if the cure is made out of dead babies. and drugs. Can you patent it then?

a reply to: cuckooold

Not understanding basic science is the basis for the 'cancer cure conspiracies'. This is confirmed by the replies you have received on this thread. Big Pharma has millions of people in its grand conspiracy... apparently.

originally posted by: LostThePlot
CBD oil was poo pooed as a cure for epilepsy for decades. Now they are admitting it works.

Please show me the article/study where 'they' admitted CBD works and how. Youtube videos from the Colorado Cannabis Club are not proof.

No one has addressed the OPs point that insurance companies most certainly would want a cure. You can't one one hand say Big Pharma is suppressing a cure but then claim that insurance companies wouldn't use their financial might to unsuppress it. Insurance is who is paying for these drugs and they'd love nothing more than a cure to lower their cost.

a reply to: Agartha

originally posted by: Agartha
a reply to: cuckooold



Please show me the article/study where 'they' admitted CBD works and how. Youtube videos from the Colorado Cannabis Club are not proof.

Here, let me help with that

The differential effects of CBD suggest that the cannabinoid acts to inhibit seizure spread in the CNS by an action on GABA, but not glycine, mechanisms.

CBD prevented tonic convulsions caused by a convulsant current (CC) 99.99, and by the convulsant dose (CD) 99.99 values of γ-aminobutyric acid (GABA) inhibitors, 3-mercaptoproprionic acid (3MPA), picrotoxin (PIC), isonicotinic acid hydrazine (INH), pentylenetetrazol (PTZ) and bicuculline (BIC).

www.sciencedirect.com...

www.karger.com...

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

www.sciencedirect.com...

DCA

a reply to: cuckooold

now your just lying to yourself...

over 100 studys agree, weed kills cancer..


a government study in the 70s showed breast cancer destroyed by 25%.. think of how many mothers daughters wifes that would have been saved from this since then.. with marijuana.

a reply to: reeferman

Show us the in vivo studies that demonstrate the efficacy of cannabis "killing" cancer.

originally posted by: FamCore
let me help with that

Thank you, Famcore, but:

www.sciencedirect.com...

This is mice, not people. What works with mice doesn't necessarily work with us.

www.karger.com...

This is from 1980.

onlinelibrary.wiley.com...

From your own link:

CBD has neuroprotective and antiinflammatory effects, and it appears to be well tolerated in humans, but small and methodologically limited studies of CBD in human epilepsy have been inconclusive

www.sciencedirect.com...

This is animals, not humans.

There is no cure for epilepsy, which is what Losttheplot wrote, hence my reply.

originally posted by: Agartha
a reply to: cuckooold

Not understanding basic science is the basis for the 'cancer cure conspiracies'. This is confirmed by the replies you have received on this thread. Big Pharma has millions of people in its grand conspiracy... apparently.

originally posted by: LostThePlot
CBD oil was poo pooed as a cure for epilepsy for decades. Now they are admitting it works.

Please show me the article/study where 'they' admitted CBD works and how. Youtube videos from the Colorado Cannabis Club are not proof.

I have no interest in providing links to someone who couldn't even be bothered to watch the videos I posted. Use Google, there are plenty of studies showing positive results.

a reply to: LostThePlot

Right! And when the pharmaceutical drugs made from natural cheap cannabis come out, they will surely have pronounced NEGATIVE side-effects. Almost all big-pharma drugs do. Here is the reason for my theory:

Health risks of Marinol - Marinol is synthetic (man-made) THC. That means synthesized in a laboratory, and there are a host of potentially near-death side-effects! It raises patients' blood pressure, and that side effect alone can be lethal.


Cannabinoids are not meant to be specifically isolated using chemistry and man's inferior methods! Nature did the way it was meant to be.

There are over 64 types of identified cannabinoids in the cannabis plant(and others that remain unidentified because of lack of medical study funding and other reasons).

There are a number of healthy cannabinoids in the non--psychoactive hemp plant-but it is a NATURAL plant, therefore they are balanced.

It is true that certain cannabis types for ALL patients can have negative side-effects such as paranoia, blood pressure drop or elevation (depending on variety and phenotype), anti-diabetic effects (THCV varieties), anti-cancer effects (CBD varieties), pain-killing, pain enhancing (teeth, and headaches-reportedly), anti-arthritic, anti-fungal (as an oil based poultice), and SO many others.

The number one thing that in this world that should be a human right is a persons OWN BODY! If they can find something that helps them that is natural (peppermint, coffee, asprin, hemp, cannabis, grape seed oil, red wine vinegar, etc, etc....) then they should be able to take a safe dosage of the natural substance, and that should be the limit of the law. If it is poisonous, they had better NEVER consume it (but that should be common sense these days).

There are thousands of substances that you can order on the internet that are plant based that can kill you for good. They are 100% legal, and you can order many of them by the pound at cheap prices. They are not illegal. There should be no reason that any natural plant should be "resricted" for any reason.

I remember a few years back someone was on ATS talking about what is now called the 2030 Agenda (UN). I remember them saying that in the future, the plan was to make restrictions on all natural herbs and everything. They want to make it to where you have to get a prescription for every single herb and supplement you take, and require pre-requisite therapies that can often be much more dangerous (chemo, blood thinners, etc, etc...). I don't see how people would be able to tolerate that. People should be raising heck on the FDA for this. This just might be "The Canary that died in the coal mine". If they can restrict access to this, then what else will they restrict access to

The scariest thing is that the tentacles of the various health control boards in the world are almost ever-reaching now. Where is my Star Gate when I need IT

originally posted by: LostThePlot
I have no interest in providing links to someone who couldn't even be bothered to watch the videos I posted. Use Google, there are plenty of studies showing positive results.

I have news for you: there is no cure for epilepsy.

a reply to: LostThePlot

YouTube videos are not academic sources.


More to the point, if you're not prepared to address challenges of validity when you present unsubstantiated claims on a medical themed forum, perhaps an online discussion board is not the place for you.

There is no cure for epilepsy, which is what Losttheplot wrote, hence my reply.

Sorry, I should have said treatment for epilepsy, not cure.