Scientists find treatment to kill every kind of cancer tumor!!!

its so true of lifestyle sometimes doesnt matter , infact my dad was from the ww2 generation
he smoked unfilterd camels & chesterfields & drank stuff that you have to keep away from open flame,lol or as he called it HOLY WATER
& he made it till 78 but he did have a stroke that knocked him for a loop when he was 77 so the last year of his life was tough, but he never developed cancer or should i say showed signs , cause when he had his shirt off i swear to god he had black cancer spots on his chest , but who knows

my mom was like him but she did smoke everyday since she was like 15 & she made it till 79 & dementcia got her but again no cancer

reply to post by dogstar23


Not only did you make a clear point; I also whole-heartily agree with it in every way. As for those who think that natural cures are the only way to solve cancer---you're sorely mistaken. In fact, I would implore some of you to pick up a very basic Cell Biology textbook and read through it--this would explain why "natural cures" in and of themselves do not qualify as being adequate cancer prevention agents or eliminators. Some things are a conspiracy; this isn't one of them. Please, pick up a text and read on it.

reply to post by PhoenixOD


There are already a lot of cancer cures that have been supressed and this one will be too because pharmaceutical companies have not been able to patent the treatment.

In a few years, maybe sooner they will announce a new form of treatment that cures cancer. This will be a DNA based cure.

Keep an eye out for articles like this appearing more frequently...

Gene Patent Ruling

Gene therapy for cancer

The cancer cure will be an individually based treatment using gene therapy that they will patent for each individual patient, allowing them to hold the copyright and charge a fortune for it. It is the only way pharmaceutical companies can profit and the only way cancer charities can still operate if cancer is cured.

It is a genius idea in my opinion but morally wrong if you believe profiting from ill people is not the way forward but it is the world we live in.

It is already done, it is not available for public consumption yet due to the current laws needing changes. Heck of a lot of money to be made if you know the companies that are going to do it.

Great, if the patient stays alive after all cancer cells are killed

Some say that humans are programmed to live more than 100 years, even 140 years.

Originally posted by XXXN3O
reply to post by PhoenixOD

 

There are already a lot of cancer cures that have been suprressed and this one will be too because pharmaceutical companies have not been able to patent the treatment.

In a few years, maybe sooner they will announce a new form of treatment that cures cancer. This will be a DNA based cure.

Keep an eye out for articles like this appearing more frequently...

Gene Patent Ruling

Gene therapy for cancer

The cancer cure will be an individually based treatment using gene therapy that they will patent for each individual patient, allowing them to hold the copyright and charge a fortune for it. It is the only way Pharmaceutical companies can profit and also the only way massive charities can still operate from cancer.
It is a genius idea but I think it is also wrong.

Its already done, it is just not available for public consumption yet. Heck of a lotta money to be made in stocks if you know the companies that are going to do it.

edit on 5-4-2013 by XXXN3O because: (no reason given)

Can you name just one "cure" that's been suppressed?
I bet you can't.

It's a popular misconception (and one that natural cure proponents use very often but wrongly) that treatments can't be patented because they're natural etc etc.
In most cases, patents for medical treatments can be for what a compound is used for, not the actual compound itself.

If a pharma company wants to patent something, believe me, they will.

reply to post by Pardon?


I am not particularly interested in debating this side of it, think of it as a side comment or feel happy if I just say it is my opinion, does not bother me.

What my point is all about is the gene therapy so I have no desire to have this old debate that goes in a circle, sorry.

reply to post by Pardon?


Why don't you do a quick google search, there have been tons. But your just another drone i guess. so you won't even bother.

In any case -on topic- hmm.. this seems too good to be true. can't help but feel something like "I Am Legend" Would happen, or who knows what they're putting into people. dunno... just me thinking.. something about this stinks... Specially the fact that it was posted on fox news... we all know fox news is a bit skewed to the left...

Did you know you can kill cancer cells with an alkaline food diet?

Originally posted by blackz28
its so true of lifestyle sometimes doesnt matter , infact my dad was from the ww2 generation
he smoked unfilterd camels & chesterfields & drank stuff that you have to keep away from open flame,lol or as he called it HOLY WATER

& he made it till 78 but he did have a stroke that knocked him for a loop when he was 77 so the last year of his life was tough, but he never developed cancer or should i say showed signs , cause when he had his shirt off i swear to god he had black cancer spots on his chest , but who knows

my mom was like him but she did smoke everyday since she was like 15 & she made it till 79 & dementcia got her but again no cancer

What people forget that there is no 100% guranteed cause of cancer and that cancer is not a single, monolithic entity but a condition that covers about 100 different types with a myriad of causes.

Lifestyle does matter in that it can increase and decrease risk. That is one thing people forget: it is not black and white, either or. It is not a binary situation. If a guy smokes all his life, he has a much higher risk to get lung and oral and laryngeal cancers than a non-smoker. This is a fact. However, it is not 100% guranteed that he will. Likewise, a non-smoker has a much lower risk than the smoker, but a nonsmoker can still get cancer. Lifestyle modification and nutrition and suppliments reduce risk but do not eliminate risk.

A cure is the pharmaceutical companies worst nightmare...

reply to post by PhoenixOD


Hi Phoenix,

Thank You for sharing this. I lost my father to cancer (lung cancer) I hope I will live the day to see a drug that can cure any kind of cancer at a relative no cost. I hope that it will make it on the market and it will not just stay at news level.

I hope the best for your dad. In the meantime if he can not make it to the clinical trials he should also try some alternative methods. Unfortunately I had not have access when my dad died to the info that I have today. Should you wish I will share my public folder with some Curing cancer related books ?????

Hope all the best for your dad.

Ive seen tons and tons of posts now in this thread where people are claiming that the pharmaceutical companies dont want there to be a cure because they will lose out on money. This just doesn't seem all that logical to me.

For a start they would be able to charge a hell of a lot for any effective treatment, also if someone did have their cancer cured then they will still be dying of something else at a later date. Whatever they eventually die from will probably require treatment and drugs. So the pharmaceutical companies are still going to make their money one way or another.

Also the one company who gets 'the cure' will benefit from a huge leap in share prices that will probably make it the richest company in the world.

reply to post by lisa2012


Thank you Lisa , much appreciated

Im sorry to hear about your father.

reply to post by PhoenixOD


PhoenixOD,

It just occurred to me that I didn't wish your father best of luck in his battle with cancer. How rude. I hope he comes out healthy and stronger than before.

reply to post by ForwardDrift


Thank you also ForwardDrift

Originally posted by Arolexion
reply to post by Pardon?

 

Why don't you do a quick google search, there have been tons. But your just another drone i guess. so you won't even bother.

In any case -on topic- hmm.. this seems too good to be true. can't help but feel something like "I Am Legend" Would happen, or who knows what they're putting into people. dunno... just me thinking.. something about this stinks...
Did you know you can kill cancer cells with an alkaline food diet?

I have searched and came up empty.
There are lots claiming they have been suppressed but when you dig deeper it seems that they didn't actually have a cure in the first place.
So I was wondering whether you could show me one please?

The alkaline food therapy is a myth.
All you need is a very basic understanding of human physiology to see why this doesn't work.

This all came about after a discovery in the 1940's that due to their metabolism, cancer cells produce a very weak and localised acidic environment. People jumped on this and decided that if somehow you were able to counter this with an alkali that you could kill the cells.
Not true, as I said, it's the cancer cells which produce the acid as they grow, they don'y grow because of the acidic environment.
This is all moot anyway as it's impossible to alter your blood and therefore tissue pH by eating "alkaline" foods. Your body maintains a very stable pH of between 7.35 and 7.45 absolutely brilliantly. Even if you drank vinegar for a week you wouldn't alter this pH.
The fundamental part is that ALL of your cells require this range to function. Sure, somehow alkalising your blood will certainly kill cancer cells but it will kill every other cell too.
If during severe illness you become acidotic or alkalotic your cells start to deteriorate. Fast.
Left untreated you will die.

Oh, just in case you mention urine pH as a marker for alkalinity, unfortunately urine is waste material. It's what the body doesn't need or can't use. Urine pH will vary quite normally throughout the day and will be affected by what you eat or drink as it's what your body doesn't want.
It's one smallish part of what is called homeostasis.
Look it up, it's fascinating.

reply to post by PhoenixOD


This news doesn't matter. They will bury this in red tape and decades worth of clinical trials. You might see this being discussed again in 2033, but for now it'll get buried.

To the OP.

Just in case I missed it in the posts here,

How can we the people get behind this either by spreading the news or supporting it financially?

reply to post by rickymouse

Your new avatar looks cranky, maybe you need a little vacation.

Lord Tywin Lannister from Game of Thrones. I tend to pick TV or movie characters I can relate to for avatars, and commonly of a show I'm currently invested in.

Back on topic though, the potential for this is kind of mind-boggling, though I have to wonder how they haven't thought of this line of approach before. I wonder if the company can be invested in?

If you honestly think that this, if true, will ever see the light of day beyond the publicity it has gathered now, then you sir, I must call naive. Think that if today a cure were to be released for the flu, how much business would be lost... jobs gone, never to return. It's not something that people with immense power want to see happen.

The sad fact is, there will never be a cure for cancer as long as there is profit in treating it. We can invent space travel, an inch wide television, the internet, and basically any other idea you can dream of, but these diseases will never be cured. Profit trumps our own species, it is the very reason why people still starve to death.

Originally posted by PhoenixOD
Ive seen ton and tons of posts now in this thread where people are claiming that the pharmaceutical companies dont want there to be a cure because they will lose out on money. This just doesn't seem all that logical to me.

For a start they would be able to charge a hell of a lot for any effective treatment, also if someone did have their cancer cured then they will still be dying of something else at a later date. Whatever they eventually die from will probably require treatment and drugs of one kind . So the pharmaceutical companies are still going to make their money one way or another.

edit on 5-4-2013 by PhoenixOD because: (no reason given)

Hi Phoenix,

In a way i disagree because I work in the pharma industry and I can tell you that only in the chemo therapy part of the pharma they are cashing huge amounts of money. A cure will virtually eliminate this process. This process is a huge money making scheme.

Of course recently it is proven that the rate of success for chemo therapy is not that high and the risks are so great so in the near future they will try and do away with this. But like everything else I think it takes time.

A cure is bound to come on the market at one point. The problem is it should have been here already long ago. With all the science and research behind it is no reason that we do not have a cure yet. I think it was stalled or it is postponed. I absolutely find this disease very inhumane and I hope that in the near future will look back and ponder as to why we did not have a cure faster. So many people are dying because of this CANCER and even if the statistics do not reflect it I believe it to be the Disease of the Century ....