Why Won't They Tell Us the Truth About the Cancer Cover-ups

.........because if they told you the truth, it wouldn't be a cover up????????.......

Try dividing the number of cancer cases by the world population increase in the same number of years...rate probably ain't a whole lot higher than ever before when you look at it that way.

Per US Census Bureau estimated US population in 1996 was 272,911,760 and in 2006 was 298,444,220.

Therefore, number of cancers dropped from 0.51 percent to 0.47 percent and the number of deaths dropped from 0.21 percent to 0.19 percent.

How dare they cover up such a decline in cancer and cancer deaths!

If you cure cancer, you are killing the "cash cow" for a lot of rich folks in the medical profession. Nope, I look for them to be "struggling" to find that cure for a long time. Don't expect the oil companies to come up with a cure for the "oil shortage" either.

wow... you're an idiot...

quote:

Originally posted by interventor:
Per US Census Bureau estimated US population in 1996 was 272,911,760 and in 2006 was 298,444,220.

Therefore, number of cancers dropped from 0.51 percent to 0.47 percent and the number of deaths dropped from 0.21 percent to 0.19 percent.

60% increase in lung cancer from 1979 until 2003. If you will note that we have come along way in decresing the heart attack rate but not the cancer rate, http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=669263

How dare they cover up such a decline in cancer and cancer deaths!

I used the figures you supplied and the US Census Bureau's estimates for total population.

If lung cancer increased, other cancers decreased significantly. The numbers are a closed system. If one area increases, the other, must decrease.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
This is your post, not mine.

"60% increase in lung cancer from 1979 until 2003. If you will note that we have come along way in decresing the heart attack rate but not the cancer rate, http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=669263"

interventor, has our population double in our country from 1999 until 2004 "FDA has become the single greatest threat to the health and saftey of the American people" http://www.newstarget.com/021635.html

quote:

Originally posted by SHELDIVR:
If you cure cancer, you are killing the "cash cow" for a lot of rich folks in the medical profession. Nope, I look for them to be "struggling" to find that cure for a long time. Don't expect the oil companies to come up with a cure for the "oil shortage" either.

I see the truth in that. they cured polio, and no one has made a dime off polio since. they aren't gonna make the same mistake twice. if you cure cancer, lots of companies and specialists will go under. also, with people living longer, the social security coffers will shrink even faster than they are now. there is money to be made, and saved, due to cancer.

bluesman, I don't have facts and figures nor do I have studies because frankly, I don't think I would even BELIEVE them anyway. They can put what they WANT to when putting info out to the public.

I DO however believe that they do NOT want to EVER cure everyone of cancer, I think it makes too much money. I think there are a lot of people out there who don't CARE, as long as they get the funding, or results they need.

I think it is a SAD state of affairs to even think this way, but I have seen way too many people maimed, hurt, harmed and DEAD from the dreaded "C" word to believe the so-called studies that are printed for our "Comfort Zones".

bluesman,

interventor, has our population double in our country from 1999 until 2004 "FDA has become the single greatest threat to the health and saftey of the American people" http://www.newstarget.com/021635.html
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Your reference and link are to a report on prescription drug death increases, not cancer. Yes, people are popping too many pills. Patients have been too demanding and doctors too compliant to their wishes.

I know from personal experience that doctors engaged in research at the Nation Institutes for Health (NIH) are some of the most dedicated persons I have seen in reference to preserving and extending the human life span and health. Admittedly, I have not dealt with those involved with cancer research.

But, using your data, shows a small drop in the overall cancer rate for a rising population base. That represents some success, but cancer is caused by actual genetic breakdowns within a ones body. We are still just beginning to deal with what happens at the cellular level. Cancer happens at the molecular level or, perhaps, the atomic level. In simple, its a dammed complicated set of causes, not always related, for cancers in a body that is literally destroying itself.

quote:

Originally posted by monster:

quote:

Originally posted by SHELDIVR:
If you cure cancer, you are killing the "cash cow" for a lot of rich folks in the medical profession. Nope, I look for them to be "struggling" to find that cure for a long time. Don't expect the oil companies to come up with a cure for the "oil shortage" either.

I see the truth in that. they cured polio, and no one has made a dime off polio since. they aren't gonna make the same mistake twice. if you cure cancer, lots of companies and specialists will go under. also, with people living longer, the social security coffers will shrink even faster than they are now. there is money to be made, and saved, due to cancer.

So can the same be said about AIDS? I'm sick of the billions of dollars funding AIDS research every year. Especially when there are so many more diseases that kill more people every year. So I guess that would be a pretty good racket. Who's getting rich off it though?

quote:

Originally posted by SkippyDoo:

quote:

Originally posted by monster:

quote:

Originally posted by SHELDIVR:
If you cure cancer, you are killing the "cash cow" for a lot of rich folks in the medical profession. Nope, I look for them to be "struggling" to find that cure for a long time. Don't expect the oil companies to come up with a cure for the "oil shortage" either.

I see the truth in that. they cured polio, and no one has made a dime off polio since. they aren't gonna make the same mistake twice. if you cure cancer, lots of companies and specialists will go under. also, with people living longer, the social security coffers will shrink even faster than they are now. there is money to be made, and saved, due to cancer.

So can the same be said about AIDS? I'm sick of the billions of dollars funding AIDS research every year. Especially when there are so many more diseases that kill more people every year. So I guess that would be a pretty good racket. Who's getting rich off it though?

Good reply!!! They only MAKE us think they are doing good. Otherwise, THEY are getting richer and richer.

We never found a cure for Polio. We found a couple of vaccines that protects one from Polio. And, much better therapies for those who have the disease.

AIDS, like polio, is a virus, and few cures for viral infections have been found. AIDS is a thoroughly controllable disease. If, you don't engage in risky, unprotected sexual practices or share needles with drug addicts, your chances of catching AIDS drops by 90 percent in the US. The other 10 percent are usually medical or public service personnel infected by AIDS patients.

In Africa, the spread is from the above reasons plus the practice of pharonic circumcision on females.

For one hundred years, medical professionals have developed means of controlling diseases they could not cure -- thru prophylaxis or rigid sanitation and quarantine. When pattient Zero begin infecting others, the US public health services tried to control the spread as we did leprosy and TB. But, legal professionals and advocacy groups stopped them. The results of the endeavor are clear.

quote:

Originally posted by Kindred:
[color:PURPLE]bluesman, I don't have facts and figures nor do I have studies because frankly, I don't think I would even BELIEVE them anyway. They can put what they WANT to when putting info out to the public.... color]

I think the old saying is "figures never lie, but liars figure" probably applies here. As already stated: it is easy enough to "show" pretty much anything with "statistics". The parameters for many medical studies show, for instance, success of an intervention - say, chemotherapy, while neglecting to show what I would consider the more important aspects of quality and length of life associated to said intervention.

quote:

Originally posted by interventor:
We never found a cure for Polio. We found a couple of vaccines that protects one from Polio. And, much better therapies for those who have the disease.

AIDS, like polio, is a virus, and few cures for viral infections have been found. AIDS is a thoroughly controllable disease. If, you don't engage in risky, unprotected sexual practices or share needles with drug addicts, your chances of catching AIDS drops by 90 percent in the US. The other 10 percent are usually medical or public service personnel infected by AIDS patients.

In Africa, the spread is from the above reasons plus the practice of pharonic circumcision on females.

For one hundred years, medical professionals have developed means of controlling diseases they could not cure -- thru prophylaxis or rigid sanitation and quarantine. When pattient Zero begin infecting others, the US public health services tried to control the spread as we did leprosy and TB. But, legal professionals and advocacy groups stopped them. The results of the endeavor are clear.

I am glad youa are putting so much confidence on medical professionals, because they don't deserve it. They throw just enough bread crumbs at all of us just to get all our money, all our insurance and then we get to see how much they care.

I actually feel sorry for anyone in the medical profession that has a job of actually TRYING to save people with cancer or aids, because I am pretty sure that they are withholding to a tune that we haven't even heard yet!!!

Kindred,

Not so much trust as deduction. To suppose a worldwide conspiracy to hide cures for cancer and AIDS just doesn't seem reasonable.

Medical research has done wonders and we have longer lives to prove it. We are just beginning to understand medicine at the molecular, atomic and sub-atomic level.

As I've stated before, I volunteered for an NIH test and found their doctors to be first rate, decent people.

Maybe Wendy Mesley has a few views on this. Even in Canada the next generation one in two Canadians will be diagnosed with cancer. "ONE IN TWO". And there is page after page at the bottom of this site http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/health/cancer/index.html

If you believe in a worldwide medical conspiracy, this won't matter:

" new report from the nation's leading cancer organizations finds that Americans' risk of dying from cancer continues to drop, maintaining a trend that began in the early 1990s. However, the rate of new cancers remains stable. The "Annual Report to the Nation on the Status of Cancer, 1975-2003, Featuring Cancer among U.S. Hispanic/Latino Populations" is published in the October 15, 2006, issue of Cancer*.

The report includes comprehensive data on trends over the past several decades for all major cancers. It shows that the long-term decline in overall cancer death rates continued through 2003 for all races and both sexes combined. The declines were greater among men (1.6 percent per year from 1993 through 2003) than women (0.8 percent per year from 1992 through 2003)."

http://www.cancer.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/ReportNation2006Release

One of the NIHs.

quote:

Originally posted by katiemule:

quote:

Originally posted by Kindred:
[color:PURPLE]bluesman, I don't have facts and figures nor do I have studies because frankly, I don't think I would even BELIEVE them anyway. They can put what they WANT to when putting info out to the public.... color]

I think the old saying is "figures never lie, but liars figure" probably applies here. As already stated: it is easy enough to "show" pretty much anything with "statistics". The parameters for many medical studies show, for instance, success of an intervention - say, chemotherapy, while neglecting to show what I would consider the more important aspects of quality and length of life associated to said intervention.

Oh, heck yes. For the mathematically challenged it is always easier to rely of intuition than on statistics. These are pretty basic and can be checked, but you need to understand numbers. In general, though, 100% of the population is going to die. Doctors have said for years that, if you live long enough, you'll develop cancer. It's entropy.

I agree that the money spent on AIDS research can be best spent elsewhere, rather than a disease that is principally behavior-based. Ditto on drug rehabilitation.

There are both environmental and genetic factors involved in cancer. One person smokes his entire life and is never touched. Another never touches a cigarette and dies from an aggressive lung cancer. I remember when getting leukemia was a sentence of death; now, not so much. Not fast enough to save everyone, but that's the way it goes.

As far as length and quality of life associated with the intervention, no one will hold a pistol to your head and make you take it. We'll just have to wait and see what choice you make if you have to. But I sincerely hope you never have to make it.

If there were a cancer cure, the European welfare states would use it in a NYC minute. Socialized medicine is killing their budgets. Medical research in Europe is slowing because of lack of funds. R&D is mainly US and Japan.

Sure we are going to get some good reports out of some of these charity organizations and some I beleive in, like St Jude's and a few others. Some I don't some of their CEO's are making some darn good money, and what else to you expect to get out of them for making that kind of money http://www.give.org/reports/index.asp

quote:

Originally posted by bluesman*:
Sure we are going to get some good reports out of some of these charity organizations and some I beleive in, like St Jude's and a few others. Some I don't some of their CEO's are making some darn good money, and what else to you expect to get out of them for making that kind of money http://www.give.org/reports/index.asp

ANYONE can created any sort of numbers and ratio's they WANT the people to buy into. Mostly for political gain and/or monies for their labs.

Bottom line is, we are NOT a dumb society. We DO have top dog Scientists and I sincerely DO believe that any country in the world can CURE cancer anytime they feel like they want the money to be cut off.

I will sincerely be so glad when people can see greedy little eyes controlling our health and lives.

quote:

Originally posted by bluesman*:
It's time for the truth. It's time for a change. In 1997 1,382,400 people had some form of cancer with 560,000 deaths, nine years latter in 2006 the numbers increased to 1,399,790 with 564,830 deaths.

Since 1975 more than 2 TRILLION dollars has been spent on cancer research, and by 2020 cancer rates are expected to climb by 50%. Why was this man fired for exposing the truth, read on http://www.mercola.com/article/cancer/cancer_options.htm And why does the countries of Mexico, Ecuador, Venezuela, and Panama have such a low rate of cancer, could be and read on www.trueoptionhealth.com/pawpaw.html

It's not only tobacco that is causing cancer, it' also triggered by toxic chemicals, pollutants, industrial chemicals, household chemicals, radon, our air, water, enviroment, even the food we eat everyday.

And who is the major players in this cover-up, read on http://www.sortlifeout.co.uk/Cancercov.htm and what else are they not telling us read on http://www.peopleagainstcancer.net/facts.asp#3

These countries mentioned have a low rate of cancer for two reasons:

1. It is not being adequately diagnosed due to lack of proper medical care.

2. Inhabitants of these countries die of other diseases first--diseases that are not rampant in civilized countries.

FV's right. All that "consumption" and "bloody flux" in the olden days were probably lung cancer, stomach and colon cancer. The bloody moles were almost certainly melanoma.

quote:

Originally posted by Kindred:

quote:

Originally posted by bluesman*:
Sure we are going to get some good reports out of some of these charity organizations and some I beleive in, like St Jude's and a few others. Some I don't some of their CEO's are making some darn good money, and what else to you expect to get out of them for making that kind of money http://www.give.org/reports/index.asp

ANYONE can created any sort of numbers and ratio's they WANT the people to buy into. Mostly for political gain and/or monies for their labs.

Bottom line is, we are NOT a dumb society. We DO have top dog Scientists and I sincerely DO believe that any country in the world can CURE cancer anytime they feel like they want the money to be cut off.

I will sincerely be so glad when people can see greedy little eyes controlling our health and lives.

I just hope you are not advocating universal, aka socialized, healthcare.

quote:

Originally posted by SkippyDoo:

quote:

Originally posted by Kindred:

quote:

Originally posted by bluesman*:
Sure we are going to get some good reports out of some of these charity organizations and some I beleive in, like St Jude's and a few others. Some I don't some of their CEO's are making some darn good money, and what else to you expect to get out of them for making that kind of money http://www.give.org/reports/index.asp

ANYONE can created any sort of numbers and ratio's they WANT the people to buy into. Mostly for political gain and/or monies for their labs.

Bottom line is, we are NOT a dumb society. We DO have top dog Scientists and I sincerely DO believe that any country in the world can CURE cancer anytime they feel like they want the money to be cut off.

I will sincerely be so glad when people can see greedy little eyes controlling our health and lives.

I just hope you are not advocating universal, aka socialized, healthcare.

I thought I was talking about cancer and cancer cures.