Saturday, February 09, 2008

No Cure For Cancer

Is is possible that the biggest affliction to the human existence, Cancer, in fact has possible cures that are suppressed by medical industry leaders to secure profits made from antiquated Chemo-Therapy treatments? A bit of research around the internet unearths two sides of the story: "There is a conspiracy. Or "There is no conspiracy and anyone who thinks there is, is a quack."

The second argument raises obvious suspicions. If the idea of a conspiracy is so ridiculous, why the lashing out? There are various arguments on both sides of the issue, and those against the conspiracy seem to have less fact on their side.

Michael Higgins:
"If history has taught us anything about cancer, it is that it is not an easy disease to cure. It is 2,400 years after the disease was first recorded by Hippocrates and presumably even longer since the first treatment was attempted. If traditional medicine has failed for this long, it seems to me that a cure will require every fraction of recently obtained knowledge about microbiology, the human genome, and modern medicine. It seems unlikely that fields of research outside this body of knowledge will make a lot of progress. But if an "alternative" practitioner did stumble onto an effective method, the scientific community would quickly embrace it and there would be no cover-up.... I know there isn't any cancer conspiracy because I know that the people doing and running the research are human. Their lives, like mine, have been touched by cancer. They, like me, would do anything to save the lives of the people they love. Furthermore, I assume that any treatments associating themselves with a conspiracy theory have something to hide—the simple fact that their treatment doesn't work." -From Quackwatch Network.

Note first that the website that hosts the article is named Quack Watch. Also note, the author, who has since passed, assumes that making money cannot corrupt the human heart. A dangerous assumption to be making. It's important to point this out because of the casting of aspersions involved and the lack of hard evidence, but more based on emotionalism. More research digs this evidence up:

Alan Cantwell Jr.
A century ago physicians began to realise that diseases like tuberculosis, leprosy, and syphilis were caused by bacteria. At the time, some scientists believed cancer was also caused by microbes. However, although bacteria were cultured from some cancers, no consistent microbe was found. Because cancer did not act like a contagious and infectious disease scientists finally declared that there was no germ in cancer. After the turn of the century, physicians who continued to believe in the existence of a cancer microbe were considered to be of unsound mind.........

The famous psychoanalyst Wilhelm Reich (1897-1957) spent years studying "orgone energy" and its effects on the body. His cancer research showed that cancerous cells have less orgone energy that normal, healthy cells. When cancer cells broke down and degenerated, he always observed toxic microbes arising out of the cancerous tissue. He called them "T-bacilli," after the German word, "Tod," which means death.

Like Livingston, Reich discovered T-bacilli not only in the cancer tumors, but also in the blood, the body fluids. and the excreta of cancer patients. He originally thought that the T-bacillus was the specific infectious agent of cancer, but these cancer microbes were eventually found in persons with other disease, and Reich also observed the T-bacilli in the blood and excreta of normal healthy people!

In the late 1950s, Reich got into serious legal trouble with the FDA in connection with the manufacture and sale of orgone accumulators. He was jailed and died while imprisoned. Six tons of his books, journals, and papers were burned by FDA officials in an unprecedented scientific holocaust.

Despite a century of cancer microbe research, physicians do not believe bacteria play any role in the cause of cancer, and most doctors have never heard of Reich's T-bacilli or Livingston's Progenitor cryptocides.

Research soon finds that there is substantial evidence that a conspiracy does in fact exist, and moreover, alternative evidence about cancer and it's growth and originations have indeed be suppressed, and further, anyone who unearthed these findings was labeled a quack.

In a society where our food and drugs are managed by the same organization, the question must be raised, is there gain for a corporate organization controlled by government if a cure for cancer is suppressed?


Anonymous,  11:36 AM  

Great post, I am almost 100% in agreement with you

About This Blog


Lorem Ipsum

  © Blogger templates Newspaper III by 2008

Back to TOP