Question on cancer and the legalities of it

[david icke is right]

Science says cancer needs to be cured legally but what if the cure for cancer was illegal, does this make it right to take the cure, otherwise you are breaking the law for curing yourself of cancer, does it make it right to cure your cancer illegally?

I mean you would live in the knowledge that you would have cured your cancer but live in the fact you broke the law. Does it really matter because you are alive and given a second chance, but if you are caught you could end up in prison for taking something illegal but yet could have better health!

Keep it clean and sciencey people, I have been warned by admin. or is their a conspiracy to never find a cure?

[Frank Merton]

Your post makes no sense to me. What would constitute an illegal cure for cancer?

[Rafterman]

Unless the "cure" is bathing in the blood of 15 virgins and wearing their skin, I really don't see how a cure for cancer could be considered illegal. I could see it being illegal initially, but it would quickly be made legal if it really cured cancer.

[RaptorBites]

Science says cancer needs to be cured legally but what if the cure for cancer was illegal, does this make it right to take the cure, otherwise you are breaking the law for curing yourself of cancer, does it make it right to cure your cancer illegally?

I mean you would live in the knowledge that you would have cured your cancer but live in the fact you broke the law. Does it really matter because you are alive and given a second chance, but if you are caught you could end up in prison for taking something illegal but yet could have better health!

Keep it clean and sciencey people, I have been warned by admin. or is their a conspiracy to never find a cure?

Legal or illegal is is not something science deals with but the judicial system does.

Considering this topic is yours, I am not surprised that you can't even get that right.

[Likely Guy]

...I have been warned by admin. or is their a conspiracy to never find a cure?

Everything is a conspiracy with you. We could be talking about prizes out of a cereal box and you will still see a conspiracy.

Is this just all thoughts of 'what if', 'maybe' and 'perhaps'? Pure speculation on your part does not a conspiracy make.

For the love of Henry, provide a cogent thought or link, because 'David Icke is Right', lately you really have started the worst threads in this forum, (a lot of which have been ejected.)

Edited September 11, 2013 by Likely Guy

[Simbi Laveau]

Science says cancer needs to be cured legally but what if the cure for cancer was illegal, does this make it right to take the cure, otherwise you are breaking the law for curing yourself of cancer, does it make it right to cure your cancer illegally?

I mean you would live in the knowledge that you would have cured your cancer but live in the fact you broke the law. Does it really matter because you are alive and given a second chance, but if you are caught you could end up in prison for taking something illegal but yet could have better health!

Keep it clean and sciencey people, I have been warned by admin. or is their a conspiracy to never find a cure?

This is the point of obamacare. To make it so we MUST use conventional methods or none at all.

Its not illegal to cure yourself using the treatment of your own choosing, unless that treatment is illegal.

Ergo, no, you cannot try to cure yourself using cocain , but if you want to take supplements or use a hyperbaric chamber or eat apricot seeds , its legal if you yourself uses it.

However, doing it to your child can be deemed child endangerment.

Trying to sell said to cure to anyone else and claiming it cures something is very illegal , and can get you jailed.

Edited September 11, 2013 by Simbi Laveau

[preacherman76]

Unless the "cure" is bathing in the blood of 15 virgins and wearing their skin, I really don't see how a cure for cancer could be considered illegal. I could see it being illegal initially, but it would quickly be made legal if it really cured cancer.

I have a cousin who is about to marry a thyroid cancer researcher. She is a year away from being a doctor. Anyhow, her and her boss through their research had made a very promising discovery. They found that there was a certain protein that was actualy destroying thyroid cancer cells. So the drug company who gave them the grants to do their research sent their findings to several other labs to confirm their findings. Only they gave the other labs the wrong type of protein to research, and obviously they didnt find the same results. So when they found out that the drug company had sent the wrong info, they tryed to correct it. Only to be told that they werent going to spend anymore money for the other labs to research it, cause the grant they used had run out, and that they would have to wait till that grant came up again.

I know no one is gonna believe me, and thats fine. But I did speak with her a great deal about this. I have no reason what so ever to think she wasnt telling the truth.

[preacherman76]

Now it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out why said drug company wouldnt be interested in finding a cure for thyroid cancer. Especialy with a cure being as simple as a protein. Not only is there very little money to be gained, but they would also stand to lose a fortune by no longer using very expensive conventional means.

Is there a conspiracy to hold back cures for cancer? I have no doubt in my mind.

[david icke is right]

Your post makes no sense to me. What would constitute an illegal cure for cancer?

I can't put it down otherwise I will get the topic closed. It's so hard dealing with closed scientific minds.

Well what If their was something that made people better and it was not legal, that is my question.

If the pharmaceutical companys started to use illegal substances then they would be held accountable, so they can't use illegal substances, or can they?

[david icke is right]

Now it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out why said drug company wouldnt be interested in finding a cure for thyroid cancer. Especialy with a cure being as simple as a protein. Not only is there very little money to be gained, but they would also stand to lose a fortune by no longer using very expensive conventional means.

Is there a conspiracy to hold back cures for cancer? I have no doubt in my mind.

Sounds like I got one on side.

[FLOMBIE]

I don't really get a sense out of your posts, but pharmaceutical companies use a lot of substances that are not available for you and me. Ever heard of medicine that is only available on prescription? Guess why that is.

Something that makes people "better"? Like steroids?

[david icke is right]

I don't really get a sense out of your posts, but pharmaceutical companies use a lot of substances that are not available for you and me. Ever heard of medicine that is only available on prescription? Guess why that is.

Something that makes people "better"? Like steroids?

So are you saying that the pharaceutical companies are already breaking the law using illegal substances?

[Agent0range]

So are you saying that the pharaceutical companies are already breaking the law using illegal substances?

Yes. Substances that are illegal for any use other than treatment. I thought that was common sense? Steroids, painkillers, MARIJUANNA...Without medical necessity they are 100% illegal (minus WA and CO for marijuanna).

[david icke is right]

Yes. Substances that are illegal for any use other than treatment. I thought that was common sense? Steroids, painkillers, *********...Without medical necessity they are 100% illegal (minus WA and CO for ********).

Please get rid of that word MAR**anna I have been told not to use that word in this topic.

Edited September 11, 2013 by david icke is right

[Frank Merton]

Everything is a conspiracy with you. We could be talking about prizes out of a cereal box and you will still see a conspiracy.

Is this just all thoughts of 'what if', 'maybe' and 'perhaps'? Pure speculation on your part does not a conspiracy make.

For the love of Henry, provide a cogent thought or link, because 'David Icke is Right', lately you really have started the worst threads in this forum, (a lot of which have been ejected.)

I love it. A popular theory in Ho Chi Minh City is that cereal prizes and other similar promotions of product in Vietnam are rigged to be sure only Hanoi residents ever win.

[Frank Merton]

There is one area here of concern. Not just drugs against cancer but all drugs must pass FDA approval, which entails expensive double-blind studies to prove both efficacy and safety.

I think a lot of drugs never get anywhere because of the expense involved, so there might well be a cure for cancer that is illegal because it hasn't been tested to FDA standards.

I think in return for a greatly restricted patent protection (which only is a lure if the drug promises to sell a lot), the government should pay for such studies, or at least mandate that when part of an approved FDA study the costs are reimbursable in health insurance ("experimental" treatments are now routinely excluded).

There exists now some "orphan drug" relief, but it hasn't been very effective.

[Simbi Laveau]

I have a cousin who is about to marry a thyroid cancer researcher. She is a year away from being a doctor. Anyhow, her and her boss through their research had made a very promising discovery. They found that there was a certain protein that was actualy destroying thyroid cancer cells. So the drug company who gave them the grants to do their research sent their findings to several other labs to confirm their findings. Only they gave the other labs the wrong type of protein to research, and obviously they didnt find the same results. So when they found out that the drug company had sent the wrong info, they tryed to correct it. Only to be told that they werent going to spend anymore money for the other labs to research it, cause the grant they used had run out, and that they would have to wait till that grant came up again.

I know no one is gonna believe me, and thats fine. But I did speak with her a great deal about this. I have no reason what so ever to think she wasnt telling the truth.

I cure for any major illness means a whole bunch of specialist doctors will be crying in their chocolate milk they're losing money on other people's suffering.

Same for all those Pharm peeps.

find a cure !?!

and lose all those poor medical professionals their ill gotten gains.

Pauvre pauvre oncologists and chemo and radiation peeps...

Boo hoo...

[Simbi Laveau]

I can't put it down otherwise I will get the topic closed. It's so hard dealing with closed scientific minds.

Well what If their was something that made people better and it was not legal, that is my question.

If the pharmaceutical companys started to use illegal substances then they would be held accountable, so they can't use illegal substances, or can they?

Anything illegal shouldn't be used by anyone.

But, if it cures cancer, and you can get ahold of it...wouldn't be the first time.

Lots of people use marijuana in places it isn't legal....yet...

Edited September 11, 2013 by Simbi Laveau

[Sundew]

There are certain substances that could be used medically that are illegal. Heroin comes to mind; when other opiates such as morphine are no longer sufficient to stop pain in a terminal patient heroin could be used to alleviate suffering. But perhaps because of its deservedly bad reputation it is unlikely to become available.

Certainly a cure for cancer would be valuable to any pharmaceutical company, if only for the good press such a product would generate, and likely it would make them a fortune. Cancer drugs are often extremely expensive: Herceptin is tens-of-thousands of dollars per dose, multiples of which are needed in treatment. The fact is it takes years to identify, test, run trials for safety and so forth for every drug. And that is no guarantee that they will be save in general use; I was using the anti-inflamatory Bextra, it was found to cause strokes and death in patients if I remember correctly and was subsequently taken off the market. So rushing a product to market can have dire consequences.

Pharmaceutical companies for all the bad press they get, do much R & D and are trying to put out products that cure disease and make them money, not necessarily in that order. But whatever their motive, in general they are helping the sick. It is too bad, however, that the medical industry does not put as much time into disease prevention and working with various traditional medicines and naturopathy, rather than trying to cure a disease after it has become advanced and dangerous. I do see signs of them leaning in that direction but it's not all that common yet and progress is painfully slow.

[frenat]

I have a cousin who is about to marry a thyroid cancer researcher. She is a year away from being a doctor. Anyhow, her and her boss through their research had made a very promising discovery. They found that there was a certain protein that was actualy destroying thyroid cancer cells. So the drug company who gave them the grants to do their research sent their findings to several other labs to confirm their findings. Only they gave the other labs the wrong type of protein to research, and obviously they didnt find the same results. So when they found out that the drug company had sent the wrong info, they tryed to correct it. Only to be told that they werent going to spend anymore money for the other labs to research it, cause the grant they used had run out, and that they would have to wait till that grant came up again.

I know no one is gonna believe me, and thats fine. But I did speak with her a great deal about this. I have no reason what so ever to think she wasnt telling the truth.

Sounds to me like typical bureaucratic red tape. I've seen many very similar incidents relating to multiple topics, in multiple businesses.

[+Liquid Gardens]

Sounds to me like typical bureaucratic red tape. I've seen many very similar incidents relating to multiple topics, in multiple businesses.

Agreed. One issue I have with the suggestion that evil pharma wants to prevent a cure for cancer from being developed is because it means that these people at pharma companies who supposedly make these decisions are inevitably harming either their friends and family or themselves, chances are decent enough that someone they know and care about may contract cancer. I would guess for most conceivable cancer cures, pharma companies would be extremely motivated to develop a cure, the amount of money to be made is huge. Even if as someone suggested above that the reason they may not want to do that is because the cure is so simple ('a protein', as if that automatically makes it inexpensive to produce...), the amount of publicity for jeez, only curing cancer, would be worth far more monetarily to any company than any potential loss caused by eventual lost revenue on the current expensive cancer treatments.

[RaptorBites]

In other words:

Cancer Researcher: Aha! Medical breakthrough I just found a cure for cancer!

Supervisor: We must hide it from the world. God forbid we make a fortune or receive a Nobel prize for it.

[Frank Merton]

The very idea of, "a cure for cancer" is impossibly unrealistic.

[FLOMBIE]

So are you saying that the pharaceutical companies are already breaking the law using illegal substances?

No, they are not breaking the law, as it is legal for (to?) them.

[FurthurBB]

Now it doesnt take a rocket scientist to figure out why said drug company wouldnt be interested in finding a cure for thyroid cancer. Especialy with a cure being as simple as a protein. Not only is there very little money to be gained, but they would also stand to lose a fortune by no longer using very expensive conventional means.

Is there a conspiracy to hold back cures for cancer? I have no doubt in my mind.

That doesn't make any sense. If it was another type of cancer I could see it, but radioactive iodine treatments are very inexpensive compared to other cancer treatments. It was probably just some red tape.

Edited September 12, 2013 by FurthurBB