Chemotherapy Quotes

"My studies have proved conclusively that untreated cancer victims live up to four times longer than treated individuals. If one has cancer and opts to do nothing at all, he will live longer and feel better than if he undergoes radiation, chemotherapy or surgery, other than when used in immediate life-threatening situations."---Prof Jones. (1956 Transactions of the N.Y. Academy of Medical Sciences, vol 6. There is a fifty page article by Hardin Jones of National Cancer Institute of Bethesda, Maryland. He surveyed global cancer of all types and compared the untreated and the treated, to conclude that the untreated outlives the treated, both in terms of quality and in terms of quantity. Secondly he said, "Cancer does not cure". Third he said "There is a physiological mechanism which finishes off an individual".)

"Keep in mind that the 5 year mark is still used as the official guideline for "cure" by mainstream oncologists. Statistically, the 5 year cure makes chemotherapy look good for certain kinds of cancer, but when you follow cancer patients beyond 5 years, the reality often shifts in a dramatic way."—Diamond.
So, some patients who died after 5 years, their treatment is considered successful. But if this person would have had no traditional treatment but instead would have transitioned to an healthier lifestyle and get plenty of rest, most chances she wouldn't have died before 5 years, and maybe she would have lived 50 years longer.

"Most cancer patients in this country die of chemotherapy…Chemotherapy does not eliminate breast, colon or lung cancers. This fact has been documented for over a decade. Yet doctors still use chemotherapy for these tumours…Women with breast cancer are likely to die faster with chemo than without it."—Alan Levin, M.D.

Toxicity

Industries drop mercury in water and this mercury becomes hightly toxic once absorbed by the simple organisms in water: methyl mercury. It is consumend and accumulated during the food chain, so that we found out that the fish who are predators (salmons, tuna, etc) have in their tissues a concentration 10 millions more powerful than what is found in the water where they live.

Concerning all the toxic products we encounter in our food, water, air, cosmetics, household products, even our clothes, and that enter our bodies by nose, mouth and even by our skin, the researchers made some shocking discoveries: sometimes tiny doses (like 1 ppm or even 1 ppb) can be more dangerous than higher dose. The reason is that when the quantity of a toxic product is so tiny, our body don't even notice it, and all this accumulates everyday, until you developp a tumor at the age of 40.But when our body encounters bigger quantities of toxic products, the immune system is activated and tries to block or reject it.
Another important new discovery: the combinations of different chemicals together can produce even more dangerous products. PCB is just a molecular variation of the chlorine atom, yet it's the most toxic product made by man. When companies test their substancies, they do this on the substance alone, not associated with other chemicals. So governement authorize chemicals since more than 50 years that way. But a product is inoffensive alone may not be when combined with one or two other products, or more; there's now hundreds of different chemicals in our food, water, sprayed on plants, etc...

Researchers were wondering why the population of belugas in the St-Laurent river in Quebec, Canada, was decreasing and why many of them are so sick. We find corpses of them on the shore. Anylisis show that their flesh contains an astonishing cocktail of chemicals, and that may be the cause of many of their cancers. 

A researcher discovered that too much residues of products of chlorine in tap water was responsable for anormally high level of misscarriage in a certain area. Her studies forced the governement to lower the maximum acceptable amount of chlorine in tap water. 

The same researcher analyzed the sperm of 4 great cities like New York, Los Angeles, etc... and a rural area of Missouri. She tought the sperm would be better in the rural zone, away from the pollution of cities... No. She found out that the sperm quality of inhabitants of Missouri was incredibly poor. She went there and tried to find out what is different there and which is not present in urban areas... Agriculture: huge fields of wheat, corn, etc... and huge amounts of chemicals sprayed on these, going in the rivers, then ending up in tap water. 

Half a century ago, before the crazy megalomaniac agriculture we have now, called agrobusiness, the fields were smaller, with no chemicals employed, and there were trees and ponds that were blocking, absorbing the chemicals if there was any, before they reach the rivers and ocean. Now it's different. Farmers cut down all trees until they meet the shore so they have more space to grow their stuff, and therefore more cash in their pockets. So their chemicals, sprayed before seeding, are not supposed to go in foods (eventhough there's some) and it goes straight in our water. 

Now guess what, a mad scientist is creating plants that will be specifically designed to absorb huge quantities of nitrogen, or mercury, etc... to put them along the shores so they will pump all the chemicals before it reach the water. He's working on about 20 genes, for 20 genetically modified plants. Talking about trying to cure instead of removing the problem. It's like legalizing and encouraging pollution.

Aberrant COMMENTS on the Web - Science & Life

Personnal views which I don’t agree with. They all reflect the opposite of my thoughts, so I don’t need to comment on most of them. Sometimes silence is the best. When someone says something stupid, remain silent, what he just said will as if it didn't hit his interlocutor and will rebound toward him, forcing him to face what he says, to think about it. Sometimes I will add just a quote from a great thinker that said something brillant related to what I just heard.

"If we believe absurdities, we commit atrocities"-Voltaire

"The custom is to accept any atrocity." -- George Bernard Shaw

Extreme stupidity is a weapon as powerful as irony is a great tool to serve a good cause. I just want to expose common sense to the world, by turning those comments against themselves.

Sometimes stupidity is so big it is funny, or sad, depending on who reads it. But one thing is sure, stupidity

-on dangerous new technologies that are still unknown, like the LHC (that could produce tiny black holes on Earth) and that are hasardous. We know that big accidents already happened : Tchernobyl, Bhopal, GMO’s, spacecraft explosions, etc. Should we or not risk people life in the name of science and progress ? Is technical progress so important or can we live (much happier) without any technologies even electricity ?
Youtube- autor unknown -

Wow, you are so terribly ignorant... without science we wouldn't have cars, electricity, healthcare and medicine, you favorites toys, hell you probably wouldn't even exist because there wouldn't have been enough food for all of us... We as species are so successful that within a couple of years we will reach a point where we are with so many that it really isn't going to matter at all if we are going to lose a few anyways. We are where we are now really mainly because of science.

-Posted by Brian W. about a text called “Have You Eaten Your Genetically Modified Food Today?” there.

As a biotechnophile (I wonder if anyone else has ever used that word...) it is my opinion that fear of GM foods is based purely on ignorance. I have to wonder how many of those people who hate GM foods even know what a gene does in general. I'd go so far as to say I dislike organic foods. For thousands of years humans have been breeding the nutrition OUT of crops. Farmers have always picked the plants with the highest yeilds to breed, but in order for a plant to make a bigger yield, it has to ditch some of its nutritional value. Today our staple crops are full of starch, and seriously lacking in protein. Genetically modifying these crops could put the nutrition back in them, among other things. So what if my wheat has a fish gene in it. All it does is make an extra protein that protects it from cold weather. It's not gonna taste like fish for god's sake. People also fear GM crops getting into the wild and contaminating the natural gene pool. To that I say: so what? A GM crops gets into the wild and....? Now we have the ocassional plant the can survive colder weather too. Big deal. To be sure we should move forward slowly, and we should test these GM crops carefully, but this irrational fear is foolish. Learn what a gene does (codes for a protein), and become less ignorant before you pass judgement on GM foods.

-Of course, I agree  with the comments of Heretic616:

Looks like a couple of Joe Six Packs responded. Let's see, Brian says we need to become less ignorant, but he says "Big Deal" if an unintended consequence of GE occurs that just happens to be beneficial. What about the other not so beneficial outcomes that you realize down the road. These changes are in some cases irreversible and self perpetuating. BTW it was a flounder gene placed into a tomato to keep it from freezing. I try to buy all organic thank you. At least there is a standard that still has some meaning.
I suppose you think it's "irrational or foolish" to require labeling all GE foods so that consumers can make a choice to be guinea pigs or not?
Senor Craig equates today’s laboratory gene manipulation field trials (experiments) with yesterdays grafting and crossbreeding. Are you serious? You think the motive is to feed the world's hungry you're mistaken buddy. It's about maximizing profit, sold under the guise of altruism. I'm sure you also bought "Operation Iraqi Freedom" and "Clear Skies Initiative" and "Healthy Forests Initiative" eh?
Science beating down religion? You've got it all wrong. The population crisis and most wars can attributed to your wonderful religions. I'll stick with science thanks but not Monsanto's irresponsible brand.

A guy who claims he’s an African Buddhist  wrote on his profile:

Books: Who wants to READ !?

Frankenstein Food

I will often talk about GMO's (genetically modified organism) or GE (genetically engineered) because I think it is the most abherant thing mankind has ever done to Nature, it is the worse insult, and the worse crime imaginable.
-This subject is so vast that I will divide my blogs. When it's about GMO in foods, I will post here. When I want to talk about other aspects of GMO's, like the ethics and environmental aspects, or about Monsanto (the biggest producer of GMO, and the worse) it will be on my other blog.

Here's a link to my Playlist of video documentarys about this real nightmare that are genetically engineered organisms. http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=AB17391E6E4F9803

Sicko

I'm what we can call a "luditte", meaning I'm kind of anti-science, progess, etc. I hate talking to the phone, for instance. I'm anti-biotechnologies (which, by the way, are not even technologies, because for something to be called as a technology, the procedure must reproduce the same results under identic conditions, which is not possible when making genetic modifications to organisms, because the gene guns shoot randomly, the target being so small, the ratio of GMO's varies up to 20% from a GMO to another. It's a very aleatory, rudimentary and very unprecise procedure, far from being mastered).

Anyway, what I wanted to say is that how the health system works is sick ! The money goes for trying to find cures instead of searching what causes the diseases. There will always be diseases, until we stop them before they appear. The only way for this is not science, but nature. Just natural foods, like fruits and greens, is all that is necessary. If we keep eating cookies and chips, then spending billions of dollars to invent antidotes to those poisons, ad nauseam.
Sometimes, the scientists also try to find what originally cause a disease. But they do this especially to help them working on a cure, not to spread the truth about what they discovered. So people keep poisoning themselves endlessly. Or when people know what is the source of their problem, do they stop ? what are they doing to change it; most people don't take the responsabilities towards themselves.

new medias

Here's some cool websites to visit. I love the hi-tech, clean look of them. There's a new tendance on Internet and new technologies : eco and green medias... what's for the future ... organic computers ? a sort of technology that we plug in our bodies, kind of like in the film eXistenZ...

-Flixya (blog, photos, videos...)

-gliving.tv
MODERN GREEN LIFESTYLE HUMAN NETWORK
This is really really great. Videos and articles about nature, music, fitness, diet, design, vehicles, science, city life and travel, organic raw vegan food.

-VeganWorld
Great community. Social Networking. Forum, recipes, photos, blogs, articles, videos...

contamination

In the GMO's debate, we hear often about the organic fields contamination by the genetically modified crops. But we hear less often about this theory (not so much of a theory we'll see) : the human contamination by GMO's. Samething, we're made of cells and proteins, just like a plant in a field.
Let me explain: GMO's contain proteins modified in laboratory with another organism inserted in it's genetic data. For soybeans it's a virus (yes, there's a virus in every GM soybean you may eat or that the cattles surely eat before they're transformed into meat). This virus, like most bacterias and simple organisms, synthetize their amino acids at a rate of around 14 amino acids per second. That's pretty fast.
Now, we know that each organism and each specie makes it's own proteins out of amino acids at a particular tempo. For humans, it's between 2 and 8 amino acids/sec, depending on which amino acid, but an average of 4.
When we eat GM food directly, or via animal proteins from animals that have been feed with GM food, those altered proteins enter our body and we become these, our body builds itself out of the amino acids it finds via nutrition -- "you are what you eat".

Therefore, (and it has been proven in a laboratory experiment where a human cell culture is affected by genetically modified proteins inserted in it), our body slowly contaminates, just like organic plants in a field where GM crops may invade by the wind, bees, birds and humans.

What we will witness will be our own accelerated ageing. More than double the speed. That's right, because our proteins will die and born at a faster rate : 14 amino acids/second instead of 4.

How come we're not already genetically modified ? What makes you think we're not ? How come there's no side effects ? What makes you think there's none ? Like the phenomenal increase in the rate of cancers during the past few years, as well as many other diseases. How how often we see articles on how to slow ageing by eating well, slowing down metabolism or eating less proteins.
What we should understand is that we don't become 100% modified in one day. We may be more or less 1% GM, depending on the amount of each person's consumption of GM foods. It takes time to be 5, 10 or 20% contaminated, just like for plants in a field, because we're made of many cells that regenerates. But once we have a few genetically modified cells in our body, in other words once the propagation has begun, and it's the case for everybody already, those few cells duplicates and the number of altered cells becomes larger and larger over the normal cells.
A sort of tumor, which is exactly what GM foods are.