The Conspiracy Behind Cancer

[cancer_truths]

Pharmaceutical companies make their money from people buying their medication and treatments. Since there are only temporary solutions for cancer, pharmaceutical companies continue to make money from each time a cancer patient goes through chemotherapy or radiation. Each time a person is diagnosed with cancer, Big Pharma Companies make roughly $300,000. With this big of an industry, why would the companies want to release a cure? Revealing a cure would cause their profits to drop substantially. Also, in the United States alone, over 500,000 people die from some form of cancer each year.

 

[Arianrhod]

Since there are only temporary solutions for cancer...

Not at all true. Great strides are being made in biotech treatments. Either educate yourself or change your username.

 

[Capstone]

Three areas in which the principles of capitalism should have never been tolerated from the giddyup: defense, education, and medicine. What's happening in those fields in the United States today is not so much the fruition of some grand conspiracy as it is the expected outcome of allowing the wrong ideas to rule the roost for far too long.

 

[BULLDOG]

 

[bodecea]

Pharmaceutical companies make their money from people buying their medication and treatments. Since there are only temporary solutions for cancer, pharmaceutical companies continue to make money from each time a cancer patient goes through chemotherapy or radiation. Each time a person is diagnosed with cancer, Big Pharma Companies make roughly $300,000. With this big of an industry, why would the companies want to release a cure? Revealing a cure would cause their profits to drop substantially. Also, in the United States alone, over 500,000 people die from some form of cancer each year.

Cancer used to be a death sentence in almost all cases. If you were old enough to remember, you'd know that great strides have been made in curing most cancers. Yes Big Pharma makes money....but more people are alive now. In my grandparents and parents' generation, most I knew who had cancer were dead soon....most of my generation who had cancer are still alive and cancer-free. Thats a Win in my book.

 

[Capstone]

The conflict of interest alluded to in the OP goes well beyond cancer treatment. The FDA has a track record of approving drugs with known lethal side effects, as if to say, "Congratulations, Mr. Smith, your RA symptoms appear to be in remission! Sorry about the Lymphoma, though.". If you watch the commercials for some of the latest drugs, big pharma tends to make no bones about the deadly side effects these days. There's nary a prescription medication out there that doesn't pack the potential to fuck you up in 5 ways other than the symptoms or causes it was prescribed to treat! No rational person could conclude that absolutely none of that has been by design.

 

[Arianrhod]

The conflict of interest alluded to in the OP goes well beyond cancer treatment. The FDA has a track record of approving drugs with known lethal side effects, as if to say, "Congratulations, Mr. Smith, your RA symptoms appear to be in remission! Sorry about the Lymphoma, though.". If you watch the commercials for some of the latest drugs, big pharma tends to make no bones about the deadly side effects these days. There's nary a prescription medication out there that doesn't pack the potential to fuck you up in 5 ways other than the symptoms or causes it was prescribed to treat! No rational person could conclude that absolutely none of that has been by design.

Only someone with no understanding of biochemistry or an ability to grasp that even aspirin can be deadly to a small percentage of the population.

Or someone who believes pharma companies deliberately want to kill their customers, which makes no sense.

 

[Capstone]

Only someone with no understanding of biochemistry or an ability to grasp that even aspirin can be deadly to a small percentage of the population. ...

Is Aspirin causally linked to such things as an entire array of cancers, Diabetic Ketoacidosis, and congestive heart failure, to name but a few?

What happened to "An Aspirin a day...?

...Or someone who believes pharma companies deliberately want to kill their customers, which makes no sense.

Well, luckily for the customers and the pharma companies, even the most serious side effects are usually treatable for some period of time before the customer in question finally kicks the bucket. Some of those treaments are ENORMOUSLY expensive too.

 

[Arianrhod]

Is Aspirin causally linked to such things as an entire array of cancers, Diabetic Ketoacidosis, and congestive heart failure, to name but a few?

You're saying these diseases are caused by medications?

Can't wait to see what tinfoil hat website you found that "information" on.

 

[Capstone]

LOL. How does the FDA's own website tickle your nuts, A-rhod?

Ketoacidosis has been linked to SGLT2 inhibitors such as Invokana and similar drugs.

...This communication provides updated information to the FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA warns that SGLT2 inhibitors for diabetes may result in a serious condition of too much acid in the blood - issued on May 15, 2015."[...]

Hepatosplenic T-Cell Lymphoma (normally a very rare cancer) has been linked to the use of TNF blockers such as Humira and similar biologics.

[04-14-2011]

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is informing the public that it continues to receive reports of a rare cancer of white blood cells (known as Hepatosplenic T-Cell Lymphoma or HSTCL), primarily in adolescents and young adults being treated for Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis with medicines known as tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blockers, as well as with azathioprine, and/or mercaptopurine. ...

Of course, who could bitch about contracting such a rare disease by way of side effect when the makers told us up front that it could happen?!

 

[Arianrhod]

LOL. How does the FDA's own website tickle your nuts, A-rhod?

Ketoacidosis has been linked to SGLT2 inhibitors such as Invokana and similar drugs.

...This communication provides updated information to the FDA Drug Safety Communication: FDA warns that SGLT2 inhibitors for diabetes may result in a serious condition of too much acid in the blood - issued on May 15, 2015."[...]

Hepatosplenic T-Cell Lymphoma (normally a very rare cancer) has been linked to the use of TNF blockers such as Humira and similar biologics.

[04-14-2011]

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is informing the public that it continues to receive reports of a rare cancer of white blood cells (known as Hepatosplenic T-Cell Lymphoma or HSTCL), primarily in adolescents and young adults being treated for Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis with medicines known as tumor necrosis factor (TNF) blockers, as well as with azathioprine, and/or mercaptopurine. ...

Of course, who could bitch about contracting such a rare disease by way of side effect when the makers told us up front that it could happen?!

IOW, someone doesn't understand the difference between "may, in some cases, increase the risk of X" and "DRUG HAS BEEN DELIBERATELY DESIGNED TO CAUSE X BECAUSE OF THINGS WE CAN'T POSSIBLY EXPLAIN!!!!!!"

Let's break this down. Tell us what you think causes ketoacidosis in the absence of the use of SGLT2 inhibitors.

 

[Capstone]

...Let's break this down. Tell us what you think causes ketoacidosis in the absence of the use of SGLT2 inhibitors.

Sure. It's a condition more commonly associated with type 1 diabetes. It occurs when a person's cells can't use the sugar in his or her blood for energy, so they're forced to burn fat for fuel instead. The process of burning fat makes acids called "ketones" which can build up over time, changing the chemical balance of one's blood and throwing off his or her entire system.

Interestingly, weight loss has been mentioned in the marketing of SGLT2 inhibitors, indicating a possible correlation to the very mechanism (fat burning) by which DKA "may result" from using them. The FDA doesn't use such language lightly, after all.

Whether or not the link to DKA was known about during the development and trial phases of these new drugs, it was established beyond question more than a year ago. Yet, they're still being prescribed to and used daily by millions of Americans today. THAT'S where the shared duplicity of drug-makers and the FDA comes into the light of day. Causal links to serious conditions are routinely identified and allowed to effect/kill people for years before the offending drugs are finally pulled off the market. We've seen it time and again.

 

[G.T.]

...Let's break this down. Tell us what you think causes ketoacidosis in the absence of the use of SGLT2 inhibitors.

Sure. It's a condition more commonly associated with type 1 diabetes. It occurs when a person's cells can't use the sugar in his or her blood for energy, so they're forced to burn fat for fuel instead. The process of burning fat makes acids called "ketones" which can build up over time, changing the chemical balance of one's blood and throwing off his or her entire system.

Interestingly, weight loss has been mentioned in the marketing of SGLT2 inhibitors, indicating a possible correlation to the very mechanism (fat burning) by which DKA "may result" from using them. The FDA doesn't use such language lightly, after all.

Whether or not the link to DKA was known about during the development and trial phases of these new drugs, it was established beyond question more than a year ago. Yet, they're still being prescribed to and used daily by millions of Americans today. THAT'S where the shared duplicity of drug-makers and the FDA comes into the light of day. Causal links to serious conditions are routinely identified and allowed to effect/kill people for years before they're finally pulled. We've seen it time and again.

Theres not one single Pharma company out there designing a drug to on-purpose hinder anyone from getting well.

Not a single one.

Side effects of Drugs are there for the consumer to weigh risk versus reward because a PERFECT drug is not yet discovered. That's just science. Its the FDA, afterall, making it required FOR side effects to BE listed - while also allowing Companies to be sued when a drug does some inadvertant nefarious thing like causing people to drop dead from heart attacks.

Also note worthy - most side effects have very small chances of even occuring.



I took a proton pump inhibitor for acud reflux and one side effect WAS increased chance for a Heart Attack. Before I cured/controlled my reflux naturally - I needed a drug to prevent too much scar tissue in my esophagus because it can later become cancerous. The HORROR of esophegeal cancer is unspeakable.


If pharmaceutical companies could find cancer's CURE, they'd have WORLD WIDE and INDEFINITE business, be heroes, and they'd be gazillionnaires.

Any conspiracy that cancer cures are being suppressed is pure GARBAGE.

MY company has its own cancer cure research facility - they dont sit and playbwith their dicks all day, capstone.

 

[Capstone]

...Its the FDA, afterall, making it required FOR side effects to BE listed - while also allowing Companies to be sued when a drug does some inadvertant nefarious thing like causing people to drop dead from heart attacks....

You mean like Darvon/Darvocet? -- A drug that was on the market for 55 years prior to its banning in 2010 (5 years after it had been banned in the UK, and 32 years after the FDA was initially petitioned to ban it by the public safety advocacy group Public Citizen? The drug had LONG been known as a cause of serious toxicity to the heart before the FDA finally did the right thing.

Or maybe you were talking about Meridia? -- A drug that was on the market for 13 years, 6 of which went by AFTER an FDA reviewer, Dr. David Graham, had given his testimony before the Senate on September 30, 2004, listing it along with Accutane, Bextra, Crestor and Serevent as drugs whose sales should be limited or stopped due to the danger to consumers, calling each of them "another Vioxx.". BTW, although the FDA has since pulled Meridia, Accutane and Bextra off the market, Crestor and Serevent remain available and "FDA approved" today.

Speaking of Vioxx though -- a drug that was credited for nearly 30,000 heart attacks or sudden cardiac deaths between 1999 and 2003 -- it remained on the market until late 2004, doing its thing for a total of 5 and a quarter years before the FDA pulled it.

The list goes on and on.

 

[G.T.]

I understand conspiracy theorists can rifle through hoards of confirmation bias on the internet.

 

[Capstone]

I understand conspiracy theorists can rifle through hoards of confirmation bias on the internet.

As I said in an earlier post, what's happening in the pharmaceutical industry in the United States today isn't the result of some grand conspiracy; it's the expected outcome of capitalism applied to things that should have been protected from its cold 'bottom line' philosophies all along - things like defense, education and medicine.

And again, whether or not the development and trial phases of the drugs listed above (and many that I haven't mentioned) revealed any of the side effects for which the drugs would eventually be banned, they were all allowed to adversely effect/kill consumers for years after the causal links had been well-established. That FACT is nearly as bad as the crazy-ass conspiracy theory that some of those damning side effects may have been intentionally engineered into the drugs.

 

[Arianrhod]

I understand conspiracy theorists can rifle through hoards of confirmation bias on the internet.

As I said in an earlier post, what's happening in the pharmaceutical industry in the United States today isn't the result of some grand conspiracy; it's the expected outcome of capitalism applied to things that should have been protected from its cold 'bottom line' philosophies all along - things like defense, education and medicine.

And again, whether or not the development and trial phases of the drugs listed above (and many that I haven't mentioned) revealed any of the side effects for which the drugs would eventually be banned, they were all allowed to adversely effect/kill consumers for years after the causal links had been well-established. That FACT is nearly as bad as the crazy-ass conspiracy theory that some of those damning side effects may have been intentionally engineered into the drugs.

Okay, that's more like it, and something that would make an excellent thread in the Healthcare forum. What threw me was when you said "No rational person could conclude that absolutely none of that has been by design" in an earlier post.

Maybe it was just the word "design" that conjured a bunch of mad scientists in some dank underground lab deliberately adding poisons to the meds that confused the issue. Glad you cleared that up.

If anyone ever wanted a perfect example of why "we don't need no stinkin' Gubmint Regalationz" is a stupid idea, pharmaceuticals would be it. Even with regulation, crap like Vioxx manages to get to market.

Yes, the FDA is a bloated clusterfuck that needs a serious overhaul, but "no regulation at all" is no solution.