You very cleverly miss the main point here. Chemo, radiation and surgery have very poor success rates. Can we agree on that? The amount of money spent on cancer is astronomical, can we agree on that? There are promising alternatives that are not extensively researched because it is not in big pharma's interest. There have been incredibly positive results from various forms of alternative cancer therapies that are generally cheaper and produce less damage. Let's insist on doing significantly more research on these promising alternatives and give people some options and a lot more hope. 'Science' is only worth a dam when it is pure and uninfluenced by corrupting influences. Can we agree that science produced by entrenched interests is suspect at best? Provably corrupt and rotten at worst. The entire body of scientific work around cancer needs to be rebuilt from the ground up, from funding to establishing independent research. Until that happens, people are understandably going to look for better alternatives. Let's help them instead of mocking them.
You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
Do you really think there isn't constant ongoing research to make cancer therapies more effective and less invasive?
The problem is that people nowadays rather eat apricot seeds than trust their doctor.
While researching this, I encountered countless studies about alternatives to chemotherapy and radiation. It's likely that I'll do cancer research myself at one point in the future, because it's very likely I'll get cancer myself.
It's very likely for all of us.
My mom went though chemo for Hodgkin Lymphoma and she suffered considerably. But she survived and is well now. If she had relied on the "cures" many people proposed under my last post, she'd be long dead.
The problem is that all this fear and mistrust towards the pharma industry leads to people who die of curable or at least treatable diseases.
I 100 percent agree with you, though I do mistrust the pharma industry and the poor education standards of doctors. You'd be lucky if you doctor knew anything about how food effects one's health let alone emerging compounds found in appreciable quantities in food. Go ask an esteemed doctor about polyamines and they'll look at you crosseyed. If someone has high cholesterol yet low endogenous synthesis of neurohormones, a doctor will prescribe you a drug that lowers blood cholesterol yet futher limits your production of neurohormones. Oh your hormone levels are messed up now? Let's just slap you with some testosterone cream that further messes up your bodies natural hormone balance. You'd be lucky if they even gave you crysin to block aromatase. Or coq10 with statins. If you have issues with your bone health, a doctor will prescribe you a drug that increases your risk of bone fractures. It's not like big pharma is telling doctors to recommend their patients vitamin k2 instead of phosamax...
The list is endless, whens the last time you heard of histamine for arthritis or niacin for anxiety? Of niacin and folate and tyrosine for depression? Doctors don't treat patients for chronic diseases, they pump you full of pharmacueticals that eventually lead to more problems. Don't get me wrong, without a proper diet your better off taking the pharmaceuticals than doing nothing at all. But that's a really low bar
I already told you what I really think. The amount of money and research behind cheaper therapies is tiny compared to the big three and it is obvious why that is. Ask yourself why people find it difficult to trust their doctors. Is it because of they are sane? Trust has been eroded in all the central pillars of western civilisation, why? Because of blatant, obvious, massive corruption. I don't like it any more than you do but to imply that people who have lost trust and are searching for alternatives are anything other than sensible is unhelpful and ignorant.
I'm so very very happy that your mum recovered from cancer. It is an absolute joy. Though I don't believe anyone could tell you what would have happened if she had taken another path. It's possible she got better in spite of her treatment, not because of it.
All I'm saying is that mistrust of an untrustworthy system is entirely rational. I hope, one day, a community like Steem's will be able to crowdfund and share cancer therapies that work and are very cheap to produce. Instead of ignoring the problem of corruption in the medical industry, let's acknowledge it, acknowledge the rational reaction of people and pursue something better. It is every person's individual choice to learn what they can and make choices for themselves.....especially where interventions are concerned.
Is it possible to acknowledge the corruption and acknowledge that natural remedies are not working? Because things are rarely black and white.
I hope for such a thing too, In the mean time I pray that monsanto, pharmacuetical companies, and other chemical manufacturers refrain from further altering our food supply and our bodies enzymology. Give me seeds back in my watermelons while we're at it
Chemo, raditation and surgery actually have quite good success rates, at least depending on the age. Cancer is more common with elderly people and they have worse survival rates in general.
Big pharma has no control over the entire scientific community. There is a plenty of research and studies done outside of the touch or funding of pharma companies.
I haven't seen a real study of any alternative cancer therapy and single stories, usually unverifiable ones, are not a strong evidence for cancer treatment. Of course people are free to find a cure in any source they wish, but selling cyanide as a cancer treatment or to prevent cancer is plain evil.
Current studies in cancer treatment are not in the way of any other kind of studies in the subject. You can't ban studying to improve chemo, raditation and surgery treatments only because you dislike them.
There are plenty of studies around the world in the preventation of cancer, which I see far more important than only focusing on altering the treatments in radical ways. Looking for alternatives is fine, but when people are using disproved claims or wrongly understood studies to prove their alternative is right.. it won't work.
Trying to turn natural things into magic isnt' working. Currently it seems as "the natural options" like vegetables, vitamins, antioxidants and such are the best way to prevent cancer or to support cancer treatment on some level. You can't tell anyone they can cure cancer alone if you can't prove it with well done studies.
I agree with you.
Thank you for the reply and all good health in your life.