BS: Cancer - New Therapy

Subject: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: gnu
Date: 05 Feb 09 - 06:06 PM

I spent a fair time trying to find links for this. Hope someone else might be able to do so.

I was watching the ATV Evening News from Halifax, Nova Scotia. I was also sorting income tax stuff, so I missed the info for links.

In a very sketchy nutshell, a lab in The Maritimes has developed a drug therapy that reverses cancers and eradicates cancer cells that have (forgive my lack of knowledge and terminology) spread to other parts of the body. They have made a "vaccine" that is delivered based in an oil. One injection only. The success rate in lab tests on animals has been 100%. They have applied to the Canuck Federal Government to begin clinical trials on humans. They say that it will be available within 5 to 8 years.

The research began 20 years ago as birth control for the seal population on Sable Island. It was successful and the technology is now used in such places as Hong Kong to control the monkey population.

My only hope is that because it was funded by the Canuck Government, it remains under their control... so that it is made available with profit greed.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 05 Feb 09 - 06:33 PM

Go online to that television station and see if they have the broadcast segments there for download. You should be able to find it for yourself that way.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: Uncle_DaveO
Date: 05 Feb 09 - 06:59 PM

A little Googling shows up what must be referred to in gnu's post.

The vaccine is based on hemp oil, according to the articles I found. And you know what popular product is made from hemp. Yeah, cannabis, marijuana, Mary Jane.

Be it ever so effective, don't hold your breath waiting for the powers that be to approve this "cure".

Dave Oesterreich

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: CarolC
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 03:45 AM

Here's some video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hR3x3NS5GEk

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: CarolC
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 03:53 AM

Here's an article about it...

http://progressmedia.ca/article/2008/06/playing-game-win

I think what these guys have produced is not a vaccine as such, but a vehicle for anti-cancer vaccines that will make them more effective. Apparently, there are several anti-cancer vaccines that are being tested elsewhere at this time.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: gnu
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 04:56 AM

Thank you CC... are you gonna keep yer maiden initials?

So, I didn't have to get up early to tape the news rerun this morning after all.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 09:23 AM

Put on one side whether this is actually genuien and important. The thing that leaps out from that article is how skewed the drug development rocess is by its being run by the drug comoanies.

This means that the bottom line is always how much money can be made by marketing the drugs, rather than how much benefit (including financial benefit) there is to society by having them available.

This means, to take an extreme example, that developing a one-off drug which actually cured a condition and which could be produced cheaply, would be financially disastrous, whereas a drug which needed to be taken continually to hold that condition at bay would be highly profitable.

In contrast in a drug development system linked in to the National Health Service (or equivalent), the financial pressures would be reversed. The priority would be drugs that cured and could then cease to be taken rather than drugs that need to be taken for a long time.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 09:49 AM

Amen! What I have been saying all along. Research is usually funded by money making pharmaceutical companies (a huge lobby in the US). To find cures is to shoot themselves in the foot.

In a health care system that is profit based it does not behoove any company or practioner to make anyone well.

Think I read somewhere a few years back that petrochemicals ( it is in everything) is the highest grossing industry and health research and care (including insurance) the second. So they sell us poisonous products on the one hand and treatments on the other.

This thread could make me go mad. My daughter died because she was eeking out her meds in order to make them last and she didn't go to hospital when she knew she should, because she couldn't pay for her last few stays.

It wasn't cancer but a life threatening and money sponging illness.

Fuck! That is my afternoon scuppered. Scuse me while I go grieve and wail a bit.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: Ebbie
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 10:44 AM

{{{{{VirginiaTam}}}}}

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 11:01 AM

thanks Ebbie. sorry about that folks... nearly four years ago, but I still get moments of rage and grief. Just praying things change in the US cuz my younger daughter is facing expensive medical care too.

I believe that Autoimmune related illnesses are the result of exposure to all the chemical toxins we are exposed to. They are in everything from carpet, MDF furniture, deodorant, shampoo, air fresheners, plastic bottles leeching stuff into spring water, and on and on and on. The toxins must effect the immune system.

We are doomed to use these things and equally doomed to seek treatment when they make us ill. Sometimes I think it is a conspiracy. Now that is hysteria.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: gnu
Date: 06 Feb 09 - 02:47 PM

Oh VirginiaTam! My tears are for you. No need to say sorry.

Something I caught from watching that video again was horrifying in light of what I said and what others have said. That was this - it will take $500M to complete the process. So, essentially, our fears are already true.... they have already placed a big price tag on the product.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: CarolC
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 01:05 AM

Now that's a project that Bill Gates or Ted Turner or some other billionaire philanthropist ought to take on. Oprah, maybe?


(Yes, keeping my original screen name, I reckon.)

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: Partridge
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 03:17 AM

Greed has become a powerful market force in today's economies

http://miraclemineral.org/breakthrough.php

A cheap form of medicine they(big pharma) can't patent and make money out of.

http://www.youtube.com/view_play_lis...FD6&playnext=1

This is about hemp oil

http://whale.to/a/cancer_c.html

this is about supressed treatments

I have also heard that Vitamin B17 found in apricot kernals has an effect on cancer

Partridge

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: folk1e
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 06:21 PM

There are as many different cancers as there are different cells in our bodies ...... each may have it's own treatment!
Talk of a panacea for cancer is very premature if indeed it is possible at all.
Some of the treatments are very effective whilst others are not, and the same cancer may have a whole list of different treatments available.

My own wife is suffering from secondary endrometrial cancer so my interest is slightly more than academic! Her treatment is Megace which (according to Christies Hospital) is eather very effective or almost useless, dependant on the patient. When she started her treatment (daily tablet) we were told of an effective treatment life for this drug was four years ...... that was four years ago now!
Having said that the secondaries are not getting any bigger and they keep revising the effective lifetime (of the treatment) every time, probably because they did not prescribe Megace more than four years ago.


Still .... it could be worse!

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: gnu
Date: 07 Feb 09 - 06:30 PM

I just saw that "typo" in my first post... withOUT profit greed

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: VirginiaTam
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 07:40 AM

Hemp oil got me thinking.

Sometime ago while I was seeking for natural fibre clothing (I have sensitive skin) I ran into the following information about hemp

Aside from recreational drug use and some medical benefits for people suffering from certain specific illnesses, I knew that hemp had been used historically for making ropes and varnish etc. I did not know it had so many other uses. Industrial hemp has been used to make environmentally friendlier products like paper and cloth fibre and building materials such as concrete, particle board and PVC plumbing.

The environmental and agricultural benefits:

One acre of hemp fibre will make 4 times as much paper as the fibre produced from an acre of trees. Cotton uses more than twice the water needed for hemp. Cotton needs herbicides and pesticides where hemp does not. Hemp fibre cloth is soft, breathable and non-irritating. Hemp crops do not deplete the nitrogen content of soil as cotton and other crops such as those grown for biomass fuel do. The nitrogen in hemp stays in the root and therefore returns directly to the soil. So no fertilisers needed. also hemp is naturally disease and insect resistant. No fertiliser or chemicals needed keeps water tables, stream, rivers, etc. clean. Not so good for the petrochemical industry which supply these products.

Other safety benefits:

Henry Ford experimented with hemp, sisal and a plastic extracted from wheat straw to make a car. There is documentation of him taking a sledgehammer to the car and it not getting a dent. I have been saying for years there is no reason why cars could not be made safer with flexible materials rather than crunchable metal. Production of metals for automobiles destroys the environment on many levels.

Apparently hemp was due to enjoy a revival in production of cloth fibre at the same time DuPont Chemical had devised and started producing the wonder material nylon. Eugene DuPont with his buddy (the then head of the FBI) worked together to make hemp illegal.   Because a reportedly addictive drug was produced form it? Not likely. Hemp grown industirally is not the same as the cannibis drug plant. The real reason they blocked hemp is simple. You cannot patent a naturally occurring product. If you can't patent it you cannot monopolise and profit from it.

This smacks of the big pharmaceuticals extracting the pain killing bit of willow bark to make asprin. Asprin causes stomach ulcers and allergic reactions. Willow bark has the other natural complimentary enzymes or whatever that prevent such reactions. But you cannot patent willow bark. Thank you Mssrs. Bayer.

Human enterprise is all fine and good, but not when it interferes on such a such huge scale with the health of the Earth and all her inhabitants.

sigh! if only i was in charge.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 01:41 PM

Growing hemp is legal enough in the UK and elsewhere in the EU, in fact it's encouraged. Farmers have to have a licence, and they check it's not psychoactive varieties that are being grown. (See here)

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: gnu
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 01:46 PM

Well, why not grow "pot" as opposed to hemp? You get all the benefits of hemp and you get pot for cancer patients. Seems like madness to me... >;-)

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: CarolC
Date: 08 Feb 09 - 01:50 PM

The thing about the cancer treatment that is being discussed in this case is that it uses the body's own immune system to kill the cancer cells. I would think that this sort of approach would be potentially effective against all types of cancer, since it's not the substance in the vaccine that is attacking the cancer, but the body's own immune system.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 01:14 AM

When insulin was discouvered by Drs. Banting and Best they tested it on dogs and then on on humans who would die soon if not treated. Today drugs can not be tested in that way. Much reasearch over several years are required before it can be allowed to be used on humans. This allows the big drug companies to get in on the action while people who are soon to die are denied the option of being a test case. Sometimes I wonder??????????????

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 09 Feb 09 - 03:33 AM

There is reason to be careful in testing medicines - remember Thalidomide and Debendox?

However the "natural" movement may have a point since apparently one of the naturally occuring components (was it DBD?) in cannabis is an antipsychotic while THC (the yield of which is escalated in stronger cultivated cannabis plants) may be implicated in certain mental problems.

Conversely, things like St John's Wort are thought to have dangers.

Subject: RE: BS: Cancer - New Therapy
From: Sandy Mc Lean
Date: 10 Feb 09 - 07:56 PM

Richard, much truth in what you say but my point is that in a terminal case with little time left there is not much to be lost but much to be gained. On lab animals this vaccine seemed to work and even cure late stage cancers. If years are wasted on research many will die. If it will work on humans the quick proof is in it's application. This is what happened with insulin years ago. Banting did not even want to patent his discovery but donate it to mankind. However, I believe that the University Of Toronto were not willing to relinquish their interest. The big drug companies look to a cancer cure as a bonanza, and sometimes laws written with good intent may allow them to place a foot in the door of a house that they did not build.