Big Cancer foundation continues to crumble – Mainstream media admits most cancer studies cannot be replicatedLit Corner | Posted 410 days ago | April 6, 2012 | 6:41 AM | Short Link: http://sethto.us/7wo
by Scott Morefield
See all articles by this author
(NaturalNews) Since the Dark Ages when the black plague swept through Europe, few diseases in human history have elicited such a deadly combination of fear and ignorance. In this modern age full of the wonders of technology, cancer is our greatest fear, and our greatest unknown. A UK poll found the highest percentage of respondents, one in five, feared cancer over anything else, including Alzheimer's, heart attack, or job loss. Even more disturbing, fully a third believed whether they got cancer or not was up to fate, that there was nothing they could do to reduce the risk.
A foundation of sand
To exacerbate the problem, a recent Reuters article admits that recent cancer research is unreliable at best, if not completely fraudulent. C. Glenn Begley, former head of global cancer research at Amgen Inc., chose 53 'landmark' publications for his team to double-check and build on for future drug development. Out of the original 53, he was only able to replicate six. Scientists at Bayer conducted a similar project and were only able to reproduce less than a quarter of the 47 cancer projects they had previously conducted. Begley wrote in the journal Nature, "It was shocking. These are the studies the pharmaceutical industry relies on to identify new targets for drug development. But if you're going to place a $1 million or $2 million or $5 million bet on an observation, you need to be sure it's true. As we tried to reproduce these papers we became convinced you can't take anything at face value."
Meanwhile, the pharmaceutical industry, always looking to profit from the public's fear and ignorance, continues to develop cancer drugs, usually based on fewer than half a dozen research publications that are pseudo-scientific at best. Then, the Big Medical/Big Government mafia continues to play God by pushing these 'treatments' on sick people as if they are the only option.
97 percent of cancer research money goes into treatments and early detection, while the other 3 percent is invested in fighting the causes of cancer. Logic dictates that to truly fight a disease, the cause should be removed. A great example of this is the Western cholera epidemic of the 1800s. With no knowledge of germs or antibiotics, the problem was traced to what seemed to be the most logical cause, contaminated water sources. Once these were removed, the cholera receded. Dr. David Servan-Schreiber, a founding board member of Doctors Without Borders, wrote, "It is ironic to think that if we had had antibiotics at the time, and had counted on them to deal with the disease as we count today on anticancer treatments, we might never have controlled cholera."
Unfortunately today's powers-that-be aren't moved by logic, only profit.
It doesn't take a pharmaceutical rep or a rocket scientist to understand that cancer is caused by environmental factors. The most common cancers are far more prevalent in the West, not Asia, yet when Asians move here they are just as prone. It is true that cancer runs in families, except that adopted children often share the cancer of their adoptive, not biological parents. People who eat or avoid specific foods are more or less prone to cancer, as are those exposed to certain chemicals for certain lengths of time. If cancer is caused by environmental factors, could it not be cured removing those factors and giving the body's immune system the nutrients it needs to fight off the cancer? It may not be as profitable, but might it save more lives?
The foundation of the modern cancer industrial complex is built on sand, and it's starting to crumble. And now, the mainstream media has openly admitted that the research the pharmaceutical companies rely on can no longer be trusted.
How long before the public wakes up?
Sources for this article include:
About the author:
Scott received his MBA from East Tennessee State University in 1998 and married his wife, Kim, in 2002. They live in the hills of east Tennessee with their four small children. Scott and Kim blog about parenting, marriage, healthy lifestyle, nutrition, and homesteading at www.amorefieldlife.com.