Cancer and the drug companies

[Edbear]

More for the conspiracy theorists to chew on.

I was with another alternative therapies advocate over the weekend, and as soon as he started talking I pegged him as a conspiracy theorist. I was right of course as I have yet to find an exponent of alternative medicine who claims the drug companies are squashing cures for cancer, who isn't a conspiracy theorist.

However, what seems so bleeding obvious that these people can't undrstand is that in every claim of a therapy that "definitely cures cancer, and there are hundreds of cases proving it!" Not one requires drug companies to develop it.

All examples, like Black Salve, infusions of Vitamin. C and so on are freely available as evidenced by the sheer number of sufferers trying them!

If these alternative therapies genuinely cured cancer, everyone would be using them and getting cured without needing the conventional therapies like Radiation, surgery and Chemo.

My visitor claimed that only 2% survive beyond 5 years with conventional treatment but the figure was 30% for alternative therapies. Absolute bollox of course.

In short, if there existed a cure for cancer, cancer would be cured. I guarantee you, though, the conspiracy theorists/anti drug exponents will not be able to accept this. Just like any conspiracy theory, they will never change their blind minds.

[sil3nt]

Who is going to be first to point it out?

[Laava]

Cue Katman, Yokel et all.
What are you expecting here Ed?

[Oakie]

Who is going to be first to point it out?

I pointed it out one night in Oamaru many years ago but I nearly got arrested so now it just leave it tucked away.

[madbikeboy]

If these alternative therapies genuinely cured cancer, everyone would be using them and getting cured without needing the conventional therapies like Radiation, surgery and Chemo.



Cancer is pretty complicated. There are lots of different cancers.

There are interesting discoveries each year, there is a school of thought that common antibiotics can help along with chemo (patients who use antibiotics during chemo show some interesting improvements statistically compared with groups who did not use antibiotics for example).

Chemo is an aggressive race between killing the bad cells and killing the host organism (meaning the human). It's unlikely that a drug company would hide the biggest single revenue earning drug in history (conspiracy theory #2.4a). Also, modern medicine has proven statistically more effective that witches and leaches, or alternative therapies… I once dated a narcissistic nano scientist bitch; she was working on a cure for cancer. She's a total cunt, but quite smart. Maybe I should have put up with her shit in case she does cure cancer…?

I personally believe there is a link between cancer and Justin Bilber music. I think we should kill that fucker before he infects anyone else. :lol:

[jonbuoy]

More for the conspiracy theorists to chew on.

I was with another alternative therapies advocate over the weekend, and as soon as he started talking I pegged him as a conspiracy theorist. I was right of course as I have yet to find an exponent of alternative medicine who claims the drug companies are squashing cures for cancer, who isn't a conspiracy theorist.

However, what seems so bleeding obvious that these people can't undrstand is that in every claim of a therapy that "definitely cures cancer, and there are hundreds of cases proving it!" Not one requires drug companies to develop it.

All examples, like Black Salve, infusions of Vitamin. C and so on are freely available as evidenced by the sheer number of sufferers trying them!

If these alternative therapies genuinely cured cancer, everyone would be using them and getting cured without needing the conventional therapies like Radiation, surgery and Chemo.

My visitor claimed that only 2% survive beyond 5 years with conventional treatment but the figure was 30% for alternative therapies. Absolute bollox of course.

In short, if there existed a cure for cancer, cancer would be cured. I guarantee you, though, the conspiracy theorists/anti drug exponents will not be able to accept this. Just like any conspiracy theory, they will never change their blind minds.

I think Steve Jobs might have had a change of mind - bit late though.

[Akzle]

fuken jews

[Edbear]

Cancer is pretty complicated. There are lots of different cancers.

There are interesting discoveries each year, there is a school of thought that common antibiotics can help along with chemo (patients who use antibiotics during chemo show some interesting improvements statistically compared with groups who did not use antibiotics for example).

Chemo is an aggressive race between killing the bad cells and killing the host organism (meaning the human). It's unlikely that a drug company would hide the biggest single revenue earning drug in history (conspiracy theory #2.4a). Also, modern medicine has proven statistically more effective that witches and leaches, or alternative therapies… I once dated a narcissistic nano scientist bitch; she was working on a cure for cancer. She's a total cunt, but quite smart. Maybe I should have put up with her shit in case she does cure cancer…?

I personally believe there is a link between cancer and Justin Bilber music. I think we should kill that fucker before he infects anyone else. :lol:

Very rare for you and I to agree but you're right of course. Although I am not sure about Justin, he's a bit late in the game...

[Edbear]

Cue Katman, Yokel et all.
What are you expecting here Ed?

Should be interesting...

[bogan]

Who is going to be first to point it out?

I think everyone is refraining so as not to add to the <s>trans</s>confusion... :innocent:

[Katman]

What else would you expect out of the mouth of a prescription drug addict?

[BuzzardNZ]

Ed, do you now have cancer to add to the lengthy list of your existing ailments?

[Paul in NZ]

Bloody hell Ed – where to start…

There are some alternative theories / treatments that have been properly researched that do prove effective in some cases. Where it all falls down is the ‘some cases’ which as it usually turns out isn’t your case and is awfully hard to predict…

One thing worth reading is ‘The China Study’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Study Its more a book about nutrition and the effects of diet on the diseases of affluence. Certainly its well written and well researched although eventually getting to the part where they recommend a vegan diet is a bit much for most of us. All I can say is that going meat free for 3 years did me no harm and my simple cancer was treated with no sign of future trouble. The diet part was easier than you would of thought, especially when its got serious motivation behind it.

Eventually we might cure cancer with drug based medicine. However I think the failure to date has been that big Pharma’s business model works on a single pill to cure a single illness theory. Cancers need to be treated holistically as many believe that they occur due to multiple changes in lifestyle. Poor diets, decreased exercise, more stress etc… Getting people to make basic changes is usually met with resistance…

Lets talk about getting people to make basic changes in say diet rather than taking a pill… Even for cancer… I’m a type 1 diabetic. I used to be involved with diabetes societies at a committee level etc and have had input to various programmes etc. I’ve basically given up as I could no longer trust myself to be polite. It is my observation that the poor statistics are driven by people’s addictions and inability to make obvious changes. Just like it’s obvious an alcoholic should avoid alcohol it’s a bit of a no brainer that if you have developed diabetes and you are 200kg, your really should do something about your diet / lifestyle.

Except some people just can’t. I have visited people on dialysis because their internal organs are overwhelmed by the crap they eat. There they are, plugged into a dialysis machine – and they are eating a bucket of KFC… Because it ‘makes them feel better’ and its OK ‘cos the machine will scrub out the bad stuff… Erm…. Later you talk to them about maybe making some kind of commitment to exercise and you get the old ‘Oh but its easy for you’… (no it bloody isn’t)

Eventually you just give up… Or get pissed off....

So – in short – yes alternative treatments might offer some gains simply because the original illness is oft due to our shitty diets and lack of exercise. However – that means its only motivated people that will try to make changes in sufficient time to make a difference. Most won’t or cant…

[Swoop]

In short, if there existed a cure for cancer, cancer would be cured.

What concerns me is the fact that IF a cure is ever found, the planet is fucked.
Even more humans infesting the face of this celestial body and screwing it up.


MBB: Take no chances with Miss Bieber. Stab the bastard immediately.

[mashman]

If these alternative therapies genuinely cured cancer, everyone would be using them and getting cured without needing the conventional therapies like Radiation, surgery and Chemo.

bwaaaaaaaaaaa ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha haaaaaaaaaaaaa

[R650R]

Its another classic case of what came first the chicken or the egg... I know plenty of people who are pro traditional medical practices (what you call alternative was the accepted option for thousands of years before 'modern' allopathic surgery and drugs came along) but not into conspiracy. The thing is once people realise they've been lied to by the medical 'profession' its a short hop to seeing what else is a con job.

When my Father was ill with cancer I spent a considerable time researching all options. This included googling the drug names administered and case studies etc... I let him make his own choices about what he wanted to do but I would not go down the drug company 'treatment' path myself. I equate it to treating a sore throat by drinking bleach, sure it will kill the bugs but it also kills you!!! Most people accept there are a lot of natural things like garlic, onion, honey and vitamin C etc that will naturally fight off throat infections and this is not considered hocus pocus. So why not accept that certain things that were traditionally part of our diets might be able to treat cancers in conjunction with other factors???

The problem is any alternative treatments need to be explored before the body is nuked by chemo and radiation. Did you know most of the 'chemo' treatments are carcinogenic themselves and need to be administered with a tumour inhibiting drug. They are so dangerous that nurses in USA are only allowed to handle them 17 times such is the risk of exposure.

BTW this is something people need to think about before the time comes, what would you do. The doctors seem to like to rush people into the treatment as if every passing hour matters. You will feel desperate, scared and wont have time to do the research on google or library etc. Do you want to die in a hospital wired up to tubes or out in real world with your family and still seeing the scenery etc...

[Katman]

Tell us about the power of prayer Ed.

[jasonu]

What concerns me is the fact that IF a cure is ever found, the planet is fucked.
Even more humans infesting the face of this celestial body and screwing it up.
.

If the curry munchers and chingies stopped or at least reduced breeding that would easily offset the amount of cancer survivors.

[James Deuce]

Its another classic case of what came first the chicken or the egg... I know plenty of people who are pro traditional medical practices (what you call alternative was the accepted option for thousands of years before 'modern' allopathic surgery and drugs came along) but not into conspiracy. The thing is once people realise they've been lied to by the medical 'profession' its a short hop to seeing what else is a con job.

When my Father was ill with cancer I spent a considerable time researching all options. This included googling the drug names administered and case studies etc... I let him make his own choices about what he wanted to do but I would not go down the drug company 'treatment' path myself. I equate it to treating a sore throat by drinking bleach, sure it will kill the bugs but it also kills you!!! Most people accept there are a lot of natural things like garlic, onion, honey and vitamin C etc that will naturally fight off throat infections and this is not considered hocus pocus. So why not accept that certain things that were traditionally part of our diets might be able to treat cancers in conjunction with other factors???

The problem is any alternative treatments need to be explored before the body is nuked by chemo and radiation. Did you know most of the 'chemo' treatments are carcinogenic themselves and need to be administered with a tumour inhibiting drug. They are so dangerous that nurses in USA are only allowed to handle them 17 times such is the risk of exposure.

BTW this is something people need to think about before the time comes, what would you do. The doctors seem to like to rush people into the treatment as if every passing hour matters. You will feel desperate, scared and wont have time to do the research on google or library etc. Do you want to die in a hospital wired up to tubes or out in real world with your family and still seeing the scenery etc...

There is not one repeatable study that agrees with any of the assertions you made.

There is no "big pharma" conspiracy.

The difficult pill that no one wants to swallow is that cancer is not simple to treat and requires a couple of baseline treatments that are very aggressive and dangerous for the patient. No one is looking for a single pill to treat cancer. The main body of research is focused on the most common types of cancer.

Anyone who uses "natural" or "alternative" treatments for cancer deserves sympathy. Nothing more, nothing less. Because they don't work.

The constant roar of anti-scientific bullshit from people who should know better is getting deafening.

For instance ancient Chinese "medicine" is nothing more than a sop to the peasant class to make them believe that their ruling elite give a shit. It doesn't work. But it stops them rebelling. Job done. Chiropractors aren't "Doctors". Naturopaths are not primary care physicians. They're charlatans. Homeopathy is water. Drink some and then bill yourself for the memory of all the poo and wee and dead animal bits that have been in it.

No one has ever reliably repeated a control test using high dose Vitamin C to treat cancer, but a bunch of unpricipled, obviously nearly scientifically illiterate fuckwits are quite happy to lean on the "Appeal to Anecdote" logical fallacy to back it up. Garlic does nothing for the common cold. Rhinovirii are not vampires. There is nothing that can treat the "common" cold once you've got it. Don't waste the doctor's time with it either.

You know the good thing about science? It changes its mind in the face of evidence. Yes, there are a few scientists who go mental and stick to their assertions in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If there weren't, the only thing that would prove is that scientists aren't human. I have NO idea why a majority consensus view of a scientific principle isn't good enough for a big chunk of what should be an educated population. A dissenting voice in science is most often not an underdog. Most often, it's a crank with a funding stream. Like anyone involved in the supplement industry. That shit does nothing. Because science. But idiots keep buying it because placebo effect.

Bah. Go swim in the dirty end of the pool.

[mashman]

There is nothing that can treat the "common" cold once you've got it.

You mean you can't just tell the cold to fuck off when you start feeling shit? Coz I've done it 3 times so far and each time the cold has indeed fucked right off, even when living and working in deepest darkest snot central.

[Katman]

There is not one repeatable study that agrees with any of the assertions you made.

There is no "big pharma" conspiracy.

The difficult pill that no one wants to swallow is that cancer is not simple to treat and requires a couple of baseline treatments that are very aggressive and dangerous for the patient. No one is looking for a single pill to treat cancer. The main body of research is focused on the most common types of cancer.

Anyone who uses "natural" or "alternative" treatments for cancer deserves sympathy. Nothing more, nothing less. Because they don't work.

The constant roar of anti-scientific bullshit from people who should know better is getting deafening.

For instance ancient Chinese "medicine" is nothing more than a sop to the peasant class to make them believe that their ruling elite give a shit. It doesn't work. But it stops them rebelling. Job done. Chiropractors aren't "Doctors". Naturopaths are not primary care physicians. They're charlatans. Homeopathy is water. Drink some and then bill yourself for the memory of all the poo and wee and dead animal bits that have been in it.

No one has ever reliably repeated a control test using high dose Vitamin C to treat cancer, but a bunch of unpricipled, obviously nearly scientifically illiterate fuckwits are quite happy to lean on the "Appeal to Anecdote" logical fallacy to back it up. Garlic does nothing for the common cold. Rhinovirii are not vampires. There is nothing that can treat the "common" cold once you've got it. Don't waste the doctor's time with it either.

You know the good thing about science? It changes its mind in the face of evidence. Yes, there are a few scientists who go mental and stick to their assertions in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. If there weren't, the only thing that would prove is that scientists aren't human. I have NO idea why a majority consensus view of a scientific principle isn't good enough for a big chunk of what should be an educated population. A dissenting voice in science is most often not an underdog. Most often, it's a crank with a funding stream. Like anyone involved in the supplement industry. That shit does nothing. Because science. But idiots keep buying it because placebo effect.

Bah. Go swim in the dirty end of the pool.

You know what Jim, sometimes bitter and twisted people bring on the misfortune that befalls them.

[Banditbandit]

Its another classic case of what came first the chicken or the egg... I know plenty of people who are pro traditional medical practices (what you call alternative was the accepted option for thousands of years before 'modern' allopathic surgery and drugs came along) but not into conspiracy. The thing is once people realise they've been lied to by the medical 'profession' its a short hop to seeing what else is a con job.

When my Father was ill with cancer I spent a considerable time researching all options. This included googling the drug names administered and case studies etc... I let him make his own choices about what he wanted to do but I would not go down the drug company 'treatment' path myself. I equate it to treating a sore throat by drinking bleach, sure it will kill the bugs but it also kills you!!!

Yeah .. but cancer is not bugs .. and cancer will kill you. It's as sure as eggs is eggs cancer will kill you ...



Most people accept there are a lot of natural things like garlic, onion, honey and vitamin C etc that will naturally fight off throat infections and this is not considered hocus pocus. So why not accept that certain things that were traditionally part of our diets might be able to treat cancers in conjunction with other factors???

Yes - in conjunction with what "other factors"?


The problem is any alternative treatments need to be explored before the body is nuked by chemo and radiation. Did you know most of the 'chemo' treatments are carcinogenic themselves and need to be administered with a tumour inhibiting drug. They are so dangerous that nurses in USA are only allowed to handle them 17 times such is the risk of exposure.

Yes - bombarding the body with radiation/chemotherapy is playing with substances that can kill you. Cancer WILL kill you - Many people with cancer have got rid of it through radiation/chemo and other contemporary medical practices ... If they had not had treatment they would have died .. some people who have undergone the treatment have died - it has not worked ...

Cancer WILL kill you - chemo/radiation treatments May help you .. make your own choice ...


BTW this is something people need to think about before the time comes, what would you do. The doctors seem to like to rush people into the treatment as if every passing hour matters. You will feel desperate, scared and wont have time to do the research on google or library etc. Do you want to die in a hospital wired up to tubes or out in real world with your family and still seeing the scenery etc...

So - your choice is not to live or to die, but to either die in hospital or die at home ... so much for the choices of alternative medicine ..

[mashman]

so much for the choices of alternative medicine ..

Ah, ah, ah, HIFU (http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/cancers-in-general/treatment/other/high-intensity-focused-ultrasound-hifu)

"Doctors have been interested in this type of treatment for nearly 50 years. But it is only in recent years that they have been seriously investigating its use in treating different types of cancer. One advantage of this type of treatment is that because it only uses sound waves to kill the cancer cells, it doesn’t have as many side effects as other types of cancer treatments already in use.".

Wonder what else modern medicine has dimissed for us.

[Maha]

You know what Jim, sometimes bitter and twisted people bring on the misfortune that befalls them.

Ever thought of a change career and writing for a card company?

[Banditbandit]

Do not misunderstand my response to R650R - in general I support alternatives to the over-drugged, over-surgical contemporary medical word - it's a black art when you look into it ...

I'm definitely in favour of alternatives. Our people had, and still have, plenty of alternatives ...

It's just that R650R does not have a good argument .. it's too full of holes .. and the only alternatives he offered for cancer treatment are die at home or die in hospital ..

[Swoop]

"Doctors have been interested in this type of treatment for nearly 50 years.

"Doctors" forget that their <STRIKE>profession</STRIKE> trade emerged from naturopathy. As do many ingredients they prescribe...

[mashman]

Do not misunderstand my response to R650R - in general I support alternatives to the over-drugged, over-surgical contemporary medical word - it's a black art when you look into it ...

I'm definitely in favour of alternatives. Our people had, and still have, plenty of alternatives ...

It's just that R650R does not have a good argument .. it's too full of holes .. and the only alternatives he offered for cancer treatment are die at home or die in hospital ..

Furry muff. That's the downside as R650R mentioned, it's not a great leap to disenfranchise people from mainstream treatments given the perceived holes (horrendous treatment potentially resulting in death)... and bagging other branches of medicine really does them no favours in regards to the confidence stakes, especially when that branch rears its head half a century later.


"Doctors" forget that their <STRIKE>profession</STRIKE> trade emerged from naturopathy. As do many ingredients they prescribe...

Aye, a trade led by business.

[sugilite]

The Human Condition: Money: (preferably lots of it) + An agenda + Influence = Corruption.
You read it here first :rolleyes:
Anyone who thinks the Pharmaceutical business, Energy business, (insert any large multinational business/industry here) are above board and truly have the general populations interests at heart are delusional in the extreme.

[James Deuce]

The Human Condition: Money: (preferably lots of it) + An agenda + Influence = Corruption.
You read it here first :rolleyes:
Anyone who thinks the Pharmaceutical business, Energy business, (insert any large multinational business/industry here) are above board and truly have the general populations interests at heart are delusional in the extreme.
I don't think they're above board, I think they're focused on making a buck. I just don't accept the widespread inter-linking conspiracy theories "people" keep presenting. The NZ Government can't even organise themselves to feed under-privileged children. I don't think corporations and overseas Governments are any better at "big picture" stuff.

[Katman]

Anyone who thinks the Pharmaceutical business, Energy business, (insert any large multinational business/industry here) are above board and truly have the general populations interests at heart are delusional in the extreme.

Sort of sums Ed up really.

[Laava]

What concerns me is the fact that IF a cure is ever found, the planet is fucked.
Even more humans infesting the face of this celestial body and screwing it up..

Exactly!...

[willytheekid]

If I may...

http://i.imgur.com/6V9gsWp.png

...and fought that fucker on MY terms...not the doc's, not the drug companys, not my family's or not my friends...I chose the weapons and I chose how the fucking fight would go down(treatment type & medicine)...cos there is no cure for cancer, no silver bullet or magic beans, just your personal choice in how the fight is gonna go down...cos its just that, a dirty fucking fight to the death...either cancer's...or yours!

That Choice of treatment...is the only thing it can't take from you.

[Swoop]

Aye, a trade led by business.

They are "hands on" and do "practical" types of stuff, so therefore a tradesman. (Regularly whilst wearing a bow tie. Gah! Hand me the bleach and a syringe.)

"professionals":crazy: do paper and words/numbers types of stuff.
While wearing collared shirts and ties.

[Brian d marge]

Bloody hell Ed – where to start…

There are some alternative theories / treatments that have been properly researched that do prove effective in some cases. Where it all falls down is the ‘some cases’ which as it usually turns out isn’t your case and is awfully hard to predict…

One thing worth reading is ‘The China Study’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Study Its more a book about nutrition and the effects of diet on the diseases of affluence. Certainly its well written and well researched although eventually getting to the part where they recommend a vegan diet is a bit much for most of us. All I can say is that going meat free for 3 years did me no harm and my simple cancer was treated with no sign of future trouble. The diet part was easier than you would of thought, especially when its got serious motivation behind it.

Eventually we might cure cancer with drug based medicine. However I think the failure to date has been that big Pharma’s business model works on a single pill to cure a single illness theory. Cancers need to be treated holistically as many believe that they occur due to multiple changes in lifestyle. Poor diets, decreased exercise, more stress etc… Getting people to make basic changes is usually met with resistance…

Lets talk about getting people to make basic changes in say diet rather than taking a pill… Even for cancer… I’m a type 1 diabetic. I used to be involved with diabetes societies at a committee level etc and have had input to various programmes etc. I’ve basically given up as I could no longer trust myself to be polite. It is my observation that the poor statistics are driven by people’s addictions and inability to make obvious changes. Just like it’s obvious an alcoholic should avoid alcohol it’s a bit of a no brainer that if you have developed diabetes and you are 200kg, your really should do something about your diet / lifestyle.

Except some people just can’t. I have visited people on dialysis because their internal organs are overwhelmed by the crap they eat. There they are, plugged into a dialysis machine – and they are eating a bucket of KFC… Because it ‘makes them feel better’ and its OK ‘cos the machine will scrub out the bad stuff… Erm…. Later you talk to them about maybe making some kind of commitment to exercise and you get the old ‘Oh but its easy for you’… (no it bloody isn’t)

Eventually you just give up… Or get pissed off....

So – in short – yes alternative treatments might offer some gains simply because the original illness is oft due to our shitty diets and lack of exercise. However – that means its only motivated people that will try to make changes in sufficient time to make a difference. Most won’t or cant…
My mum had breast cancer . . my dad had lung cancer

yes . . .im screwed

but they all went through NZ health care system

Rated right up there . . best or one of the best in the world

only complaint the costs are creeping in . .

anyway agreed about the diet . I remember a study done and the figures . .dont quote me

but just after the war . .bowel cancer . . America 142 000 or something like that . . .China

18
china kept very good records for some reason after the war

reason they concluded . . . meat

America ripped into the old 96er breakfast lunch and dinner

china used meat as a garnish keeping it under about 5 %
of weekly consumption

now I dont know either way but at a guess me thinks that
diet too much of a good thing
exercise too little of a good thing
stress . . at least the stress of being eaten by a lion or T Rex was only temp not like the everyday stresses we have today

btw the above will cost you 2 cents
cos thats how much its worth

[bogan]

Bloody hell Ed – where to start…

There are some alternative theories / treatments that have been properly researched that do prove effective in some cases. Where it all falls down is the ‘some cases’ which as it usually turns out isn’t your case and is awfully hard to predict…

One thing worth reading is ‘The China Study’ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_China_Study Its more a book about nutrition and the effects of diet on the diseases of affluence. Certainly its well written and well researched although eventually getting to the part where they recommend a vegan diet is a bit much for most of us. All I can say is that going meat free for 3 years did me no harm and my simple cancer was treated with no sign of future trouble. The diet part was easier than you would of thought, especially when its got serious motivation behind it.

Eventually we might cure cancer with drug based medicine. However I think the failure to date has been that big Pharma’s business model works on a single pill to cure a single illness theory. Cancers need to be treated holistically as many believe that they occur due to multiple changes in lifestyle. Poor diets, decreased exercise, more stress etc… Getting people to make basic changes is usually met with resistance…

Lets talk about getting people to make basic changes in say diet rather than taking a pill… Even for cancer… I’m a type 1 diabetic. I used to be involved with diabetes societies at a committee level etc and have had input to various programmes etc. I’ve basically given up as I could no longer trust myself to be polite. It is my observation that the poor statistics are driven by people’s addictions and inability to make obvious changes. Just like it’s obvious an alcoholic should avoid alcohol it’s a bit of a no brainer that if you have developed diabetes and you are 200kg, your really should do something about your diet / lifestyle.

Except some people just can’t. I have visited people on dialysis because their internal organs are overwhelmed by the crap they eat. There they are, plugged into a dialysis machine – and they are eating a bucket of KFC… Because it ‘makes them feel better’ and its OK ‘cos the machine will scrub out the bad stuff… Erm…. Later you talk to them about maybe making some kind of commitment to exercise and you get the old ‘Oh but its easy for you’… (no it bloody isn’t)

Eventually you just give up… Or get pissed off....

So – in short – yes alternative treatments might offer some gains simply because the original illness is oft due to our shitty diets and lack of exercise. However – that means its only motivated people that will try to make changes in sufficient time to make a difference. Most won’t or cant…

Yeh well put. I'd say naturopaths have their place, not curing cancer, but possibly contributory to preventing it in the first place, and definitely contributory to preventing other illnesses.

[Akzle]

So – in short – yes alternative treatments might offer some gains simply because the original illness is oft due to our shitty diets and lack of exercise. However – that means its only motivated people that will try to make changes in sufficient time to make a difference. Most won’t or cant…
you should have put this part first.

i think the simple fact is that most people deserve to die.

If the curry munchers and chingies stopped or at least reduced breeding that would easily offset the amount of cancer survivors.
or, if yanks did. and that would be a huge win all over the planet.


The NZ Government can't even organise themselves to feed under-privileged children. I don't think corporations and overseas Governments are any better at "big picture" stuff.

no, but i'm sure they can organise WMDs and 7 series BMWs and pay rises and shit. :yes:

[Laava]

If I may...

http://i.imgur.com/6V9gsWp.png

...and fought that fucker on MY terms...not the doc's, not the drug companys, not my family's or not my friends...I chose the weapons and I chose how the fucking fight would go down(treatment type & medicine)...cos there is no cure for cancer, no silver bullet or magic beans, just your personal choice in how the fight is gonna go down...cos its just that, a dirty fucking fight to the death...either cancer's...or yours!

That Choice of treatment...is the only thing it can't take from you.

I think it is very important to have a good attitude like yours as well. My wife has recently been through the mill too and had a good attitude at all times even when she looked and felt like a bag of arseholes. But this is off topic and it was a stupid thing to start a thread about in the first place. Most people understand that the causes, effects and treatments are radically different from one person to another added to which is the fact that the best of our medical experts just graze the surface when it comes to knowledge about cancer and how to treat etc.
You get given information such as,for example, in our case, the chemo and radio treatment will give you a 14% better chance of it not reoccurring. Doesn't sound a lot does it? But they only have statistical data to reassure you with. They have nothing else to offer. Alternative stuff has been known to work wonders on some people and others have died. You make your own choices as my wife did and then get behind it and try to maximise your treatment, ie with a good attitude, diet etc.

[willytheekid]

I think it is very important to have a good attitude like yours as well. My wife has recently been through the mill too and had a good attitude at all times even when she looked and felt like a bag of arseholes. But this is off topic and it was a stupid thing to start a thread about in the first place. Most people understand that the causes, effects and treatments are radically different from one person to another added to which is the fact that the best of our medical experts just graze the surface when it comes to knowledge about cancer and how to treat etc.
You get given information such as,for example, in our case, the chemo and radio treatment will give you a 14% better chance of it not reoccurring. Doesn't sound a lot does it? But they only have statistical data to reassure you with. They have nothing else to offer. Alternative stuff has been known to work wonders on some people and others have died. You make your own choices as my wife did and then get behind it and try to maximise your treatment, ie with a good attitude, diet etc.

Bloody well said mate:niceone:

...all the very best to you an yours ;):love:

[Bikemad]

Cancer and the drug companies............good name for a band............bit like Jesus and the Dinosaurs

[yokel]

My mum had breast cancer . . my dad had lung cancer

yes . . .im screwed

but they all went through NZ health care system

Rated right up there . . best or one of the best in the world

only complaint the costs are creeping in . .

anyway agreed about the diet . I remember a study done and the figures . .dont quote me

but just after the war . .bowel cancer . . America 142 000 or something like that . . .China

18
china kept very good records for some reason after the war

reason they concluded . . . meat

America ripped into the old 96er breakfast lunch and dinner

china used meat as a garnish keeping it under about 5 %
of weekly consumption

now I dont know either way but at a guess me thinks that
diet too much of a good thing
exercise too little of a good thing
stress . . at least the stress of being eaten by a lion or T Rex was only temp not like the everyday stresses we have today

btw the above will cost you 2 cents
cos thats how much its worth

You know there could've been some kind of contamination in the US meat like say radiation, plenty of that around the US, just ask John Wayne.

When you consider how much money and resources the drug companies and the medical industry has at their disposal, can you really compare their results with alternative treatments?

How willing would the drug companies be to test to see if blended banana skins and cinnamon could be a cure for cancer?
when you can get banana skins and cinnamon for cheap anywhere.

[mashman]

They are "hands on" and do "practical" types of stuff, so therefore a tradesman. (Regularly whilst wearing a bow tie. Gah! Hand me the bleach and a syringe.)

"professionals":crazy: do paper and words/numbers types of stuff.
While wearing collared shirts and ties.

Tis a waste of a fuckload of people... still though, it's an awesome way to create jobs.

[ellipsis]

...just found this edthread...sounds very much like rubbing your knob with 60 grit sandpaper and expecting a reaction...try 40 grit on a power drill Ed...the expected results would cum quicker...

[caseye]

If I may...

http://i.imgur.com/6V9gsWp.png

...and fought that fucker on MY terms...not the doc's, not the drug companys, not my family's or not my friends...I chose the weapons and I chose how the fucking fight would go down(treatment type & medicine)...cos there is no cure for cancer, no silver bullet or magic beans, just your personal choice in how the fight is gonna go down...cos its just that, a dirty fucking fight to the death...either cancer's...or yours!

That Choice of treatment...is the only thing it can't take from you.

Glad you did buddy, be a lonely ol pace without ya!
Hate the stuff, killed my mum 7 years ago, has tried to kill my bro, sister last year, both have beaten it off , but the shit keeps coming. Dad an I only ones with no known issues.
Having "the " right attitude does definitely make a big difference.

[mashman]

...just found this edthread...sounds very much like rubbing your knob with 60 grit sandpaper and expecting a reaction...try 40 grit on a power drill Ed...the expected results would cum quicker...

You painted a picture that I'm having trouble getting rid of :brick:

[James Deuce]

You know there could've been some kind of contamination in the US meat like say radiation, plenty of that around the US, just ask John Wayne.

When you consider how much money and resources the drug companies and the medical industry has at their disposal, can you really compare their results with alternative treatments?

How willing would the drug companies be to test to see if blended banana skins and cinnamon could be a cure for cancer?
when you can get banana skins and cinnamon for cheap anywhere.

I can guarantee that they've tested any number of organic compounds. All of which contribute to the composition of the manufactured drug at the end of the process.

BTW there's far more ionising radiation in a banana than any meat product. Brazil nuts contain radium as well as K-40.

[Brian d marge]

this will cure the fker

http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/03/23/965eb45dd051ab608143b3a03097712a.jpg

stephen

[Edbear]

Ed, do you now have cancer to add to the lengthy list of your existing ailments?

Nah I am healthy as a horse..

Notable as always is the conspiracy theorists and knockers have nothing to say. They just want to think they sound clever by dissing me. But still, stupid is as stupid does. Pathetic.

[bogan]

Nah I am healthy as a horse..

Didn't realise tramadol was used as a horse tranq...

Learn something new everyday eh Ed :laugh:

[Edbear]

Many thoughtful replies despite that. Drug companies do have to make a buck or they would be immediately out of business. It costs millions to research, develop and test a drug. They have to do double blind testing and it takes years to go through the Governmental requirements. Nobody and no company can do it for free.

The alternative exponents don't need to do anything but shout loudly and make unsubstantiated claims. Try getting one to submit to rigorous, or any, proper tests and see how far you get.

Naturopathy is not necessarily homeopathy and many naturopath medicines do work for some things. I can vouch for Evening Primrose oil for treating allergies relating to behavioural issues for example. St. John's Wort is a benefit for some too.

For myself, with my fraught medical history including nearly dying five times and being labelled a medical mystery because of surviving what is supposed to be unsurvivable by the medical professionals, I can categorically state that despite spending literally thousands of dollars and years of time on alternatives, the only effective and measurable treatments I have had are from conventional medicine and through qualified medical specialists.

I have been told many times that I would be completely cured by alternative providers and not only did they fail and I got worse, I would have certainly died had I followed one's advice and not gone to the Doctor.

[Akzle]

BTW there's far more ionising radiation in a banana than any meat product. Brazil nuts contain radium as well as K-40.

you are fucking kidding eh, the amount of ionising radiation, as k40 in bananas is fucking minimicronanosieverts. You get a higher dose walking downtown.(or sleeping under a smoke alarm)
also, taken as bananas it isnt bioaccumulative.

Nice try, but go jump.

[SPman]

I personally believe there is a link between cancer and Justin Bieber music. I think we should kill that fucker before he infects anyone else. :lol: I'm with him! :Punk:

Trillions spent on researching a cure - any research done on finding causes and ways of prevention? Diet? Lifestyle? Soaking the planet in noxious chemicals, radiowaves, EMF's, etc as well as lifestyle can't be helping.....

Long term, surely that would be more beneficial..

[bogan]

I can vouch for

For myself,
with my fraught medical history
including nearly dying five times and
being labelled a medical mystery
I can categorically state that despite spending literally thousands of dollars and years of time on alternatives
I have had are from conventional medicine and through qualified medical specialists.

I have been told many times that
I would be completely cured by alternative providers and not only did they fail and
I got worse,
I would have certainly died had
I followed one's advice and not gone to the Doctor.

But you'd never just post anecdotal evidence, shirley :scratch: :facepalm:

[mashman]

Leave Justin alone.

Trillions spent on researching a cure - any research done on finding causes and ways of prevention? Diet? Lifestyle? Soaking the planet in noxious chemicals, radiowaves, EMF's, etc as well as lifestyle can't be helping.....

Long term, surely that would be more beneficial..

But but but, that'd kill the economy.

Keeping a biological record of individual development would be a nice start. But hey, that'd kill the economy too. Shame really, coz the NSA (et al) infrastructure could house and process such data. Prevention.

[Akzle]

I'm with him! :Punk:

Trillions spent on researching a cure - any research done on finding causes and ways of prevention? Diet? Lifestyle? Soaking the planet in noxious chemicals, radiowaves, EMF's, etc as well as lifestyle can't be helping.....

Long term, surely that would be more beneficial..

silly cunt.

You cant SELL that.

[Katman]

Nah I am healthy as a horse..

Notable as always is the conspiracy theorists and knockers have nothing to say. They just want to think they sound clever by dissing me. But still, stupid is as stupid does. Pathetic.

Just keep on popping those pills Ed.

[Edbear]

But you'd never just post anecdotal evidence, shirley :scratch: :facepalm:

I was relating personal experience here. I have always used proper testing for accurate diagnosis and results of treatments including before and after tests. Diagnoses by Naturopaths and Homeopaths were followed up by my GP with tests to confirm or deny what they said. Invariably they were wrong despite their own "tests" using a variety of equipment.

Had we listened to one about our eldest daughter, she would have been extremely sick or worse!

[bogan]

I was relating
personal experience here.
I have always used proper testing


And how does your anecdotal evidence trump that of those you first complained about? I'm seeing a lot of similarities between this and your other bloody thread... only difference is you've transfused yourself to the other side of the fence in between :shifty:

[Edbear]

And how does your anecdotal evidence trump that of those you first complained about? I'm seeing a lot of similarities between this and your other bloody thread... only difference is you've transfused yourself to the other side of the fence in between :shifty:

You're doing it again aren't you?

[bogan]

You're doing it again aren't you?

Science, I never stop.

[BMWST?]

My daughter is involved with a NZ agency involved in research for cancer among other things.
I can tell you that this is a very very complex fight.This is stuff happening at a cellular level,and its embedded in our very make up.I can tell you they are looking at things that are very left feild indeed.
Cancer doesnt need any outside factors.New born babies can have it.Some say we all actually have it but for some reason some thing at a cellular level loses control and then you have "proper" cancer .

[James Deuce]

you are fucking kidding eh, the amount of ionising radiation, as k40 in bananas is fucking minimicronanosieverts. You get a higher dose walking downtown.(or sleeping under a smoke alarm)
also, taken as bananas it isnt bioaccumulative.

Nice try, but go jump.

I'm not following your point.

You're making a giant logic leap over a chasm of your own creation.

[rustyrobot]

You're making a giant logic leap over a chasm of your own creation.

The Evil Knievel of dialectics.

[Berries]

Or is it Kevin Knight of the dyslexics?

[rustyrobot]

Or is it Kevin Knight of the dyslexics?

The Kanye West of dyspeptics

[Laava]

Or is it the Winston Peters of Diuretics?

[Katiepie]

Not so sure if there will ever be a "cure" for Cancer. It is a complex beast, constantly adapting, changing, new lines of Cancer, new resistance and so many bloody forms of it that react in different ways to different treatments / elements in life.

Alternative therapies may have different benefits for different people, and the very same goes for the main stream Cancer drugs and treatments. Research is on-going on both sides of the line, and every person has such different views and beliefs on each.

I for one believe in research of any kind in the labs. And yes, they do research many alternative options in their work. I cycled with people who were alive last year purely due to the clinical trials and new drugs that had been developed to treat them and saw the results first hand. I rode along side survivors, cancer patients still fighting their fight, some who have stopped all mainstream treatment and made a decision to treat their illness with better lifestyles, diet, exercise, mind-set and herbal products. Some doing well, some not doing very well. And some I rode with aren't here today.

But even though we may never "cure" this ever-changing modern day plague, we are making some remarkable breakthroughs with better treatments, detection, prevention for some cancers. We now have (in NZ) an 80% survival rate for breast cancer, which used to be one of the biggest killers in the cancer world. Try telling some of those survivors that they would have made it through just fine with the natural products and healthy lifestyle. My aunty was one of the fittest and healthiest people I knew, competing in world champion rowing for years. She got hit not once, but twice with breast cancer - and beat it with the treatments now available.

We are making progress, and now have our general survival rate up to 51% in NZ, which is a long way ahead of where we were 10 years ago. This is why I cycled my arse off to raise $12,500 last year for Cancer Research, and why I am going to Brisbane this year to cycle the 200km again to raise more money.

Some are winning, some aren't. We've come a long way, we have even further to go. But they are trying, they are working hard to give more people a better chance, break the back of cancer. And I think they are closer than ever before at some real life changing results.

Whether treatment is natural or not, who cares. It's the result of staying alive that is the deciding factor in each case at the end of the day.

[caseye]

Hey there our! Katiepie.
You are one of those directly helping to get people better, your exploits of late are awe inspiring, despite some pretty big obstacles of your own.
Keep smiling Kiddo, great to see you .

[Maha]

I'm not following your point.

You're making a giant logic leap over a chasm of your own creation.

It's how he is able to sleep at night with a wee grin of contentment.

[TheDemonLord]

It's the result of staying alive that is the deciding factor in each case at the end of the day.

I find thats the best cure for cancer - not dieing from cancer ;)

[Banditbandit]

How willing would the drug companies be to test to see if blended banana skins and cinnamon could be a cure for cancer?
when you can get banana skins and cinnamon for cheap anywhere.

So - if you had cancer, would you want to be in the group that received normal cancer treatment (chemo etc) or the group that got the banana skin and cinnamon extract treatment, or the control group that got nothing? Volunteers swill be needed ..

[Edbear]

My daughter is involved with a NZ agency involved in research for cancer among other things.
I can tell you that this is a very very complex fight.This is stuff happening at a cellular level,and its embedded in our very make up.I can tell you they are looking at things that are very left feild indeed.
Cancer doesnt need any outside factors.New born babies can have it.Some say we all actually have it but for some reason some thing at a cellular level loses control and then you have "proper" cancer .

Good post!


So - if you had cancer, would you want to be in the group that received normal cancer treatment (chemo etc) or the group that got the banana skin and cinnamon extract treatment, or the control group that got nothing? Volunteers swill be needed ..

Excellent question! I could make a suggestion... or maybe not...

[Edbear]

Katiepie is one of the most qualified here to comment. Well put, love!

And I have no doubt that you will achieve your goal in Aus.

[James Deuce]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2015/03/23/394132747/why-the-war-on-cancer-hasnt-been-won

Please don't forget to debunk this article with a wad of of unsubstantiated pseudo-science and anecdote. Otherwise this post was in vain.

[James Deuce]

Just to make sure I'm not one eyed.

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/23/8264355/research-study-hype

[unstuck]

Tumeric and or olive oil. Healthy attitude and lots of laughs. Unless you already CHOOSE to hold the belief that cancer is incurable. Find ways to raise your vibration and that shit can't touch you, oh, and Ed's a plonker.:2thumbsup

[Swoop]

Find ways to raise your vibration...

You have to buy a fucking harley?

Cancer sounds more appealing.

[sugilite]

Science since ages ago.
The World is flat!
Wait, it is round and is the centre of the universe!
It all started with a big bang!
Nek minute.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/67503845/what-if-the-big-bang-never-really-happened
Stay tuned for tomorrows reality - bought to you by science!

[TheDemonLord]

Science since ages ago.
The World is flat!
Wait, it is round and is the centre of the universe!
It all started with a big bang!
Nek minute.
http://www.stuff.co.nz/science/67503845/what-if-the-big-bang-never-really-happened
Stay tuned for tomorrows reality - bought to you by science!

Science doing science and finding out that thanks to new data, our previous understanding of the world was either wrong or not 100% correct is still the best method that we have for explaining the natural world around us.

[sugilite]

Science doing science and finding out that thanks to new data, our previous understanding of the world was either wrong or not 100% correct is still the best method that we have for explaining the natural world around us.
It's those that treat current science as absolute gospel that make me laugh.
Humankind - Overrating their intelligence since ages ago.

[R650R]

Do not misunderstand my response to R650R - in general I support alternatives to the over-drugged, over-surgical contemporary medical word - it's a black art when you look into it ...

I'm definitely in favour of alternatives. Our people had, and still have, plenty of alternatives ...

It's just that R650R does not have a good argument .. it's too full of holes .. and the only alternatives he offered for cancer treatment are die at home or die in hospital ..

I was just offering a sweeping generalisation. Don't get too detailed these days otherwise have to reply to some multi quoting fool taking it all out of context.

Back to topic, one fact is that Cancer is endemic and increasing exponentially. EVERYONE these days has been affected by someone close dealing with cancer. People observe what happens to those taking conventional treatments and those using alternative methods. Both have their merits in certain circumstances but you cant dismiss alternative therapies when so many people stand by them.

[sugilite]

Back to topic, one fact is that Cancer is endemic and increasing exponentially. EVERYONE these days has been affected by someone close dealing with cancer. People observe what happens to those taking conventional treatments and those using alternative methods. Both have their merits in certain circumstances but you cant dismiss alternative therapies when so many people stand by them.

I reckon you are right about there being merits to both alternative and orthodox methodologies. I believe both could and should work hand in hand in some (but not all) cases. Thank goodness I have no direct experience with cancer. However the combination of my passion for motorcycling and a certain amount of over exuberance at times has allowed me the opportunity to gather a fair amount of experience with both orthodox medical practices and alternative methods.
In one such case I broke my femur in 4 places, one of them being an x-ray pimping spiral fracture. I intuitively declined painkillers after the operation and for the following 5 weeks I spent in traction at the hospital.
I was very positive, positive about wanting to get out of hospital and ride that is lol.
The guy in the bed next to me broke his femur in one place, was there before me, and still there after I left. He had the attitude, "I'm always gong to feel pain, I'll have a permanent limp yadda, yadda". I was out in record time and blasting around on an RM125 motocross bike complete with my leg still in a cast. I saw that guy a year later, and yes, he did indeed have a limp and the pain he had been expecting.
I believe that the combination of no pain killers (Painkillers for the most part mask the pain message getting back to the brain, thus the body does not take the self healing side of things as important as it may of otherwise) and a positive state of mind being key in my speedy recovery. Would I want a herbalist to set my leg? Hell no, give me that orthodox surgeon who did a awesome job any day! Did I want the orthodox pharmaceutical pain killers? For my case, No.
Alternative medicine to a point seems to have a positive effect on well - keeping the mind positive. Very important to my way of thinking. Room for both me thinks, as long as we are allowed to continue to make the personal choice.

[Katman]

Did I want the orthodox pharmaceutical pain killers? For my case, No.


I'm sure Ed will have them.

[ellipsis]

...I have a tested and alternate treatment for burns...1st, 2nd or 3rd degree...have proven it works on a few occasions...everybody laughs when I tell them, some even get edlike...mends any of the above degrees in 20 to 30% of the time...no doctors or nurses...I found it by accident...what do I win...

[Akzle]

rongoa wins, all over shit.


Science doing science and finding out that thanks to new data, our previous understanding of the world was either wrong or not 100% correct is still the best method that we have for explaining the natural world around us.
why do you feel the need to explain shit?
shit is happening.
it's been happening as long as i can remember.
if old people are to be believed, it's been happening as long as they can remember.
fair fucken bet it's going to continue happening.

science is god for white cracker jew cunts. it's just another fucken theory.

and how then, does it make you feel, when science can only arbitrarily name, but not describe, observe or measure 90% of what stuff is (or, isn't...)?


...I have a tested and alternate treatment for burns...1st, 2nd or 3rd degree...have proven it works on a few occasions...everybody laughs when I tell them, some even get edlike...mends any of the above degrees in 20 to 30% of the time...no doctors or nurses...I found it by accident...what do I win...
depends of if it's called aloe or not. otherwise someone's beat you to it.

[Banditbandit]

but you cant dismiss alternative therapies when so many people stand by them.

Yes I can. I never accept "50 million blowflies can't be wrong" type of arguments ...

And don't take that out of context either - I'm just saying that many people supporting an idea does not make it true ...

[TheDemonLord]

It's those that treat current science as absolute gospel that make me laugh.

Well, Hang on a sec there:

Someone does Science and Publishes a Paper in a Peer Reviewed Journal
Other Scientists (the aforementioned Peers) then attempt to tear the paper to shreds - looking for any flaw/fault in the experiment
If no flaw or fault can be found, then the other scientists attempt to re-create the experiment to confirm the results

If the results are confirmed science then says:

Based on this evidence, this theory is the current best-fit model to explain what we observed in our experiment.

Then at some point later, new Evidence might be observed that either completely contradicts or slightly alters the previous best-fit model
Science then attempts to do more research to come up with a new best-fit model, based on the evidence observed.

To give an example - you believe in Gravity right? but there is observed data (Quantum mechanics) that fly completely in the face of our current theory of Gravity. We know its not 100% right, but for all other interactions (except at the Quantum level) it works. Does it mean that Gravity doesn't exist?

Too often people say ' Oh Science changes its mind so often, so how can it be trusted?' but always when science changes - it is based on Evidence (the Observed results from an experiment)

And as an aside - Flat Earth and Earth being the centre of the universe were both views that came from Religon, not Science, in the end, it was Science that proved both were wrong.

[TheDemonLord]

why do you feel the need to explain shit?

The alarming number of scientifically illiterate people, making 'scientific' claims in the public domain for a start.


science is god for white cracker jew cunts. it's just another fucken theory.

and how then, does it make you feel, when science can only arbitrarily name, but not describe, observe or measure 90% of what stuff is (or, isn't...)?

It fills me with wonder at the depths of our ignorance and joy at the prospect of new discovery.

[ellipsis]

depends of if it's called aloe or not. otherwise someone's beat you to it.


...that shit from a succulent...nah...that's about as effective as water...

[sugilite]

Well, Hang on a sec there:

Someone does Science and Publishes a Paper in a Peer Reviewed Journal
Other Scientists (the aforementioned Peers) then attempt to tear the paper to shreds - looking for any flaw/fault in the experiment
If no flaw or fault can be found, then the other scientists attempt to re-create the experiment to confirm the results

and more.....

Hang on a sec there:
You seem a bit defensive.
I'm sure you are familiar with what the word absolute means.
You use my flat earth and centre of the universe examples as being born of religious methodology and fair enough.
However, I notice you kind of forgot to mention what I said next.

So what happens if the hadron collider disproves the big bang theory? That would be a pretty freaking big change, yes?
Big changes in the scientific knowledge base can and do occur.
So it makes me wonder why you are being so defensive about my earlier statement? "It's those that treat current science as absolute gospel that make me laugh."
It would appear to me that your argument to my quote is in fact backing up what I are in effect saying. Science from the past through to the present is hardly an "absolute".

[mashman]

Shoulda left science to groups of guys in garages.

[TheDemonLord]

Hang on a sec there:
You seem a bit defensive.

I sure am, because statements like that normally precede someone trying to push a product/idea with absolutely no verifiable evidence to support it, and using the inherent changeable nature of science (in the face of new evidence) to justify it: 'Oh well Science doesn't know everything so therefore my poison Ivy Powder will cure you of your ills'



I'm sure you are familiar with what the word absolute means.
You use my flat earth and centre of the universe examples as being born of religious methodology and fair enough.
However, I notice you kind of forgot to mention what I said next.

Mainly because the explanation is too long for a witty short reply - but since you asked:

The big bang theory was accepted after an accidental discover by 2 astrologers when they were doing an experiment. Initially they thought the readings were incorrect because no matter what part of the night sky they pointed their equipment to, the same reading was present - however after many checks and peer review, they discovered that they had found some form of background radiation that was present at every point measurable from earth. Since such radiation couldn't originate from a single entity (like a pulsar or Black hole) then it must have been formed at the same time that space was formed (in order to occupy every part of space) so from that (and a few other things - my memory is a little hazy, guess I will be reading up on the Big Bang Theory as I haven't in a while) formed the evidence for the Big Bang Theory.


So what happens if the hadron collider disproves the big bang theory? That would be a pretty freaking big change, yes?
Big changes in the scientific knowledge base can and do occur.

It would be awesome - and all the Big Bang deniers/Religious groups/fucktards/conspiracy theorists would all say 'See, we told you so' except for one small and very key fact.

(since the Big Bang is still the current peer reviewed theory - I will write this from the PoV that is still stands as CERN has yet to publish a peer reviewed paper to contrary)

They either denied the current evidence used to support the theory or failed to produce their own verifiable, testable evidence to refute it.

If the new Theory is right - it will be SCIENCE that searches for and provides the new evidence that will force us to change our viewpoints (instead of clinging hopelessly to old Dogma)


So it makes me wonder why you are being so defensive about my earlier statement? "It's those that treat current science as absolute gospel that make me laugh."
It would appear to me that your argument to my quote is in fact backing up what I are in effect saying. Science from the past through to the present is hardly an "absolute".

If everyone on the planet understood the concept of how and why science never has any absolutes (Except C - hur hur hur) and didn't use its lack of absolutes to push whatever crap they are trying to peddle - then sure, I would have no reason to get defensive, unfortunately, most people seem to have trouble grasping
the concept of a Theory: "If Evolution is true, why is it just a Theory"
the concept of testable, repeatable Evidence based conclusions: "The Bible says its so, so you must be wrong"

As a final aside - we know that the Theory of Gravity isn't 100% correct, it doesn't work at all levels of Physics and we don't know why - we have the Rainbow Gravity theory, Quantum loop gravity theory, String theory etc.

yet our flawed knowledge of Gravity is sufficient for launch satellites into orbit (which not even you moon landing deniers can deny) - so yes Science has no absolutes, but there is no other system that has produced better results for humanity and has an inbuilt error checking and correcting mechanism.

/rant

[sugilite]

so yes Science has no absolutes.
/rant

All that, to in the end agree with what I said in my one sentence quote. :blink:

[Akzle]

...they discovered that they had found some form of background radiation that was present at every point measurable from earth. Since such radiation couldn't originate from a single entity (like a pulsar or Black hole) then it must have been formed at the same time that space was formed (in order to occupy every part of space)

and what do you base all that on?? m0ar science.

if the premise is flawed, anything built upon it can't be any less incorrect.

what if: what appears to be measurable as "background radiation" is actually some product of that 90& of "something/nothing" that they don't know what is?
lawdy knows there's a fuckload of not-very-much out there

what if: they're not actually measuring fucken anything and that "measurable from earth" is actually "experienced by the men interpreting the machines thereon"?

what if: that experience is similar to the god-head attained by monks who meditate for decades? or a moslem visiting mecca?
repeatable? go for it!
verifiable? you can't measure elsewise!
peer reviewed, absolutely.
science? :lol:

[Edbear]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2015/03/23/394132747/why-the-war-on-cancer-hasnt-been-won

Please don't forget to debunk this article with a wad of of unsubstantiated pseudo-science and anecdote. Otherwise this post was in vain.


Just to make sure I'm not one eyed.

http://www.vox.com/2015/3/23/8264355/research-study-hype

What's the bet virtually nobody read those links? Most posters simply want to spout their ignorance it would seem.

Both links are to be taken seriously, but that won't go down well with the alt.cancer/anti-science/conspiracy theorists.

[Katman]

What's the bet virtually nobody read those links? Most posters simply want to spout their ignorance it would seem.

Both links are to be taken seriously, but that won't go down well with the alt.cancer/anti-science/conspiracy theorists.

Truly Ed - to repeatedly try scoring points arguing 'cancer beats conspiracy theorists' marks you for the fucking repulsive character you clearly are.

You're fucking disgusting.

[TheDemonLord]

and what do you base all that on?? m0ar science.

if the premise is flawed, anything built upon it can't be any less incorrect.

what if: what appears to be measurable as "background radiation" is actually some product of that 90& of "something/nothing" that they don't know what is?
lawdy knows there's a fuckload of not-very-much out there

what if: they're not actually measuring fucken anything and that "measurable from earth" is actually "experienced by the men interpreting the machines thereon"?

what if: that experience is similar to the god-head attained by monks who meditate for decades? or a moslem visiting mecca?
repeatable? go for it!
verifiable? you can't measure elsewise!
peer reviewed, absolutely.
science? :lol:

Show me another system that produces the results that Science has and we can argue about the philosophy of Science.

[Akzle]

Show me another system that produces the results that Science has and we can argue about the philosophy of Science.

rastafarianism has it pegged.
'its just, like, you know, stuff. man.'

and, what fuken results?

[Laava]

Truly Ed - to repeatedly try scoring points arguing 'cancer beats conspiracy theorists' marks you for the fucking repulsive character you clearly are.

You're fucking disgusting.

Here Ed, you got what you were after!
Are you guys brothers with a bit of a barrier between?

[Berries]

Katiepie is one of the most qualified here to comment.
How the hell do you work that one out?


No offence to Mrs Pie, but you haven't got a clue about what others on here have experienced or are indeed experiencing.

[yokel]

Show me another system that produces the results that Science has and we can argue about the philosophy of Science.

There are two types of science, good science and bad science.

https://youtu.be/JKHUaNAxsTg?t=9m45s

[caseye]

How the hell do you work that one out?


No offence to Mrs Pie, but you haven't got a clue about what others on here have experienced or are indeed experiencing.

Now berries, it's Miss Pie! an she is well and truly qualified to talk on this subject.
But that doesn't take away your distrust of our Ed Bear.
I understand that.
Taking you to task? no.
Putting you straight, Not likely, not for me to say, but knowing what I do of our Katiepie, please don't, involve her in your slagging off of Ed, he's more than capable of looking after hisself!

[oldrider]

Show me another system that produces the results that Science has and we can argue about the philosophy of Science.

Try "nature" - it was here before we got here - probably/hopefully still be here when we are all gone! :niceone:

[mashman]

Try "nature" - it was here before we got here - probably/hopefully still be here when we are all gone! :niceone:

+1... what else is science trying to understand?

[Katman]

Try "nature" - it was here before we got here - probably/hopefully still be here when we are all gone! :niceone:

<img src="https://trinityeyes.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/ommmm.jpg"/>

That's doG, man.

[yokel]

<img src="https://trinityeyes.files.wordpress.com/2009/08/ommmm.jpg"/>

That's doG, man.

more on dogmatic science,

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mR1SLQwHDog" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[TheDemonLord]

Try "nature" - it was here before we got here - probably/hopefully still be here when we are all gone! :niceone:

99% of every species that ever lived is extinct - sounds like a pretty shitty system....

[Edbear]

Here Ed, you got what you were after!
Are you guys brothers with a bit of a barrier between?

Haha! He just continues to prove me right about him. He never posts anything on the subject itself. He exists solely to diss me. I'm not sure what the attraction is but for some reason I am irresistible to him and he follows me everywhere like a sick puppy.


How the hell do you work that one out?

No offence to Mrs Pie, but you haven't got a clue about what others on here have experienced or are indeed experiencing.

Spoken as one who judges in ignorance. You know neither me nor Katie.

[unstuck]

HOW WHOLE TURMERIC HEALS THE DAMAGED BRAIN. http://myscienceacademy.org/2014/10/03/how-whole-turmeric-heals-the-damaged-brain/

I think you need to eat a truckload Ed.:niceone:

[BuzzardNZ]

I'm not sure what the attraction is but for some reason I am irresistible to him and he follows me everywhere like a sick puppy.



You seem to have a number of loyal KB groupies Ed, what's your secret?

[bogan]

Spoken as one who judges in ignorance. You know neither me nor Katie.

I think his point was that you don't know everyone else, just as everyone else doesn't know you or katie. Ie, he knows his own ignorance, you still seem to be judging from yours...

[Katman]

HOW WHOLE TURMERIC HEALS THE DAMAGED BRAIN. http://myscienceacademy.org/2014/10/03/how-whole-turmeric-heals-the-damaged-brain/

I think you need to eat a truckload Ed.:niceone:

Cayenne Pepper is another remarkable spice.

As with Turmeric though, it's not patented by a pharmaceutical company so I can't imagine Ed being at all interested.

[Banditbandit]

Does it mean that Gravity doesn't exist?




No it doesn't mean that Gravity does not exist - but "Gravity" is just a word ... how do you know it actually has any connection to reality??? It appears to .. but it is just the best explanation at this time ... it may not have any connection to "truth" ...




yet our flawed knowledge of Gravity is sufficient for launch satellites into orbit (which not even you moon landing deniers can deny) - so yes Science has no absolutes, but there is no other system that has produced better results for humanity and has an inbuilt error checking and correcting mechanism.

/rant

So - you are basing the acceptance of Science on a Use value .. or maybe a value judgement ??? Science is based on a value judgement ???


Show me another system that produces the results that Science has and we can argue about the philosophy of Science.

:rofl: You seem to be accepting Lakatos' position ... the test of a science research project is whether it is producing results or not. That's definitely a use value/value judgement basis ... even Lakatos admits there is no way to prove "truth" ..

I'm with Feyerabend ... there is no real truth basis for science .. anything goes ...

[Edbear]

You seem to have a number of loyal KB groupies Ed, what's your secret?

I dunno, mate. It would be nice if these pathetic individuals would actually post something of substance on the topic.


I think his point was that you don't know everyone else, just as everyone else doesn't know you or katie. Ie, he knows his own ignorance, you still seem to be judging from yours...

Do please, point out any inaccuracies in my posts. Something those in opposition to me can't seem to do. You know, like quote a post and analyse it. In your case, especially, I would expect you to use peer reviewed scientific data.

[bogan]

Do please, point out any inaccuracies in my posts. Something those in opposition to me can't seem to do. You know, like quote a post and analyse it. In your case, especially, I would expect you to use peer reviewed scientific data.

I just did, why not start by addressing that.

You've not posted anything of substance that is worthy of a peer review rebuttal, all you've done is slag off conspiracy theorists for the same shit you do to justify your cultist ways.

[bogan]

No it doesn't mean that Gravity does not exist - but "Gravity" is just a word ... how do you know it actually has any connection to reality??? It appears to .. but it is just the best explanation at this time ... it may not have any connection to "truth" ...



So - you are basing the acceptance of Science on a Use value .. or maybe a value judgement ??? Science is based on a value judgement ???



:rofl: You seem to be accepting Lakatos' position ... the test of a science research project is whether it is producing results or not. That's definitely a use value/value judgement basis ... even Lakatos admits there is no way to prove "truth" ..

I'm with Feyerabend ... there is no real truth basis for science .. anything goes ...

Don't be a cunt, science is facts in evolution, since omnipotence is not an option it is the best we've got; and it's a fucking good one considering how much we've done with it. Image just how loud you'd have to yell in 'pre-science' days to talk to me from there.

If you ask me, jesus died to start the scientific revolution.

[caspernz]

The one overlooked aspect in all of this is state of mind. Plenty of examples on KB that cover the entire spectrum :shutup:

[Katman]

The one overlooked aspect in all of this is state of mind.

I think Unstuck covered that back on page 5.

[Edbear]

More for the conspiracy theorists to chew on.

I was with another alternative therapies advocate over the weekend, and as soon as he started talking I pegged him as a conspiracy theorist. I was right of course as I have yet to find an exponent of alternative medicine who claims the drug companies are squashing cures for cancer, who isn't a conspiracy theorist.

However, what seems so bleeding obvious that these people can't undrstand is that in every claim of a therapy that "definitely cures cancer, and there are hundreds of cases proving it!" Not one requires drug companies to develop it.

All examples, like Black Salve, infusions of Vitamin. C and so on are freely available as evidenced by the sheer number of sufferers trying them!

If these alternative therapies genuinely cured cancer, everyone would be using them and getting cured without needing the conventional therapies like Radiation, surgery and Chemo.

My visitor claimed that only 2% survive beyond 5 years with conventional treatment but the figure was 30% for alternative therapies. Absolute bollox of course.

In short, if there existed a cure for cancer, cancer would be cured. I guarantee you, though, the conspiracy theorists/anti drug exponents will not be able to accept this. Just like any conspiracy theory, they will never change their blind minds.

Isn't it funny just how far from the OP the thread has become? It's like few have actually read this and understood what it says so plainly.

Sorry, of course! This is KB after all... :shutup:

There has been some really good posting by members on here that should be taken note of, but a few plainly betray their incomprehension to all.

[Paul in NZ]

The irony being not trusting science to produce good drugs but lusting after the latest and greatest carbon fibre dripping, expensive alloy and ceramic built, multi cylinder high tech bikes with sophisticated electronics and fuel injection... Science had no part in that shit....

[Edbear]

Tumeric and or olive oil. Healthy attitude and lots of laughs. Unless you already CHOOSE to hold the belief that cancer is incurable. Find ways to raise your vibration and that shit can't touch you, oh, and Ed's a plonker.:2thumbsup

Unstuck lives a charmed life, nothing can touch him because he's in tune with the Universe. His vibrator ensures this... :rolleyes:

[bogan]

Isn't it funny just how far from the OP the thread has become?

It is still completely on track, you started a thread trying to bash some of the stupid members on this site (as most Edthreads do), now one of the most stupid here is getting bashed (it's you, in case that went over your head). Justice has been done. Science continues.

[Katman]

Isn't it funny just how far from the OP the thread has become? It's like few have actually read this and understood what it says so plainly.

Sorry, of course! This is KB after all... :shutup:

There has been some really good posting by members on here that should be taken note of, but a few plainly betray their incomprehension to all.

Are you saying that absolutely no-one has ever experienced any benefit from any form of alternative cancer treatments?

[TheDemonLord]

No it doesn't mean that Gravity does not exist - but "Gravity" is just a word ... how do you know it actually has any connection to reality??? It appears to .. but it is just the best explanation at this time ... it may not have any connection to "truth" ...

Oh this old Chestnut:

Fine - The Truth here is the physical manifestations of shit that happens.

We created a word for the Shit that happens
We then (by science) created a model for predicting how Shit happens with reasonably accurate results.

It doesn't matter by what word we refer to a phenomenon...


So - you are basing the acceptance of Science on a Use value .. or maybe a value judgement ??? Science is based on a value judgement ???

Science is our best attempt at explaining and investigating the Shit that happens.




:rofl: You seem to be accepting Lakatos' position ... the test of a science research project is whether it is producing results or not. That's definitely a use value/value judgement basis ... even Lakatos admits there is no way to prove "truth" ..

I'm with Feyerabend ... there is no real truth basis for science .. anything goes ...

A research project will always produce results - Science is trying to understand the results. The results happen regardless.

[Banditbandit]

Oh this old Chestnut:

It may be old - but it is not a "chestnut" ... it's the basis of post-modernism, building on an idea from Kant ... and applies equally to science - Kuhn, Feyerabend and Lakatos all agree that science is not based on a truth value - science is based in the discourse - whoever has the best argument wins .. science has a strict set of rules that govern what evidence counts in the argument, but it is an argument nonetheless.


Fine - The Truth here is the physical manifestations of shit that happens.


There are two basic assumptions there - and they are assumptions .. 1) there is a world external to us and 2) we can know the world external to us. (Read Sire for a start.)




We created a word for the Shit that happens

Read Richard Rorty's The Lignuistic Turn ... there is no way that we can show that the word is actually describing anything real.



We then (by science) created a model for predicting how Shit happens with reasonably accurate results.

It doesn't matter by what word we refer to a phenomenon...

No it doesn't matter what word we use .. but the way we observe phenomena is suspect ... and the way we break up the world into parts which we then label may or may not have anything to do with the actual reality.



Science is our best attempt at explaining and investigating the Shit that happens.

Yes ... that's basing science on a use value - science is useful .. is it an accurate description of reality ??? Who the hell knows ..




A research project will always produce results - Science is trying to understand the results. The results happen regardless.

Atomic theory was in abeyance as a research project because it did not produce results for a couple of hundred years ... then along comes the end of the 19th and beginning of the 20th Century and Hello - atomic theory is back on the table and it is it ...

[Edbear]

It is still completely on track, you started a thread trying to bash some of the stupid members on this site (as most Edthreads do), now one of the most stupid here is getting bashed (it's you, in case that went over your head). Justice has been done. Science continues.

Lol! Here's a classic example of incomprehension in action! :lol:


Are you saying that absolutely no-one has ever experienced any benefit from any form of alternative cancer treatments?

For those like yourself who are one of the severest sufferers, if you had actually read the post, I have neither said nor implied any such thing.

[bogan]

Lol! Here's a classic example of incomprehension in action! :lol:

Ah, you're going for the other 'track' only you can see, which is that the thread is about showing how clever you are. Just like your tansfusion one, this too, is pointless drivel.

In any case I see you are providing examples of substance-less posts; and showing how to dodge the questions that you asked be put to you (see post 114). How about you save yourself some trouble, and face, and just skip to the bit where you stop replying to my posts forever (again) :laugh:

[Katman]

For those like yourself who are one of the severest sufferers, if you had actually read the post, I have neither said nor implied any such thing.

You appear to be rubbishing any form of treatment that doesn't include chemo or radiation.

[Edbear]

Much as I try, and of course no-one is more trying than me, to clarify my views, some people just can't seem to get it.

I have explained my opinion on the difference between naturopathy and homeopathy and my views on placebos.

Much of the medicines we have and use come from nature by way of isolating the effective ingredients and synthesising them for mass production in order to meet demand. This too, costs megabucks for the drug companies. I have given examples of natural remedies that I know from experience and observation do work for some people.

My position on placebos is that for some people they seem to have a benefit. So if a placebo helps you, whether medically or otherwise, why not?

[buggerit]

More for the conspiracy theorists to chew on.

I was with another alternative therapies advocate over the weekend, and as soon as he started talking I pegged him as a conspiracy theorist. I was right of course as I have yet to find an exponent of alternative medicine who claims the drug companies are squashing cures for cancer, who isn't a conspiracy theorist.

However, what seems so bleeding obvious that these people can't undrstand is that in every claim of a therapy that "definitely cures cancer, and there are hundreds of cases proving it!" Not one requires drug companies to develop it.

All examples, like Black Salve, infusions of Vitamin. C and so on are freely available as evidenced by the sheer number of sufferers trying them!

If these alternative therapies genuinely cured cancer, everyone would be using them and getting cured without needing the conventional therapies like Radiation, surgery and Chemo.

My visitor claimed that only 2% survive beyond 5 years with conventional treatment but the figure was 30% for alternative therapies. Absolute bollox of course.

In short, if there existed a cure for cancer, cancer would be cured. I guarantee you, though, the conspiracy theorists/anti drug exponents will not be able to accept this. Just like any conspiracy theory, they will never change their blind minds.

Suggest you "research":lol:glasshouses/stones

[Katman]

My position on placebos is that for some people they seem to have a benefit. So if a placebo helps you, whether medically or otherwise, why not?

Sounds like a classic Ed back-track to me.

[Edbear]

You appear to be rubbishing any form of treatment that doesn't include chemo or radiation.

People tend to see what they want to see and many are very quick to jump to erroneous conclusions based on prejudice.

I say what I mean and you need only to read what I actually say.

[Edbear]

Suggest you "research":lol:glasshouses/stones

I suggest you read the words, pointing at each word to see if you can understand it.


Sounds like a back-track to me.

See my previous post.

[Edbear]

Ah, you're going for the other 'track' only you can see, which is that the thread is about showing how clever you are. Just like your tansfusion one, this too, is pointless drivel.

In any case I see you are providing examples of substance-less posts; and showing how to dodge the questions that you asked be put to you (see post 114). How about you save yourself some trouble, and face, and just skip to the bit where you stop replying to my posts forever (again) :laugh:

Sorry, but it is fun to show you up. That post was another example of your inability to read and comprehend. I doubt you could go through the OP word by word and get even close to comprehending it.

[Paul in NZ]

Do alternative treatment options work? Well define an alternative treatment option?

If you use an alternative treatment to the exclusion of scientific options you may end up with a very poor result. If I go back via self-interest to diabetes for a model to explain myself.. I get by pretty well on insulin. My blood sugars are generally OK and my control is in the excellent bracket…

However – insulin isn’t the only strategy I use. I take drugs to manage my blood pressure as even a relatively normal blood pressure can cause me issues. I do a LOT of exercise just to stay in the normal zone. I eat properly and try very hard to restrain my baser urges of gluttony etc. It all works together… Just relying on insulin and pills won’t work.

Yet no doctor ever prescribed exercise or could tell me how to go about it (I need to constantly balance insulin with sugar as too much / not enough of either is disastrous) as a type 1…

So some of my practise is a little ‘experimental’ and un conventional.

But it works…

I have tried to help some along the path I have forged for myself. I’m not a teacher and to be fair the pupils were in the mess they were in because of multiple issues bought on by shitty life choices so my fail rate is pretty high. What most wanted was a pill that would negate all the bad things about diabetes and leave them free to continue not exercising and eating/drinking badly. Yeah – not gunna happen. If you don’t transform yourself to act better all the drug will do is delay the horrible consequences (and they are truly horrible)…. If you develop type 2 diabetes because you have a shitty diet and drink too much the drugs wont help if you don’t mend your ways… You really need to expand your knowledge and find a way that works for you because the tools in the doctors tool box are pretty limited. Call something alternative if you must but if it addresses and issue use it.. Just have a plan B too…

[buggerit]

I suggest you read the words, pointing at each word to see if you can understand it.


.

No thanks, I had a good education, but if it works for you, by all means.

[bogan]

Sorry, but it is fun to show you up. That post was another example of your inability to read and comprehend. I doubt you could go through the OP word by word and get even close to comprehending it.

:killingme you keep telling yourself that Ed.

I comprehended it just fine on both levels, that is why instead of trying to correct my interpretation of it you just throw insults about; simply put, you can't correct me because I am correct. Just like in the battery thread, just like in the RR thread, just like in every other Ed-thread; I am correct and you favor insults over enlightenment.

[Edbear]

No thanks, I had a good education, but if it works for you, by all means.

What seems to be real hard for some is to understand that I was observing that I have yet to find an alt.cancer exponent who was also anti drug companies who wasn't a conspiracy theorist.

I also pointed out that the drug companies cannot squash alternative treatments since they are freely available.

I also pointed out that if these treatments worked as claimed, everyone would be using them and being cured.

How difficult is this to understand?

[oldrider]

99% of every species that ever lived is extinct - sounds like a pretty shitty system....

That would make some sense if you factored in time - how many billion years are we talking? - Western medicine time? - nice try! :shifty:

[TheDemonLord]

That would make some sense if you factored in time - how many billion years are we talking? - Western medicine time? - nice try! :shifty:

Not creatures, but entire species.

[bogan]

What seems to be real hard for some is to understand that I was observing that I have yet to find an alt.cancer exponent who was also anti drug companies who wasn't a conspiracy theorist.

I also pointed out that the drug companies cannot squash alternative treatments since they are freely available.

I also pointed out that if these treatments worked as claimed, everyone would be using them and being cured.

How difficult is this to understand?

I think everyone gets that, perhaps you are missing what others are trying to add to the discussion. Like depolarising your views. Ie, it is completely reasonable to be an 'alt.cancer' exponent without being anti-drug company. Lets face it, anti drug-co is by definition a conspiracy theory. So you're trying to show everyone how smart you are because you can't find a conspiracy theorist who isn't a conspiracy theorist :blink: Maybe that is why others ignore your drivel and add to the discussion instead; and why others just point out your drivel for what it is.

[oldrider]

Not creatures, but entire species.

We will be on that list before long - in real (billion) time - we haven't been here long as it is! - enjoy! :lol:

[BuzzardNZ]

It is still completely on track, you started a thread trying to bash some of the stupid members on this site (as most Edthreads do), now one of the most stupid here is getting bashed (it's you, in case that went over your head). Justice has been done. Science continues.

This particular EdThread's looking a bit threadbare.

[Edbear]

This particular EdThread's looking a bit threadbare.

As usually happens the intelligent respondents have mostly said their piece and a couple of prejudiced knockers have started to get personal. It's about this time I lay off for a while.

KB works to a general Formula.

[Edbear]

That would make some sense if you factored in time - how many billion years are we talking? - Western medicine time? - nice try! :shifty:

Time is of the essence! We must hurry!

[mashman]

We will be on that list before long - in real (billion) time - we haven't been here long as it is! - enjoy! :lol:

New Ancient “Mystery Human” Species Identified Shakes Up The Theory Of Evolution (http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/03/01/new-ancient-mystery-human-species-identified-shakes-up-the-theory-of-evolution/)... Don't believe the hype... coz we've still got several million miles of the planet to excavate and as we only seem to find new things when we dig, claiming that we haven't been here long is kinda like, well, are you a scientist? :shifty:

[bogan]

It's about this time I lay off for a while.

KB works to a general Formula.

Called it.

It does, almost like clockwork a bikeless cultist will turn up and make a thread all about his own views, which then get trounced for the drivel they are as can only respond with insults it is a very one sided match; then he fucks off, tail between legs until next time.

[BuzzardNZ]

As usually happens the intelligent respondents have mostly said their piece and a couple of prejudiced knockers have started to get personal. It's about this time I lay off for a while.

KB works to a general Formula.

I've seen the formula before, it goes like this:

1) you start a thread.
2) people reply to it and sometimes you don't like their posts.
3) you pack a sad and run off and lick your wounds.
4) After a while all the medication you take makes you forget what happened to cause 3) and you start at 1) again.

QED.

[Edbear]

I've seen the formula before, it goes like this:

1) you start a thread.
2) people reply to it and sometimes you don't like their posts.
3) you pack a sad and run off and lick your wounds.
4) After a while all the medication you take makes you forget what happened to cause 3) and you start at 1) again.

QED.

Now if you actually followed the thread it goes like this.

I start a thread. Sometimes in seriousness, sometimes for amusement.

People post a variety of views and many are from intelligent members and I acknowledge them by both comment and bling and if appropriate by PM.

My erstwhile opponents who follow me around like sick puppies start posting idiotic and derogatory comments that betray their low IQ's and blind prejudice and I respond accordingly. For my own amusement mainly.

The intelligencia get bored of it and after one or two take the idiots to task, generally leave off.

That leaves the poor idiots to get ever more pathetically personal and I, after playing with them for a while lay off as well.

A couple of serious members may continue to address each other ignoring what is going on but the thread dies away for a future time.

[bogan]

Now if you actually followed the thread it goes like this.

I start a thread posting idiotic and derogatory comments

:whistle: well you got part of it right

I mean seriously, how is congratulating yourself for finding a conspiracy theorist (anti-drug co) who then turns out to be a conspiracy theorist not idiotic?

[oldrider]

New Ancient “Mystery Human” Species Identified Shakes Up The Theory Of Evolution (http://www.collective-evolution.com/2015/03/01/new-ancient-mystery-human-species-identified-shakes-up-the-theory-of-evolution/)... Don't believe the hype... coz we've still got several million miles of the planet to excavate and as we only seem to find new things when we dig, claiming that we haven't been here long is kinda like, well, are you a scientist? :shifty:

Well - I watched a program on the earth and how long it's been here and the human known timescale is but a blink in comparison!

I don't have to be anything but a viewer to follow their learned drift on that one - still - there is always a chance of further evidence! :rolleyes:

[Katman]

What seems to be real hard for some is to understand that I was observing that I have yet to find an alt.cancer exponent who was also anti drug companies who wasn't a conspiracy theorist.


So, in other words, you're simply using the subject of cancer as a means of having a personal little dig at conspiracy theorists.

What a winner.

:tugger:

[buggerit]

Time is of the essence! We must hurry!

Darwin waits for no one

[Katman]

Time is of the essence! We must hurry!

Hurry to do what? - Save the planet?

You have repeatedly stated that it is never going to happen.

Once again you contradict yourself.

[mashman]

Well - I watched a program on the earth and how long it's been here and the human known timescale is but a blink in comparison!

I don't have to be anything but a viewer to follow their learned drift on that one - still - there is always a chance of further evidence! :rolleyes:

I'm waiting to ask an alien, or Slartibartfast, how old Earth and humans are before truly caring which one is correct :D Could it be that WE are older than the Earth? The bugga is, could I trust the alien who knows to give me the correct information :shifty:

lol.

[Katiepie]

How the hell do you work that one out?


No offence to Mrs Pie, but you haven't got a clue about what others on here have experienced or are indeed experiencing.

No offence taken. I never said that I did know what others on here have experienced or are experiencing. This is simply my view from what I have learned from others around me over the past 3 years within the Cancer world, some who didn't win, and now some who have wont their battle, including two people who have just been cleared of all Cancer from a 6+ year battle with Leukaemia - many of whom have used both "alternative" treatments and "mainstream" treatments. Of course I'm no expert - just someone learning from others best I can and doing something in a small way to try and help in a way I feel appropriate. Also spoken a fair bit with a few who are actively working in the Cancer research field.

I have so much to learn, I am certainly not smart enough to get much of a grasp on it, but I do not have a closed mind and listen a lot to different views to better understand the different parts of the hideous world that is Cancer. I never want to be an "expert". Its far too complex for me to ever really understand. I just want learn, and help those who I can in my own world. Cancer is heavily in my family - there is a very high chance I too could have it one day.

[Banditbandit]

I'm waiting to ask an alien, or Slartibartfast, .

If you get to talk to Slartibartfast he will tell you that humans came to this planet from Golgafrincham .. and therefore much older than the Earth itself ... (and, of course, disturbed the mice's computer programming )

[TheDemonLord]

If you get to talk to Slartibartfast he will tell you that humans came to this planet from Golgafrincham .. and therefore much older than the Earth itself ... (and, of course, disturbed the mice's computer programming )

Fourty Two

[Akzle]

Do please, point out any inaccuracies in my posts.
start here (http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/search.php?do=finduser&userid=4262&contenttype=vBForum_Post&showposts=1)

The irony being not trusting science to produce good drugs but lusting after the latest and greatest carbon fibre dripping, expensive alloy and ceramic built, multi cylinder high tech bikes with sophisticated electronics and fuel injection... Science had no part in that shit....
no. mainly: men.

coz we've still got several million miles of the planet to excavate and as we only seem to find new things when we dig,
New Zealand is at the fore, you know:
After having dug to a depth of 10 feet last year, Canadian scientists found traces of copper wire dating back 200 years and came to the conclusion that their ancestors already had a telephone network more than 150 years ago.

Not to be outdone, their American neighbours dug to a depth of 20 feet, and shortly after concluded that their ancestors already had an advanced high-tech communications network 50 years earlier than the Canadians.

One week later, the NZ authorities reported the following:

In the Waikato, after digging in the back paddock to 30 feet for a new dam, Rangi Putawera, a self-taught archaeologist, reported that he found "fuck all au".
He therefore concluded that 250 years ago, te Waikato had already gone wireless.

Called it.

It does, almost like clockwork a bikeless cultist will turn up and make a thread all about his own views, which then get trounced for the drivel they are as can only respond with insults it is a very one sided match; then he fucks off, tail between legs until next time.
rbjiafp

[nzspokes]

conspiracy theorists.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kN9LdTkR85Q

[FJRider]

Unstuck lives a charmed life, nothing can touch him because he's in tune with the Universe. His vibrator ensures this... :rolleyes:




Good vibrations often come from sources ... other than mechanical ....



But ... he comes from GORE. 'Nuff said.


(If you don't understand what I mean by this ... live in GORE [area] for at least 10 years and you WILL understand)

[FJRider]

In the Waikato, after digging in the back paddock to 30 feet for a new dam, Rangi Putawera, a self-taught archaeologist, reported that he found "fuck all au".
He therefore concluded that 250 years ago, te Waikato had already gone wireless.

rbjiafp

Bling (will be) given ...

[Ocean1]

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2015/03/23/394132747/why-the-war-on-cancer-hasnt-been-won

Please don't forget to debunk this article with a wad of of unsubstantiated pseudo-science and anecdote. Otherwise this post was in vain.

Does this qualify?: http://nano.cancer.gov/learn/

[mashman]

"Each product only contains one component. The poison only works when they're mixed. Hair spray won't do it alone. But... hair spray and perfume and lipstick will be toxic and -- Untraceable." - Batman.

[Berries]

Spoken as one who judges in ignorance. You know neither me nor Katie.
Or indeed the scores of others who post on KB. Which is why I would never, ever, make such a sweeping statement as you did. It belittles everyone else.

[Berries]

No offence taken. I never said that I did know what others on here have experienced or are experiencing. This is simply my view from what I have learned from others around me over the past 3 years within the Cancer world, some who didn't win, and now some who have wont their battle, including two people who have just been cleared of all Cancer from a 6+ year battle with Leukaemia - many of whom have used both "alternative" treatments and "mainstream" treatments. Of course I'm no expert - just someone learning from others best I can and doing something in a small way to try and help in a way I feel appropriate. Also spoken a fair bit with a few who are actively working in the Cancer research field.

I have so much to learn, I am certainly not smart enough to get much of a grasp on it, but I do not have a closed mind and listen a lot to different views to better understand the different parts of the hideous world that is Cancer. I never want to be an "expert". Its far too complex for me to ever really understand. I just want learn, and help those who I can in my own world. Cancer is heavily in my family - there is a very high chance I too could have it one day.
I lost a good friend to leukaemia at Christmas, my Mum to breast cancer when I was 11 and many more in the years in-between. My comment was aimed at the completely crass response from the OP as if this was some kind of pissing contest.

To be honest I don't know why anyone would even considering starting a thread like this on a motorcycle forum unless it was to grab attention or to wind people up.

[oldrider]

To be honest I don't know why anyone would even considering starting a thread like this on a motorcycle forum unless it was to grab attention or to wind people up.

In fairness to OP - this is Rant or Rave - it's not intended to be limited to motorcycles - it's the equivalent of pub talk and shit like that! :scratch:

I.E. -
Forum: Rant or Rave

Talk about any non-motorbike stuff here.

[Ocean1]

Or indeed the scores of others who post on KB

Other posters score on KB?

[Edbear]

Or indeed the scores of others who post on KB. Which is why I would never, ever, make such a sweeping statement as you did. It belittles everyone else.

It wasn't a sweeping statement, it was specific to knowing Katie and what she has been through and doing of late. At no time have I stated or implied that anyone else here does not have experience or qualifications to comment.


I lost a good friend to leukaemia at Christmas, my Mum to breast cancer when I was 11 and many more in the years in-between. My comment was aimed at the completely crass response from the OP as if this was some kind of pissing contest.

To be honest I don't know why anyone would even considering starting a thread like this on a motorcycle forum unless it was to grab attention or to wind people up.

Sorry to hear of your experiences. I too, have lost family and friends to cancer and other awful diseases as, no doubt, have many members.

It is a serious subject and my posting the thread was to highlight the fact. These alt.cancer conspiracy theorists have a completely lop-sided and simplistic view which demeans the gravity of the disease, and unfairly criticises those Doctors, Oncologists and researchers who are working endlessly and genuinely to find a cure, or at least a treatment that is better for the patient.

You will have noted that any post of an appropriate nature gets my recognition, but I treat the idiots, who's sole agenda is to diss me personally, as they deserve.

[bogan]

It wasn't a sweeping statement

but I treat the idiots, who's sole agenda is to diss me personally, as they deserve.

No, that is exactly what it was.

By ignoring them completely and not mentioning how 'superior' to them you are in every post?

[mashman]

http://i1.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/000/894/wahmbulance.jpg

[Edbear]

Other posters score on KB?

Apparently it has been known to happen. :eek:

[Katman]

It is a serious subject and my posting the thread was to highlight the fact. These alt.cancer conspiracy theorists have a completely lop-sided and simplistic view which demeans the gravity of the disease, and unfairly criticises those Doctors, Oncologists and researchers who are working endlessly and genuinely to find a cure, or at least a treatment that is better for the patient.

My Dad died as a result of cancer.

But it was primarily the overdose of radiation he was given that led to his death.

But you just keep right on popping those pills your doctor prescribes Ed.

[Edbear]

My Dad died as a result of cancer.

But it was primarily the overdose of radiation he was given that led to his death.

But you just keep right on popping those pills your doctor prescribes Ed.

Would you care to elaborate?

[BuzzardNZ]

But you just keep right on popping those pills your doctor prescribes Ed.




Would you care to elaborate?

Tramadol!!!, everyone knows, or have you forgotten? ;)

[Katman]

Would you care to elaborate?

What do you think?

[Edbear]

What do you think?

I think you don't.

[ellipsis]

...Ed's puerile shit never bothered me, but now that Cassina has turned up and proven that some people should just step in front of a train, I have been given a point of reference...Ed is hovering at the same point as her...

[bogan]

I think you don't.

Far be it from me to tell you how to be a good christian, but perhaps sympathy is more appropriate than narcissism when somebody tells you they have lost a loved one.

[BuzzardNZ]

Far be it from me to tell you how to be a good christian, but perhaps sympathy is more appropriate than narcissism when somebody tells you they have lost a loved one.

amen to that! ( like that Ed :D )?

[Laava]

Madness, is it lesbian time yet?

[Madness]

Madness, is it lesbian time yet?

Nah. It's high time this cycle of fuckery was broken.

[Katman]

Far be it from me to tell you how to be a good christian, but perhaps sympathy is more appropriate than narcissism when somebody tells you they have lost a loved one.

Please, the last thing I want from Ed is sympathy.

It is simply obsene to suggest that anyone should be belittled for their belief in any alternative cancer treatment.

The cancer sufferer's focus of energy is none of our business.

[BuzzardNZ]

Please, the last thing I want from Ed is sympathy.

It is simply obsene to suggest that anyone should be belittled for their belief in any alternative cancer treatment.

The cancer sufferer's focus of energy is none of our business.

I agree, Ed is pretty rotten for belittling this sensitive subject and trying to win points! ( who knows why!! ) . I'm sorry 4 your loss Katman.

[Laava]

Nah. It's high time this cycle of fuckery was broken.

Fair enough but I would hate for anyone to post anything on topic. Be it on your head!:yes:

[TheDemonLord]

It is simply obsene to suggest that anyone should be belittled for their belief in any alternative cancer treatment.

There are a few things here though that can result in a very slippery slope:

1: The placebo effect is well documented and so with any claims of alternative treatments, we must always be skeptical whether it was the treatment or the placebo effect that worked.
2: There is a Danger that someone would refuse a course of treatment (such as Chemo and Radiotherapy) that could either 'Cure' or significantly reduce the negative physical effects of the Cancer, preferring treatments that are considered more 'natural' or with less side effects as current treatments.
3: An unscrupulous Business person could profit off those desperate enough to try any thing.

By all means - let alternative treatments be tested in the same double-blind, controlled tests that every other drug has to go through to prove itself viable. But should it fail in these tests, then the treatment should be treated with skepticism at best, and ridicule at worst.

[mashman]

By all means - let alternative treatments be tested in the same double-blind, controlled tests that every other drug has to go through to prove itself viable. But should it fail in these tests, then the treatment should be treated with skepticism at best, and ridicule at worst.

Respect even though they may only work 1 person though?

[Berries]

There is a Danger that someone would refuse a course of treatment (such as Chemo and Radiotherapy) that could either 'Cure' or significantly reduce the negative physical effects of the Cancer, preferring treatments that are considered more 'natural' or with less side effects as current treatments.
If that comforts the sufferer then that is perfectly fine and although it is easy to say right now if I am strong enough I would choose not to have chemotherapy or radiotherapy having seen up close and personal how it 'works' in some cases.

Everyone should be allowed to make their own free decision without others criticising it from their own particular biased view point, it has nothing to do with them and everything to do with the person facing death.

I'm with Barry Sheene on this one.

[Katman]

1: The placebo effect is well documented and so with any claims of alternative treatments, we must always be skeptical whether it was the treatment or the placebo effect that worked.


And if the placebo effect works - well and good. Anything that forms a positive reinforcement of recovery in a patients mind should be encouraged.


2: There is a Danger that someone would refuse a course of treatment (such as Chemo and Radiotherapy) that could either 'Cure' or significantly reduce the negative physical effects of the Cancer, preferring treatments that are considered more 'natural' or with less side effects as current treatments.

And how exactly is that any of your business?


3: An unscrupulous Business person could profit off those desperate enough to try any thing.


Unscrupulous business people? There's enough of them in the pharmaceutical industry already.

[oldrider]

There are a few things here though that can result in a very slippery slope:

1: The placebo effect is well documented and so with any claims of alternative treatments, we must always be skeptical whether it was the treatment or the placebo effect that worked.
2: There is a Danger that someone would refuse a course of treatment (such as Chemo and Radiotherapy) that could either 'Cure' or significantly reduce the negative physical effects of the Cancer, preferring treatments that are considered more 'natural' or with less side effects as current treatments.
3: An unscrupulous Business person could profit off those desperate enough to try any thing.

By all means - let alternative treatments be tested in the same double-blind, controlled tests that every other drug has to go through to prove itself viable. But should it fail in these tests, then the treatment should be treated with skepticism at best, and ridicule at worst.

Really?

Chemo or radiotherapy does not cure anything - it is designed to kill everything and then leave the immune system to do the healing with whats left.

Some people get lucky - others don't - pretty low success statistics - shouldn't it be treated with skepticism at best and ridicule at worst too?

Just sayin - just sayin. :shifty:

[bogan]

He has a point but has phrased it poorly I think. The treatments themselves should not be treated with scorn, but any untruthful 'results'/'branding' (see OP) being bandied about should be. Let those who have one of the hardest decisions of their lives make an informed one.

[Ocean1]

Respect even though they may only work 1 person though?

If they only worked for one person they'd never be released for use, would they?

[Ulsterkiwi]

Really?

Chemo or radiotherapy does not cure anything - it is designed to kill everything and then leave the immune system to do the healing with whats left.

Some people get lucky - others don't - pretty low success statistics

There is very little about your statements which is factually correct. Would 90% survival at 5 years for some cancers count as low success to you? If the immune system was all you make it out to be the individual would not have developed a cancer in the first place.


If they only worked for one person they'd never be released for use, would they?

It would be highly unlikely. What people seem to forget is a well designed stage III randomised controlled clinical trial, while considered the top of the hierarchy of evidence used to determine best practice, will rarely, if ever, give absolute answers.
Trials along those lines are used to assist agencies like the FDA decide whether or not to approve a pharmaceutical for use within a healthcare system. Agencies like PHARMAC will look at the evidence to hand to decide if the pharmaceutical in question justifies devoting some of its limited resources to making it available within their system. If a drug is not approved it becomes problematic for a healthcare system to provide it. If the situation were any other way there would no doubt be torches and pitchforks at the doors of government.
This is where Katman makes a very valid point, if something contributes to healing for an individual then its up to that individual whether or not they use it and they should not be prevented from doing so, whether its FDA or PHARMAC approved or not. Healing of course is not the same as cure. There are many products available which have no demonstrable benefit pharmacologically speaking but nor do they do any harm, so who cares? I would be more concerned if actual harm was being caused.
Of course many treatments have side effects which can be described as harm, so called natural products are not exempt from causing side effects either. The real harm is when any benefit gained does not outweigh the harm/side effects caused. Believe it or not that is a guiding principle for medical practice. Xrays anyone? Paracetamol? Asprin? Oxygen?

[Ocean1]

This is where Katman makes a very valid point, if something contributes to healing for an individual then its up to that individual whether or not they use it and they should not be prevented from doing so, whether its FDA or PHARMAC approved or not.

Perfectly correct.

As long as they don't expect anyone else to stump up for the price of their snake oil it's none of anyone else's business.

[Laava]

Perfectly correct.

As long as they don't expect anyone else to stump up for the price of their snake oil it's none of anyone else's business.

Yep, and sometimes it can be as simple as having a good attitude. This of course is not a quantifiable substance but I am not alone in thinking that this, as well as "the placebo effect", is not to be summarily dismissed as having not a lot of merit. IMO.

[Ocean1]

Yep, and sometimes it can be as simple as having a good attitude. This of course is not a quantifiable substance but I am not alone in thinking that this, as well as "the placebo effect", is not to be summarily dismissed as having not a lot of merit. IMO.

Oh aye, in fact there's been a bit of recent work hanging actual numbers on those variables, surprisingly high correlation between what you might call positive attitude on wellbeing in general and oncological outcomes in particular.

Unfortunately you can't prescribe it.

[Laava]

Oh aye, in fact there's been a bit of recent work hanging actual numbers on those variables, surprisingly high correlation between what you might call positive attitude on wellbeing in general and oncological outcomes in particular.

Unfortunately you can't prescribe it.

Haha! Fortunately it can be had without prescription as well! In my wifes case, she is a very positive person and coincidentally at the time when she was having chemo and looking and feeling like death warmed up, she had the appearance of her first grandson with whom she is joined at the hip. Was the best thing ever as far as I am concerned. I can't help feeling she was very lucky, as was I, I suppose!

[Edbear]

There are a few things here though that can result in a very slippery slope:

1: The placebo effect is well documented and so with any claims of alternative treatments, we must always be skeptical whether it was the treatment or the placebo effect that worked.
2: There is a Danger that someone would refuse a course of treatment (such as Chemo and Radiotherapy) that could either 'Cure' or significantly reduce the negative physical effects of the Cancer, preferring treatments that are considered more 'natural' or with less side effects as current treatments.
3: An unscrupulous Business person could profit off those desperate enough to try any thing.

By all means - let alternative treatments be tested in the same double-blind, controlled tests that every other drug has to go through to prove itself viable. But should it fail in these tests, then the treatment should be treated with skepticism at best, and ridicule at worst.


If they only worked for one person they'd never be released for use, would they?


There is very little about your statements which is factually correct. Would 90% survival at 5 years for some cancers count as low success to you? If the immune system was all you make it out to be the individual would not have developed a cancer in the first place.



It would be highly unlikely. What people seem to forget is a well designed stage III randomised controlled clinical trial, while considered the top of the hierarchy of evidence used to determine best practice, will rarely, if ever, give absolute answers.
Trials along those lines are used to assist agencies like the FDA decide whether or not to approve a pharmaceutical for use within a healthcare system. Agencies like PHARMAC will look at the evidence to hand to decide if the pharmaceutical in question justifies devoting some of its limited resources to making it available within their system. If a drug is not approved it becomes problematic for a healthcare system to provide it. If the situation were any other way there would no doubt be torches and pitchforks at the doors of government.
This is where Katman makes a very valid point, if something contributes to healing for an individual then its up to that individual whether or not they use it and they should not be prevented from doing so, whether its FDA or PHARMAC approved or not. Healing of course is not the same as cure. There are many products available which have no demonstrable benefit pharmacologically speaking but nor do they do any harm, so who cares? I would be more concerned if actual harm was being caused.
Of course many treatments have side effects which can be described as harm, so called natural products are not exempt from causing side effects either. The real harm is when any benefit gained does not outweigh the harm/side effects caused. Believe it or not that is a guiding principle for medical practice. Xrays anyone? Paracetamol? Asprin? Oxygen?


Perfectly correct.

As long as they don't expect anyone else to stump up for the price of their snake oil it's none of anyone else's business.


All very good posts!

[oldrider]

There is very little about your statements which is factually correct. Would 90% survival at 5 years for some cancers count as low success to you? If the immune system was all you make it out to be the individual would not have developed a cancer in the first place.

Statement? - sorry try reading that again - more as a question - didn't put a question mark on that comment and I am not qualified to make that as a statement!

I seem to read a lot of stuff that criticises chemo and radio therapy as having a very low % of success!

Also that hospital and medical deaths are higher than the road toll but never read much that verifies exactly what is correct.

Me - I don't claim to know the correct answer - if you do - what is it? :confused:

[Edbear]

Statement? - sorry try reading that again - more as a question - didn't put a question mark on that comment and I am not qualified to make that as a statement!

I seem to read a lot of stuff that criticises chemo and radio therapy as having a very low % of success!

Also that hospital and medical deaths are higher than the road toll but never read much that verifies exactly what is correct.

Me - I don't claim to know the correct answer - if you do - what is it? :confused:

I recommend visiting the Oncology ward at Auckland Hospital, it will change you. It changes everyone. Talk to the Dr's and nurses there.

[mashman]

If they only worked for one person they'd never be released for use, would they?

No. Treatment would be tailored.

[Ocean1]

No. Treatment would be tailored.

Oh aye? It costs billions to develop treatments that benefit almost everyone, and you figure we can do that for each and every patient?

[mashman]

Oh aye? It costs billions to develop treatments that benefit almost everyone, and you figure we can do that for each and every patient?

Yup... although it'd be cheating, coz we wouldn't be hindered by budget constraint. Alas... when you put it the way you put it, money is more important than people.

[Laava]

Thing I don't understand is, when two women are making love, how do they know when they are finished?

[mashman]

Thing I don't understand is, when two women are making love, how do they know when they are finished?

They both want to hug.

[Ocean1]

Yup... although it'd be cheating, coz we wouldn't be hindered by budget constraint. Alas... when you put it the way you put it, money is more important than people.

Let's just pretend that what everyone else understands about money equalling resources is correct, OK?

Still going to spend billions on developing custom treatments for everyone?

[mashman]

Let's just pretend that what everyone else understands about money equalling resources is correct, OK?

Still going to spend billions on developing custom treatments for everyone?

Ok.

Why not? Better than spending it on stuff that makes stuff go boom or cause people to die unexpectedly.

[Laava]

They both want to hug.

Wouldn't that just set the whole thing in motion again?

[mashman]

Wouldn't that just set the whole thing in motion again?

Dunno. Will think about it for a while.

[Brian d marge]

They both want to hug.

the talking starts more like ....signal noise ratio goes through the roof and men shut down

Stephen

[Ocean1]

Ok.

Why not? Better than spending it on stuff that makes stuff go boom or cause people to die unexpectedly.

Because just as there isn't that much money in the world there's not that many resources in the world.

Which brings us back to using the health resources we do have most effectively. Which means treatments that benefit almost everyone.

[Ulsterkiwi]

Statement? - sorry try reading that again - more as a question - didn't put a question mark on that comment and I am not qualified to make that as a statement!

I seem to read a lot of stuff that criticises chemo and radio therapy as having a very low % of success!

Also that hospital and medical deaths are higher than the road toll but never read much that verifies exactly what is correct.

Me - I don't claim to know the correct answer - if you do - what is it? :confused:

The answer? that all depends on the question.
If you are keen, there is a lot of data out there which is freely available. Some will say its government data so its all dodgy, I do not subscribe to that thinking. Data are data, its what you do with it which can be dodgy.
So that all said, go to the Ministry of Health website, you can readily access stats on cancer registrations and deaths.

I only have 2010 numbers on my home PC but the trends are similar in other years....

in 2010 there were 21,235 new cancer registrations in New Zealand. Thats a new diagnosis of a cancer (a term applied to a group of approximately 200 diseases)
in 2010 there were 8593 deaths directly attributed to cancer as the cause of death. You need to remember this figure is not broken down into the year the actual diagnosis was made although undoubtedly some will die the year they are diagnosed.

in the 10 year period preceding these numbers, registrations increased by 18.7%
in the 10 year period preceding these numbers, deaths increased by 12.8%

On a simple examination, the rate at which people are dying from cancer is increasing is at a lower level than the rate people are being diagnosed. That does not fit with the argument that treatments have a low success rate. When we take growth of population and the aging of our population into account the actual rate of deaths from cancer has dropped by over 14%
Cancer registrations have increased for sure but again when we take the aging of our population and the growth in our population that is to be expected.

The same document tells us that 8593 deaths from cancer happened in a year when heart disease and cerebrovascular disease (mostly stroke) caused the death of 2467 and 5389 people respectively. There were 416 deaths due to the road toll. (I would say the more worrying statistic was 535 deaths caused by intentional self harm.) If by hospital and medical deaths you mean deaths caused by medical misadventure or hospital acquired infections and the like I do not have those numbers to hand but they will exist.

The success of a particular treatment is hard to define here. some cancers can be dealt to very effectively, some not so.
Breast and Prostate are the most common types of cancer but the leading cause of cancer death is lung cancer. Lung cancer is harder to treat effectively. An extreme example might be pancreatic cancer, in 2010 there were 493 registrations and 435 deaths recorded. If someone can develop a more effective way to treat this cancer it will make a huge difference.

I honestly understand why there is criticism of cytoxic chemotherapy and radiation therapy. The side effects can be very nasty. Personally speaking it it difficult to be part of something which causes such distress to individuals as they endure the treatments. I refer back to my original comments about harm caused balanced with benefit gained. In the light of that there is satisfaction in knowing that there are people still around today because of something I contributed to, even though it was an awful experience for them at the time.
I think it is vital therefore that we continue to strive for means to treat these terrible diseases which do not cause such horrendous side effects. Until those treatments are in place what option do we have?
This is why I am convinced that should an individual find a therapy which is beneficial to them then noone should stand in their way if they choose to make use of it. Of course I would be concerned that vulnerable people are given false hope or taken advantage of financially, that is why all decisions should be informed decisions and why there are laws, rules and regulations to try and control what companies and individuals can lay claim to being able to do.
Good science tends on the whole to be heavy on evidence based facts and low on claims and promises. Snake doctors will tend to be the opposite.

[Ocean1]

Statement? - sorry try reading that again - more as a question - didn't put a question mark on that comment and I am not qualified to make that as a statement!

I seem to read a lot of stuff that criticises chemo and radio therapy as having a very low % of success!

Also that hospital and medical deaths are higher than the road toll but never read much that verifies exactly what is correct.

Me - I don't claim to know the correct answer - if you do - what is it? :confused:

Man, if you think hospitals cause a lot of illness and deaths you should look into mortuaries!

[mashman]

Because just as there isn't that much money in the world there's not that many resources in the world.

Yes there are.

[Ocean1]

Yes there are.

You can begin by explaining where you're going to get the hundreds of thousands of man-hours from for each custom-built treatment.

[mashman]

You can begin by explaining where you're going to get the hundreds of thousands of man-hours from for each custom-built treatment.

Bullshit jobs.

[Ocean1]

Bullshit jobs.

Your arithmetic is as poor as the rest of your argument. There's more man-hours required to develop even a partially successful cancer treatment than there is in a human lifetime. And that's not even including the original pure research that it was based on. Or the facilities.

And even if "bullshit jobs" could supply the time required I can't see the bullshit employees as being quite what's required.

Particularly if they're anywhere near the calibre of your efforts.

[mashman]

Your arithmetic is as poor as the rest of your argument. There's more man-hours required to develop even a partially successful cancer treatment than there is in a human lifetime. And that's not even including the original pure research that it was based on. Or the facilities.

And even if "bullshit jobs" could supply the time required I can't see the bullshit employees as being quite what's required.

Particularly if they're anywhere near the calibre of your efforts.

So you're guessing what the rest of my argument is going to be without hearing it :killingme. Epic, but highly entertaining, fail bro. I'd say that the system and the logistics used is archaic and outdated and that is the reason tailored healing in general cannot be provided. And btw, the methodology of healthcare provision I'm thinking about will be directed more towards identification and prevention. You think so small in your predefined world.

You've heard of training haven't you?

I can think of much worse.

[Ocean1]

So you're guessing what the rest of my argument is going to be without hearing it :killingme. Epic, but highly entertaining, fail bro. I'd say that the system and the logistics used is archaic and outdated and that is the reason tailored healing in general cannot be provided. And btw, the methodology of healthcare provision I'm thinking about will be directed more towards identification and prevention. You think so small in your predefined world.

You've heard of training haven't you?

I can think of much worse.

Dude, you can think of fuck all. The whole concept of a personal-specific cancer treatment is farcical, pretty much like most of the rest of your "ideas".

Now fuck off and play on the motorway.

[mashman]

Dude, you can think of fuck all. The whole concept of a personal-specific cancer treatment is farcical, pretty much like most of the rest of your "ideas".

So you fell at the first and went straight to the too hard basket to find my ideas. Hardly surprising you couldn't find what I'm thinking about.

[bogan]

So you fell at the first and went straight to the too hard basket to find my ideas. Hardly surprising you couldn't find what I'm thinking about.

So what you are saying, is you have workable ideas to help cure cancer, but insist on others having to find them for themselves instead of sharing them?

So not only are you an idiot, you're a selfish cunt too...

I actually think you're almost aware enough of the former to exclude the later.

[mashman]

So what you are saying, is you have workable ideas to help cure cancer, but insist on others having to find them for themselves instead of sharing them?

Nope that's not what I'm saying at all.

[bogan]

Nope that's not what I'm saying at all.

So no workable ideas to solve this issue either then, got it.

[mashman]

So no workable ideas to solve this issue either then, got it.

Nope, got a plenty workable idea thanks.

[Ulsterkiwi]

The whole concept of a personal-specific cancer treatment is farcical, pretty much like most of the rest of your "ideas".

hmmm, not so farcical actually. here in NZ there is research currently being conducted on cancer 'vaccines' essentially a therapy based around your immune system. Your immune system is just that, yours. Therefore any 'vaccine' created will be a customised treatment for the individual patient.

I have put the word vaccine in quote marks as that is a simplistic word to use and does not quite fit the true meaning of a vaccine but without meaning to sound condescending its a term most folks can relate to so its the one which has stuck when describing the research to the lay population.

Many cancers have the ability to down regulate or 'switch off' the usual immune responses to the mutations which are the hallmark of cancers. Again in simple terms the 'vaccines' aim to up regulate or 'turn back on' and actually amplify those responses.

Of course this is only in development stages and will in all probability be hugely expensive. Currently the focus is on cancers which are otherwise difficult to treat, like melanoma.

Also strictly speaking each time a patient is prescribed radiation therapy the way in which that treatment is delivered is customised to suit the individual. No two people receive a course of radiation therapy in exactly the same way.

To a lesser extent, chemo can be tailored to suit the individual. However that will change. As small molecule or targeted therapies become more prevalent we are already seeing much smaller sub groups of patients being given specific drugs or cocktails of drugs. As our understanding of the profile of different cancers becomes better those kinds of scenarios will increase.

[TheDemonLord]

hmmm, not so farcical actually. here in NZ there is research currently being conducted on cancer 'vaccines' essentially a therapy based around your immune system. Your immune system is just that, yours. Therefore any 'vaccine' created will be a customised treatment for the individual patient.

I have put the word vaccine in quote marks as that is a simplistic word to use and does not quite fit the true meaning of a vaccine but without meaning to sound condescending its a term most folks can relate to so its the one which has stuck when describing the research to the lay population.

Could you provide a link to this - I would like to read as it sounds very interesting.



Also strictly speaking each time a patient is prescribed radiation therapy the way in which that treatment is delivered is customised to suit the individual. No two people receive a course of radiation therapy in exactly the same way.

To a lesser extent, chemo can be tailored to suit the individual. However that will change. As small molecule or targeted therapies become more prevalent we are already seeing much smaller sub groups of patients being given specific drugs or cocktails of drugs. As our understanding of the profile of different cancers becomes better those kinds of scenarios will increase.

I agree, that each treatment in that sence is bespoke - but bespoke using a range of pre-existing Drugs, adjusting the combination as required, as opposed to developing a new drug each time for the patient (which is what was being argued as farcical, given the cost developing a new drug)

[mashman]

as opposed to developing a new drug each time for the patient (which is what was being argued as farcical, given the cost developing a new drug)

Sorry, who mentioned new drugs? I damned sure that it wasn't me... so, sold to the one eyed man with the new kid :shifty:

[mashman]

hmmm, not so farcical actually. here in NZ there is research currently being conducted on cancer 'vaccines' essentially a therapy based around your immune system. Your immune system is just that, yours. Therefore any 'vaccine' created will be a customised treatment for the individual patient.

I have put the word vaccine in quote marks as that is a simplistic word to use and does not quite fit the true meaning of a vaccine but without meaning to sound condescending its a term most folks can relate to so its the one which has stuck when describing the research to the lay population.

Many cancers have the ability to down regulate or 'switch off' the usual immune responses to the mutations which are the hallmark of cancers. Again in simple terms the 'vaccines' aim to up regulate or 'turn back on' and actually amplify those responses.

Of course this is only in development stages and will in all probability be hugely expensive. Currently the focus is on cancers which are otherwise difficult to treat, like melanoma.

Also strictly speaking each time a patient is prescribed radiation therapy the way in which that treatment is delivered is customised to suit the individual. No two people receive a course of radiation therapy in exactly the same way.

To a lesser extent, chemo can be tailored to suit the individual. However that will change. As small molecule or targeted therapies become more prevalent we are already seeing much smaller sub groups of patients being given specific drugs or cocktails of drugs. As our understanding of the profile of different cancers becomes better those kinds of scenarios will increase.

Would a pre-illness baseline of the patients physiology be of any use to researchers?

[TheDemonLord]

Sorry, who mentioned new drugs? I damned sure that it wasn't me... so, sold to the one eyed man with the new kid :shifty:

That was the impression I got from your posts (and by the look of the responses, so did everyone else)

[EmBe]

Could you provide a link to this - I would like to read as it sounds very interesting.

The Malaghan Institute of Medical Research (NZ) are currently focusing their cancer reasearch on immuno-therapy, their cancer research page has multiple links to clincal studies and trials, scientific publications and research updates/highlights
http://www.malaghan.org.nz/what-we-do/cancer/

exciting stuff being spearheaded right here in NZ :cool:

[bogan]

I agree, that each treatment in that sence is bespoke - but bespoke using a range of pre-existing Drugs, adjusting the combination as required, as opposed to developing a new drug each time for the patient (which is what was being argued as farcical, given the cost developing a new drug)

Sounds very similar to an anesthesiologist really, those guys tailor each dosage to the patient; but it still follows the same pattern of drugs/science/doctors/results so is not a new principal or ideal or anything like that.

[mashman]

That was the impression I got from your posts (and by the look of the responses, so did everyone else)

Perhaps you'll break the mould and ask instead of following all sheep like into the bin of too hard ;)

[bogan]

Perhaps you'll break the mould and ask instead of following all sheep like into the bin of too hard ;)

You could break your mold and write an unambiguous post too once in a while. Because essentially you've said one thing to say how 'big medical' is doing it wrong and they should spend billions developing personlised treatments instead, but now say they are doing personalised treatments (do you still think it costs billions?), so you still have no workable ideas to contribute (unless you mean carry on carrying on ofc). But no doubt you've left enough ambiguity wiggle room in your own interpretations to delude yourself into thinking you're not wrong on this point either.

[mashman]

You could break your mold and write an unambiguous post too once in a while. Because essentially you've said one thing to say how 'big medical' is doing it wrong and they should spend billions developing personlised treatments instead, but now say they are doing personalised treatments (do you still think it costs billions?), so you still have no workable ideas to contribute (unless you mean carry on carrying on ofc). But no doubt you've left enough ambiguity wiggle room in your own interpretations to delude yourself into thinking you're not wrong on this point either.

You could break your mould and open the other eye for a change. The post was fine. Your initial assumptions were incorrect, worse, they were inherited.... anyhoo, those initial assumptions, if you decide to go and read the posts again, have led you along the road to where you are.

I started one step at a time with Ocean, as he looks to be the most "intelligent" of you... and he survived 2 posts before he made a huge assumption and ran away. Odd given that I had agreed to work within the Ocean defined box. A lovely part of that box was the billions you seem to think that I brought up... coz it weren't me guv.

Your entire, erm, argument above is built entirely on false premise given the assumptions made and the subsequent disinformation propagandised in the form of a counter argument. You must be a really shit scientist.

Having said that, it was all too familiar, almost, lemming like. Chur for the lulz. Please try not to hold me responsible for your incorrect assumptions... and if you want to try, start with these posts:



No. Treatment would be tailored.



It costs billions to develop treatments that benefit almost everyone

Let's just pretend that what everyone else understands about money equalling resources is correct, OK?

Still going to spend billions on developing custom treatments for everyone?




Ok.

We get the billions required by not making weapons



Because just as there isn't that much money in the world there's not that many resources in the world.

Which brings us back to using the health resources we do have most effectively. Which means treatments that benefit almost everyone.

Now I mentioned that we didn't have to spend billions on weapons and I had also mentioned bullshit jobs which also gave us the personnel. And then the assumption



Your arithmetic is as poor as the rest of your argument. There's more man-hours required to develop even a partially successful cancer treatment than there is in a human lifetime. And that's not even including the original pure research that it was based on. Or the facilities.

And even if "bullshit jobs" could supply the time required I can't see the bullshit employees as being quite what's required.

Particularly if they're anywhere near the calibre of your efforts.

Following that he got all abusive and I had to run to my wife and she held me sobbing all night.

Let me go for the overview, ya know, so that you can think it over in your own time.

We have the bullshit job people and we have training and we have budget from cutting boom boom spending.

Can we build the facilities whilst training the people we'll need? Yes. In fact we can train builders at the same time, among various other things.

How do you get a tailored, let's go for pill:



the healthcare provision I'm thinking about will be directed more towards identification and prevention.

Start baselining physiology and get computers to analyse the fuck out of it every whatever period the medical council decides should be appropriate.

Get the computer to send a text to the person should anything odd come up with appointment time and date etc...

Is any of that even possible? Yes. All of it!

So. What's the problem? Quite simply, there is no will to attempt such a thing.

:killingme... happy days.

[Akzle]

...given the cost developing a new drug)
ahhh. cost!
thank fuck for jews ehh, otherwise, people might just do shit because it needs doing, rather than for some twisted maniacal self-masturbatory gain.

Sounds very similar to an anesthesiologist really, those guys tailor each dosage to the patient; but it still follows the same pattern of drugs/science/doctors/results so is not a new principal or ideal or anything like that.
the measure makes the medicine ehh... good shit whitey. you get one point on the "points to have in life" chart.


essentially you've said now now, don't let your solitary point go to shit now.
if you view everyone else through your own lens of incompetence, of course it isn't goin to work!


'big medical' is doing it wrong and they should spend billions developing
ahh. billions. fuck i'd love some billions.
...almost as much as i love jacking off and fishing. sometimes at the same time.

pray, whos billions are they spending?

not persons, who may have some personal interest in the outcome??


...no doubt you've left enough ambiguity wiggle room in your own interpretations to delude yourself into thinking you're not wrong on this point either

[bogan]

But no doubt you've left enough ambiguity wiggle room in your own interpretations to delude yourself into thinking you're not wrong on this point either.


You could break your mould and open the other eye for a change. The post was fine. Your initial assumptions were incorrect, worse, they were inherited.... anyhoo, those initial assumptions, if you decide to go and read the posts again, have led you along the road to where you are.

Called it :killingme

If you still think you are right, summarise all your previous points in one concise post. I know you can't because half your previous points are either at odds with each other, or consist of nothing but bitching about 'the way things are'. You're just another fucking clueless politician, living proof that the system works :woohoo:

[mashman]

Called it :killingme

If you still think you are right, summarise all your previous points in one concise post. I know you can't because half your previous points are either at odds with each other, or consist of nothing but bitching about 'the way things are'. You're just another fucking clueless politician, living proof that the system works :woohoo:

You're never going to understand that I'm not trying to be right are you? Shit's available. Case closed. You lose :killingme. Yet we lose coz it ain't being done. I know, overkill, you're sensitive.

Oh and well done for resorting to, what is it you call it, oh yeah, running out of argument and hurling abuse... it tickled me a might tad though. Your lack of ability to sift through the fine detail without me holding your hand every single step of the way really isn't my problem either. So, I'd say that after considering the logistics of achieving such a goal, that I've summarised it pretty well ta... and you're just a dunce.

[bogan]

You're never going to understand that I'm not trying to be right are you? Shit's available. Case closed. You lose :killingme. Yet we lose coz it ain't being done. I know, overkill, you're sensitive.

Oh and well done for resorting to, what is it you call it, oh yeah, running out of argument and hurling abuse... it tickled me a might tad though. Your lack of ability to sift through the fine detail without me holding your hand every single step of the way really isn't my problem either. So, I'd say that after considering the logistics of achieving such a goal, that I've summarised it pretty well ta... and you're just a dunce.

More excuses. You've done nothing else but hurl abuse so I thought you might like something back. I did invite you to attempt a robust discussion by summarising your points, but again you favored abuse.

So I'll make it clear, you have said nothing of value in this thread, pointing that out or desiring clarification is just being honest; not abusive. However once it is pointed out you invariably get evasive and abusive, like I said, your politician's traits are proof positive the system works.

[Katman]

More excuses. You've done nothing else but hurl abuse so I thought you might like something back. I did invite you to attempt a robust discussion by summarising your points, but again you favored abuse.

So I'll make it clear, you have said nothing of value in this thread, pointing that out or desiring clarification is just being honest; not abusive. However once it is pointed out you invariably get evasive and abusive, like I said, your politician's traits are proof positive the system works.

You sound more like Ed every day.

[mashman]

More excuses. You've done nothing else but hurl abuse so I thought you might like something back. I did invite you to attempt a robust discussion by summarising your points, but again you favored abuse.

So I'll make it clear, you have said nothing of value in this thread, pointing that out or desiring clarification is just being honest; not abusive. However once it is pointed out you invariably get evasive and abusive, like I said, your politician's traits are proof positive the system works.

Can you point my abuse out please oh sensitive one.

Can you point my abuse out please oh sensitive one.


You sound more like Ed every day.

:killingme... twinziez... although at least Ed got the brains.

[bogan]

You sound more like Ed every day.

You too could outline some relevant points for discussion...

Or do I need to kick it off? I think alternative treatments should be explored (I'm an advocate of naturopathy when it is appropriate), under one condition, any treatment is subject to the same rigorous testing and evaluation, and no treatment's results are massaged. Each person should be free to choose their own treatment, but most importantly, this freedom must include being able to make an educated decision. That is the way forward, and that is the way under which we have come so far.

[bogan]

Can you point my abuse out please oh sensitive one.

Can you point my abuse out please oh sensitive one.

The bit where you called me a dunce is the obvious choice.

Now can you point out how mine directed at you, differs from yours directed at me?

Or more on point, can you direct me to a post of yours containing a standalone point that is on topic and constructive?

[mashman]

Or more on point, can you direct me to a post of yours containing a standalone point that is on topic and constructive?

Yes, I can.

[Katman]

The bit where you called me a dunce is the obvious choice.

Now can you point out how mine directed at you, differs from yours directed at me?

Or more on point, can you direct me to a post of yours containing a standalone point that is on topic and constructive?

You should start door-knocking.

[bogan]

Yes, I can.

I see my first two point hit home.

Now you say you can, but will you show it? do you discuss points like an academic, or evade them like a politician?


You should start door-knocking.

Don't need to, true knowledge spreads itself :sunny: Even on kiwibiker you guys are recognised as frauds and morons (Ed included).

[TheDemonLord]

The Malaghan Institute of Medical Research (NZ) are currently focusing their cancer reasearch on immuno-therapy, their cancer research page has multiple links to clincal studies and trials, scientific publications and research updates/highlights
http://www.malaghan.org.nz/what-we-do/cancer/

exciting stuff being spearheaded right here in NZ :cool:

Cheers for the Link - Do you have anything on hand that is a bit more indepth (the article appeared targeted at the Layman, I would like something with a little more meat on it)

[Swoop]

I think alternative treatments should be explored (I'm an advocate of naturopathy when it is appropriate), under one condition, any treatment is subject to the same rigorous testing and evaluation, and no treatment's results are massaged.

Some people might find it interesting to note that simply because of the connotation of "wacky and alternative", the review/s of any research in the naturopathy field is far more involved than mainstream research (say, from Auckland or Canterbury Universities).
Students study the same anatomy and physiology courses and have to sit the same exams for those courses as any other medical students. Only then do they branch off to naturally occurring compounds and medicines.

[mashman]

I see my first two point hit home.

Now you say you can, but will you show it? do you discuss points like an academic, or evade them like a politician?


Really? More assumptions :killingme

I did show it, even proved that the resources required are available.

[bogan]

Some people might find it interesting to note that simply because of the connotation of "wacky and alternative", the review/s of any research in the naturopathy field is far more involved than mainstream research (say, from Auckland or Canterbury Universities).
Students study the same anatomy and physiology courses and have to sit the same exams for those courses as any other medical students. Only then do they branch off to naturally occurring compounds and medicines.

I think part of that connotation is because they are more likely to explore other alternative treatments, vit c infusions, perhaps even homeopathy. Which shouldn't detract from their main field, and research, but it does seem to. It does seem like a no brainer though, drugs are just things you put in your body, so how can taking a holistic view of what goes in your body not help? The differences were made all too clear for me when I had a guts thing, Doc said nah just eat as normal and we'll book you in for an endoscopy, Naturopath said only eat these 7 things; reversed the illness within a week and no camera up the bumhole. Win-win!


Really? More assumptions :killingme

I did show it, even proved that the resources required are available.

Called it, again. Shall we just call you Hone?

[mashman]

Called it, again. Shall we just call you Hone?

No. You merely failed in your usual unscientific way.

[Banditbandit]

'course - you can always lop off bits ... like this one did ...


http://learningenglish.voanews.com/content/angelina-jolie-has-second-surgery-to-prevent-cancer/2695834.html



<img src="http://assets-s3.usmagazine.com/uploads/assets/articles/77049-angelina-jolie-bought-bridal-magazines-months-before-brad-pitt-wedding/1409759921_angelina-jolie-zoom.jpg" width="400px"/>