Jump to content

Welcome to canucks.com Vancouver Canucks homepage

Photo

Interesting article about chemotherapy


  • Please log in to reply
34 replies to this topic

#1 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 11 November 2012 - 01:59 PM

Pharmacists give themselves cancer from dispensing toxic chemotherapy chemicals

Posted ImageTuesday, July 13, 2010
by Mike Adams , the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles...)
3,212 Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image (NaturalNews) One of the side effects of chemotherapy is, ironically, cancer. The cancer doctors don't say much about it, but it's printed right on the chemo drug warning labels (in small print, of course). If you go into a cancer treatment clinic with one type of cancer, and you allow yourself to be injected with chemotherapy chemicals, you will often develop a second type of cancer as a result. Your oncologist will often claim to have successfully treated your first cancer even while you develop a second or third cancer directly caused by the chemo used to treat the original cancer.

There's nothing like cancer-causing chemotherapy to boost repeat business, huh?

During all this, the pharmacists are peddling these toxic chemotherapy chemicals to their customers as if they were medicine (which they aren't). While preparing these toxic chemical prescriptions, it turns out that pharmacists are exposing themselves to cancer-causing chemotherapy agents in the process. And because of that, pharmacists are giving themselves cancer... and they're dying from it.


Why pharmacists are dying of cancer
People who live in glass houses should never throw stones, they say. And you might similarly say that pharmacists who deal in poison shouldn't be surprised to one day discover they are killing themselves with it.

Chemotherapy drugs are extremely toxic to the human body, and they are readily absorbed through the skin. The very idea that they are even used in modern medicine is almost laughable if it weren't so downright disturbing and sad that hundreds of thousands of people are killed each year around the world by chemotherapy drugs.

Now you can add pharmacists to that statistic. For decades, they simply looked the other way, pretending they were playing a valuable role in our system of "modern" medicine, not admitting they were actually doling out chemicals that killed people. Now, the sobering truth has struck them hard: They are in the business of death, and it is killing them off, one by one.

The Seattle Times now reports the story of Sue Crump, a veteran pharmacist of two decades who spent much of her time dispensing chemotherapy drugs. Sue died last September of pancreatic cancer, and one of her dying wishes was that the truth would be told about how her on-the-job exposure to chemotherapy chemicals contributed to her own cancer.


Secondhand chemo
The Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA), it turns out, does not regulate workplace exposure to toxic, cancer-causing chemotherapy chemicals. At first glance, that seems surprising, since OSHA regulates workplace exposure to far less harmful chemicals. Why not chemo?

The answer is because the toxicity of chemotherapy has long been ignored by virtually everyone in medicine and the federal government. It has always been assumed harmless or even "safe" just because it's used as a kind of far-fetched "medicine" to treat cancer. This, despite the fact that chemotherapy is a derivative of the mustard gas used against enemy soldiers in World War I. Truthfully, chemotherapy has more in common with chemicals weapons than any legitimate medicine.

So today, while workers are protected from secondhand smoke in offices across the country,pharmacists are still being exposed every single day to toxic, cancer-causing chemicals that OSHA seems to just ignore. The agency has only issued one citation in the last decade to a hospital for inadequate safety handling of toxic chemotherapy drugs.

As the Seattle Times reports, "A just-completed study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) -- 10 years in the making and the largest to date -- confirms that chemo continues to contaminate the work spaces where it's used and in some cases is still being found in the urine of those who handle it..."

That same article goes on to report more pharmacists, veterinarians and nurses who are dead or dying from chemotherapy exposure:

• Bruce Harrison of St. Louis (cancer in his 50's, now dead)
• Karen Lewis of Baltimore (cancer in her 50's, still living)
• Brett Cordes of Scottsdale, Arizona (cancer at age 35, still living)
• Sally Giles of Vancouver, B.C. (cancer in her 40's, now dead)


The great contradiction in cancer treatments
As the Seattle Times reports:

"Danish epidemiologists used cancer-registry data from the 1940s through the late 1980s to first report a significantly increased risk of leukemia among oncology nurses and, later, physicians. Last year, another Danish study of more than 92,000 nurses found an elevated risk for breast, thyroid, nervous-system and brain cancers."

The story goes on to report how new safety rules are being put in place across the industry to protect pharmacists, veterinarians, nurses and doctors from toxic chemotherapy chemicals. But even the Seattle Times, which deserves credit for running this story, misses the bigger point:

If these chemicals are so dangerous to the doctors, nurses and pharmacists dispensing them, how can they be considered "safe enough" to inject into patients who are already dying from cancer?

It's a serious question. After all, if nurses can become violently ill after merely spilling chemotherapy chemicals on themselves (it's true), then what effect do you suppose these chemicals have wheninjected into patients?

The cancer industry, though, has never stopped injecting patients long enough to ask the commonsense question: Why are we in the business of dispensing poison in the first place?Poison, after all, isn't medicine. Not when dispensed in its full potency, anyway.

The whole idea of "safety" in the cancer industry is to find new ways to protect the health care workers from the extremely dangerous chemicals they're still injecting into the bodies of patients. Something is clearly wrong with this picture... if health care workers need to be protected from this stuff, why not protect the patients from it, too?


Nobody ever died from handling herbs
In contrast to all this, consider the truthful observation that no naturopath ever died from handling medicinal herb, homeopathy remedies or nutritional supplements. These natural therapies are good for patients, and as a bonus, you don't have to wear a chemical suit to handle them.

Furthermore, medicinal herbs, supplements and natural remedies don't cause cancer. They support and protect the immune system rather than destroying it. So they make patients healthier and more resilient rather than weaker and fragile.

But herbs, supplements and natural remedies don't earn much money for the cancer industry. Only the highly-toxic patented chemotherapy drugs bring in the big bucks. So that's what they deal in -- poison for the patients. And when you deal in poison, some of it always splashes back onto you.


Chemotherapy doesn't work
Beyond this whole issue of pharmacists and health care workers dying from exposure to secondhand chemotherapy, there's the issue of whether chemotherapy actually works in the first place. Scientifically speaking, if you take a good, hard look at what the published studies actually say, chemotherapy is only effective at treating less than two percent of the cancers that exist. And that two percent does not include breast cancer or prostate cancer.

Yet chemotherapy is routinely used to "treat" breast cancer even though it offers no benefit to breast cancer patients. In effect, the cancer industry is engaged in a criminal treatment hoax that promises to make you healthier but actually gives you even more cancer -- which is great for repeat business, but terrible for the cancer patients who suffer under it.

The level of quackery at work right now in the cancer industry is simply astonishing. You would think that if doctors and pharmacists were dishing out these chemicals to patients, they would make sure there was some sort of legitimate science to back them up. But they haven't. The science doesn't exist. Chemotherapy doesn't work at anything other than causing cancer -- and it accomplishes that indiscriminately, damaging any person it comes into contact with. Merely touching chemotherapy chemicals is dangerous for your health.

So if you're considering chemotherapy for yourself, think about this long and hard: If chemotherapy is so dangerous that it's giving the pharmacists cancer just from touching it, why on earth would you want to inject it into your body?

This is not an idle question. It is perhaps the most important question of all for someone considering conventional cancer treatment using chemotherapy. The question is essentially this: If chemotherapycauses cancer, how can it treat cancer?

Treating cancer with chemotherapy is like treating alcoholism with vodka. It's like treating heart disease with cheese, or like treating diabetes with high-fructose corn syrup. Cancer cannot be cured by the very thing that causes it.

And to those who deal in poison, watch out for the cause-and-effect laws of biology. If you deal in chemotherapy chemicals, don't be surprised if you get cancer one day. If you deal in chemical pesticides, don't be surprised if you get Alzheimer's. If you're a dentist installing mercury fillings in the mouths of clients, don't be surprised if one day you just go stark raving mad (because mercury causes insanity, and dentists breathe in mercury vapor thrown into the air from their drills).

If you work around chemicals, they will eventually impact your health, and never in a good way. There's a karmic element in all this, too: If you spend your life dishing out chemotherapy drugs as a pharmacist, you have a lot to answer for. You have been an enabler of a very real chemical holocaust against the people. Don't be surprised if that holocaust turns against you one day. Karma tends to work that way. Cause and effect is a universal law that cannot be escaped.

And if you're a cancer patient, I urge you to think twice about the toxicity of anything you might allow in your body. If you are trying to HEAL your body, why would you allow yourself to be poisoned with a chemical that causes cancer?

Don't let some cancer doctor talk you into chemotherapy using his fear tactics. They're good at that. So next time he insists that you take some chemotherapy, ask him to drink some first. If your oncologist isn't willing to drink chemotherapy in front of you to prove it's safe, why on earth would you agree to have it injected in your body?



Learn more: http://www.naturalne...l#ixzz2BwveSsyS


I know chemotherapy helps in stopping the division of rapidly dividing cells such as cancer cells but I was always uncomfortable with the idea that we are injecting poison into our body. It is more disturbing that health workers such as pharmacists, nurses and pharmacy technicians who work with chemotherapy are also harming themselves. I also have a friend who is a pharmacy technician at the BC Cancer Agency and compounds chemotherapy drugs regularly and kind of think about him and the health risk of his job. In my mind, modern medicine should start researching alternative ways to treat cancer patients but I guess money talks in the pharmaceutical industries.
  • 0

Posted Image


#2 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 11 November 2012 - 02:14 PM

A solution would be to use robotics to prepare chemotherapy medications in a fast, efficient, safe and accurate way to reduce health risks and exposure to health care workers.


  • 0

Posted Image


#3 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,689 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:19 PM

If medicinal herbs could actually cure/treat cancer, we would've not had any real problem with cancer.
  • 0
Posted Image

#4 canuckster19

canuckster19

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,543 posts
  • Joined: 16-August 03

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:24 PM

This would seem more legit if there wasn't a sales pitch for herbal remedies, which are an even bigger scam, halfway through the "article."

My sister seems to be doing alright after her bout with brain cancer, 10 years and no sign of it returning.

Edited by canuckster19, 11 November 2012 - 03:25 PM.

  • 0
Posted Image
Trekkie Monster says: GO CANUCKS GO!

Please read the Board Rules

#5 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,689 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:25 PM

I know some idiot that shells out $400 per month on junk naturopath powders that have done absolutely nothing to make her better. She has no more energy. She still has headaches.

And she's still depressed. Probably because she's shelling out tons of cash for garbage and knows she's an idiot for doing so, yet still does it, on account that naturopathy scams the weak and the desperate.
  • 0
Posted Image

#6 VICanucksfan5551

VICanucksfan5551

    Canucks Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,790 posts
  • Joined: 11-August 04

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:35 PM

Naturopaths who swindle cancer patients should go to jail.
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image

#7 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,689 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:36 PM

Then hell.
  • 0
Posted Image

#8 nux4lyfe

nux4lyfe

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,905 posts
  • Joined: 07-May 03

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:41 PM

That's how these things start off...a very, very, very loooong read and then, Bam! 'buy this product'.
  • 0

13zpnd4.jpg

Thank You Twilight Sparkle for the dope sig!


#9 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:42 PM

This would seem more legit if there wasn't a sales pitch for herbal remedies, which are an even bigger scam, halfway through the "article."

My sister seems to be doing alright after her bout with brain cancer, 10 years and no sign of it returning.


Well, it also depends on the patient and chemotherapy in some ways might be the only real option for those certain aggressive cancers. Am just thinking that its really all about money and how pharmaceuticals could patent their own products to make big profits. Obviously you can't patent a herb or something that is organically grown which is why there is less research and studies about natural remedies than there is about man made chemicals.
  • 0

Posted Image


#10 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:46 PM

That's how these things start off...a very, very, very loooong read and then, Bam! 'buy this product'.


The thing am more concerned about is the fact that healthy health workers who work with chemotherapy drugs and are constantly exposed to them. That is a real fact that pharmacy techs or pharmacists who handle the cytotoxic drugs are still not as protected as they should be in some places.
  • 0

Posted Image


#11 butters

butters

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,362 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 11 November 2012 - 03:59 PM

its funny how BS articles always sound the same, no matter the subject.
  • 0

#12 Wetcoaster

Wetcoaster

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 40,454 posts
  • Joined: 26-April 04

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:22 PM

This would seem more legit if there wasn't a sales pitch for herbal remedies, which are an even bigger scam, halfway through the "article."

My sister seems to be doing alright after her bout with brain cancer, 10 years and no sign of it returning.

You nailed that one.

And I can personally attest to the fact I would not be here today but for such treatment - I had spinal cancer.
  • 1
To err is human - but to really screw up you need a computer.

Always listen to experts. They'll tell you what can't be done and why. Then do it.

Quando Omni Flunkus Moritati

Illegitimi non carborundum.

Never try to teach a pig to sing - it wastes your time and annoys the pig.

#13 cj_coolcat

cj_coolcat

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,168 posts
  • Joined: 14-July 03

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:23 PM

In my mind, modern medicine should start researching alternative ways to treat cancer patients but I guess money talks in the pharmaceutical industries.


They are. Look up cancer research. It's all focused on getting away from chemotherapy and finding more targeted treatments that kill cancer cells but don't affect surrounding healthy cells. Technologies like siRNA and cancer vaccines are going to drastically change how cancer is treated in the very near future.
  • 0
QUOTE (kanadahockey @ Aug 20 2009, 08:48 AM) ah yes, comparing Natives to stray dogs wasn't critical of the Natives, it was actually critical of the Whites. How very White Man's Burden of you. Pip, pip and all that - let's retire to the library for cucumber sandwiches.

#14 Erik Karlsson

Erik Karlsson

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,713 posts
  • Joined: 24-March 09

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:23 PM

Too bad even if there is a cure we will never see it because Big Pharma doesn't make money off cures... they make it off treatments and such.

Edited by TheGame., 11 November 2012 - 04:24 PM.

  • 0

Posted Image

Credit to -Vintage Canuck-


#15 TOMapleLaughs

TOMapleLaughs

    Canucks Hall-of-Famer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 31,689 posts
  • Joined: 19-September 05

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:31 PM

Too bad even if there is a cure we will never see it because Big Pharma doesn't make money off cures... they make it off treatments and such.

A company that made a vaccine to cure cancer or aids would profit immensely, while crushing it's competitors. So either they are all in agreement to hide this vaccine. Or there is no vaccine.
  • 0
Posted Image

#16 butters

butters

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,362 posts
  • Joined: 23-July 04

Posted 11 November 2012 - 04:34 PM

Too bad even if there is a cure we will never see it because Big Pharma doesn't make money off cures... they make it off treatments and such.


Polio, Smallpox, RInderpest, guinea worm disease, hookworm, malaria, Lymphatic filariasis, measles, rubella, Onchocerciasis, Yaws all beg to differ
  • 1

#17 MadMonk

MadMonk

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 551 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 03

Posted 11 November 2012 - 05:29 PM

Too bad even if there is a cure we will never see it because Big Pharma doesn't make money off cures... they make it off treatments and such.


A company can charge a lot more, not less, for a cure than a treatment that may or may not work.
  • 0

#18 Aleksandr Pistoletov

Aleksandr Pistoletov

    Canucks Third-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,118 posts
  • Joined: 07-April 03

Posted 12 November 2012 - 03:04 AM

They are. Look up cancer research. It's all focused on getting away from chemotherapy and finding more targeted treatments that kill cancer cells but don't affect surrounding healthy cells. Technologies like siRNA and cancer vaccines are going to drastically change how cancer is treated in the very near future.

I hope so, one of my sisters (who just died yesterday as a result of organ failure after voluntarily ceasing her medications for months) grew up fighting leukemia, after 15 years, a few relapses, and several bone marrow transplants plus extensive chemotherapies finally beat it, but thanks to treatments had two other cancers develop which she also had to beat. I really hope for a breakthrough on chemo in these regards.

Edited by zaibatsu, 12 November 2012 - 03:05 AM.

  • 0

"When Jonah's agent called him and said Quentin Tarantino wanted to put him in a spaghetti western [Django Unchained], Jonah was like, 'You had me at spaghetti.'"

 

"Aziz has been charming audiences and snakes for years. And I guess you’re here tonight because now that Kanye had a real baby he doesn’t need you anymore."

 

 -- Jeff Ross

 

 


#19 Hobbes!!!

Hobbes!!!

    Canucks First-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,986 posts
  • Joined: 07-May 03

Posted 12 November 2012 - 06:28 AM

That article reminds me of articles written by botchford. Very needlessly dramatic.
  • 0


#20 Offensive Threat

Offensive Threat

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,396 posts
  • Joined: 18-March 03

Posted 12 November 2012 - 02:28 PM

Hey Pouria, Maybe you should not post this crap here. If you want to spend your money on snake oil go ahead but leave the rest of us out of it.
  • 0

Posted Image


#21 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 12 November 2012 - 10:07 PM

A company can charge a lot more, not less, for a cure than a treatment that may or may not work.


A company can profit more by charging multiple times to treat a disease vs. a one time payment for a cure. What are they going to charge for the cure? $10 million dollars??
  • 0

Posted Image


#22 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 12 November 2012 - 10:10 PM

Hey Pouria, Maybe you should not post this crap here. If you want to spend your money on snake oil go ahead but leave the rest of us out of it.


Forget about the article, am just wondering why we are still using chemotherapy to treat cancers when there should be other alternatives for treating it. Chemo doesn't work all the time and it could cause secondary and tertiary cancers but unfortunately it is the only option being pushed by big pharma.
  • 0

Posted Image


#23 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 12 November 2012 - 10:13 PM

I hope so, one of my sisters (who just died yesterday as a result of organ failure after voluntarily ceasing her medications for months) grew up fighting leukemia, after 15 years, a few relapses, and several bone marrow transplants plus extensive chemotherapies finally beat it, but thanks to treatments had two other cancers develop which she also had to beat. I really hope for a breakthrough on chemo in these regards.


The bad thing about chemo is not only it could cause other types of cancers but it can be harmful to doctors, nurses, pharmacists and pharmacy techs who dispense or administer the drug. Too bad most people here are ignorant of some of the chemicals that are in chemo drugs.
  • 0

Posted Image


#24 Nevlach

Nevlach

    Canucks Franchise Player

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,020 posts
  • Joined: 04-April 05

Posted 12 November 2012 - 10:27 PM

Well when you already have cancer......
  • 0
Posted Image
Posted Image

#25 Charlie.the.Unicorn

Charlie.the.Unicorn

    Canucks Prospect

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,398 posts
  • Joined: 10-July 07

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:16 PM

The bad thing about chemo is not only it could cause other types of cancers but it can be harmful to doctors, nurses, pharmacists and pharmacy techs who dispense or administer the drug. Too bad most people here are ignorant of some of the chemicals that are in chemo drugs.


I am pretty sure most people know that chemotherapy contains harmful drugs. Anything that makes you puke your guts out and lose hair doesn't sound appealing to most people.
  • 0

#26 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:24 PM

I am pretty sure most people know that chemotherapy contains harmful drugs. Anything that makes you puke your guts out and lose hair doesn't sound appealing to most people.


Well, it is actually more potent and toxic than what you described. The fact that touching or even breathing particulates from these drugs might cause healthy individuals to eventually get cancer is more disturbing. The techs have to wear double nitrile and surgical gloves, gowns and prepare these chemicals in laminar flow hoods because of its toxicity.
  • 0

Posted Image


#27 MadMonk

MadMonk

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 551 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 03

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:27 PM

A company can profit more by charging multiple times to treat a disease vs. a one time payment for a cure. What are they going to charge for the cure? $10 million dollars??


If a course of a chemotherapy costs $10,000 and have a success rate of (say) 50%, would you not pay at least that for a treatment that has 100% success rate?

Forget about the article, am just wondering why we are still using chemotherapy to treat cancers when there should be other alternatives for treating it. Chemo doesn't work all the time and it could cause secondary and tertiary cancers but unfortunately it is the only option being pushed by big pharma.


What alternatives do you propose? Currently you either undergo surgery, radiation or chemotherapy. Usually you need a combination to maximize the chance of success.
  • 0

#28 Pouria

Pouria

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,933 posts
  • Joined: 25-October 08

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:29 PM

If a course of a chemotherapy costs $10,000 and have a success rate of (say) 50%, would you not pay at least that for a treatment that has 100% success rate?



What alternatives do you propose? Currently you either undergo surgery, radiation or chemotherapy. Usually you need a combination to maximize the chance of success.


Well, like some other posters said, there could be other alternatives to chemo.
  • 0

Posted Image


#29 MadMonk

MadMonk

    Comets Star

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 551 posts
  • Joined: 11-January 03

Posted 12 November 2012 - 11:38 PM

Well, like some other posters said, there could be other alternatives to chemo.


Sure when they work they will replace the current treatment. However the point is at present you can't avoid chemotherapy, and questioning its current usage is pointless.

Yes it is toxic, and yes it is not 100% effective, but it is one of the few things that are actually helpful to a cancer patient.
  • 0

#30 Offensive Threat

Offensive Threat

    Canucks Second-Line

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,396 posts
  • Joined: 18-March 03

Posted 13 November 2012 - 12:45 AM

Forget about the article, am just wondering why we are still using chemotherapy to treat cancers when there should be other alternatives for treating it. Chemo doesn't work all the time and it could cause secondary and tertiary cancers but unfortunately it is the only option being pushed by big pharma.


Who says there should be other alternatives to chemo? There SHOULD be miracle cures for everything but this is the real world and we have to deal with whats available. Right now Chemo, surgery and the related drugs are our only real choice in most Cancer cases. Im old enough to remember when Cancer in most cases was a death sentence and Im young enough to believe there may be a near 100% survival rate during my lifetime. Through improvements in Chemo or other treatments not yet invented. But this whole "I dont think we should be doing chemo, it seems dangerous" mentality is foolish. Of course its dangerous. If you have Cancer its the lesser evil.

And dont even go into the whole Big Pharma conspiracy BS. The researchers at UBC and the BC cancer institute are in on the conspiracy? The researchers all around the world are in on it? Thats ludicrous and insulting.
  • 0

Posted Image





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

Canucks.com is the official Web site of The Vancouver Canucks. The Vancouver Canucks and Canucks.com are trademarks of The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership.  NHL and the word mark and image of the Stanley Cup are registered trademarks and the NHL Shield and NHL Conference logos are trademarks of the National Hockey League. All NHL logos and marks and NHL team logos and marks as well as all other proprietary materials depicted herein are the property of the NHL and the respective NHL teams and may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of NHL Enterprises, L.P.  Copyright © 2009 The Vancouver Canucks Limited Partnership and the National Hockey League.  All Rights Reserved.