Rate of the disease

I just disproved here and here Apologize.

>muh oligarch conspiracy theory
I am sure the illuminati does rule the world, but this is unrelated.

Exactly. This makes cancer difficult to cure/prevent, whereas 1 antibiotic or preventative measure like sanitation and disinfection often has an effect on a multitude of infectious diseases. So now that we can cure/prevent most infectious disease, people live on until they get cancer (or heart disease).

wrong.
cancer cases expected to soar by 70%

independent.ie/irish-news/ireland-warned-of-cancer-epidemic-35763209.html

drsircus.com/general/cancer-epidemic-getting-worse/

>incidence of cancer at 1 in 2
scienceblog.cancerresearchuk.org/2015/02/04/why-are-cancer-rates-increasing/

theguardian.com/society/2014/feb/03/worldwide-cancer-cases-soar-next-20-years

who.int/mediacentre/news/releases/2003/pr27/en/

>More Younger Women Getting Breast Cancer

articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/05/21/breast-cancer-young-women.aspx

youtube.com/watch?v=lINa5jGEQ5w

its not really difficult to cure, its difficult to bypass bureaucracy setup by political and corporate interests.

protip: cures have been sidelined and ignored for a while

a cure from 1959 that they have since "rediscovered" every few decade without putting to practice

UNUSUAL 'CURE' OF A CANCER CITED; Blood of Melanoma Victim Helped Second Sufferer, Two Physicians Report

The strange disappearance of cancer in a patient who had received about half a pint of blood from a woman who had spontaneously "recovered" from the same disease was reported here yesterday.

nytimes.com/1959/04/03/archives/unusual-cure-of-a-cancer-cited-blood-of-melanoma-victim-helped.html

It is because we can cure other diseases but cancer is more difficult to cure as I explained here , cancers in young people only make up a small proportion of cancer deaths and the major causes of each individual type of cancer has been ascertained as I explained here here and here 2917819

An article from 1959 does not meet scientific standards of proof. If we were to accept this as proof it follows we must accept a newspaper article about batboy as proof that batboy is real.

lay off the glue. you did not explain jackshit.

so clinical evidence of curing is not proof? you dont need to embarass your retarded self any more. leave the thread troll

>cancer cases expected to soar by 70%
Jumping from 3.0 per 100,000 to 5.1 per 100,000.
I'm so scared now.

[Citation needed]

Citation needed and not some meme infograph, I mean an actual verified and well acknowledged source.

Sure, but the biggest factor by far is age.

it is 1 in 2 people. meaning 50% of the population
cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/risk/lifetime-risk

by 2020 it is 80% of the population

> in 1880s was 1 in 70
>1920s 1 in 50
>1970s 1 in 10
>2000s 1 in 2

the oligarchs get the cures and live to a ripe old age. the plebs get the epidemic and get to panic about russia and the climate instead of getting cured

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combinatorial_ablation_and_immunotherapy

president Reagan's medical history, though guarded by privacy, reveals that he had skin cancer [ 1987 ], colon cancer [ 1985 ] and prostate cancer [ 1987 ] during his presidency.

"He died at age 93, and not from cancer. " [ Although President Reagan refused America's outdated cancer treatments, he did not share his cancer story with his fellow Americans. ]

>Rockefeller 102 yrs old
>Jimmy Carter 93 yrs old, cured of metatstatic cancer in 2015
>Gerald Ford 93 yrs old
>Reagan 93 yrs old, cured of metatstatic cancers (colon, prostate, skin) in 1985
>George Bush 93 yrs old
>Henry Kissinger 93 yrs old
>Charles W. Robinson 95 yrs old
>Robert S. Ingersoll 96 yrs old
>Andrew Marshall 95 yrs old
>Prince Philip 95 yrs old
>Zbigniew Brzezinski 90 yrs old

consider the fact that cancer treatments have remained the same for 100 years using archaic radiotherapy and chemo

consider the fact that immunotherapy, cryoimmunotherapy have been around for over 100 years, but suppressed and avoided by medical establishment

consider the fact that the FDA setup red-tape and expensive phased clinical trials to delay and discourage new treatments

also it has been proven that diseases like cancer can be treated with a combination/cocktail of old common, cheap, repurposed drugs and other suppressed alternatives

while they got the goyim worried about the climate, they are culling them with cancer

Thats run by the oligarchs too though.

[Citation needed]

'1 in 2 people will develop cancer in their lifetime', it will be over 70% by 2020
medicalnewstoday.com/articles/288916.php

In 1971, when President Richard M. Nixon initiated the War on Cancer, the average person had a 1 in 10 risk of developing cancer in his or her lifetime. Today, that's changed – for the worse. The risk as of 2005 is 1 in 2.

this is the major cause of rapid decline in western populations

cancer is now as common as the flu, that is intentional. the existing cures for cancer are intentionally suppressed.

the great culling/poisoning orchestrated by CIA, CFR, etc has led to dramatic population declines. the genocide machine is being refueled by new immigrants to pack into the poison chambers

Belongs in Veeky Forums
Sage

...

don't forget that the world we live in today is first driven by financial reasons. These are the reasons that lead to wars, etc. that are a reality of today. Today, every large company has employees specifically allocated to perform lobby and make sure the regulations are in line with their (financial) needs. In this context, I do not expect a general acceptance of anti-cancer solutions such as 3BP or Salinomycin on short term. Or in other words, I do not expect a top-down acceptance. Instead, I expect that the process will be bottom-up, starting with discussions on interwebz, and with awareness more and more patients will adopt this (either going to specialized clinics such as Dayspring or administrated themselves at home). And this takes time, I think. Fortunately, we have the internet that will accelerate the process :)

Wow good post, I haven't look into these for a while. All of them work well in so many different ways. You know I have old papers, on most of them. But its on my old computer's hard drive. with reports on useing them from cancer forum patient. going back years who have tried them for a while. then posted there results from useing them. You know there so many diferent cancer fighting componds that work. Some a lot better the just stoping the curb cycle (the way cells devid) like chemo and radiation dos. Im just amaze they with all the cancer resurch that been going on over the last 100 years doctors still keep useing chemo and radiation.

Most of the drugs are off patent so no drug company will invest money on trials, the same with certain immune system modulators and non surgical procedures

>[Citation needed]
It's actually rather simple, the longer the average lifespan the higher the chances to eventually develop cancer

It shouldn't be surprising. There are billions of dollars in profits to be made from cancer treatment. Why cure it when you can sustain the business model with a limitless supply of desperate patients?

[Citation needed]

and as the articles ITT mentioned, lifespan in US remained constant while cancer rates increase to 80% of the population.

Did you know that before 1973 it was illegal in the US to profit off of health care. The Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973 passed by Nixon changed everything

>the law Nixon mandated also included clauses that encouraged medical providers to not CURE afflictions, but to PROLONG them by only treating the symptoms. There’s no money to be made in CURING sickness.

Is the health insurance business a racket? Yes, literally. And this is why the shameless pandering to robber baron corporations posing as “health providers” is such an egregious … and obvious … tactic to do nothing more than plump up insurance company profits.

the downfall of the American health insurance system falls squarely on the shoulders of former President Richard M. Nixon.

In 1973, Nixon did a personal favor for his friend and campaign financier, Edgar Kaiser, then president and chairman of Kaiser-Permanente. Nixon signed into law, the Health Maintenance Organization Act of 1973, in which medical insurance agencies, hospitals, clinics and even doctors, could begin functioning as for-profit business entities instead of the service organizations they were intended to be

Immunotherapy/Warburg's metabolic treatments have been called quackery by the medical establishment ignoring research and clinical evidence:

>Coley's Immunotherapy suppressed for 100 years
>Arnott's cryotherapy suppressed for 100 years
>Warburg's metabolic approach suppressed for 90 years
>adjuvant hyperthermia has been suppressed 100 years
>invivo tumor lysate vaccine suppressed 100 years

>Photodynamic therapy suppressed for 50 years

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Coley

>archaic
1800s saw the birth of mass communication as well as modern oncology.

The radio, telephone, radiation therapy, and oncological surgery were prevelant 100 years ago.

100 years later, you have, for as little as $50 anyone can purchase a handheld, portable, flat device that features high-definition color display, FM radio, internet access, telephone communication, music playback, live audio/video conferencing, streaming, recording, gaming, word processing, GPS, camera and other advanced capabilities.

100 years you have: Warburg, HIFU, cryoablation, RF ablation, photodynamic therapy, laser ablation, MWA, immunotherapy all being neglected

and just use the same rusty, old chemo/radio

this is insane!
why are people being distracted with climate change when there is a real ebalo-tier epidemic that is expected to impact 80% of the population by 2020s?

>inb4 elderly disease
as discussed in the articles ITT, its not an elderly disease, unless you consider anyone past 20 to be too old to live

Lifestyle?
It wasn't exactly common for people to lie on the beaches and get a tan before 1945

skin malignancies does not account for all increases in disease, as mentioned in the articles ITT.

not that your statement matters, but follow a policy of backing up your statements with articles:
>It wasn't exactly common for people to lie on the beaches and get a tan before 1945
[Citation needed]

Cancer 'is purely man-made' say scientists after finding almost no trace of disease in Egyptian mummies

dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1320507/Cancer-purely-man-say-scientists-finding-trace-disease-Egyptian-mummies.html

Logically explain what you do not understand about my argument.

That is a newspaper article not clinical evidence. I can't find referrals to clinical evidence in the article or any other source.

With a simple bing search you can easily find evidence that the risk of cancer increases with age and death by diseases besides cancer (and heart disease) is on the decline while life expectancy is increasing.

sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/07/120702134732.htm
nih.gov/news-events/news-releases/nih-study-offers-insight-into-why-cancer-incidence-increases-age
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4544764/
cdc.gov/healthywater/drinking/history.html
businessinsider.com/the-most-common-cause-of-death-at-every-age-2014-5?IR=T
ssa.gov/oact/NOTES/as120/images/LifeTables_Body-2a.gif

because we can cure other diseases but cancer is harder to cure as explained here and elsewhere
>ages
Confirmation bias. Did you include the ages of those who weren't so lucky?
>cancer treatments have remained the same for 100 years
wrong, most chemotherapy does not involve radiation, even if it did the age of a treatment has no bearing on its validity, the smallpox vaccine is over 200 years old
>goyim
confirmed /pol/, life is short, I'm through

You're a funny guy

the cause of the epidemic which will cull the majority of the population is intertwined with industrial toxins, pollutions, and modern western lifestyle promoted by corporations, politicians and social engineers.

it took 100 years for the authorities to acknowledge that smoking is harmful to health

it will take 1000 years for the authorities to allow minimally-invasive, effective, curative treatments with great safety profile

the cures are suppressed. they want you to not exist.

>Cancer 'is purely man-made' say scientists after finding almost no trace of disease in Egyptian mummies

And yet, off the top of my head, we know Empress Theodora died of breast cancer.

see
>and as the articles ITT mentioned, lifespan in US remained constant while cancer rates increase to 80% of the population.
if you feel you dont trust confirmed clinical reports of nationally-recognized physicians posted in NYT, then you are a special type of idio

the increase in humans is man-made. thats the result of the research

In the 1920s scientists showed that cigarette smoking caused lung cancer.[224] Which resulted in no governmental ban on smoking.

In the UK and the USA, an increase in lung cancer rates was being picked up by the 1930s, but the cause for this increase remained suppressed. Decades followed of suppression of truth, unsuccessful attempts by victims to sue the companies and government protecting the interests of the tobacco mafia.

After 7 decades, and millions dead, the tobacco mafia in the United States has suffered greatly since the mid-1990s, when it was successfully sued by several U.S. states. The suits claimed that tobacco causes cancer, that companies in the industry knew this, and that they deliberately denied the legitimacy of their findings, contributing to the illness and death of millions worldwide.

The industry was found to have decades of internal memos confirming in detail that tobacco (which contains nicotine) is both addictive and carcinogenic (cancer-causing

There have been multiple court cases on the issue that tobacco companies have researched the health effects of tobacco, but suppressed the findings or formatted them to imply lessened or no hazard

yet compare the benefit of doubt towards deadly tobacco with the prolonged, bureaucratic burden of proof for modern, elegant, non-brute force, safe, cheap cancer cures

is the world being setup for culling?
scientists warn a global pandemic is imminent that could depopulate the planet

hypothetically, there exists cheap old drugs that can be repurposed to treat the pandemic.

FDA requires 30 years of testing before the existing drug can be repurposed and approved to treat another disease

so even if there exists a known treatment, it will not be available to the public for 30 years, after most of the population is culled.

Funny how ebola vaccines just appeared out of nowhere in six months or so.

FDA CONFIRMS NO EBOLA VACCINE FOR USA.

Mate if the FDA in its current form existed in 1953 we wouldn't have a polio vaccine

It costs billions of dollars just to get a fucking drug approved by the FDA

you could be sitting on the literal cure to cancer but you would never get it to the public because you'd go broke trying to jump through layer after layer after layer of red tape

Think about all the potential cures for lupus that have all sorts of FDA and market based obstacles. Try hookworm, gets rid of most autoimmunity. There are medical leeches, why not medical hookworm? It is the missing piece of "probiotics", helminths (worms) co-evolved with humans and when they are gone people get allergies, MS, eczema, etc. This can be seen in Africa. Autoimmunity shows up fairly soon after people are given de-worming meds. When eosinophil white blood cells have nothing to attack (they fight multicellular parasites, not bacteria or viruses) they cause allergies. Pretty much all autoimmunity is mediated by an immune process that goes away once the person is exposed to certain commensal/mutalisitic/symbiotic bacteria (and in this case mostly helminths). I know multiple people who no longer have allergies or asthma. Like Phage Therapy, FDA makes this basically impossible, as the pharma industry lawyers (who also work for FDA) care more about Jew malpractice lawsuits than they do about your life expectancy

off-patent drugs which are blocked for re-purposing by FDA regulations

This keeps the monopoly and profit margins high, as people have no options but to obtain unaffordable drugs approved by FDA.

THE FDA thinks a specific number of rat turds and meat is acceptable in your food.

Seriously, don't cheerlead for the FDA. They need to go.

If all the stuff in this thread is true, China is going to beat the shit out of us.

g'luck getting that in US. it took from 2003 to get some traction for the vaccine, still no approval in US.

penicillin and aspirin would not be available to the public if it would have received the modern clinical trial treatment

oh it is. China is waaay ahead in the game. CRISPR, combo-immunotherapy gene therapy and stem cells, US and its vassals are fukt.

>14 years of regulatory BS
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RVSV-ZEBOV_vaccine

>Russia treated cancer w/ photo-dynamic therapy for over 20 years

>USSR treated cancer w/ virotherapy since the 90s (Rigvir)

>Cuba has real cancer vaccines

>China has real gene therapy Gendicine

>China treats most solid cancers w/ ablation (HIFU, RF, cryo etc) since the 1990s
>China offering advanced procedures including Molecular Targeted Therapy, HIFU, cryoablation, gamma knife, photo-dynamic therapy, targeted therapy, stem-cell therapy, immune cell therapy, NK Immunotherapy, CRISPR and gene therapy.

with an 80% cancer incidence in the next few years, say so long to burgers and the west. the cull will provide china the planet

modern western medicine comes from a long tradition of eugenics

the technology/methods to cure cancer have been available for atleast 50 years

protip: invivo tumor lysate vaccine

shit like: invivo tumor lysate vaccine, adjuvant hyperthermia has been around for at least 100 years

we are 50 years behind in treatment
the chinese have adopted treatments that are still being denied in the west

Using chemo to kill cancer is like using a shotgun to remove a wart.

Medical advances in chemo will eventually make it like using a rifle to remove a wart.

We need to stop improving faulty methods and start using ignored methods: immunotherapy, cryoablation

Sell em a treatment. Never a cure.

Cancer treatments make hospitals and the pharmaceutical industries billions of dollars, why would they have any incentive to ever cure or find better treatments for cancer?

why and how did the FDA approve the non-therapeutic, risky and lifethreatening, sex reassignment surgery and therapy as a standard treatment for those gender dysphoria mental disorder?

why and how did the FDA approve the risky and lifethreatening, non-therapeutic circumcision of male infants as a standard treatment in newborns?

Unwilling parents are even persuaded by doctors to have non-therapeutic circumcision of their newborn male children.

and why does the FDA deny, reject, and disapprove of life-saving, therapeutic cancer treatments that are practiced in other countries?

US covers up short life expectancy by importing millions of elderly immigrants from China, Mexico, India, Asia etc...

if the US were not practicing this, it would reveal a massive die-off of the native population

here is a useful insight on this matter

In 2010, more than three in eight (.25 percent) U.S. adults ages 65 and older were foreign born, a share that is expected to continue to grow. The U.S. elderly immigrant population rose from 2.7 million in 1990 to 4.6 million in 2010, a 70 percent increase in 20 years.

>the elite have access to suppressed medicine and cancer cure

what explains the historical discrepancy between the population being killed off by cancer and other diseases while the elites get cures?

its no coincidence that after Nixon no president has died before 93

its no coincidence that after Nixon no president has died of their metastatic cancer, but instead were cured (ie Reagan (colon, prostate, skin), Carter)

it is no coincidence that there is a cancer epidemic in the US and youngins are dying from the same shit that the prez' got cured from

100% of people get cancer now.

You have it, right now.

Cancerous cells happen all the time, whether they become malignant and metastasize is another thing, but pretty much everyone has some, and everyone develops some eventually. Live long enough, and eventually one will be malignant.

Yet humans have the lowest incidence of cancer of any mammal (save those few with an excess of the TP53 gene - such as elephants), despite being in close proximity to a lot more carcinogens than most, which is one of those mysteries oncologists have been confused about for a long time.

Further, death rates from cancer have been going nowhere but down. The only charts that give the illusion that cancer rates are on the rise, don't take population growth, age, and increased longevity into account.

Finally, this is neither History nor Humanities:

if ebola epidemic was in the US in 2003 it would take 14 years for the drug finish phase 3 clinical trial and still not be available to the public.

a cancer epidemic does exist, the cure has existed for over a few decades. by the time it will be available, china would have settled north america.

In a land mark article, John Bailar published in the “New England Journal of Medicine” “Are we losing the war on cancer?”

We recently confirmed that this is, still the case. We obtained from the WHO mortality time-series data of 20 countries over 45 years (1960–2015). During these 50 years the age standardised cancer death rate has varied little (−4%).

These data confirm the preliminary results from Bailar and contradict the notion of a breakthrough in cancer prevention, early detection, and cancer treatment (Summa 2012). Today, as before, cancer to the notable exception of some childhood malignancies and of lymphoma remains almost universally fatal.

Today cancer is an epidemic. Tomorrow the Chinese replace you.

In 1957, the first results from a clinical trial of the diabetes drug metformin in patients were published. Yet, it would take nearly 40 years for the drug to be approved in the United States as a treatment for type 2 diabetes.

The information you will learn is mostly censored and banned in the United States when it comes to cancer treatment, as only pharmaceutical products approved by the FDA are allowed to treat cancer in the U.S.

Unfortunately, the pharmaceutical industry and the U.S. government has lost the war on cancer.

At the beginning of the last century, one person in twenty would get cancer. In the 1940s it was one out of every sixteen people. In the 1970s it was one person out of ten. Today one person out of three gets cancer in the course of their life.

The cancer industry is probably the most prosperous business in the United States. In 2014, there will be an estimated 1,665,540 new cancer cases diagnosed and 585,720 cancer deaths in the U.S. $6 billion of tax-payer funds are cycled through various federal agencies for cancer research, such as the National Cancer Institute (NCI). The NCI states that the medical costs of cancer care are $125 billion, with a projected 39 percent increase to $173 billion by 2020.

The simple fact is that the cancer industry employs too many people and produces too much income to allow a cure to be found. All of the current research on cancer drugs is based on the premise that the cancer market will grow, not shrink.

And the U. S. A. doesn't have "severe scientific and political conflicts of interest"?! Give me a break!

>humans have the lowest incidence of cancer
WRONG.
50% incidence is far from lowest.

Chemotherapy has only a 2.1% success rate

chrisbeatcancer.com/how-effective-is-chemotherapy/

scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/09/16/two-percent-gambit-chemotherapy/

It is clear we are still living in the stone age.

>intense radiation with radiotherapy
>cell damaging chemicals with chemotherapy
>disfiguring surgeries such as a mastectomy

Will doctors ever admit, that we have no idea what we are doing with cancer? And that the current practices are insane? No doubt, 100 years from now, people will look back and laugh at how barbaric we were.

why is the epidemic being suppressed?

How much of this is caused by people no longer dying young, in war or due to things like malnutrition and infection as opposed to immune systems and cancer rates growing?

none. life expectancy has remained the same over the last few decades, while disease rates have increased from minority of the population to majority of the population

>and as the articles ITT mentioned, lifespan in US remained constant while cancer rates increase to 80% of the population.

post your face when you realise, they are opening borders to cover up the culling of their own peoples

you shouldn't expose your ignorance and illiteracy like that.

everyone has benign conditions. malignant cases is the disease itself and is now an epidemic.

the genocide is beyond a doubt!

~20 years ago ebola vaccine was ready to save lives!! it just now went thru all the regulatory b.s and still not allowed to be used in the US!!

>The researchers said tests in people might start within two years, and a product could potentially be ready for licensing by 2010 or 2011.

>It never happened. The vaccine sat on a shelf. Only now is it undergoing the most basic safety tests in humans

nytimes.com/2014/10/24/health/without-lucrative-market-potential-ebola-vaccine-was-shelved-for-years.html?_r=1

seriously, the west is fucked

actually its intentionally under-reported/mis-reported as complications/suicides/over-doses. the authorities really dont want to cause alarm and public panic of the epidemic, they try to focus public panic and hysteria on oligarch issues: global warming or russia

One time I heard the head of the intensive care unit give a talk in which he bragged about how he had one of the lowest mortality rates in his unit. I went out to lunch with him, where he became a bit inebriated, and told me how he managed to get those statistics---by wheeling the dying patients out into the corridor where they died and didn't sully our departments record.

>Lets skew those statistics any way that looks good to us.

With the projected statistics for cancer in this country at 8 of 10 Americans will develop cancer in their lifetime