Slashdot Mirror

but I don't think there is some big conspiracy to block it or actual cures. I think the much simpler solution is that curing most diseases is much harder than curing it. And drug companies do come out with things like antibiotics that do in fact cure disease.

With all due respect, like most people inside and outside the medical community, you've been fed a line of complete bullshit.

I've got karma to burn so here goes (this is just scratching the surface):

Cancer-Gate: How to Win the Losing Cancer War by Samuel S. Epstein, M.D.

Harvard Medical Students Rebel Against Big Pharma Ties

"More Marketing Than Science" - An Anonymous Confession About Deceptive Marketing Published in the British Medical Journal

Big pharma loves the (non-stop) war on cancer

The Nature of the Pharmaceutical Industry

Big Pharmaâ(TM)s War on Health

The drugs donâ(TM)t work: a modern medical scandal ~ Ben Goldacre

Money, Politics, and Health Care: A Disease-Creation Economy â" Part I by Mark Hyman, MD

Corruption in Drug Research and in Medicine

A.M.A. and the Drug Cartel

The Disease Economy

25 Shocking Facts That Prove That The Entire U.S. Health Care Industry Has Become One Giant Money Making Scam

Scientific Sleight of Hand: Two Ways Big Pharma Lies to You

People & Power - Drug Money

The 6 Types of Pills Big Pharma Wants You Hooked On for Life

Should We Stop Trying To Cure Cancer?

Top Ten Reasons To Avoid Your Doctor

Doctored - The Movie

The Cure For Cancer Suppressed

Good luck getting ethics board approval for infecting a bunch of East African to see what happens.

Whatever you say, dude! As if the kind of people (eugenicists and their NWO ilk) capable of pulling such an atrocious stunt - as they've consistently shown themselves - would run it by an ethics board first. ROFL!

Seriously, drink your kool-aid (ahem... flouridated tap water) and be sure not to visit this page.

Go on, take the blue pill; trust me, it's a lot less disturbing...

Don't worry about a few parts per quadrillion of who the heck knows what.

You should worry about the massive amounts of fluoride that is being placed deliberately in our drinking water despite many known dangers. This extremely toxic and dangerous substance is being put into our water in massive quantities, on purpose, allegedly to help our teeth.

FDA making sure your food is safe... that's an illusion.

Have you looked at the meet and dairy food industry lately? FDA has approved a whole bunch of crap (engineered hormones, like rBGH) produced by Monsanto to boost production in these fields. The FDA seems not to care that this can increase cancer, and make cows sick.

read this:
http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/bgh.htm

FTFA:
While rBGH is banned in Europe and Canada, and has been boycotted by 95 percent of US dairy farmers, the FDA, Environmental Protection Agency and Department of Agriculture continue to license the drug (and other new genetically engineered foods) without pre-market safety tests.

I'm glad that I live in Canada, where this is banned. FDA... whatever. I don't like puss in my milk tyvm.

They've been doing it for a long time. Back in the 20s and 30s when "nudist colonies" started up in the US, one of the primary reasons was health. Of course, they emphasized total health - diet, exercise, et al. - one component of which was letting the sun and breeze hit your whole body.

Interesting that a remedy from ancient times has been the sun bath.
Walt Whitman
Some "Wellness Cafe"
Another site

IMHO (with no medical training), one of the bad things about sun exposure is the way we "binge" and "starve" ourselves. In the summer, people will work in an office all week then go to the beach and be in the sun for 10 hours. Or we cower in our offices during winter and then fly to some sunny clime and lay on the beach for a week. Not good.

- Jasen.

Well I'm not a pro-debater/arguer/political activist. I'm not all refined and politically correct. But I do believe without question, that I am competent enough to decide what goes into my body and what does not. I resent and find it insulting that people would suggest that I or anyone is too stupid to think for themselves and make their own decisions for themselves. Trust the experts because you couldn't possibly understand. So shut-up and bendover and take whatever they tell you too. That's extremely offensive to me.

There are professionals who have counter arguments, so I will defer with some links to them and their arguments:

Mercola.com: Dr Mercola's site is good (Vid and article):
Shocking Documentary Will Convince You to Stay Away From Vaccines For Good

Alex Jones ranting on the topic, with political cartoons cycled for images to the audio stream (Sorry, I'm no fan of Alex Jones, but sometimes he does have facts to back up his sensationalism)

Tons of links and further stuff here regarding vaccines
Vaccine deception and tragedy

the doctor within (a great site IMO)
THE SANCTITY OF HUMAN BLOOD: VACCINATION I$ NOT IMMUNIZATION

VACCINES, ANTHRAX, AND WAR: THE MARKETING OF DISASTER

and this "here are already 82 reports of serious adverse events filed with the FDA.(mercola dot com)
"In the case reports submitted to VAERS, five of the reactions were described as "life-threatening," six were "disabling," and 210 (54.5 percent) had "not recovered" as of the date data were provided by VAERS. Hospitalization was reported in 12 cases and two-thirds sought additional care in an emergency room or doctor's office (see Use of Health Services section)."

With potential side effects up to death according to Alex Jones, reports of Eubola virus like reactions to the vaccine (bleeding out of every orifice). And that the vaccine is only supposedly protective against 4 of hundreds of known HPV variants that could cause cancer. And for me personally I'm skeptical it can protect against anything. I bet this will actually cause cancer in many people who receive it. So again no thanks.

Just so you know, I don't believe in evolution.

I aggree that if these things got out there would be changes. But no more than any other evolutionary change. Both are equally unpredictable.

If this was to happen at random in nature, it would be amazing and wonderful, but if we caused it due to a desire, its evil bad and distructive, for the same exact reason, because we (Humans) dont know what it will do.

Why is the reaction different?

IIRC according to the theory, it takes a really long time for significant changes to occur. What's happening now is like an "over night" kind of thing. What these guys are doing is taking some genes from one species and putting it into another. That's like recombining the branches on the evolution tree. I've never seen a tree do that or a frog with feathers. It really isn't natural. The point people are trying to make is that you have to have studies on the affects of something like the fish getting into the wild before releasing it in the "wild". It may be harmless, it might not be...who knows? Better to err on the side of caution.

Now, if we could do that to ourselfs, the same 'oh no its bad!' reaction would happen. But if it was a natural mutation.. for the same thing.. What then? Would it be bad then too? Would it be ok? Why?

When parents have a child that is not "normal", they usually try to correct the deformity. Maybe people are born without legs because nature knows that most of us drive cars now. That doesn't make sense. I know your example was extreme and so is mine.
If evolution as a theory is correct, you'd think that nature would make small changes so as not to upset the balance. Metaphorically not throwing a big rock into a small pool.

So lets look at small changes. GM grains. They are evil because, why again? They compete with life like everything else and happen to be better than the things they kill off?

From personal experience, I have allergic reactions to GM crops like Canola and Soya. I never had problems with food before now. I have to actually read what is on the labels before I buy something (a good practice anyway). Canola is resistant to pests because it's basically a poison "they" just modify it so that you can tolerate it. If you check out the history of soy you'll see that it was never meant to be eaten (especially at the quantities we injest now). Again, it's modified so we can eat it.
Why do they modify these plants? Just because they're cheaper to grow. What I really don't like is that they also modify the plants so that they are sterile...which means that if you plant these crops in the field, you'll have to buy their patented seeds from them every year (increasing their profits). Sterile not meaning that they don't produce polen which can go anywhere.
I've even heard stories of companines suing farmers because they try to reuse seeds (before they got the sterility right) they produced under patent infringment laws.

What about if we could genetically change a human to not be allergic to something (Say, milk) is that as equally as bad if these changed humans get out and reproduce?

Right now we have both types of humans, the 'older' strains that are allergic to cows milk, and the 'newer' strain that isnt and can drink it.
Its a small gene change but it is no different if we do it or it 'just happens'.

You're not necessarily born with allergies. In the case of milk allergies, you can grow out of them.
"old strain" - It's dangerous to start classifying people by what genes they have...think about it...

A fish is a larger change. But its the same example, whats the differce if it just naturally happened? And who are we to say it never would?

Maybe thats just a far out way of thinking, but no one that reacts