Discussion in 'Off-topic Zone' started by jobberone, Mar 29, 2013.
Yeah, but there's no money in the cure.
It is absolutely absurd to think that big pharma would be hiding drugs such as a cure for cancer.
First of all, any company that actually patents a drug would hold a patent for 17 years and generate what would potentially be close to a trillion dollars in revenue in reality. Competition drives the market as well and many companies have been pursuing the immonology route precisely because of it's potential effectiveness. There is plenty of money in finding a cure. In fact, it's a golden egg.
Secondly, people in big pharma also have family members that are struck with cancer and situations of grief. They too have reason to find a cure.
Third, to act as if 'small pharma' and a bunch of 'naturalists' aren't motivated by money, when naturalists often charge ridiculous margins on their 'magical potions', is delusional thinking. It is different when one tells a person to live a clean, simple and natural lifestyle, by reducing processed food to when the situation is of an extreme nature, i.e. disease has already taken route in the body and the malfunction now exists. This is why antiobiotics have been so revolutionary in saving human lives in emergency situations, when for the traditional man, people could die from a small wound that got infected.
There are surely issues with big pharma, but those issues are like any business. Among them the pursuit of a particular path to treat cancer and alter course to pursue a different venue would lead to plenty of sunk costs, and we all know people have a hard time letting go of sunk costs.
The drug seems promising, the main issue I could see right now is that it's a
'mouse model'. Besides the fact that killing cancer in vitro or in vivo is totally separate issues, going from mouse to human also has different complications.
The problem has never been about killing cancer cells it is killing the cells without killing the person in the process.
Exactly, my mother recently broke her ankle and is in a nursing home because the bones can't heal while she is on chemo, because the bone heals from dividing cells and chemo stops the cancer cells, and all other cells, from dividing. Since chemo keeps the bones from dividing, they took her off chemo, which is kind of risky. But if she doesn't want a broken ankle for a really long time, it was necessary. Dad and I went to see her yesterday and she's back on chemo and feeling good, too good actually, and she'll be going home within a month.
Interesting argument, though I would not say absurd.
If Exxon discovers a way to fuel our cars indefinitely, do you believe they would release it? They have relatives who need to fuel their vehicles too.
I pray everything works out for you and your family.
Thanks, Dooms. I hate cancer. It's such a stupid thing that we should have eradicated long ago. I think she'll be OK. I lost my grandpa to cancer when I was young and things have come a long way since then. For me, it seems like one thing after another of bad news. But I'll get through it. It makes me stronger. Again, thanks.
Yes, if Exxon could have a patent on the way everyone on earth fuels their vehicles they would release it. Oil is expensive and dangerous to find, refine, and bring to market. The reason oil companies make such enormous profits is because it's such a high volume business. Just go outside and listen to how many engines you hear. Our way of life is dependent on oil based fuels. But if an energy company could skip all the costs associated with oil, they would in a heartbeat.
Conspiracy theories make people feel better because they give them someone to blame for life's problems. In truth, we don't have a great way to meet our energy demands, and cancer is an incredibly complex medical problem. There is no boogey man. We just have problems that need solving.
Sorry to hear that, seems like you've been through about as miserable a few years as I can imagine.
I don't even think these are comparable to start with.
Yeah, and then some. But somehow, I try to keep my spirits up and stay positive.
First of all, that's impossible. Secondly, Exxon would patent it and make billions and trillions, because if they didn't, somebody else would. No corporation operates in a vacuum. Third, like other posters said, it would dramatically reduce investment costs for Exxon.
There are ways to use garlic to cure some kinds of cancer if used in conjunction with certain dietary and lifestyle changes and if caught in the early stages. There are many creative ways to use garlic to cure even the most resistant forms of bacterial infections. But because garlic is an abundant natural lifeform, pharma companies can't patent it and so will not use it or make medicines from it, yet it cures things their medicines can't.
Eventually though they will succeed in using gene-splicing to create patentable lifeforms of garlic with specialized super powers based on different genetic manipulations to produce particular chemical reactions to interact in specific ways with different disease processes. This work has been going on for over 20 years in different places by different not necessarily related groups. When they succeed they will begin touting the powers of garlic and not until. Of course, it will be only their garlic they tout not natural garlic, which they will continue to denigrate. It may be smelly, crude and inelegant but it will continue to work anyway for those who know how to use it.
In the meantime people who want to try garlic cures are on their own. Once people learn how to process the garlic in order to achieve the results they are looking for then they are able to use it to heal their own bacterial infections, including MRSA. Dozens of volunteers who had been diagnosed with MRSA that mainstream drugs could not cure reported complete cures and/or great relief using a series of garlic water soaks.
I have now devised a homespun way to process garlic to produce a penetrating salve that I believe has strong antitumor properties and I believe also inhibits metastasis. One volunteer used it as part of a two phase garlic therapy on an unknown mass growing steadily for two years in her breast and the mass disappeared completely in six weeks. I regard this as a good sign because that is exactly what I expected to happen. Her doctor was shocked but we don't know if it was malignant of not because no biopsy was ever performed.
I have not yet decided what to do about the salve (which is made with a particular garlic) which I suspect may have a storage life of a few years but need to test it.
I am not a doctor of any kind so I cannot give any medical advice or encourage anyone to do any particular thing, all I can do is discuss garlic and the chemical changes that occur when garlic is processed in different ways and let people and their doctors decide for themselves what, if anything, to do. Likewise, I do not charge any professional fees.
Yeah, I'm probably some kind of nut-job kook but that doesn't seem to matter much to all the people who have voluntarily chosen to cure themselves by using my ideas, some of whom seemed grateful enough to thank me for the idea.
Life is good when you take time to notice it.
Again, pharmaceuticals attempt to engage similar pathways to various 'natural' substances, like garlic may, because of some chemical. Then there is the issue of deliverance of a chemical. Curcumin, from turmeric, has anti-cancer properties as well, but turmeric itself cannot make the curcumin bio-available to exert whatever benefits it possibly may. So it is upto 'pharmaceutical' companies to find ways in which one makes curcumin bio-available in large doses.
Chemicals impact a cell based upon whether a cell has a particular receptor for it. If a substance cannot engage in a pathway of that cell, nothing will happen, whether it's natural of artificial.
It's basic science.
Many drugs are derived from natural plant sources and yet companies can patent them. Once those patents run out they patent a new delivery method.
This is not an issue.
I honestly would like to know more about garlic and the abilities you say that it possesses but there just doesn't seem to be a lot of hard evidence to go off of.
If someone cannot replicate the process and get the same outcome, people become skeptical. Even if skepticism could be erased by strictly controlling and monitoring your process as it succeeds, if it cannot be reproduced outside of your home then ultimately what benefit does it provide to others?
I'm genuine when I saw I would like to see some research on it. If you know of some published data and have a few links, I would like to see them.
You are right about the receptors;however, bacteria's natural mutations lead to resistance developing against antibiotics that cannot bond with the new receptors so new ones have to be developed that can bond with the new receptors. This is where the allicin that is produced when non-irradiated garlic is crushed is different.
Allicin does not need to bond with any receptors, it is naturally positively charged and the bacteria are naturally negatively charged so the allicin is irrisistably drawn to the bacteria. Upon arrival, its fat-solubility allows it to be drawn through those bi-lipid cell walls and get directly into the interior of the cell. Its mere presense in the interior of the cell changes the electrical polarity of that cell and the resulting electrical field draws in surrounding interstitial fluid causing the cell to swell up and burst, killing it. Bacteria cannot evolve resistance to that anymore than you or I could evolve immunity to being stabbed or blown up and that is pretty much what happens to the bacteria. This is the reason why garlic water kills even the most resistant strains of staph, even those resistant to vancomycin. Bacteria cannot become resistant to allicin. It is the natural way of things.
Can you explain to me how garlic can go bad? For example, can garlic be susceptible to clostridium botulinum?
Don't take this as a knock on your claim that garlic does have some anti-bacterial properties or can exert some positive effects against certain types of cancers, which I agree with.
Here is some good info on Garlic and Cancer Prevention from the National Cancer institue
Really? That is the only train of thought here?
There is actually an authoritative book that explains garlic chemistry very well. Garlic The Science and Therapeutic Application of Allium Sativum L. and Related Species by Heinrich Kock, PhD and Larry D. Lawson, PhD. Actually Heinrich became ill at the beginning of the project and all the work was done by Larry but he still gave equal credit to Heinrich. At the time the book was written, Larry was the Director of Research and development at Nature's Way, a well known and respected supplement company but he is retired today. The book contains about 80 pages of referencers to peer-reviewed studies. It is very comprehensive and difficult bit of academia intended for serious academics and chemists. It is my guide and learning these things has allowed me to use these principles to devise several unique ways to use these known properties to develop effective therapies to successfully treat MRSA and other bacterial infections, MDRTB (now called totally resistant), IBS and other forms of intestinal bacterial infections and possibly breast cancer and other cancers. All of these thing and more are possible in the hands of a knowledgeable doctor willing to learn and implement some new ideas about an old herbal remedy.
I am not a doctor so I can't give anyone any advice but I would be open to training any doctors who may be interested in learning so that they could incorporate these therapies into their treatment options. Of course it would have to be without the blessing of the FDA since these are not approved protocols. In many cases they work better than the mainstream modalities but without the drawbacks from the patient's perspective.
The more you learn about the chemistry of garlic, the more interesting it becomes and the more treatment applications you can envision. It really does work.
One of these days I need to quit being distracted by the minutae of life and write a few books but the sitting would probably kill me.
Life is good, anyway.