There are very few things I listen to when it comes to the American Cancer Society (or any other government agency, for that matter).  One thing, they say (and have for many many years), that pickled cured and smoked foods can increase cancer risk.  When i was a kid, I had a list of their things to avoid.  I think there were 5.  Anyway, I believe them on that one.  My question is...if these things are associated with cancer, why are they sold to us?  Could it be because of Capitalism and that means everyone has an equal opportunity (and I use the term loosely) to poison other humans?  I have my own way of thinking about things...if it increases cancer, take it off the market.  We don't need to eat or drink things that up our cancer risk.  It's already one in three and our society as a whole is seemingly not alarmed by this. 

How crazy and uniformed was that dude who went on that Mcdonald's diet a couple yrs or so ago?  Another prime example of if it is sold, it is ok to consume. 

Our country doesn't need to be ran by capitalistic Ventures that have no concern for our health.  It needs a team of food cops that religiously make sure we eat organic healthy food with no additives that harm us.  As long as there is Capitalism, I don't see that ever happening.

Here is an example of how Capitalism, not health and safety, run our society...many years ago, we could have produced tires that would last for very long periods of time.  Some say we could produce some that never wear out.  Nasa has been privy to a lot of things we as consumers are not allowed to have.  Anyway, we did not produce long lasting tires until recently.  why?  Because tire companies would have went out of business and oil companies would have suffered greatly, too.  Because of the problem with the landfills and pollution of burning them, humans have slowly made a longer lasting tire.  Waiting all this time, gave corporations time to adjust and find other investments.  It's not about you, people, it's about profits. 

Here is another example...remember the Alar (chemical sprayed on apples to make them ripen before falling off the tree,  that was said to cause cancer) scare that 60 Minutes discovered years ago?  Now, one thing to note, there are chemicals still being used that are as bad or worse that Alar.  Anyway, when that was uncovered to the American people, there was such outrage that the apple growers were forced to do a  voluntary ban.   It was removed from the market, but we all know that takes a while.  A few years later, because of pressure and because some farmers were still using Alar, the EPA had to issue a ban.  Had no one kept up on it, the mandatory ban would not have been made.  What did the voluntary ban do?  It helped the Capitalists to adjust and not lose too much money.  Some small farmers went bankrupt, but the government was only concerned with the corporate farmers.  A lot of backlash has come from Alar, unfortunately.  It was reported to only have 50 cancers per million and that is considered low.  Terms like chicken little envionmentalism have been used.  That is very unfortunate, because it sends the message that we should be more complacent and accept low level carcinogens in our food if it helps the producers.

Another example of profits before safety involves automobiles.  Many years ago, science knew how to make a car that would not run into things.  We are just now seeing some of this technology in high-end autos.  If we had pursued this safety feature before, the insurance companies, as well as the autobody industry, would have suffered immensely.  Yes, we need cars that crash so that everyone is able to capitalize on it.  There is more at stake here than meets the eye.  The car companies themselves is the bottom line.  They stand the most to lose.  It would mean far less cars being sold and the safety features like airbags and seatbelts would be meaningless.  So, why are we seeing this technology at all?  Well, with so many people in the world, it is hard to curtail certain technologies altogether, so the government and big business stave it off as long as possible, while in the meantime figuring out ways to capitalize on it, whether they have to re-invent some things or whether they have to re-invest.  Again, it is not human welfare that industry looks out for. 

While we are on the subject of airbags and seatbelts, a very sore subject with me, I will enlighten you to facts that most do not know.  First of all, the I've never unbuckled a dead person, was not only a misleading statement, it was a marketing ploy.  For one, the coroner is the one who unbuckles them, but don't be fooled by marketing, many people have died with seatbelts on.  I, for one, am against all government regulation that restricts our individual choices.  I do not wear seatbelts and I have also had one relative die from one, nearly three friends die if they had worn them they said (the cab of the truck was crushed and they were able to get on the floor), and a schoolmate permanently disabled (while 3 others who were not wearing them escaped with minor injuries).  But whether your befliefs are from brainwashing by the media or some personal experience you have had, that is beside the point.  There is a reason we have big brother forcing us to wear seatbelts and it isn't because of our welfare and safety.  It all started with the air bag industry.  They were coming on hot and heavy and found to be much better at saving lives than seatbelts.  There was a slight problem.  Seatbelts are free.  The auto industry had tried to privately sell the airbags, but to no avail.  So, if there is a better mousetrap, shouldn't it be free as well?  Logically, yes.  But, Capitalists found a way to once again take your money and politically screw you out of it.  For those who do not know the definition of politics, it is making you do something you do not want to do and making you happy to do it.  Anyway, car manufacturers were going to be forced by law (mandated by the NHTSA in 1970)  to put an airbag in every new vehicle they produced, but they saw a huge profit to be made by charging consumers for them.  Over a 10 year period, they set out to convince the government that seatbelts were not being used and that was the problem with fatalities.  The Federalism-belief-based Regan Adminstration felt sorry for the auto industry and tried to rescind the mandate.  They were unsuccessful, but the plea was remanded to the Department of Transportation.  Then-Secretary of Transportation Elizabeth Dole unprecedentedly settled it by giving the car manufacturers a deadline, they had to get mandatory seatbelt laws passed in 2/3 of the states in the nation by september 1989 or face installing airbags (something that would save lives without human manipulation, like fastening a seatbelt) free gratis.  The manufacturer lobbyists went to work, campaigning across the nation, convincing us we must have the law forcing us to wear seatbelts for our own good, that too many are dying.  The public bought this tactic hook line and sinker, with most not knowing any of the particulars behind their dilligence.  They thought they were voting on saving people's lives, but they were really voting to save the auto industry a ton of money, and in turn, paving the way for car manufacturers to profit immensely.  They say humans are different from apes because of their ability to reason and produce logical abstract thoughts.  Well, in this case, it wasn't prevelent.  Once again, we sheepishly followed.  Some people would say, well it's a good outcome, we have seatbelts evethough it was motivated by the profuts of the auto industry.  Well, ok, but I for one would rather base my voting on real truths.  But, I don't even want to get started on voting right now, because that one of the most deceptive practices we employ. 

I could go on and on, but I will leave you with probably the biggest atrocity of our time regarding profits before health... the cover up of the cancer cure.  By now, you have heard that we will never find the cure for cancer.  Well, we actually admit to having found the cure for Leukemia (see my blog on Leukemia), although we don't call it a cure, because the government and the pharmaceutical industry does not want us to use such lingo.  Anyway, there are cures out there (see my blog on the cure for cancer).  In fact, there are a few cures and treatments that work.  We have some here, but, no one is allowed to imply they can cure ot treat cancer, so many go abroad or to Mexico in order to simply survive.  The cure rates of upstanding cancer hospitals in Mexico, for instance, are much higher than those of the US.  They always have the world's top 5 or so cures, while our mainstay is chemotherapy and radiation.  The bottom line is that there is so much money to be made by drug companies and research companies, that there will never be a cure for cancer.  If the US ever proclaims to have one, it will extremely expensive and wil most likely involve damaging healthy cells, just as chemo does.  Cancer is one of the biggest money makers of our time and if you could go to the doctor and get well, so much profit would be lost, that it simply would not be a lucrative business to be in like it is now.  I will let these experts speak for me:

• "But nobody today can say that one does not know what cancer and its prime cause be. On the contrary, there is no disease whose prime cause is better known, so that today ignorance is no longer an excuse that one cannot do more about prevention. That prevention of cancer will come there is no doubt, for man wishes to survive. But how long prevention will be avoided depends on how long the prophets of agnosticism will succeed in inhibiting the application of scientific knowledge in the cancer field. In the meantime, millions of men must die of cancer unnecessarily."
  Nobel Prize Winner Otto Warburg in a meeting of Nobel Laureates, June 30, 1966
  See: http://www.alkalizeforhealth.net/Loxygen3.htm
   

• Dr. James Watson won a Nobel Prize for determining the shape of DNA. During the 1970's, he served two years on the National Cancer Advisory Board. In 1975, he was asked about the National Cancer Program. He declared, "It's a bunch of shit."
  Nobel Prize Winner James Watson
  See: http://www.altcancer.com/lysis.htm

• "Everyone should know that the 'war on cancer' is largely a fraud."
  Two Time Nobel Prize Winner Linus Pauling, author of several books on Vitamin C and cancer

Other Cancer Quotes

• "To the cancer establishment, a cancer patient is a profit center. The actual clinical and scientific evidence does not support the claims of the cancer industry. Conventional cancer treatments are in place as the law of the land because they pay, not heal, the best. Decades of the politics-of-cancer-as-usual have kept you from knowing this, and will continue to do so unless you wake up to their reality."
  John Diamond, M.D. & Lee Cowden, M.D.

• "Chemotherapy is an incredibly lucrative business for doctors, hospitals, and pharmaceutical companies…..The medical establishment wants everyone to follow the same exact protocol. They don’t want to see the chemotherapy industry go under, and that’s the number one obstacle to any progress in oncology."
  Dr Warner, M.D.

• "You wouldn’t believe how many FDA officials or relatives or acquaintances of FDA officials come to see me as patients in Hanover. You wouldn’t believe this, or directors of the AMA, or ACA, or the presidents of orthodox cancer institutes. That’s the fact."
  Hans Nieper M.D. (1928-1998) (Dr. Nieper used a cesium chloride protocol in Hanover, Germany)

And there are many, many more such quotes. See:
http://www.whale.to/cancer/quotes.html
http://www.whale.to/m/quotes6.html
http://theanswertocancer.com/the_real_war.htm

Add This Entry To Your CureZone Favorites!