Page 1 of 3
#1
Hey, everyday in my Philosophy class, a student goes up and talks about an issue and we all debate about it. Today he asked if you think that the government has the cure for cancer but they just arent selling it. I mean i t makes sense, because they're rollliing in big money with the radiation and kemo etc. Do you think this is true? I personally believe that they have to have found it.
One Love

“One good thing about music, when it hits- you feel no pain” -Bob Marley
#2
no, it doesn't make sense
Quote by Stephen Colbert
Ignorance is bliss. Oedipus ruined a great sex life by asking too many questions.
Quote by Jack Off Jill
Is it odd that I get an erection every time RageAgainst... posts?

President of "Colbert Nation "
#3
Why would they have to have found it?
No I don't. Somehow the world would know by know...
#4
Quote by musicmyrock
Hey, everyday in my Philosophy class, a student goes up and talks about an issue and we all debate about it. Today he asked if you think that the government has the cure for cancer but they just arent selling it. I mean i t makes sense, because they're rollliing in big money with the radiation and kemo etc. Do you think this is true? I personally believe that they have to have found it.


Nope, they could make alot more money buy releasin the "cure" at a high price.
Quote by ep1kz
wtf? why didnt you punch one of them in the face or something? they're not girls, they are fat chavs, they are their own gender
#6
The government wouldn't hold it back.

More insurance payments from chemo and drugs means more money spent by gov. So, more people healthy, more people to tax, more people for military, etc. etc.

Some shadowy corporation, however, is entirely possible. Whatever it is, they'll probably have a red and white logo and accidently render mankind to nigh extinction.
Is it a bad thing if one of your testicles is larger then the other two?
#7
i wouldn't be suprised...
honestly.

i hope to god thats not true though because that would just be awful.

but you'd be suprised at what happens in the government, most of which we know nothing about...
Quote by Guitar0player
You're Thurstonsexual

Happily E-Married to En_zed
The public doesn't want new music; the main thing that it demands of a composer is that he be dead.
-- Arthur Honegger

Enjoy reading? Please crit my work .
#8
No, it makes no sense at all.
Proud owner of an Engl Thunder 50 Reverb and an Ibanez S470

"The end is extremely fucking nigh..."
#9
That's just conspiracy bull****. There's no way. Our government isn't that corrupt.
Quote by Kensai
Forget about her, she seems complicated. Who wants a girl who answers in riddles? I'm not the fucking sfinx.

Quote by Rambo-Conny
Woah, woah. Back the hell up.

Polo shirt?

Sunglasses?

Of course he got all the girls, he's Rick Astley.
#11
My dad told me about a man on tv who sells books of cures for random illnesses....I got my mom to order the books..and I'm waiting for them. This man talks about a cure for cancer being withheld from the public, if I'm not mistaken.
LimbLifter is the best band in the world! and they're Canadian .
#12
Hey about this gayz, we didn't land on the moon and USA bombed WTC? It all makes sense man!!!!!
#13
i heard that too, it was something along the lines of it would cost so much money for the cure that only rich people would be able to afford it and health insurence wouldnt cover it or something and the gov. wouldent make any money off of it after all that so they decided not to release it. im not saying thats the truth, thats just what ive heard
Quote by gatechballer
SoLgEr is the ****ing man!!!!!
#14
Quote by Izz
Hey about this gayz, we didn't land on the moon and USA bombed WTC? It all makes sense man!!!!!


+1

They're just colourful theories for people with nothing better to devote their time to.
Proud owner of an Engl Thunder 50 Reverb and an Ibanez S470

"The end is extremely fucking nigh..."
#15
i very much doubt it. Infact thats a ridiculous proposition. They would make more money selling the 'cure' than keeping it underwraps.
Professional Mixing available at request.

Everton FC
#16
well governments get billions from tax revenues for alcohol and tobacco, and they have the added incentive of not having to provide welfare or healthcare for these people in their old age because they may be dead. always thinkin ahead they are.
#18
Quote by musicmyrock
I personally believe that they have to have found it.


Why? I don't understand how you can say that they 'have to have found it'.
Anyway, I don't believe that they they have, at least not until someone comes up with any evidence to suggest otherwise.
"It's funny how most people love the dead. Once you're dead, you're made for life" - Jimi Hendrix

Quote by TheClincher
Is it incest if I had sex with my brother in law's half sister? Because if it is, it was so ****ing worth it.
#19
No just no.


There is NO magic cure for cancer yet


Every cancer is different....Every persons genes are different


Its so ridiculously fucking complex it makes you wonder how life ever evolved...but i can answer that too , so its all good
#20
I very much so doubt they have found it. It doesn't make any sense whatsoever.
My all gold grills give her cold chills
Said she gotta coke feel cuz I'm sooo trill.
#21
my uncle has cancer and he has done lots of research. i dont know if its all true but there are some natural cures and so far their working for him. the thing is these natural cures can be made for dirt cheap prices so if big name companies were to produce them a generic brand would come out for way cheaper. the big name companies are making tons off of chemo and radiation because right now its all most people know to cure cancer. so the big name companies go to the government and either pay off people to vote against the approval of the drug, or they do faulty testing w/ many many variables being tested at one time to prove that the drug does not work. like i said i dont know if this is all true but it makes sense.
#22
Look at it this way. Every cancer patient would buy it, and you can't collect taxes from dead people.
"The poor didn't want this one."
#23
Stay tuned for another breathtaking episode of "When education fails".


Seriously, what kind of dumbshit asks something like that? And in a philosophy class, no less....
Dear God, do you actually answer prayers?

Yes, but only in a way indistinguishable from random luck or the result of your own efforts.
#24
they HAVE found it. apparently its a type of virus that treats it.. but why haven't they released it? it'd obviously be too experimental.. and whats to say the cure won't kill you afterward.. if the virus spreads then its even worse.

but even more important is how much money they'd lose from no longer need chemotherapy, radiotherapy, the thousands of different drugs needed to bring a cancer patient into an acceptable quality of life, and many other money making schemes that'd be run into the ground.

its the same reason if someone were to find a cure for the common cold. The producer of the 'cure' would be murdered and the cure lost.. due to the substantial loss of money from the sales of cough syrups, cold medicines and tylenol.
Grammar and spelling omitted as an exercise for the reader.
#25
uhhh, what? the cheapest cure for cancer is death...period. gov's got a military...kud cure a lot of cancer in a heartbeat....so in a scrwed up kinda way yea they r holdin back THAT cure for cancer...
#26
Just remeber the more u visit conspiracy forums and websites, the more money the owner makes from advertising, mereley by making up conspiracies for you internet sheep.
Gear:
Wasburn x-40w/floyd roseOFR
Swineshead venom+warthog pups
Kustom 100 wt quad DFX,Boss MT-2,Ibanez TS-7
~We Rock Out With Our Cocks Out!: UG Naked Club.~
Post a naked picture of yourself with your guitar to join.
#27
Quote by Kivarenn82
they HAVE found it. apparently its a type of virus that treats it.. but why haven't they released it? it'd obviously be too experimental.. and whats to say the cure won't kill you afterward.. if the virus spreads then its even worse.


A cure isn't a cure until it has completed clinical trials.
Proud owner of an Engl Thunder 50 Reverb and an Ibanez S470

"The end is extremely fucking nigh..."
#29
Quote by musicmyrock
Hey, everyday in my Philosophy class, a student goes up and talks about an issue and we all debate about it. Today he asked if you think that the government has the cure for cancer but they just arent selling it. I mean i t makes sense, because they're rollliing in big money with the radiation and kemo etc. Do you think this is true? I personally believe that they have to have found it.


America isn't the only nation in the world you know. Most countries have a non-profit health service and so they'd release it anyway. But America wouldn't. However, any scientist who discovers the cure for cancer would definitely go to a different country with their research if America weren't releasing it, which is unlikely anyway because they could make as much money with selling the treatment for a high price.
I play by my own rules. And I have one rule; There are no rules... but if there are, they're there to be broken. Even this one.


Confused? Good.

Quote by CrucialGutchman
Sigs are wastes of my precious screen space.

^ Irony

Quote by RevaM1ssP1ss
LET ME HUMP YOU DAMMIT
#30
I think that the conclusion to come from this argument is that the government prioritizes money over lives. Based on everyones posts, that seems to be the common belief. Heck, I believe it.
We're only strays.
#31
Quote by rokstar666
uhhh, what? the cheapest cure for cancer is death...period. gov's got a military...kud cure a lot of cancer in a heartbeat....so in a scrwed up kinda way yea they r holdin back THAT cure for cancer...


1. Look up the definition of cure.
2. Look up insensitive whilst you're at it.
3. Then look up moron.
I play by my own rules. And I have one rule; There are no rules... but if there are, they're there to be broken. Even this one.


Confused? Good.

Quote by CrucialGutchman
Sigs are wastes of my precious screen space.

^ Irony

Quote by RevaM1ssP1ss
LET ME HUMP YOU DAMMIT
#32
so what are you saying? cancer has been around before jesus, and that nobody has figured a way to combat it? surely someone knows something. just because the 'cure' isn't on the shelves of shoppers drug mart, doesn't mean it hasn't been developed.
Grammar and spelling omitted as an exercise for the reader.
#33
Quote by Kivarenn82
they HAVE found it. apparently its a type of virus that treats it.. but why haven't they released it? it'd obviously be too experimental.. and whats to say the cure won't kill you afterward.. if the virus spreads then its even worse.

but even more important is how much money they'd lose from no longer need chemotherapy, radiotherapy, the thousands of different drugs needed to bring a cancer patient into an acceptable quality of life, and many other money making schemes that'd be run into the ground.

its the same reason if someone were to find a cure for the common cold. The producer of the 'cure' would be murdered and the cure lost.. due to the substantial loss of money from the sales of cough syrups, cold medicines and tylenol.



Thats a sort of gene therapy....doesnt really work in humans yet...last time they tried it a kid died....

So yea, we can treat cancer, but belive me, we are a loooonnnggg way from getting a 100% cure


and when i say long i mean, long as in looooooooooooooooooonnnnnngggggggggggggg cat long
#34
Quote by *Juno*
Thats a sort of gene therapy....doesnt really work in humans yet...last time they tried it a kid died....

So yea, we can treat cancer, but belive me, we are a loooonnnggg way from getting a 100% cure


and when i say long i mean, long as in looooooooooooooooooonnnnnngggggggggggggg cat long



Cat long is a very long time indeed.

XD

but interesting tidbit of information for sure.
Grammar and spelling omitted as an exercise for the reader.
#35
Quote by Kivarenn82
so what are you saying? cancer has been around before jesus, and that nobody has figured a way to combat it? surely someone knows something. just because the 'cure' isn't on the shelves of shoppers drug mart, doesn't mean it hasn't been developed.


Cancer hasn't been around since Jesus. People never even got cancer till this century, which many attribute to our lifespan's significant increase, or the greater use of radioactive materials, etc, etc.
I play by my own rules. And I have one rule; There are no rules... but if there are, they're there to be broken. Even this one.


Confused? Good.

Quote by CrucialGutchman
Sigs are wastes of my precious screen space.

^ Irony

Quote by RevaM1ssP1ss
LET ME HUMP YOU DAMMIT
#36
Quote by Kivarenn82
so what are you saying? cancer has been around before jesus, and that nobody has figured a way to combat it? surely someone knows something. just because the 'cure' isn't on the shelves of shoppers drug mart, doesn't mean it hasn't been developed.

Um..yes we have found ways to "combat" iit. Just not cure it.
My all gold grills give her cold chills
Said she gotta coke feel cuz I'm sooo trill.
#37
Quote by ClaptonWannabe
You can't just cure cancer.

A person suggesting that there is a 'cure' for cancer is totally 100% misinformed. So far there are multiple ways to treat cancer, Radiotherapy, Brachytherapy, Chemotherapy, Surgery, Immunotherapy being the most prominent methods.

Notice I said treat, not cure.

Cancer is so varied that you simply cannot have a cure for it.

For example, a Basal cell carcinoma is exactly what is says. A cancer of the basal cells (in the skin). But a prostate tumour has an entirely different cell structure and as such would not respond to this miracle cancer treatment that MIGHT cure a basal cell carcinoma.

Its like saying, theres a pill which can cure broken legs, the flu, meningitus, the bubonic plague, and Herpes all in one.

There might be a cure for A single cancer using medicines (chemo) but there will never be a drug which 'cures cancer.'

This comes from an Training Radiotherapist and Oncologist.

It's hard to say really, technology has progressed alot over the past 50 years and keeps getting better so I personally can't say wheither or not there can be a 'cure', there certanly isn't a cure at the moment but the futre has so many possibilities.
#38
Gaaah.

"The Government" wouldn't hold it back. Why on earth would they? At least not in countries with free healthcare systems.

Why do people always target "them"? Just think about who before you make conspiracy theories, it's not always The Government

Large drug companies, sure. They'd hold back to make money on treatment instead of cures. Of course.

But come on. Use yer 'ead, people.
#39
Quote by break-me-in
Cancer hasn't been around since Jesus. People never even got cancer till this century, which many attribute to our lifespan's significant increase, or the greater use of radioactive materials, etc, etc.



Yes it most certainly has....cancer has been around all the time...its not a disease, its (mostly) a genetic malfunction


Animals get cancer aswell as we do....people never getting cancer til this century is false aswell.

Greater use of radioactive materials isnt really a factor, but increasing life span does have a part to play....
#40
No, there IS a cure, all of the treatment methods I descibed can be cures.

Yes there might be an increased chance of repeat tumours later in life but most cancer is 100% curable, radiotherapy, chemo and surgery cure hundreds of thousand of people a year.....

Edit: Juno, you're right about cancer through the ages, it occurs after DNA damage essentially, which causes the cell to replicate uncontrollably. I'm sure you knew that already, but what did you mean about the 'greater use of radioactive materials?'
Last edited by ClaptonWannabe at Oct 25, 2007,
Page 1 of 3