https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/the-cancer-industry-hype-vs-reality/
Cancer has spawned a huge industrial complex involving government agencies, pharmaceutical and biomedical firms, hospitals and clinics, universities, professional societies, nonprofit foundations and media. The costs of cancer care have surged 40 percent in the last decade, from $125 billion in 2010 to $175 billion in 2020 (projected).
Research funding has also surged. The budget of the National Cancer Institute, a federal agency founded in 1937, now totals over $6 billion/year. That is a fraction of the total spent on research by nonprofit foundations ($6 billion a year, according to 2019 study), private firms and other government agencies. Total research spending since Richard Nixon declared a “war on cancer” in 1971 exceeds a quarter trillion dollars, according to a 2016 estimate.
Cancer-industry boosters claim that investments in research, testing and treatment have led to “incredible progress” and millions of “cancer deaths averted,” as the homepage of the American Cancer Society, a nonprofit that receives money from biomedical firms, puts it. A 2016 study found that cancer experts and the media often describe new treatments with terms such as “breakthrough,” “game changer,” “miracle,” “cure,” “home run,” “revolutionary,” “transformative,” “life saver,” “groundbreaking” and “marvel.”
There are more than 1,200 accredited cancer centers in the U.S. They spent $173 million on television and magazine ads directed at the public in 2014, according to a 2018 study, and 43 of the 48 top spenders “deceptively promot[ed] atypical patient experiences through the use of powerful testimonials.” A 2014 study concluded that cancer centers “frequently promote cancer therapy with emotional appeals that evoke hope and fear while rarely providing information about risks, benefits, costs, or insurance availability.”
Breast cancer is #1 in that scheme. More tests = more treatment; more treatment = more suffering, more money extraction, lower quality of life, less potential mothers. Breast cancer mortality, in contrast, has remained the same throughout.
Don't have to tell me about it...I lived through it for 8 out of 10 years of marriage to my late wife...all the things I am in agreement with. I am quite sure that Fenbendazole is one along with a couple of others. The docs start small and then ratch it up as the patient gets cancer for the 2nd time and that is when the big guns come out...When I got through, the insurance had paid out ALMOST $700,000.00!!!!!!!
Here is the KICKER: From a RADIATION Oncologist's own words: "When a person gets cancer twice, NO MATTER WHAT TYPE OF CANCER, the cancer is in the person's system and WILL NEVER BE DESTROYED..."
You have my sympathy. It's a crime. Some of the doctors know, some are merely clueless, unworthy of their titles. Like you, I've been in the room when the oncologist ratchets up the fear and turns the psychological screws like the manager of a car dealership, until getting the "I'll do everything possible" from the patient.
A good description of it is in this article. Lefty mag, but with some truth-tellers leftover from back when the hippies were the conspiracy seers. https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2015/10/faulty-research-behind-mammograms-breast-cancer/
They tried to do the same with prostate cancer, but men respond differently to that pressure so it didn't take. But they keep pushing. What a blessing to know the dam is cracking, with truth and cures leaking out.
I remember back when they were doing the "I love boobies" bracelets that were so popular which inadvertently red pilled me on it. The store I worked it sold them and the line we were told to use was "[...] goes towards breast cancer research".
One day out of boredom I looked them up and saw the print... "[...] goes towards breast cancer AWARENESS" NOT research.
AKA we spend the money not on research but on raising awareness and marketing. I was like oh my God it's all fucking scam.
I'm convinced these charities and foundations are 100% laundromats. They ask well-meaning ppl to donate money. They rake in billions. Yet no cure. Where exactly is that money going?
Give to the sick person directly, not to the "charity"
We have known since 1938, that cancer is caused by a low PH, and high carbohydrate diet. At this moment, I can't remember his name, but a doctor got the Nobel prize in medicine for discovering this simple fact. Warburg, I believe, was his name.
Probably increased another 400% in the last 2 years, or at least will have, once current happenings are historical records.
lol
There is probably a complete cure for cancer, but they can't give up the cancer revenues. Extremely wicked of them, if true.
Goldman Sachs asks in biotech research report: ‘Is curing patients a sustainable business model?’
Goldman Sachs analysts attempted to address a touchy subject for biotech companies, especially those involved in the pioneering “gene therapy” treatment: cures could be bad for business in the long run.
“Is curing patients a sustainable business model?” analysts ask in an April 10 report entitled “The Genome Revolution.”
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/04/11/goldman-asks-is-curing-patients-a-sustainable-business-model.html
they create the cancer & get rich of the "treatments"
of course, the money is leads to control. the more money they make, the more control they have.
medicine= control
war= control
politics= control
taxes= control
Fenbendazole.
Ivermectin.
Hydroxycholoroquine.
These kill cancer. Ignore the necromancers and ghouls wearing White coats and stethoscopes: They know only what they were forced to regurgitate to get a piece of paper telling everyone they're "qualified".
Argument: If a Doctor really gave 2 fucks more than getting kickbacks from big pharma for pushing barbaric practices (Chemo) and drugs that make things worse, they'd take time to research and implement things that CURE YOU rather than just mask symptoms. Prove me wrong.
Liberals: naw they wouldn't do that.
Just the same with free energy, they chase hot fusion all the time as a goal for "future" power, when all it does is nothing.
...oh well...