• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Natural Substances that Do Work

Even bigger than the Parmaceutical business is the Health Insurance biz. Wouldn't the insurors who actaully pay for most of the drugs, have something to say about the conspiracy? Their payouts are based on reasonable care and medical neccessity. Why would anybody think an INS CO. would be party to the big conspiracy?
 
Oh yes, and all the countries where healthcare is paid for by the state. And medical research is also state-sponsored. Like they're suppressing research into treatments that could save the exchequer a bomb?

And all those doctors and pharma executives that are in on the conspiracy, not one of them ever has a crisis of conscience and breaks ranks? Not even if their own child or mother or wife gets cancer? Not even if they're dying of cancer themselves?

Get real, dude.

Rolfe.
 
Filip Sandor said:
No PK, it doesn't make sense because it's my opinion, it makes sense mathematically. If a cancer patients who recieve chemo-therapy also need to pay for hospital care, due to the toxic effects of the CT treatments, which is very expensive. They also need to take many different drugs to combat the negative effects of CT on their health, which are not free and also cost a lot of money, this goes on for many years in most cases. If the patient was to receive a drug that actually cured them of the cancer they would have no need to buy more drugs, which means the drug companies would make no money off that individual. So mathematically speaking, it is more profitable for the drug companies to provide the patient with ongoing drug treatments for many years than to actually get rid of their cancer.

If you wish, I can fetch some actual statistics on the $$ involved for your information, but I don't think that's necessary.. you seem to have your own opinion. Seriously though, do you really think the CEO's of the pharmaceutical giants are a bunch of warm, fuzzy, people-loving characters who dance around and sing Kumbaia in the office during lunch-break? Get real dude.
Click to expand...

Nope, I have years of working in and around healthcare, and my wife who has worked on pharmaceutical research studies (double-blind placebo controlled - the kind the FDA requires, in Phase II at least) on which I based my opinion. Besides which, how does a pharmaceutical manufacturer make a dime off of hospitalizations? The medications that are disbursed in hospitals are the same ones that are gotten by prescription with only a few exceptions, and they make up a very small part of the bill you get.

Now, about the attitude of pharmaceutical manufacturers: I don't think they are Philip Morris in their approach to the consumer. I think some are capable of corruption, but none approaches the Illuminati Trilogy scope you appear to imply. Next you'll be telling us the Rand corporation is in on it with the saucer people and reverse vampires.
 
Tea Tree Oil is awesome stuff, not to mention a remarkably effective natural organic solvent.

It has an odd effect on me personally, however. My wife uses a shampoo that contains tea tree oil. Whenever she uses it, I can feel the vapors when they hit my eyes. The fumes make my eyes feel cold. After a few seconds, I can feel my eyeballs inside their sockets, as if they've turned to ice. It doesn't hurt or effect my vision, but it's a weird sensation. :eye-poppi

Several brands of liquid bandages use tea tree oil to dissolve the skin-like polymer that's used to bond to your skin. When the tea tree oil volitilizes, the polymer begins to set. Nice stuff. Sure beats benzene. :)
 
Mojo said:
No, they're businesspeople who will do whatever they can to maximise their company's profits in the short to medium term. They're interested in what goes in next year's annual statement to the shareholders, not how the industry as a whole is going to be doing after they've retired.
Click to expand...
Excellent point (I say that since you and I both attempted to get this same point across in the "There is No Money in Curing Disease" thread).
 
Rolfe said:
Oh yes, and all the countries where healthcare is paid for by the state. And medical research is also state-sponsored. Like they're suppressing research into treatments that could save the exchequer a bomb?

And all those doctors and pharma executives that are in on the conspiracy, not one of them ever has a crisis of conscience and breaks ranks? Not even if their own child or mother or wife gets cancer? Not even if they're dying of cancer themselves?

Get real, dude.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Yes Rolfe, it's all about helping you. That's why there are thousands or articles like this in on the net. I'm curious, do you work for the FDA by any chance?
 
What's the FDA? Do tell.

Rolfe. Who is not American. And very very happy about that.
 
Filip Sandor said:
Yes Rolfe, it's all about helping you. That's why there are thousands or articles like this in on the net. I'm curious, do you work for the FDA by any chance?
Click to expand...

Actually, I'm glad he's in jail. He would have to, like the pharmaceutical companies, conduct double-blind placebo-controlled studies; and in light of his attempting to block a competitor, and his inability to afford an attorney, it was about money. I really like how he claims the whole of his opponents medicine costing $150-$300 that takes a mere $1 to make, but he gives patients twice as much for... 2$? Nope! For 2$ worth of medicine, he sells it for $75. Now THERE is an honest joe. A snake-oil salesman of the first water, never at fault. Could have sold his supplement with no claims, if he was really interested in helping his fellow man, for $4 a bottle and doubled his money.

I don't buy his sob story, and apparently neither did the judge.
 
Last edited:
No, I can confirm I don't work for the MHRA.

MHRA. The body who recently put out to consultation the proposal that homoeopathic remedies should be permitted to be marketed with therapeutic claims. Oh yeah.

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
Filip Sandor said:
That's why there are thousands or articles like this in on the net.
Click to expand...
Oh, like that story isn't slanted. :oldroll:
"Kimball represented himself at his criminal trial in 2000, because he couldn’t afford a lawyer, and the judge refused to appoint one."
Since when?
"The judge added ten years to the expected three, Jo says, because he “was so furious with Jay because he didn’t have an attorney and things didn’t go the way they should have during the trial.” "
Come on. Give me a break. A judge refuses to appoint an attorney (they can't) and he gives him an extra ten years for not having an attorney?! Right. There is a lot more to this story than is being told.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom