Comments on: The Future’s War on Cancer

By: Newbigtech

Newbigtech — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 21:52:39 +0000

By the way, It was not the Leukemia that killed her.

It was the Graft VS Host… The treatment

By: Newbigtech

Newbigtech — Mon, 24 Dec 2012 21:51:11 +0000

Cancer continues to be big business. Llok at the $$ spent on advertising FOR Cancer Paience.

Our daughter passed from Leukemia…It came on sudden and was type -o-… They went ahead with Chemo, they went ahead with the Bone Marrow Transplant…. And they said it was enviromental….

Doctors never achieve the status of being PROFessional.. Thats why they are always Practicing.

By: Cathy Rapicano

Cathy Rapicano — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 05:54:23 +0000

A “cure” for many cancers should lose it’s “quotes” since many do already exist. Perhaps when the Medical Mafia has decided they’ve made enough money on keeping people ill and dying, they’ll release these cures to humans. Perhaps.

By: Hawaii Guy

Hawaii Guy — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 03:41:03 +0000

ps of the 16 terminal patients monitored under Rife’s care by USC and other physicians 14 were cured during the 3 month trial the other 2 were cured a few weeks after, 100% success in 1930, not too shabby!

By: Hawaii Guy

Hawaii Guy — Mon, 09 Jan 2012 03:34:47 +0000

Royal Raymond Rife had the right path in 1930 with his 60,000x optical microscope able to look at living cancer cells and other viruses (we look at dead tissue today). He also demonstrated to a group of USC and other powerful doctors from the US (with an announcement following of “the cure for all disease has been demonstrated”) about matching the vibrating wall membrane of different viruses etc. Finding the correct frequency smashes the wall instantly and thus kills the virus, ie cancer etc. The road since Raymond Rife has been to close the door on the solution and open the door to maintenance based medicine. So if your looking for a cure don’t hold your breath, you might ask what happened to the most powerful non destructive microscope ever built went though (over 58,000 hand made parts)! I think its in the smithsonian black ops warehouse:(

By: Phil

Phil — Sun, 08 Jan 2012 21:25:06 +0000

@Richard actually Cohn was right about life expectancy. In 1956 US life expectancy was 69 and in 2009 it was 77, which is about ten years. If you think of a generation as a period of about 15 years then you’re right, he is wrong, but he’s still right in the sense that most of the people alive in 1956 did indeed live about ten years longer than they would have if medicine had stayed at 1950s levels.
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus10.pdf#022

By: Rachael

Rachael — Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:04:37 +0000

There have been genuine cures for cancer for the last one hundred years. Dr Burzynski is just one of many. Today there are some extremely high-tech, cutting edge cures as well if you know where to look. This is ‘cure’ as in all gone, not just in remission.

By: Richard

Richard — Sun, 01 Jan 2012 23:31:51 +0000

It’s a pity that there is so much hype about cancer “cures,” along with other medical progress and scientific “breakthroughs,” because it encourages a skeptical outsider to suppose that it’s all lies and nothing is being accomplished. The quote from the 1950′s that life expectancy “could in our generation increase another ten years” was demonstrably wrong; the correct number was closer to four years. I think four years increase in a generation (an improvement which is continuing fairly steadily into the present) is pretty good.

By: Matt Novak

Matt Novak — Sat, 31 Dec 2011 06:55:56 +0000

@Cheryl The FDA’s 2009 warning letter to Dr. Burzynski: http://www.fda.gov/ICECI/EnforcementActions/WarningLetters/2009/ucm192711.htm

By: Cheryl

Cheryl — Fri, 30 Dec 2011 22:12:28 +0000

We are closer to a cure than people think…weird that Dr. Burzynski’s treatment is never mentioned when it comes to treating, and beating, cancer. Call him a quack if you will, but his treatment is currently in clinical trials and at least offers more hope than any other treatment today.