No doubt, but its off the point. You said the many would be made vulnerable by the few, but I'm saying that herd immunity work's because most people are immunized.... so they are protected already and therefore not (as) vulnerable as those which constitute the 'few', for whatever reason they might not have been immunized. So the few don't endanger the many, as you claimed.
Not at all surprised by that comment. Take away a doctors prescription pad and referral options, and they are just a bunch of "witch doctors" shaking their rattles and banging their tambourines. I admire anyone for defending their profession, but you do know what they say about someone, who blindly follows without questioning - don't you?
Again - you have the claim - prove it. I am happy to post meta-analysis of chemotherapy IF and WHEN you delineate which treatment you are claiming does not work
Everyone interested in vaccines, and how they are produced - you need to read this. Maybe your faith in the medical industry will rise. http://halalfocus.net/malaysia-worlds-first-halal-vaccine-plant-to-begin-production-in-early-2018/
Seriously? If chemotherapy worked, then there would be no cancer deaths, would there not? Would it not be hailed around the world as a cure for cancer, not just a treatment? How many cancer patients are told there is a chemotherapy sensitivity test available, before they are treated? Would you care to comment on the following link? http://www.nydailynews.com/life-sty...rse-triggering-tumor-growth-article-1.1129897
Cancer comes in many many forms and yes many we can cure - especially if we get them early enough Are you seriously trying to tell me no-one has ever been cured of cancer?
We are going a bit off topic here, so I will get us back on track. You asked me to prove that chemotherapy didn't work, and I proved that in post # 56 with a link.
For those still interested, what I have demonstrated with the link I offered, is proof that chemotherapy doesn’t wok, and in some instances causes more harm to the patient by helping the cancer to grow, and metastasis. I might add, that practitioners in the medical profession are required to swear to the “Hippocratic Oath” to do no harm. I have stuck to the original topic, by proving alternative evidence on another medical treatment that proves the advise and claims by the mainstream medical industry and pharmaceutical industry that their drugs are safe, is tainted and biased. Is it not a fair and reasonable assumption, that the pharmaceutical company, who manufactured this chemotherapy drug would have trailed it, and advertised it “safe” for public use? Is it also not fair and reasonable to suggest that doctors agreed that the chemotherapy drug was safe to use, based entirely on what the pharmaceutical company told them? Otherwise they would be in direct violation of the Hippocratic oath. Therefore, I propose, (considering the evidence substantiated in the link provided) it demonstrates that the trails and experiments done by the pharmaceutical company on the drug was not sufficient or adequate, before it was released for public use? I believe that if this kind of incompetence and betrayal can occur with a major cancer fighting drug, then it also demonstrates this same kind of incompetence and inadequate drug trailing could happen in simple vaccine drugs?
I will ask again. How many cancer patients are told there is a chemotherapy sensitivity test available, before they are treated? A test that proves if the chemotherapy will work or not. Why are doctors, nurses and other so-called professionals, giving patients drugs that harm the patients, and not upholding their ethical standards under the Hippocratic Oath? THE HIPPOCRATIC OATH: I swear to fulfill, to the best of my ability and judgment, this covenant:... I will respect the hard-won scientific gains of those physicians in whose steps I walk, and gladly share such knowledge as is mine with those who are to follow. I will apply, for the benefit of the sick, all measures which are required, avoiding those twin traps of overtreatment and therapeutic nihilism. I will remember that there is art to medicine as well as science, and that warmth, sympathy, and understanding may outweigh the surgeon's knife or the chemist's drug. I will not be ashamed to say "I know not," nor will I fail to call in my colleagues when the skills of another are needed for a patient's recovery. I will respect the privacy of my patients, for their problems are not disclosed to me that the world may know. Most especially must I tread with care in matters of life and death. If it is given me to save a life, all thanks. But it may also be within my power to take a life; this awesome responsibility must be faced with great humility and awareness of my own frailty. Above all, I must not play at God. I will remember that I do not treat a fever chart, a cancerous growth, but a sick human being, whose illness may affect the person's family and economic stability. My responsibility includes these related problems, if I am to care adequately for the sick. I will prevent disease whenever I can, for prevention is preferable to cure. I will remember that I remain a member of society, with special obligations to all my fellow human beings, those sound of mind and body as well as the infirm. If I do not violate this oath, may I enjoy life and art, respected while I live and remembered with affection thereafter. May I always act so as to preserve the finest traditions of my calling and may I long experience the joy of healing those who seek my help. "First do no harm" It is a popular misconception that the phrase "First do no harm" (Latin: Primum non nocere) is a part of the Hippocratic oath. Strictly speaking, the phrase does not appear in the oath, although the oath does contain "Also I will, according to my ability and judgment, prescribe a regimen for the health of the sick; but I will utterly reject harm and mischief", in Latin "Victus quoque rationem ad aegrotantium salutem pro facultate, judicioque meo adhibebo, noxamvero et maleficium propulsabo".[6] Another equivalent phrase is found in Epidemics, Book I, of the Hippocratic school: "Practice two things in your dealings with disease: either help or do not harm the patient".[7] The exact phrase is believed to have originated with the 19th-century surgeon Thomas
Do not confuse poor journalism with good science This was ONE type of chemo on ONE type of cancer It is the difference between in vivo studies and in vitro studies There are thousands of different cancers and multiple different chemotherapies
Take you time and read the link again. I think even for the layperson, it demonstrates doctors were giving patients HARMFUL chemotherapy. http://www.nydailynews.com/life-sty...rse-triggering-tumor-growth-article-1.1129897 If you claim chemotherapy drugs are NOT harmful, then can you explain why patients suffer from countless effects after being given and treated with chemotherapy; LIKE HAIR LOSS?
I would have thought, someone like yourself working in the medical profession, would be outraged at pharmaceutical drugs being distributed into the public for general use before they are trialed correctly? Considering, it now seems obvious this chemotherapy drug was NOT trialed correctly. I think there is a term for that - human guinea pigs.
What are the possible side-effects? Chemotherapy can produce side-effects in some but not all people. Different chemotherapy drugs cause different side-effects. Most are often temporary and can be treated or managed. Possible side-effects include: nausea and vomiting diarrhoea or constipation (often due to anti-nausea medication) fatigue (tiredness) mouth sores or ulcers increased risk of infection increased risk of bruising hair loss muscle weakness skin sensitivity to sunlight (specific drugs only) dry or tired eyes loss of appetite. http://www.cancer.org.au/about-cancer/treatment/chemotherapy.html Doing NO harm - huh?
Care to comment on the following link? http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer...cinogens/known-and-probable-human-carcinogens Tamoxifen - chemotherapy drug, and known human carcinogenic - up there with cigarette smoking. Do you still want to advocate that chemotherapy drugs are safe, and doctors are doing NO HARM to their patients?
You said "Would you rather we sacrificed the many for the few?". Now tell me how that does not mean you were saying the many were vulnerable to the few in the context of the discussion. I'm not saying your wrong, but to me your statement certainly infers that was your point.... I mean, how else are the many vulnerable in regards to herd immunity and allowing more people to opt out without penalty??
I raised valid concerns regrading current practising medical morals, ethics and standards in relating to the Hippocratic Oath professional medical professional take before practising any form of medicine. The Hippocratic Oath: “do no harm”. We both know, and the majority of the forum members know, that all doctors; specialists; and Oncologists will always advocate the use of mainstream therapies like: surgery; Chemotherapy or Radiation therapy, when a client/patient has been diagnosed with cancer. Considering that doctors; specialists and oncologists are intellectually aware that chemotherapy is a toxic poison, and radiation burns. Then why do they advocate the use of these treatments, that will cause serious “harm” to their patients/clients, and will invalidate their sworn Hippocratic oath of: “do no harm”? You do understand the dilemma? If an individual cannot trust and rely upon a medical professional to keep their sworn oath, then how can an individual be expected to believe anything the medical professions say about other drugs. You are asking and expecting individuals to forgive medical professionals for breaking and renouncing their sworn Hippocratic oath regarding chemotherapy and radiation therapy, but then trust them and believe what they say about vaccines. For someone working in the medical profession like yourself, to deny, or refuse to acknowledge that chemotherapy and radiation therapy causes harm and kills cancer patients, is extremely insulting. It also demonstrates the depravity some people working in medical profession will stoop too, to justify their own self-righteous agenda and employment. You have advocated on numerous occasions, that you are nurse who has worked in the medical profession for some decades, and during that time you would have witnesses first-hand how chemotherapy completely destroys cancer patients immune systems, and forces them to be 100% reliant on antibiotics. But, instead of being honest and genuine about the problems chemotherapy induce, you deliberately pretend to be obtuse. You would also be aware, and have the knowledge to know that the cancer itself rarely kills the patient. A high percentage of cancer patients die form pharmaceutical induced drugs, that crash the patients immune system, making them to weak to fight the cancer, and other basic illnesses that a healthy immune system can fight off. We both know the biggest killer of cancer patients is a weakened immune system, and condition known as: “cachexia”. We also both understand that if chemotherapy or radiation therapy doesn’t kill the patient first, then the weakened immune system and “cachexia.” probable will. We also both know that for decades, the medical industry and the pharmaceutical companies have known that cancer primarily gets its energy/fuel supply from sugar and carbohydrates to survive. How many doctors, specialists, and oncologists advise their patients/client to reduce their sugar/carbohydrate intake. I hear you say; this is all conjecture and “quackery” - right, but herein lies the kicker… LOL What is the biological process known as cachexia? Cancer secretes huge amounts of Lactic Acid, which the liver has to filter and excrete. But, instead of the liver filtering the lactic acid into waste, it uses the patients ingested protein to convert the lactic acid back into glucose/sugar for the cancer energy supply. If the liver cannot get enough digested protein as a energy source form the patient for the conversion of lactic acid back into glucose/sugar for the cancer, it then begins to break down the patients stored fat and muscle reserves to use as energy for that conversion. A medical process known as “cachexia” - or more commonly known as wasting disease. Why for the past five decades, has this serious known problem been ignored or never addressed by doctors; oncologists and drug making pharmaceutical companies? I don’t think either one of needs to bore the other silly, by dragging out endless links and documents to support opposite theories. In our hearts, we both know the truth, even if it is inconvenient. I have produced enough independent scientific medical evidence to support my claims that chemotherapy is a toxic drug that harms patients. I have also produced enough evidence to support my claims that the current medical profession actively engage in harming their patients by dosing them with known dangerous chemotherapy drugs that harms the patient, and in essence, reneged on their sworn Hippocratic oath to do NO HARM. I have pointed out substantiated facts that the medical profession don‘t always tell the truth; even though they are suppose too. Therefore, I believe, I have clearly demonstrated the reasons why I believe individuals should not be “force medicated”. How can anyone be expected to have faith, and believe that the medical profession is telling the whole truth about vaccines, when they have previously dispensed dangerous and toxic chemotherapy drugs to their patients, knowing these drugs have dangerous side effects and will cause HARM. I believe all medicine, be it mainstream or natural has its advantages and disadvantages, but respect for the patients well being, and what is in the patients best interest should always come FIRST; before profit and greed. Maybe this is a philosophy that the medical profession need to re-visit?
Let me compare that list to a couple of more common medications PARACETAMOL People react differently to medicines. Just because a side effect is listed it doesn’t mean you will get the side effect. Side effects from paracetamol are rare but include: ##rash ##blood disorders ##liver and kidney damage (when taken at higher than recommended doses). http://www.healthdirect.gov.au/paracetamol OMG!! LIVER AND KIDNEY DAMAGE!!!! oh! The inhumanity!!! Then how about that other pain reliever that has been around since the middle ages (albeit not in refined form) ASPIRIN stomach upset, including nausea (feeling sick), vomiting, heartburn and indigestion dizziness. However, the most serious side effect to be aware of with aspirin (as with all anti-clotting medicine) is the increased risk of bleeding-related side effects. This risk is further increased if you’re taking aspirin along with another anti-clotting medicine, such as warfarin. Ask your doctor what signs and symptoms of bleeding you need to look out for, when you should contact your doctor about them and when you may need to go to a hospital emergency department. Some signs of bleeding may not be obvious, particularly with internal bleeding, so it’s important to know what these are. Signs and symptoms of bleeding Some signs and symptoms of bleeding include: bruising that occurs easily or takes longer than normal to heal red or dark brown urine red or black bowel motions nosebleeds — particularly when they occur more frequently or take longer than normal to stop trouble breathing or swallowing coughing up blood heavier than usual menstrual periods bleeding from cuts, wounds and scrapes that takes too long to stop dark or blood-stained vomit severe headache or dizziness unexplained pain, swelling or discomfort. http://www.nps.org.au/medicines/hea...aspirin_low_dose/for-individuals/side-effects And this is for the LOW DOSE ASPIRIN Do you want me to go on? ALL medications have side effects - ALL of them (yes including homeopathic medications - if you disbelieve me look up water intoxication or better yet go on the DHMO website) All herbal "remedies" have side effects Do you want to post an alternative to the therapies we are currently using?? PS GIT disturbance (Nausea and vomiting constipation and diarrhoea can also be caused by many many different foods) - - - Updated - - - Rhetorical question
LOL, ok then... but that makes no sense at all, since its not what I said, and it's not what you say you were saying, and its not related to what was being discussed. Let me try; Does the green ask blue?
Doctors and nurses deliberately poison people everyday with toxic and dangerous pharmaceutical manufactured drugs, but under the Hippocratic Oath, they are suppose to do NO harm. Then they wonder why intelligent people don't believe them or trust them, and question, why these same doctors and nurses want people to be forced medicated with vaccines that have never been trialed correctly. There is something wrong with that picture.
Yes it is a massive unfounded conspiracy theory There is no basis in fact IF it WERE true then why has the developed world where all these medications are being given out have a lower mortality rate and a higher life expectancy than third world countries that do not have these medications?
