Cancer “Vaccine” Eliminates Tumors in Mice

[NeoNemesis]

Being we're on the subject of Vaccines I just want to point out the Law:

Title 42 § 300aa–22. Standards of responsibility

(B) Unavoidable Adverse Side effects; warnings

"(1) No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in
a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related
injury or death associated with the
administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988,
if the injury or death resulted from side effects
that were unavoidable even though the vaccine
was properly prepared and was accompanied by
proper directions and warnings."



So in a nutshell, if a vaccine is 100% lethal to the person the Manufacture is 100% protected by Gov and not responsible. Companies and shareholders protected!!!

People say a lot of things about vaccines both for and against. I would suggest actually looking up the studies and reading what actual scientist say about them. Saying "I believe a vaccine is / isn't good" is not science.

Also one must consider in the U.S. they are giving approx 30 vaccines to kids before the age of 6. That is a secured continual income that makes vaccine manufactures exorbitant amounts of money. Yet we have more and more people diagnosed with ADD, ADHD, Autism, Breast Cancer, crones disease, etc.... Many of the vaccines have not had enough studies done to prove they aren't doing something else to our bodies (may cure the cancer but make you brain dead in the process). These companies lobby to the CDC with one good study even though 90% of the studies could prove the vaccine is harmful and if they pay off the right politician, the vaccine gets approved.

I'm just saying look into it.

If you or a loved one may have been injured by a vaccine you may want to look into the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and see if you can get compensation from the Government (U.S. Taxpayers). This program has already paid out $3.6 Billion to vaccine victims. Again the manufactures product harms someone and the taxpayer pays for it. A win for the vaccine manufacture again.

Ya, this is why we still have people dying from Measles in 2018. The first part basically just says that if someone dies from a standard vaccine that has been approved, is free of defect, and has been used in a correct manner, they have no legal recourse against the pharma company. This makes sense because every single person (should) be vaccinated and there are bound to be unforeseen reactions that nobody could possibly predict.

The rest of your post is just filled up with consipiracy theories. You throw out a bunch of scary diseases that could have millions of possible causes and attempt to tie them to vaccines without any evidence at all.

The misinformation you spread kills people so please stop.

 

[tetris42]

View attachment 52837The Martin Shkreli situation angered and confused me. I'm a fiscal conservative / social libertarian, and I like to believe that there is always a simple and elegant solution to areas where morality and legality collide.

Ironically, this is at the very core of why I'm NOT fiscally conservative or libertarian. Those kinds of systems only work if there aren't any bad actors, people act reasonably, and everybody has a conscience. That's not the real world. On the contrary, our current economic system incentives bad actors to thrive and often makes immoral behavior highly profitable. Whether it's denying easily produced life-saving medication, polluting groundwater to save on production costs, making predatory loans full of legalese that ends with people losing their homes and savings, there's no end to it. For me, being fiscally liberal has nothing to do with wanting to control people or interfere with how people business, it's about not wanting wanton exploitation or people killed from the worst that's out there from business as usual. If everything was fine left to its own devices, there would be no reason to interfere.

 

[Aireoth]

Being we're on the subject of Vaccines I just want to point out the Law:

Title 42 § 300aa–22. Standards of responsibility

(B) Unavoidable Adverse Side effects; warnings

"(1) No vaccine manufacturer shall be liable in
a civil action for damages arising from a vaccine-related
injury or death associated with the
administration of a vaccine after October 1, 1988,
if the injury or death resulted from side effects
that were unavoidable even though the vaccine
was properly prepared and was accompanied by
proper directions and warnings."



So in a nutshell, if a vaccine is 100% lethal to the person the Manufacture is 100% protected by Gov and not responsible. Companies and shareholders protected!!!

People say a lot of things about vaccines both for and against. I would suggest actually looking up the studies and reading what actual scientist say about them. Saying "I believe a vaccine is / isn't good" is not science.

Also one must consider in the U.S. they are giving approx 30 vaccines to kids before the age of 6. That is a secured continual income that makes vaccine manufactures exorbitant amounts of money. Yet we have more and more people diagnosed with ADD, ADHD, Autism, Breast Cancer, crones disease, etc.... Many of the vaccines have not had enough studies done to prove they aren't doing something else to our bodies (may cure the cancer but make you brain dead in the process). These companies lobby to the CDC with one good study even though 90% of the studies could prove the vaccine is harmful and if they pay off the right politician, the vaccine gets approved.

I'm just saying look into it.

If you or a loved one may have been injured by a vaccine you may want to look into the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 and see if you can get compensation from the Government (U.S. Taxpayers). This program has already paid out $3.6 Billion to vaccine victims. Again the manufactures product harms someone and the taxpayer pays for it. A win for the vaccine manufacture again.

That post is full of shit. Vaccines do not cause autism, your research skill does.

 

[dgz]

I hope it progresses to human trials - and with good results. I've lost several people to various forms of cancer over the years.

You're hardly alone. I am not even that old. Breast cancer, stomach cancer, blood cancer...

 

[seanreisk]

Ironically, this is at the very core of why I'm NOT fiscally conservative or libertarian. Those kinds of systems only work if there aren't any bad actors, people act reasonably, and everybody has a conscience. That's not the real world. On the contrary, our current economic system incentives bad actors to thrive and often makes immoral behavior highly profitable. Whether it's denying easily produced life-saving medication, polluting groundwater to save on production costs, making predatory loans full of legalese that ends with people losing their homes and savings, there's no end to it. For me, being fiscally liberal has nothing to do with wanting to control people or interfere with how people business, it's about not wanting wanton exploitation or people killed from the worst that's out there from business as usual. If everything was fine left to its own devices, there would be no reason to interfere.

A fiscal conservative is not republican, democrat, liberal or 'conservative,' at least not in the sense that Republicans call themselves 'conservative'. A fiscal conservative believes in small government and no government debt. For myself, a fiscal conservative is someone who believes that what MUST be paid for is paid for, and after that the budget must be balanced. With the money left over you can buy what you want, but you never use the things you want as leverage against those items that must be paid. The fiscal conservatives I know are strongly against any finance system that fails to highlight true costs, such as the fact that every citizen in this country pays for every uninsured citizen's health care, whether they want to pay for Obamacare or not. Or the fact that within the current US health care system, insurance companies automatically raise the price of medical costs by a minimum of 10% without providing any benefit. Or that insurance companies are allowed to act as health care agents while still having their share holders as their primary responsibility, and not the people they insure. They believe that shorting stock should be illegal, currency trading should be illegal, and that when banks or defense contractors or oil companies or food processors are found negligent, someone should go to jail.

Social libertarians are not Ayn Rand nutjobs - you're thinking of those dreamers who believe that capitalism will autocorrect if the government would completely deregulate business (these people have not read The Jungle.) They are just as crazy as communists, compassionate conservatives, anyone who gets a theater arts degree, and anyone who thinks democracy means freedom. A social libertarian just believes that people should be allowed to do what they want, provided that it doesn't interfere with anyone else's rights, and that if they harm themselves by their own actions they must accept it.

 

[KD5ZXG]

It bugs me when the grocery asks that I should donate to give cancer to rats.
You know they all get dissected, especially the survivors, which doesn't really
sound like surviving to me. All they have to do is wait about a year and a half
and 90% of them are getting lumps anyway. Which they could try to fix and
learn how to fix, and learn to better diagnose and image non-invasively. Do
they need to engineer mice and rats with shorter lives to develop cancers
even sooner, and this is research?

If they were trying to help people get quick affordable care so that lumps don't
spread, that I might support. But don't get no control the direction of research.
Wait till costs spiral out of control, then do too little or too much, far too late.

A vaccine though, sounds pretty good. But only the rich will ever see it.
Your government has a sure cure for diabetes too: Let them eat cake.
"Qu'ils mangent de la brioche!". Dude, thats what SHE said...

 

[Tsumi]

It bugs me when the grocery asks that I should donate to give cancer to rats.
You know they all get dissected, especially the survivors, which doesn't really
sound like surviving to me. All they have to do is wait about a year and a half
and 90% of them are getting lumps anyway. Which they could try to fix and
learn how to fix, and learn to better diagnose and image non-invasively. Do
they need to engineer mice and rats with shorter lives to develop cancers
even sooner, and this is research?

If they were trying to help people get quick affordable care so that lumps don't
spread, that I might support. But don't get no control the direction of research.
Wait till costs spiral out of control, then do too little or too much, far too late.

Your government has a sure cure for diabetes: Let them eat cake.
"Qu'ils mangent de la brioche!". Dude, thats what SHE said...

Words cannot describe the level of ignorance in this post.

Ever heard of the expression time is money? Waiting around for a bunch of rats to naturally develop cancer is a waste of time and money. Additionally, many will not develop cancer but instead die of other natural causes, like old age.

As for everything else... that is just nonsensical babbling.

 

[beemanit]

That post is full of shit. Vaccines do not cause autism, your research skill does.

Based on what Proof do you have? Your assuming all vaccines are safe without giving any evidence for or against.

 

[mope54]

lmao, get the fuck out of here with the anti-vac bs

 

[Tsumi]

Based on what Proof do you have? Your assuming all vaccines are safe without giving any evidence for or against.

Any evidence that says vaccines are safe will be instantly dismissed as government conspiracies or corporate conspiracies by people like you. Attempting to present you with facts will simply be an exercise in futility as you will simply stick your head in the ground and claim that it is not real facts.

 

[beemanit]

Ya, this is why we still have people dying from Measles in 2018. The first part basically just says that if someone dies from a standard vaccine that has been approved, is free of defect, and has been used in a correct manner, they have no legal recourse against the pharma company. This makes sense because every single person (should) be vaccinated and there are bound to be unforeseen reactions that nobody could possibly predict.

The rest of your post is just filled up with consipiracy theories. You throw out a bunch of scary diseases that could have millions of possible causes and attempt to tie them to vaccines without any evidence at all.

The misinformation you spread kills people so please stop.

You did read I put this little caveat in there " People say a lot of things about vaccines both for and against. I would suggest actually looking up the studies and reading what actual scientist say about them. Saying "I believe a vaccine is / isn't good" is not science."

A lot of people assume vaccines are safe because that's what we all have been brought up believing. It's what we're taught in public school, it's re-enforced by doctors, and fear is generated on the news...

If you have a few hours, watch Dr. Suzanne Humphries: https://youtu.be/SFQQOv-Oi6U

She goes into much of the science and studies that have been done.

 

[Kuurus]

Awesome. Hopefully it continues progressing and we finally find a way to beat cancerous tumors! I know I would have rather kept my parts instead of having them cut out! If only something would have reduced the tumor to nothing and saved me from all the fear and pain! I'm sure many others feel the same way : )

 

[beemanit]

Any evidence that says vaccines are safe will be instantly dismissed as government conspiracies or corporate conspiracies by people like you. Attempting to present you with facts will simply be an exercise in futility as you will simply stick your head in the ground and claim that it is not real facts.

con·spir·a·cy - a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

Yeah your right, who in a corporation or government would do anything secret behind everyone's back for profit? Wells Fargo, Enron, Martha Stewart(convicted for conspiracy and obstruction of justice) for starters. Those are the proven ones.

 

[Tsumi]

con·spir·a·cy - a secret plan by a group to do something unlawful or harmful.

Yeah your right, who in a corporation or government would do anything secret behind everyone's back for profit? Wells Fargo, Enron, Martha Stewart(convicted for conspiracy and obstruction of justice) for starters. Those are the proven ones.

Uh huh. The difference is one of scale. The science and corporate conspiracy you claim to exist would be a massive one that permeates multiple levels of society, the workforce, management, etc. It would involve millions of people. Human nature would quickly leak conspiracies before they even get that large. The examples you allude to are limited to a relatively small number of people, with only a few hundred having firsthand knowledge at most, and most of them numbering in the tens of people.

 

[BB Gun]

^...and, oddly enough, all those mentioned were, uh, found out after a few years. HOW long have vaccines been around, again?

 

[nutzo]

edit: maybe genetics have a large role to play in this. Some people smoke for 15 years and die in lung cance, others smoke until they are 95 and die of an heart attack. But you're absolutely correct. You can get cancer from fucking everything that's why we need this badly

Genetics is a very large part of this.
Part of my extended family (no blood relation luckily) has very bad genetics when it comes to cancer.
My wife's step father died of cancer in his late 60's. Both his brothers also died of cancer around the same age.

His son died last year in his late 50's. I feel sorry for his kids. Hope they inherited the genes from their mom instead.
He never smoked, lived clean, ate good, didn't matter.

Smoking is one of the worse environmental causes. If you smoke, and don't end up with cancer, you will end of dying from heart disease.
I don't smoke, but if I did I would likely be dead by now based on my fathers/family history. Almost everyone in his family who smoked ended up dying in their 50's or 60's, including my dad.

 

[MacLeod]

FIFY -

Guestimate: $187,462.98 per tumor shot (in the US).
RoW pays: $187.46 per ounce.
Cost to make: $37.54 per ounce.

Because "We have the 'best' health care (price) in the world."

$37.54 to make, about a billion dollars and 30 years of work and research to develop.

 

[SamuraiInBlack]

just make sure you don't end up being the other 50% that gets the plecebo.. that's what happened to my aunts dad who had parkinsons or what ever it is when he signed up for an experimental treatment.. was one of the worst things she had to deal with knowing he wasn't actually getting the real medication but he thought he was.

I'm sorry that happened to him. That is really terrible.

 

[nomas]

$37.54 to make, about a billion dollars and 30 years of work and research to develop.

My point is why does the rest of the world pays far less for the pharma drugs invented here, while we get to pay full MSRP or MSRP x10-100 seemingly? Even wealthy OECD countries pay a fraction of the price here.

 

[Gorankar]

My point is why does the rest of the world pays far less for the pharma drugs invented here, while we get to pay full MSRP or MSRP x10-100 seemingly? Even wealthy OECD countries pay a fraction of the price here.

The long and short is because they can't sell them for that much outside of the US. Whether it is due to regulatory issues, or price controls in that given country, or that price is all that market will bear.
It is not just pharmaceuticals, pesticides, and other patented chemicals tend to be cheaper in other countries despite being invented, and often even produced in the US.
It is not quite right to say we are subsidizing the rest of the world when it comes to pharmaceuticals invented here, but it does feel like it sometimes.

 

[Aireoth]

Based on what Proof do you have? Your assuming all vaccines are safe without giving any evidence for or against.

The evidence is overwhelmingly in favor of vaccines, but you would know this if your head wasn't burried up McCarthy's anus.

 

[danc3]

I'm glad there is progress in battling cancer. We have yet to see about how much it costs and how effective it is. Cancer has taken away many loved ones from me, young and old. My support to the cancer researchers.

As for vaccine concerns, I guarantee you the positives of vaccines overwhelm any negatives. Widespread vaccination have helped us induce herd immunity. Scientific articles listed on the CDC do not indicate any link between vaccines and autism (https://www.cdc.gov/vaccinesafety/concerns/autism.html).

 

[NeoNemesis]

You did read I put this little caveat in there " People say a lot of things about vaccines both for and against. I would suggest actually looking up the studies and reading what actual scientist say about them. Saying "I believe a vaccine is / isn't good" is not science."

A lot of people assume vaccines are safe because that's what we all have been brought up believing. It's what we're taught in public school, it's re-enforced by doctors, and fear is generated on the news...

If you have a few hours, watch Dr. Suzanne Humphries: https://youtu.be/SFQQOv-Oi6U

She goes into much of the science and studies that have been done.

There is no caveat. The debate is between a group that actually has knowledge of a subject and one that makes up whatever best supports their arguments.

 

[KD5ZXG]

Words cannot describe the level of ignorance in this post.

Ever heard of the expression time is money? Waiting around for a bunch of rats to naturally develop cancer is a waste of time and money. Additionally, many will not develop cancer but instead die of other natural causes, like old age.

As for everything else... that is just nonsensical babbling.

Ignorance is you don't have rats that know their individual names and come when you call.

Every one of the female rats will get at least one mammory tumor that turns to cancer if not
removed while its small enough to reasonably do so. With minimal care, they do not die of
other causes, but live about 6months longer than the process of reliably developing at least
one natural tumor requires. Waste of time for the first batch maybe, until you get a pipeline
going. Engineering rats to get better cancer faster was the wasted money. Grain is cheap.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ng-lots-fields-amid-global-glut-idUSKBN17D0EO

After you spend $80 to have your $2 rat removed from it's lump, then you can watch it die
a few months later of treatable but incurable murine myco. That part isn't quite so much fun.

Allergies dictate that its rats, or no pet for me. I suppose fish, if a high maintenence pet that
can't be removed from its tank and doesn't even know who you are appeals. If it don't prefer
hanging with you first before food and other distractions, whats the point?

Almost smart as pigs with a lot less runny poop, mmmmmm BACON.

 

[Tsumi]

Ignorance is you don't have rats that know their individual names and come when you call.

Every one of the female rats will get at least one mammory tumor that turns to cancer if not
removed while its small enough to reasonably do so. With minimal care, they do not die of
other causes, but live about 6months longer than the process of reliably developing at least
one natural tumor requires. Waste of time for the first batch maybe, until you get a pipeline
going. Engineering rats to get better cancer faster was the wasted money. Grain is cheap.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-...ng-lots-fields-amid-global-glut-idUSKBN17D0EO

After you spend $80 to have your $2 rat removed from it's lump, then you can watch it die
a few months later of treatable but incurable murine myco. That part isn't quite so much fun.

Allergies dictate that its rats, or no pet for me. I suppose fish, if a high maintenence pet that
can't be removed from its tank and doesn't even know who you are appeals. If it don't prefer
hanging with you first before food and other distractions, whats the point?

Almost smart as pigs with a lot less runny poop, mmmmmm BACON.

People's time is not cheap. Facilities and space are not cheap, especially in hotbed urban areas like San Francisco. You also only specifically mentioned female rats, what about male ones?

If it wasn't cost effective for companies to artificially give rats cancer, I guarantee you that it would not be a widespread practice. However, there is more to the cost than just simply feeding them.

 

[KD5ZXG]

If you had read the article more carfeully, you might have noted that female
mice in question were engineered to quickly develop cancer in all ten teats.

Male rats (and mice) would probably get some sort of cancer too if they lived
longer than it took Myco to wreck their lungs. In a lab, Myco isn't as much an
issue as pets and wild. I dunno what happens to lab males? Probably nothing
they knew they were signing up for.

My mother taught the difference between right and wrong, and the punishment
was exactly the same. So people who do crap without thought for anyone else
or any virtue but money don't really surprise me. Now if you'll excuse, I gots to
go buy up all the affordable gaming cards. Muchas gracias gozaimasu...

 

[Tsumi]

Right and wrong is highly subjective, and you cannot claim your morals to be superior to anyone else's.

 

[-PK-]

You did read I put this little caveat in there " People say a lot of things about vaccines both for and against. I would suggest actually looking up the studies and reading what actual scientist say about them. Saying "I believe a vaccine is / isn't good" is not science."

A lot of people assume vaccines are safe because that's what we all have been brought up believing. It's what we're taught in public school, it's re-enforced by doctors, and fear is generated on the news...

If you have a few hours, watch Dr. Suzanne Humphries: https://youtu.be/SFQQOv-Oi6U

She goes into much of the science and studies that have been done.

That's one doctor who is trying to profit off of homeopathic talks and books. Homeopathy is one of those unregulated markets; last year they passed guidelines stating that any homeopathic product sold in stores has to have a disclaimer stating that the product is not based on any clinical trials and is not based on scientific fact. Doctors like Suzanne Humphries are a plague on society who prey on human psychology and a lack of knowledge, and they are vastly outnumbered by ethical health professionals whom caring for patients is their passion. There have been multiple studies of vaccines with millions of children and they have not observed ANY of the long term side effects that you have stated.

Most side effects are mild inflammation or redness at the site of injection. This is a local skin response to being poked by anything. You may have a mild fever or fatigue lasting up to 48 hours. This is a good immune response before your body begins producing antibodies. Severe reactions to eggs, yeast, or any additives are extremely rare, about 1 in a million. You are far more likely to contract a painful or deadly disease from not having a vaccine than you are to have a deadly reaction to a vaccine. They also have you wait a few minute afterwards to make sure you don't have an immediate reaction. If you have never had a reaction to any vaccine in the past, eggs, or yeast, then you have a near 0% chance of having a reaction to any other vaccine because you've already prescreened yourself by going through the process.

I have learned about immunology and I have researched the metabolism of the additives, and I can confirm that there is nothing alarming about vaccines at all. You trust countless drugs to relieve pain, you trust doctors to perform open heart surgery, and immunology is no different in a health professional's study. Ethical doctors in established practices get paid salary, they do not get paid to push pharmaceuticals or personal religious beliefs. This is not the case in alternative medicine, private pain clinics, and chiropractors, which are regulated more like Cosmetology and are entirely based on anecdotal experience/psychology, instead of scientific evidence.