/sci/ - Science & Math

oh fuck i've seen this before

>>1484091
SCIENTISTS ARE SATANS ARMY, DESTROY IT.

>>1484091
is that the gold-particle thing where you get them attatched to cancer cells and heat them up using some form of radiation to destroy them? basically like a cancer smart bomb?

>and yes, 100% kill rate on rat and rabbit tumors, you heard that right.

More detail please?

Side effects? What types of cancer does it target? All of them is a bit had to believe. How does it target the cancer?

gonna go watch the vid now.

>John Kanzius died from pneumonia on February 18, 2009, aged 64, at a hospital near Sanibel, Florida, where he had a winter home. The pneumonia developed as complication after two recent rounds of chemotherapy

so much about 100% kill rate

How does it feel knowing we had a cure for Cancer years ago and the reason we don't cure it (much like Aids and other life shortening but treatable diseases) is the fact that the TREATMENT of disease is a industry in itself. If we woke up tomorrow and there was a cure for cancer the Markets with crash with HUNDREDS OF BILLIONS being lost in the cancer treatment industry.

Capitalism hurts doesn't it?

wont happen, the pharmaceuticals will not let it. they'll buy the technology and then destroy it or somehow stop it from getting to the people.. too much money to be made off of sick people, yep.

>>1484128

VEGF-inhibitors also had a similar success rate in rat's and other small animals, yet failed to be even nearly as successful in human trails so I'm not going to get my hopes up.

>>1484141

Don't hate the speaker of the Truth just hate yourself for ignoring it

>>1484146

>>1484128

The free market works agaisnt monopolies. there is always someone willing to sell.

>>1484157
>The free market works agaisnt monopolies.

lol

>>1484154

My aunt died of cancer 4 days ago, guess you can say im a little on the pissed off side yes

>>1484157

>free market
>works against monopolies
>my face when you really believe that

>>1484157
>The free market works agaisnt monopolies

Everything gets cheaper and better. All you tinfoilies can get bent/

>>1484128
this is why america has never invented a vaccine for anything.

>>1484143
this method is pretty unstoppable though
with the antibodies applied and the cancer cells covered in the nanoparticles, it's more of a mechanical issue of "how much heat can the tumor take"?

>>1484137
then an upstart grabs the tech and sells it for cheap, because it's a huge profit and they don't give a fuck about long term.

it WILL come to market one way or another

>>1484128
0/10

>>1484320
>then an upstart grabs the tech and sells it for cheap, because it's a huge profit and they don't give a fuck about long term.

No. An upstart grabs the tech and tries to sell it for cheap, but the technology is patented. The patent holder doesn't bring the technology to market, but sues the shit out of anyone who does.

Then a country like India says "fuck this shit" and develops the technology for themselves. The patent holding corporation in the states then bribes American politicians into drafting a bunch of laws threatening to embargo, tax, or whatever, India.

Indian politicians go "oh shit", accept some bribes, and legislate and make illegal the technology in support of the patent holding company's wishes.

>>1484416
Intellectual property law is an elaborate scheme to troll poor people. :V

>>1484416

We can't stop NK from developing the nuclear bob but we can stop our citzens from curing cancer.

Don't be such a tard.

>>1484465
Well I'm not saying we DO

But we sure as fuck COULD

and you only have to look at the bullshit that goes on with prescription drugs and medicine to see that the EXACT scenario I laid out ALREADY HAPPENS.

>>1484416
what are you shitting me?
"the cure for cancer"
>gets sat on by some phamaceutical company
"is in lockdown"
pretty much the entire US goes apeshit and will probably boycott THE FUCK out of that company.

>>1484483
Like I told you already, this sort of thing is happening right now with various drugs on the market. The only difference is that the company doesn't sit on the medicine, they just sell it at extremely inflated prices far in excess of what it costs to make the drugs because sick people don't give a rats ass about how much their medicine costs if it cures them.

But if a company WANTED to just sit on the medicine, they could do that. Our patent laws allow it, the government system allows it, trade agreements allow it.

You are a naive fool to believe that it's impossible.

Wow, I wonder how long it'll take the drug companies to develop this pill that will cause them to stop making hundreds of thousands of dollars from each cancer patient. Probably soon! Why wouldn't they jump on this?

>>1484499
THANK YOU

no one knows biology here, they don't even know cancer is just a mutation of one of their awesome cells.

Cancer cells are the perfect form. They are deathless. Their only fault is that their host cannot sustain them.

Instead of curing cancer, we should make ourself capable of sustaining immortal cells.

>>1484483
>boycott

They'd probably do a lot more than that...

>>1484528
if you sustained something with cancer, and it continued its progress, I'm pretty sure it just would look like a ball of meat.

>>1484499
Cancer is impossible to preventatively cure, but deaths from it could be eliminated, I think.

>>1484504
I would say that you're naïve for believing those lame conspiracy theories. Have you ever wondered how big and perfect such a conspiracy must be to be still working relatively ok? Even small conspiracies kept by a few have been discovered soon.
Or maybe you have some reference from Wikileaks? It's anonymous and pretty secure, so you won't have a scarcity of whistleblowers.

>>1484539
>if you sustained something with cancer, and it continued its progress, I'm pretty sure it just would look like a ball of meat.

Suddenly: Artificial Meat! Made of 100% pure cancer. Delicious.

>>1484552
Sure, but saying "there is finally a cure for cancer" is another thing.

>>1484571
Yeah. The problem with the Kanzius treatment is that you need to already have antibodies that target the cancer cells and none of the host cells.

>>1484553

It's exactly doubters like you that keep conspiracies existing.

Pharmaceutical companies won't let marijuana be an official treatment for many diseases despite being named the most helpful drug out there, you really think they'll let this happen?

>>1484536

I totally saw the cookie monster in that pic.

>>1484553
They're not conspiracy theories if they're actually happening, bro.

Go learn something about the disputes between USA and India over pharmaceutical drugs before you show everyone how much more ignorant you are.

Also, conspiracies are not hard to keep secret. There have been countless thousands of conspiracies throughout human history, and there will yet be countless thousands more. Every time a group of companies come together and price fix - that's a conspiracy. A good recent example would be RAM manufacturers, or Intel subsidizing intel processors in dell computers, and thank goodness we've got regulatory bodies like the SEC to uncover these conspiracies for us.

You're a fool for thinking it's impossible for conspiracies to exist. Or for them to stay hidden.

They'll probably do something similar to what they did with weed. They suffocated monkeys with 50 blunts in under a minute and they claimed it causes brain cell death and look at all the people who believe that.

They're probably going to inject too much of the liquid into rats causing their blood to get fucked up and say it poisons you.

>>1484600
>thank goodness we've got regulatory bodies like the SEC to uncover these conspiracies for us.

But at the same time woe is us for having such a broken legal system that the conspiracy was still more profitable even after you're caught red handed.

>>1484594

cannot unsee!

>>1484559
Huh. Would consuming cancerous tissue be dangerous?

Disregard that, i suck cocks

>>1484634

That has to do with the way we deal with corporations in this country. Usually some sort of fine is is slapped on the corp. and none of the people behind the misdeeds are even charged with any wrongdoing.

> No cancer

Apply some to these boards please.

>>1484643
Well that was a nice way to prove yourself an idiot

>>1484600
>stay hidden
if a retard like yourself can know of and understand it, its not really a conspiracy now is it.

before i even bother watching is this just another one of those "cancer cures" that gets spouted on the internet every other week?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4OklIm5a1Lc&feature=related

this guy doesn't stop. (well, he has now. he's dead)

>>1484674
Nope, its legit shit. Like particle acceleration cancer cures

>>1484590
Placebo =/= treatment.

Sometimes a placebo can cause your brain to reconfigure itself back to normality, but there's nothing in marijuana that kills any sort of bacteria or repairs any sort of protein strings. In other words, it's only a placebo that can relax you.

That's why pharmaceuticals don't want it legalized, because many people will just use it to "treat" themselves, while never actually getting to the root of the problem. It's like getting drunk to hide a hangover, it only gets worse the more you leave it.

>>1484588
Do you have any solid evidence at all?
And you could also address the objections I made instead of using that typical conspiranoid cheap answer.

>>1484600
WTF, you need to learn how to read. I never said that conspiracies do not exist. The bigger the conspiracy, the easier to note. The dirty deals between Bill Gates and some pharmaceutical companies with presence in India have already been noticed.
I just say that this about keeping a cure for cancer hidden is stupid, and it would already be a scandal so big that it would not have this status of stupid cheap conspiranoia anymore.

>>1484691
I'm not sure about this particle acceleration cancer cure, but the OP's stuff sounds pretty legit to me.

>>1484674
It's a method for killing cancerous growths, selling as a 'cure' is disengenus, but it would be another useful tool next to the existing options

>>1484716
Dude, they don't even have to keep it secret. Our legal framework LETS THEM GET AWAY WITH IT.

If someone's got a patent on the technology, and they don't want you to use it, you're out of luck.

http://www.archives.expressnews.ualberta.ca/article/2007/01/8153.html

Research stalled because nobody's willing to fund a non-patentable drug.

>>1484727

Nope you are batshit crazy.

>>1484700

Treatment =/= cure

GTFO

also: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B8_5Ebsjk8I

>>1484727
Nice. Now: where is the evidence for that hidden cure.

> Also, conspiracies are not hard to keep secret.
Not all are equally "easy" to keep secret. A hidden definitive cure for cancer is hardly an easy one.


> There have been countless thousands of conspiracies throughout human history, and there will yet be countless thousands more.
I'm not saying otherwise.

> A good recent example would be RAM manufacturers, or Intel subsidizing intel processors in dell computers, and thank goodness we've got regulatory bodies like the SEC to uncover these conspiracies for us.
And that's relatively irrelevant compared to hidden cures for important illnesses. So a hidden cure for cancer or AIDS of anything would be even easier to detect. You need just one fucking anonymous whistleblower contacting wikileaks.

>>1484746
"However, as DCA is not patented, Michelakis is *concerned* that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test DCA in clinical trials."
But it continues:
" He is grateful for the support he has already received from publicly funded agencies, such as the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR), and he is hopeful such support will continue and allow him to conduct clinical trials of DCA on cancer patients.

Michelakis' research is currently funded by the CIHR, the Canada Foundation for Innovation, the Canada Research Chairs program, and the Alberta Heritage Foundation for Medical Research. "

>>1484752
Which again relates to my point about not getting to the root of the problem. For some scenarios, like brain diseases, it makes sense to use a depressant, because it slows brain activity to a normal level, an example would be ADHD drugs like Riddilin.

However, while marijuana may show "therapeutic effects" for certain conditions, that does not necessarily rid you of said condition, it rids you of the symptoms, hence being a placebo. However, this never fully cures the patient, and their forced to take a drug for the rest of their life so long as they have whatever they were ailed with in the first place.

Likewise, if marijuana was made legal, we'd have an incredible spike in DUI incidents, because people don't know how to control themselves. And don't pull that bullshit about driving high is safer than driving drunk, it's bullshit.

http://www.merck.com/mmhe/sec25/ch312/ch312j.html

Note the part on ruining your depth perception and concentration. Too bad we kind of need those on a day to day basis.

>>1484788
I figured I wouldn't have to qualify that statement with a bunch of talk about only a few donations from non-profits that don't cover the cost of drug approval studies, but I guess I was wrong. I'll remember to take you through it step by step next time.

>>1484788
>"However, as DCA is not patented, Michelakis is *concerned* that it may be difficult to find funding from private investors to test DCA in clinical trials."

If this isn't a perfect example of what I'm talking about..

Corporations want control, and they want money. Cure for cancer is a lot of money, but if it's unpatented then why subsidize the research when you can just steal it all and patent it later, when it's finished, for free?

and then you get a monopoly on the treatment, which means artificially inflating the price unless a government regulatory body stops you.

>>1484765
I'm not talking about a conspiracy over a hidden cure for cancer at all. The pharmaceutical company can come right out and say they've got a patented cure and flat out state they won't give it to anybody, and our legal system would PROTECT them.

>>1484809

>Implying cold medicine and every other medicine that reduces symptoms is a placebo

There are no reasons to keep marijuana illegal. It does have medical benefits and there is no evidence that it is a placebo. The legalization would not cause usage to rise. There has never been a case where a drug is legalized and usage goes up. It's actually the opposite(see Portugal). It's safer and more enjoyable as a social drug than tobacco and alcohol. There is much money to made off of it through taxes and environmentally friendly from the hemp products that can be made. Many urban areas would improve because people wouldn't have the option to sell weed. People in areas like Detroit sell weed instead of having a productive job because it's much more profitable.

>>1484825
Or better yet, present the current status for full credit. That article is from 3 years ago. I know about the interest of pharmaceutical companies in patents, but that doesn't prove there is already a definitive final cure for cancer hidden somewhere, which is what I'm asking evidence for, but nobody has anything to say until now. Just all the same old retarded "you are naive", "people like you keep these conspiracies running for not believing in them", etc.
The treatment presented there is only appropriate for some cases and it has side effects that restrict the number of patients able to use it.

>>1484860
>There are no reasons to keep marijuana illegal

Lol yes there is.

>>1484890

That is?

>>1484852
"The pharmaceutical company can come right out and say they've got a patented cure and flat out state they won't give it to anybody, and our legal system would PROTECT them."
1) Depends on where it's discovered.
2) It doesn't mean that the case would be easily settle there.
3) It doesn't mean it's going to be that way.

>>1484809
See
>>1484514

>>1484897

>Implying an American company would be generous when they could have billions in profit

>>1484890
No there isn't.

>>1484894
Just some guy upset with me and trolling because of it.

My argument against druqk laws and other such shit can be found here:

>>1484514

also you're creationists who need to GB2/magnets/

>>1484894
It can't be regulated (taxed) because of how damn easy it is to grow.

Also rate of DUI will go WAY up because idiots will think "lol its safe i can drive high".

+ theres no current accurate test to test how high you are that can be preformed by officers when they pull you over.
Anywho, its not going to happen any time soon.

>>1484907
> implying it will be an American company

>>1484938

>Implying this is a discussion about non-American companies

>>1484947
> implying your personal bias is an excuse for a bad argument

>>1484924
IMO, those potential damages PALE in comparison to the current damages caused by making weed illegal.

Things like driving while high can be fought the same way drinking and driving were. A quick test for THC in the blood stream is a technological challenge, but not one that is impossible. And regulated drugs mean safe and reliable drugs. Maybe you *could* grow your own. Maybe everyone will have some weed growing in their shed that they harvest for themselves. More likely I think people would rather just run down to the drug store and pick some up, even if it's a couple dollars more expensive than if they made it themselves.

burnp

>>1484499
this image holds a lot of truth
luckily this method hits one of the few traits common to all cancer cells; they have protein tags, and they can be easily attached to by synthetic tags bonded to the gold nanoparticles

which is why dozens of universities are scrambling to find a cheap way to bind proteins to gold nanoparticles

also to everyone saying it's going to get sat on by some pharmaceutical company; realize that pretty much everyone will boycott that company into the fucking DIRT if they do that. every media outlet in the world will slam their ass daily with "big evil corp" and "boycott the red eyed demons", the last place you want to be.

so if some corp was STUPID enough to sit on it, they'd go out of buisness soon after, or just cave and sell the damn treatment.

WTF IS THIS SHIT

THERE ARE NO RATS OR RABBITS HERE. THIS WON'T HELP US.

FUCK YOU GUYS IM GOIN TO CHURCH

Well it would mean faggots would finally be able to stop bitching about the space program.

>PhD in mathematics
>any jon i want
>300k hearting

>>1484924
90% of crashes under the influence of weed are also under the influence of alcohol. The remaining number makes the crash rate of stoned people marginally less than that of sober people.

>>1484924

Studies have shown that smoking weed makes you drive more cautiously, something like an average of 10kph under the limit. The only side effect noted other than that was swerving from over-correction, which still occurred within the same lane. It's a British study.
I'll try to find it after I go grab a pack of smokes now that cancer's been cured. WOOHOO!

>>1487982

You may have a problem with the source, but just like Wikipedia it uses verifiable citations at the bottom of the page.
http://www.cannabisculture.com/articles/1775.html

OP speaks truth.

Does any of you newfags remember in the early 60s when FDA and big pham. tried to ban vitamins and supplements from over the counter sale?

>>1488575
60's????

FDA is still banning natrually occuring vitamans and minrals.

vitaman B6 was declared a illegal drug last year,
vitaman B17, the real cure for cancer, banned over 20 years ago. List goes on.

>>1484157

>>1484553
>conspiracy theories.
moar like market strategies

>>1484157

This is what happens when you visit /new/

>>1488608
Though it is sometimes sold as "Vitamin B17", it is not a vitamin. Amygdalin/laetrile was claimed to be a vitamin by chemist Ernst T. Krebs in the hope that if classified as a nutritional supplement it would escape the federal legislation regarding the marketing of drugs. He could also capitalise on the public fad for vitamins at that time.[10]

[10]
^ a b Lerner IJ (1981). "Laetrile: a lesson in cancer quackery". CA Cancer J Clin 31 (2): 91–5. doi:10.3322/canjclin.31.2.91. PMID 6781723. http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/reprint/31/2/91..

>>1484594
that anon is keen

>>1488707
So almonds are like ubercyanide poisonous or cure cancer?

Not sure if habeeb. Even if wikipedia.

>>1488727
Put on your non-insane hat, and I think you can answer that one yourself.

>>1484938
>>1484947
>>1485034
>implying there are national multi-nationals

>>1487982
>Studies have shown that smoking weed makes you drive more cautiously
that's probably because it makes you paranoid

I am pro legalization, but for this certain case legalization would make users just high without any significant reason to be cautious (other than being afraid of an accident).

aged