Do you suspect that natural cures for cancer are suppressed?

Electric cars predate the internal combustion engine.

 

Why do you assume they will be low cost?

 

I have known two men who had cancer fairly well.

One of them went the conventional route of chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery. It was a six-month ordeal, and there have been very unpleasant, lasting after-effects, but he has survived it so far almost seven years, and the cancer is completely gone. The other man had compiled a huge amount of information on "natural" cures and was using a variety of them, but, unfortunately, he has been dead now for several years, killed by cancer.

I think natural remedies are much better for preventing health problems than curing them. And it goes without saying that habits like eating way too much, smoking, and drinking alcohol to excess are just begging for really nasty problems. They may take years to develop, but once the damage is done it is very damned difficult to undo it.

 

Apricots contain sugar. That is why apricots are sweet.



​

 

*******N, some people are just AMAZINGLY gullible about this kind of stuff.

You can't blame the ones who have some terrible disease who are just trying desperately to save their own lives, in fact your heart goes out to them, and that just makes people who would take advantage of them even more despicable.

But the people who don't have anything incurable, and believe in this kind of nonsense anyway, they're supporting these con men too. People really have a responsibility to others not to be so ****** purposely idiotic, and the media has a responsibility not to push all this junk science down our throats on talk shows and public tv all the time

 

There was a report that just came out....I read it but I have to find it again....that they will have a Genetic Cure for almost all types of Cancer in the next 2 years.

A Genetic Cure is the way to go as Cancer Cells are cells that are reproducing incorrectly via mitosis so if they can Genetically Engineer Cancer Cells by using a Retro-Virus and thus reprogram the cells Genomes....this will make it possible to cure a number of diseases.

The MONEY is in CANCER TREATMENT...so it is possible a CURE may have been supressed.

But as far as NATURAL CURES.....it takes a lot more than some natural remedy to cure Cancer.

The Cancer Cells themselves have to be reprogrammed.

No amount of Herbs is going to do that.

AA

 

I suspect that a genetic cure for cancer may well eventually work in eighty percent or more of types of cancer.

But.............. if an extremely low cost cocktail of various remedies existed...… that would work in over thirty percent of types of cancer..... a lot of people might just tend to take the low cost more natural alternative if it was well known and well researched thus............. the companies who stand to make BILLIONS...… if not tens of billions.... if not eventually even trillions of dollars off this genetic cure have ZERO FINANCIAL incentive to make sure that that low cost cocktail of remedies is well researched????!!!

 

Thank you immensely for this update.

I hadn't heard about this yet and will certainly Google this to see if I can find more about it now!

… Found it....

http://waterpoweredcar.com/stanmeyer.html

 

Yes..... I heard that turmeric and cumin and certain other spices were excellent low cost sources of trace minerals for one thing.

So apparently is pink Himalayan salt.

 

"To date, no peer review studies of Meyer's devices have been published in the scientific literature. An article in journal Nature described Meyer's claims as one more "water as fuel" myth.[2]

Lawsuit[edit]
In 1996, Meyer was sued by two investors to whom he had sold dealerships, offering the right to do business in Water Fuel Cell technology. His car was due to be examined by the expert witness Michael Laughton, Professor of Electrical Engineering at Queen Mary, University of London and Fellow of the Royal Academy of Engineering. However, Meyer made what Professor Laughton considered a "lame excuse" on the days of examination and did not allow the test to proceed.[3] According to Meyer, the technology was patent pending and under investigation by the patent office, the Department of Energy and the military.[citation needed] His "water fuel cell" was later examined by three expert witnesses in court who found that there "was nothing revolutionary about the cell at all and that it was simply using conventional electrolysis." The court found Meyer had committed "gross and egregious fraud" and ordered him to repay the two investors their $25,000.[3]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stanley_Meyer's_water_fuel_cell

 

Pink salt is mostly sodium chloride, with a little ferric oxide contamination that gives it the pink color. (Ferric oxide is rust.) Cumin and turmeric have a high concentration of salicylic acid though (the substance aspirin becomes in your stomach). If you eat a good sized Vindaloo curry it's almost as effective as a baby aspirin.



​

 

Technically you are correct but......… when an American justice allows an astonishingly unwise act to take place in his courtroom.....................… there are consequences!

http://www.politicalforum.com/opini...ite-substance-added-stanley-meyer-device.html


USA judge allows white substance to be added to Stanley Meyer device?



What do you personally think of this act?

Personally............. the judge in this case was either one of North America's most naïve justices or more likely......… he had gotten pressure from fairly high up...… to allow this travesty of justice to take place!


http://www.electro-tech-online.com/t...-energy.42388/

 

Their first incarnation wasn't particularly competitive with internal combustion, although this wasn't the case in the late 90s/ early 2000s.

 

What don't you understand, it was a fraud. I seem to recall when this was going on and he was going to drive it around a big civic center somewhere and it totally failed and was shown to be a fraud.

Tell me something, if a legitimate auto company had technology that would do this and they could make BILLIONS off of it, why wouldn't they put it into production?

- - - Updated - - -

Yeah it is still the case when you consider ALL the points of competition and take away the subsidies else they would be selling like hot cakes

 

Well, there were quite a few subsidies that got the oil industry rolling as well. Don't get me wrong. I don't like it when government subsidizes any industry, but we can't deny that a lot of the energy and tech markets that currently dominate got their start with government money and help.

It's like how a lot of the initial internet infrastructure was created with public money.

 

No they pretty much did it on their own and the selling price of oil has never been subsidized else tell me where I can apply for mine.

What do you call a subsidy? What subsidies do the energy, not the ridiculous "renewables" Obama has wasted tons of money on, we're talking fossil fuels. I've never received a subsidy to purchase fossil fuel energy.

And this isn't about R&D write off of expenses so they aren't taxed, those a legitimate expenses like copier paper and employee labor. This is about a subsidy to the BUYER in order to get them to purchase the product.

BTW I was calling on the Nissan plant in Symrna TN two weeks ago and out front they have maybe 30-40 charging stations there for employees who drive their Leaf's. MAYBE half were being used.. They employ over 8,000 people there it is the largest assembly plant in the country.

 

Here's a good starting point for how the oil industry is subsidized: http://priceofoil.org/fossil-fuel-subsidies/

 

Tax deductions for the cost of production and research are NOT subsidies. I have no problem with the auto industry writing off those cost just as all business do, they are tax write offs against profits because they are an EXPENSE.

The issue here is a direct subsidy to the BUYER of the product to entice them into purchasing the product

 

I'd prefer to not have any additional write-offs for any industry.

The market should clear things without any special deductions being involved. My link showed that there's a lot more than just that going on for the oil industry, however.

 

Of course you write off expenses to operate and expand. YOU get to write off living expenses or take your standard deduction for those. And link has already framed it wrong.

AGAIN this is about subsidies to the PURCHASER to entice them to buy the product. Just as with windmills and solar panels take those away and the economics disappear, are you ready to get rid of those subsidies and grants that industry gets?

 

I'd prefer to get rid of both.

 

Thank you for being consistent.

But again, deducting operating expenses from your gross margins to come up with your taxable net income is NOT a subsidy.

 

Alright, would the word "incentive" or "deduction" work better?

In either case, the ideal situation is one where deductions are very limited, but the base tax rate is low. It allows for much more accurate revenue outlays when creating a government budget.

 

How the government budgets should have nothing to do with it. As I said they are expense deductions, like the wages paid to workers, the cost of the energy they purchase to operate, the cost of their insurance, the cost of their equipment, the cost of the copier paper they use, and all other legitimate operating expenses. Just as you deduct from your personal taxes basic living epenses and if you take the standard deduction it is because your actual deductions do not exceed a certain level but you get to deduct the entire standard deduction. Should we limit personal deductions to the actual itemized deductions a person has? How about the EITC which is a subisidy, an actual cash payment, to low income earners?

 

I'd prefer a simplified tax plan where you pay a basic percentage, and deductions are extremely limited. To have a system with so many deductions allows for a lot of tax evasion.

As far as the people affected by the EIC goes, it would make more sense to just have an income tax threshold. In a lot of other countries, the first few thousand dollars of income isn't taxed at all. That's simpler and less prone to fraud.

So, for example, we could end the EIC and then implement an income tax threshold of $10,000. You wouldn't get taxed on the first 10 grand, but then you'd have a base rate to pay beyond that amount.