‘Truth About Cancer’ documentary

Information on the important documentary to be released online April 12 states, “CANCER WILL KILL NEARLY 8 MILLION PEOPLE THIS YEAR.”

Truth is systematically suppressed on how to avoid being one of its victims. Media scoundrels won’t air the documentary, with vital information drug industry bandits want suppressed.

Media freedom in America is wishful thinking. Industry corporate giants suppress what’s most important to report.

People are systematically lied to. Big Pharma is hated for good reason, profiting from ripping off consumers, contesting natural/alternative remedies to their toxic choices.

According to Health Ranger Mike Adams, The Truth About Cancer documentary “threatens to collapse the for-profit cancer industry,” benefitting hugely from remedies often causing more harm than good.

Its business model depends on suppressing information on what causes cancer and keeping patients dependent on toxins they sell.

Western medicine is hooked on drugs, heavily influenced by Big Pharma funding. An informed public is the industry’s worst enemy. The more people know, the lower its profits.

America’s healthcare industry is misnamed, requiring sickness to thrive. All drugs have harmful side effects. Yet they’re frequently prescribed.

Sometimes the best treatment is none at all. Sound individual judgment is vital to decide how to deal with illness when it strikes.

Cancer affects one in three people, a killer disease causing pain, suffering and millions of deaths.

War on cancer isn’t winnable when not being fought. Drug industry bandits and government officials conspire to keep people sick. Profits aren’t made from wellness.

The government/industry cancer establishment bears full responsibility for losing a winnable war—committing a high crime on humanity in the process.

According to internationally recognized cancer expert Samuel S. Epstein, “cancer is caused mainly by exposure to chemical or physical agents in the environment.”

“The more of a carcinogen present in the human environment, hence the greater the exposure to it, the greater the chance of developing cancer from it.”

“There is no known method for measuring or predicting a ‘safe’ level of exposure to any carcinogen below which cancer will result in any individual or population group.”

Hazardous prescription drugs “may pose the single most important class of unrecognized and avoidable cancer risks for the US population.”

Cancer establishment figures, regulatory agencies (run by industry officials), compromised academics and bought-off consultants downplay risks demanding highlighting.

Conflicts of interest are rife. Instead of waging war on cancer, it affects increasingly greater numbers of people needlessly.

Carcinogens government should ban taint our food, air, water, consumer products, prescription drugs and workplaces.

Cancer reached epidemic levels in America because corporate profits override public health. The more money spent on the disease, the more it proliferates because little goes for prevention.

The winnable war on cancer is being lost by design. Sickness industry bandits want it that way.

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at lendmanstephen@sbcglobal.net. His new book as editor and contributor is “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.” Visit his blog at sjlendman.blogspot.com . Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

2 Responses to ‘Truth About Cancer’ documentary

  1. The “war on cancer” is one big fraud because huge corporate interests are the leading motive for this “war” instead of the officially advocated missions.

    So, the ”war on cancer” has thus been a “war” on the unsuspecting public: to keep them misinformed and misguided.

    If the public were to scrutinize what the medical industry and their government pawns are telling them about the ‘war on cancer’ instead of blindly believing what they’re saying, they’d find that the cancer industry and the cancer charities have been dismissing, ignoring, and obfuscating the true causes of cancer while mostly putting the blame for cancer on the individual, denying or dismissing the serious harms from orthodox cancer treatments, and resorting to deceptive cancer statistics to “educate” (think: mislead) the public that their way of treatment is actually successful (read the well referenced epilogue of an article if you google “A Mammogram Letter The British Medical Journal Censored” and scroll down to the afterword or click on this link ).

    What the medical establishment “informs” the public about is about as truthful as what the political establishment keeps telling them. Not to forget, the corporate media is a willing tool to spread these distortions, lies, and the scam of the war on cancer.

    Do you really think it’s a coincidence that Nobel laureate Linus Pauling called the ‘war on cancer’ a “fraud”? If you look closer you’ll come to the same conclusion.

  2. The husband of a friend of mine died of cancer. It was called smoking-related. He had worked for decades for the military, working with agent-orange type chemicals with no protective gear. The doctors didn’t ask what he did for a living, only if he smoked. They didn’t want to expose the government, the military, or the petrochemical giants to liability. The tobacco industry lost a lawsuit and agreed to put warnings on tobacco products, so they have no liability either–you’ve been warned not to smoke, so the liability is your own.

    But there is no science linking smoking or second-hand smoke to cancer. In order to prove causation, you have to rule out other likely causes, and this is something that the “scientific” papers supposedly linking smoking to cancer do not, and cannot do. They can’t rule out dioxin, a known carcinogen, because it is in everybody’s bloodstream. They can’t rule out the radiation from above-ground atomic bomb tests, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, routine radioactive releases from uranium mines, nuclear weapons factors, nuclear power plants, and nuclear aircraft carriers and submarines, Chernobyl, and Fukushima, because the entire world has been exposed to it. They can’t rule out decades of leaded gasoline to which everyone in the United States was exposed. They can’t rule out the carcinogens in outdoors and indoor air pollution that everyone in developed countries is exposed to. The only way they could possibly rule out other carcinogens would be to take laboratory animals which were never exposed to any other carcinogens and expose them to cigarette smoke and second-hand smoke. This has been done many times but no lab animal has ever gotten cancer from cigarette smoke, not even when forced to smoke 700 cigarettes a day–something no human could ever manage. Indeed, some lab animals who were exposed to tobacco smoke and remained healthy, were then exposed to other carcinogens, and, unlike lab animals who had never been exposed to tobacco smoke, they proved resistant to cancer. Far from causing cancer, smoking protects against cancer.

    But trying to tell people that, is like telling flat-earthers that the world is round. It makes you sound like a heretic and they aren’t going to listen. They listen to the authorities who are poisoning them with impunity, not to somebody like me, a healthy 76-year-old who has been smoking for sixty years.

    Now my senior building, which was recently renovated with hundreds of toxic materials and chemicals, is banning smoking. I won’t be able to smoke in my own apartment and will have to go outdoors, rain or shine, to smoke. I expect to be very unhappy for whatever remaining years I may have–but I’m not going to stop smoking. I’d rather forfeit my privacy and comfort, and spend most of my waking hours outdoors where I can smoke, than spend them in a penal unit for which I pay rent but where smoking is not permitted. I have no rights in the matter–I’m being penalized without having committed a crime, on the spurious basis that only smoking has no safe levels of exposure but all other known carcinogens do.

    I intend to sue my landlord, which happens to be an offshoot of the local housing commission along with the city, for infliction of emotional distress, but I don’t expect to prevail. In a country where torture is legal, the tort of emotional distress is probably considered frivolous.