Inside is the cure for all cancers

[Hades]

edtharan, your science is reported by big pharma. youre told what THEY want you to know and they want you to know this fabrication. my information lies in the clinical studies that conclusively demonstrate whatssup

[Edtharan]

edtharan, your science is reported by big pharma. youre told what THEY want you to know and they want you to know this fabrication. my information lies in the clinical studies that conclusively demonstrate whatssup

Such an easy statement to make, but it is only your opinion. But, lets look at the reasoning behind your claim and why it is not true. If you have done clinical studies, post a link to the journal that they have been peer reviewed in. IF someone has invested the money to do a clinical study of your "cure", then they would want it to be peer reviewed, otherwise all that money that they spent on that study would have been for nothing.

 

You can easily do the experiments your self:

1) Get a cat

2) Make sure it can't lick it's self

3) Keep testing it's saliva for antibacterial properties.

 

If the saliva looses it's antibacterial properties, then it is not the saliva that is the source. If it retains it's antibacterial properties, then the source of the antibacterial property is not with the cat licking it's self but would be in the saliva.

 

This kind of experiment is so easy to do that it can be replicated by nearly anyone. You could likely replicate this as a school experiment. Why then would a big pharma company, falsify such an easily reproducible experiment?

 

If any high school laboratory could expose them, they are definitely taking an massive risk in falsifying this kind of experiment. If any lab assistant could prove that this company was lying about such thing, lawsuits would fly.

 

So, from this, I can be quite sure that they are not lying. I haven't done the experiment my self, but I know how easy it would be to repeat it, so I am confident that people, not associated with big pharma's would have done so and reported it if they had different results.

 

Science works on peer review and with such a simple experiment, it would have been tested.

 

If just 1 pharmaceutical company wanted to bring down the others, they could release information contrary to this and demonstrate that these companies were lying to the public. The companies would loose all credibility, their stock prices would plummet and they would go out of business. The only one standing would be the company that blew the whistle on the lying companies. They would then have a monopoly and not have any competition.

 

Remember, all these "big pharma" are in competition with each other, so they are not collaborating.

 

Anyway, from what I remember it was a University study seeking to find new antibacterials that can be used, so they would not have had any incentive to lie about it, and it wasn't even funded by the pharmaceutical companies so how could they lie about it (and why when they would want use this information themselves).

 

So, you claim that it is all "Fabrications" seems not to be set out on stable foundations. You seem to want the big pharmas to be lying to the people to act as "proof" that your solution is correct.

 

Whether or not the big Pharma are lying has no impact on the validity of your claim. Do not use them as "proof" or evidence that your claims are true. If your claims are true, provide the proof.

 

If you are concerned about making money off of it then pay for the patent, and then share the data. That is what patents are there for.