Why does this scientist call fraud the majority of cancer research?

"Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely fraudulent, and that large organizations dealing with detailed study of this problem do not perform their duties to people who support them."

Opinion of an authoritative scientist

The above quotation belongs to Lynus Pauling (1901-1994), Ph.D. and two-time Nobel Prize winner in chemistry. This person is considered one of the most authoritative scientists in history. He is also the founder of many theories in quantum chemistry and molecular biology.

The scientist was a champion of peace on Earth. He was invited to head the chemical department of the Manhattan Project, but he refused. He is also the author of monumental work on military technology, which made a significant contribution to the world of science. A quick Google search will be sufficient if you want to get more information about this person.

The role of this scientist in science is enormous. And he is not the only expert in the world who expresses skeptical beliefs about cancer research.

The theory of fraud is finding confirmation

Here is another excellent example of a hard quotation when it comes to scientific fraud and manipulation. It comes from Dr. Marcia Angell, a physician who for a long time held the post of editor-in-chief of the New England Medical Journal (NEMJ). This magazine belongs to the most prestigious publications in the world of medicine.

"It's simply impossible anymore to believe in clinical studies whose reports are published, or rely on the opinions of trusted doctors and authoritative medical advice. I want to admit that I am extremely unhappy with this conclusion. I went to this conclusion slowly and reluctantly for two decades as editor of the New England Journal of Medicine, "the scientist notes.

The list of skeptics is constantly replenished

The list of skeptical scholars has no end. Dr. John Byler worked for 20 years at the National Cancer Institute. The researcher is also the former editor-in-chief of his own journal. The scientist made a public statement: "My common opinion is that the national program for combating cancer should be scaled down. All of our cancer research in 20 years was a series of continuous failures. " He also mentioned that the treatment of cancer as a whole should be considered a complete failure.

Experiments on animals do not have informativeness

The public interest is also the fact that most of the money donated to cancer research is spent on studying the animal organism. Such scientific work is considered by many to be useless.

For example, in 1981, Dr. Irwin Bross, former director of the Sloan-Kettering Cancer Research Institute (the world's largest research center) said: "The uselessness of most animal studies is not so widely known. For example, the discovery of chemotherapeutic agents for the treatment of human cancer has been positioned in science as a triumph because of the use of animal modeling systems. However, there are also exaggerated expectations. The results were approved by a group of people who received federal funds for animal studies. There is very little evidence to support these dogmas. Virtually all chemotherapeutic agents were found in the clinical context, and not in the experiments conducted on animals. "

but on the other hand

Today, the treatment of diseases is financially motivated. This is an extremely profitable industry, but only if it is directed at treatment, rather than preventive measures or therapies, and this is a very important fact.

Another quote that complements all of the above statements was made by Dr. Dean Burke, an American biochemist and senior chemist at the National Cancer Institute: "When you have power, you do not need to tell the truth. This rule is effective for several generations. It determines the behavior of so many people who prefer not to open all the cards when they are in administrative positions. "

His work "Determination of the dissociation constants of enzymes," published in the Journal of the American Chemical Society, is one of the most frequently cited works in the field of biochemistry. The scientist also said: "Fluoride causes more deaths from cancer than any other chemical. This is one of the most powerful evidence in science that I have met in the field of cancer research for 50 years. "

Science wanders in the dark

In the January 15, 2015 issue of Lancet magazine, which is considered the leading medical publication in the UK, editor-in-chief Richard Horton stated: "Much of the scientific literature may simply be incorrect. Science turned to darkness. "

In 2005, Dr. John P. A. Ioannidis, now professor of disease prevention at Stanford University, published an article widely available for reading in the archives of the Public Library (PLoS). It had the original name "Why most published research results are false".

In the report, the scientist stated: "An increasing concern is that the overwhelming number of published results of the study of cancer are false."

The interests of pharmaceutical companies prevail

The complex cancer center of the University of Michigan published an analysis that showed that popular research in the field of cancer pathologies is false and that many results have been fabricated. This fact is explained by the conflict of interests.

The scientists suggested that the falsified results met the expectations of the largest pharmaceutical concerns. In the end, the vast majority of oncological research is fueled directly by them.

There is a large amount of information that serves as a confirmation of this opinion, and also comes from people who were directly involved in these processes. In fact, there is no shortage of credible sources that would like to state that we live in a world of scientific fraud and manipulation.

All this can be attributed to the "corporatocracy" in which we are today, when giant corporations belonging to a select group of "elite" people took control of the planet and all its resources.

This explains why some patients are inclined to alternative treatment, and also pay special attention to the prevention of cancer. Much of what surrounds us in everyday life is associated with cancer. To number of provocateurs of an oncology it is possible to carry pesticides, GMO, some cosmetic means, certain food stuffs, smoking, alcohol and many other things. This is something that has never been particularly stressed. We are always mistaken, thinking that donating money to charitable organizations that conduct cancer research will give us a chance to get away from the problem, despite the fact that their practical activities are very doubtful.

Cannabis use is not proven

However, many people have succeeded in alternative methods of treatment. For example, good results were given by cannabis oil in combination with a raw diet. Some people included him in their chemotherapy course.

The official position on cannabis is the clearest example of the very disinformation that is mentioned in the article. Its antitumor properties have been demonstrated for decades, but no clinical trials have been conducted.

The article gives a little food for thought. This information can be ignored, but do not turn a blind eye to many facts.