Clusterheadaches.com Message Board


    
      
        Clusterheadaches.com Message Board
        (http://www.clusterheadaches.com/cgi-bin/yabb/YaBB.cgi)
      

        New Message Board Archives >> 2005 General Board Posts >> Very important but not CH related
        
(Message started by: DonnaHar on Oct 13^th, 2005, 11:30am)

Title: Very important but not CH related
Post by DonnaHar on Oct 13^th, 2005, 11:30am

Please take just a minute to read the letter at

http://letters-to.com/smf/index.php?topic=24.0

I wouldn't normally ask you to do this, but it is too close to home for many of us.

If you can offer a suggestion, please do so.

Thanks,
Donna H

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Racer1_NC on Oct 13^th, 2005, 12:04pm

I suggest one think about this in a rational way. Assuming this story is true (which I doubt), there is no way such a cancer treatment could be buried for almost 40 years. FDA stops testing in this country? A doctor with such a revolutionary treatment would just go to another country to conduct trials. Discounting the moral issues, the profit from such a treatment would be beyond description.

I'd file this one right next to the tales of UFOs kidnapping people for medical experiments.

Bill

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Ronny on Oct 13^th, 2005, 12:07pm

Damn, how is that possible.

Suggestion (i know its a poor one):

A lettre to the company that made it back in 1967 to remind them of the miracle drug they made.

Or several lettres to well know cancer specialists.

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by DonnaHar on Oct 13^th, 2005, 12:08pm

It is documented in this man's medical chart that this vaccine was being administered and was working in his favor.

Edited to add: I've heard it said that drug companies do not want to see cures for some diseases, haven't you?

I was and still am in regular contact with this family and know of this happening from 1st hand experience. I was there. His and her entire family were in shock.

Look up "Eernest Ayers" on yahoo, google or whoever and you will find the quote in her letter, but no more. How can that be all there was to be said?

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Racer1_NC on Oct 13^th, 2005, 12:20pm

on 10/13/05 at 12:08:40, DonnaHar wrote:

It is documented in this man's medical chart that this vaccine was being administered and was working in his favor.

You have seen this chart and personally verified it using scientific procedures?

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Linda_Howell on Oct 13^th, 2005, 12:27pm

Quote:

If you can offer a suggestion, please do so.

The only one I can offer is to let our resident snake-oil/fraud detective look into this more closely.

Ueli where are you?

The fact that the food and drug Administration would pull something like this from the market does NOT surprise me though, so some of this could be accurate.

Linda

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Gator on Oct 13^th, 2005, 12:27pm

on 10/13/05 at 12:04:19, Racer1_NC wrote:

I'm not normally a conspiracy theorist, but money talks. Look at the automotive industry. Engines and carburators that were capable of 50 mpg in the late 70's were bought up by the corporations potentially affected with loss of profits and haven't been heard of since. I wouldn't put it past a few unscrupulous executives in the medical industry to buy the rights to the vaccine and not produce it. An industry that would pay off researchers to give the okay to potentially harmful drugs would have no problems pulling a med that would cause them to lose money in their chemotherapy and other lines.

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by DonnaHar on Oct 13^th, 2005, 12:30pm

Please see my edited post above.

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Linda_Howell on Oct 13^th, 2005, 12:33pm

Quote:

I wouldn't put it past a few unscrupulous executives in the medical industry to buy the rights to the vaccine and not produce it. An industry that would pay off researchers to give the okay to potentially harmful drugs would have no problems pulling a med that would cause them to lose money in their chemotherapy and other lines.

Exactly!

I hate it though....that someone else has my skeptisism of the medical community. lol

Linda

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Racer1_NC on Oct 13^th, 2005, 1:05pm

Quote:

An industry that would pay off researchers to give the okay to potentially harmful drugs would have no problems pulling a med that would cause them to lose money in their chemotherapy and other lines.

True.....but a verified cure for cancer would bring untold riches to those that held the rights to such a cure.

Quote:

Look up "Eernest Ayers" on yahoo, google or whoever and you will find the quote in her letter, but no more.

I did......I even corrected the spelling of the first name and searched that as well.

Quote:

How can that be all there was to be said?

Only goes to prove my point. I can find more on Gator's supposed 50 mpg fuel system than I can this.

Bill

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Woobie on Oct 13^th, 2005, 4:25pm

population control.

all the drugs that the drug companies make for cancer treatment..........

the drug companies - they'd lose all that money
the hospitals and doctors... the cancer treatment center... a lot of people out of jobs.

cant have a cure for cancer - cant have a cure for diabetes.

I heard they DO have a cure for diabetes - they just arent releasing it. same with cancer.

HOW could they NOT have a cure for these things? All the money that has been collected for research over the years and NOTHING?

Yea, right.

I dont believe it

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Opus on Oct 13^th, 2005, 5:01pm

I posted what little info I could find, to me it does look like a cover up, because at the time of it happening the story should have been huge. I would like to know if this was a real vaccine for a virus, or it was just called that. If it was then the researchers knew that viruses cause cancer before it was common knowledge.

There are still medical cover ups going on, for example the fact that there is no proof that heart disease is caused by high cholesterol , but maybe in fact caused by C pneumonia. (http://www.docguide.com/news/content.nsf/NewsPrint/8525697700573E1885256AE0005E9A20) It appears that little has been done to test if antibiotics ( which for most patents have run out) can be a treatment, instead they are pushing their new cholesterol lowering drugs.

Opus/Paul

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Ueli on Oct 13^th, 2005, 7:59pm

I'm very, very skeptical about this suppressed cancer vaccine. As Racer Bill mentioned, it would be extremely difficult to repress any knowledge about such a vaccine, in particular when it already had some success. Also, there should be some traces left in the literature, how it is supposed to work, first results of animal experiments and such.

There are tons of urban legends about greedy industry bosses that withhold for profit reasons useful inventions. Especially in the medical fields this claim is often made by debunked inventors of bogus 'cures'. But in other fields too, from the ever-lasting light bulb to the anti-gravitation machine. While the later would be difficult to find an investor (as it is incompatible to physical laws) there are more plausible victims, as the super carburetor.

While the automobile industry is notorious for not introducing something new just on the grounds that it is better (it must be cheaper too), there is no reason why they should waive a system that would cut the gas cost in half. Think what sales argument that would be with the current gas price!

So let's take a closer look at the 50 mpg carburetor and engine. First, to make any meaning to me I have to convert the 50 mpg to the fucking metric system ( :P at Randy). It turns out as 4.7 liter / 100 km. Now, gas consumption is more or less proportional to weight of the car, including payload. An average medium European car weighs about a ton (including 2 people) and consumes 7 to 9 liters for 100 km. Easy to bring down consumption down to 4.7 l, just double the efficiency of the engine, isn't it? After all, the efficiency of todays gasoline engines is only 25%, lots of space for improvement. But wait, todays most efficient heat engines, a 1000 MW steam turbine, has an efficiency of not much more than 40%. So a small gas engine with 50% efficiency is mere wishful thinking. For the average American 2 ton gas guzzler to reach 50 mpg an efficiency of over 100% would be needed, or mayhaps an anti-gravitation engine.....

Another legend debunked,

Ueli [smiley=smokin.gif]

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Lizzie2 on Oct 13^th, 2005, 8:06pm

Hmmm.....

The question I always ask when this issue comes up is, if these cures really do exist and there's a big conspiracy to hide them in a huge money-making scam, why do politicians, doctors, nurses, their families, drug company CEOs, and then some...STILL get cancer?

I'd think if the cure was out there, they'd at least use it for their own benefit.

But maybe that's just me....

Trust me when I say I'd very much prefer to be put out of a job if there were cures for all kinds of hideous things. As would the physicians I work with. Not a single one of us wants to see this suffering day in and day out - no matter how bad a doc or nurse out there, I still don't know a single one who wants to see someone suffer just to make a buck. It's a hard profession - and sadly, one that many take for granted these days.

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by BobG on Oct 13^th, 2005, 8:25pm

I find it hard to believe that a drug company would suppress a vaccine for cancer if it worked. Cancer has been around since the beginning of this world. It will be around for many more centuries, vaccine or no vaccine. For every cancer victim that dies there is another person born with the potential to be cancer victim, and thus, a customer of the drug maker. It’s an endless supply of money.

I have no idea if the Rand Vaccine is for real or not, good or bad, safe or not. My thoughts are, because I’m mostly a cynic and skeptic, the Rand Vaccine was a scam.

But, I went looking anyway and this is what I found (or didn’t find).

James Rand and/or Eernest Ayre
Google: 1967 The FDA stops the use of an experimental cancer vaccine which was producing significant results. Developed by James Rand and Eernest Ayre, a recognized cancer specialist. The Rand vaccine produced significant improvement in terminal patients in over 30% of patients. It cured tumors and breast cancer in four to six months, without radiation, surgery or chemotherapy. (No mention why it was pulled from the market.)

I also searched Quackwatch and Urban Legends and Folklore sites using each of these words: James Rand, Eernest Ayre, US Senator Stephen Young, “How the US Government is Blocking a Cancer Cure”, Rand vaccine, Experimental cancer vaccine. Found nothing.

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by sassy_lady on Oct 13^th, 2005, 9:12pm

[quote author=DonnaHar link=board=general;num=1129221005;start=0#3 date=10/13/05 at 12:08:40]It is documented in this man's medical chart that this vaccine was being administered and was working in his favor.

Edited to add: I've heard it said that drug companies do not want to see cures for some diseases, haven't you?

I've heard of that, I beleave they have a cure for cancer, I beleave they have a cure for aids too!!
I've also heard that it's a population control thing !!

just my [smiley=twocents.gif] worth !!

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Opus on Oct 13^th, 2005, 9:23pm

on 10/13/05 at 19:59:58, Ueli wrote:

So let's take a closer look at the 50 mpg carburetor and engine. First, to make any meaning to me I have to convert the 50 mpg to the fucking metric system ( :P at Randy). It turns out as 4.7 liter / 100 km. Now, gas consumption is more or less proportional to weight of the car, including payload. An average medium European car weighs about a ton (including 2 people) and consumes 7 to 9 liters for 100 km. Easy to bring down consumption down to 4.7 l, just double the efficiency of the engine, isn't it? After all, the efficiency of todays gasoline engines is only 25%, lots of space for improvement. But wait, todays most efficient heat engines, a 1000 MW steam turbine, has an efficiency of not much more than 40%. So a small gas engine with 50% efficiency is mere wishful thinking. For the average American 2 ton gas guzzler to reach 50 mpg an efficiency of over 100% would be needed, or mayhaps an anti-gravitation engine.....

Another legend debunked,

Ueli [smiley=smokin.gif]

This is my take on the car gas mileage topic. 20 years ago cars got about 30 mpg with a large 4 cylinder engine. Today cars weigh 1/2 the amount, not 2 tons, they were 2000 pounds [909kg] then and a 1000 pounds [454kg] or less now. Driving one on a windy day is quite a challenge. With all the advances they have been selling us the fuel mileage is still 30mpg. They say it is because of increases exhaust emission standards, and that could be correct, but it seems like a lot to lose.

Opus/Paul

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Charlie on Oct 13^th, 2005, 9:42pm

I'm with everyone here. Ueli makes sense but so do Gator and Linda.

Our FDA, especially in this enlightened century, is a Byzantine creation that answers to drug companies and alters scientific research to please politicians in Kansas.

I'd put nothing past them. So far as I know Europe has nothing that comes even close.
More to come on this I hope. http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/specs scratch.gif

Charlie http://www.netsync.net/users/charlies/gifs/uhm.gif

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by BobG on Oct 13^th, 2005, 10:06pm

I can think of zero reasons why the auto companies would not want to market new cars that get 30 miles per gallon (or 50 or more). They would sell a heck of a lot of them.
Gasoline powered engines are capable of those milages but the trade off is horsepower and torque. You can't have both.
High milage/low power cars might be OK on a small island in the Virgin Isles but on American roads horsepower wins everytime. A 500 cubic inch American V8 can be built and "tuned" to 6 - 7,000 (yep, thousand) horsepower. But, it'll only get about 40 gallons to the mile. And cost about $200,000.
My next door neighbor has a Toyota Prius (sp?) and it's a dang nice car. Quiet, fuel efficient, nice ride, roomy, slow, and ugly as hell! Honda also has a nice car in that class. It'll take the Americans many years to catch on to these cars but when they do there will be hundreds of thousands on the road. 25 years from now the 2004 Toyota will be a collectors item probably worth it's original selling price.
IMHO there is no reason for the car companies to be afraid to bring high milage cars to market. 500,000 cars at $30,000+ each and every year = a bunch of money.
But, I'm not buying one. I'm a firm believer there is no substitute for cubic inches.
Drive it like it's rented! ;;D

Title: Not CH related at all..in the least...
Post by Mr. Happy on Oct 13^th, 2005, 11:04pm

on 10/13/05 at 19:59:58, Ueli wrote:

So let's take a closer look at the 50 mpg carburetor and engine.
Another legend debunked,

Ueli......I'm PROUD to be part of Team Realism. No matter how we do the math, we're fucked.

Virgins of the world, have mercy.
RJ

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by DonnaHar on Oct 13^th, 2005, 11:30pm

I asked for help in finding more information on the Rand/Eernest Ayers (no, I didn't misspell it) cancer vaccine. I only found the one paragraph that I suggested you all look up, and nothing more. If you have any suggestions as to where to look for more, I would greatly appreciate it.

I know this case if true. The widow is my sister. I lived this out with them. He was responding, without a doubt. My sister worked for the neurosurgeon who administered the vaccine and also performed John's surgeries.

She has been looking for answers ever since. The doc is no longer alive.

I don't blame some of you for being skeptical and I wasn't going to reveal who the person was, but I guess by not mentioning names, I held up my end of the promise. I'm just trying to prove to you that this is not a dreamed up story.

Now, if any of you remember the late '60's and the Rand vaccine, please send me a note or post it in my Letters column. That thread, when it has a few responses, is really going to the FDA just as all threads in that catagory do.

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by BobG on Oct 14^th, 2005, 12:07am

Sorry to the hijacking of your thread.

This paragraph is much like the one I posted above but mentions a Goddard guy so I searched him. You might want to look also. He might lead you to the info you are looking for.

"1967 The FDA stops the use of an experimental cancer vaccine which was producing significant results. Developed by James Rand and Eernest Ayre, a recognized cancer specialist. The Rand vaccine produced significant improvement in terminal patients in over 30% of patients. It cured tumors and breast cancer in four to six months, without radiation, surgery or chemotherapy. The FDA Commissioner was James L. Goddard, the same man who persecuted the use of DMSO. Goddard used the DMSO issue in 1966 in an attempt to foster a medical dictatorship in the US in collusion with the medical and pharmaceutical industries, and remove viable treatments from public access."

I went to Ask Jeeves and found these. Don’t know if it will help you or not.
I did not Google or Yahoo him.

FDA Commisioner (mentioned above) James L. Goddard
The Joshua Lederberg Papers
http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/BB/G/D/P/H/

http://profiles.nlm.nih.gov/BB/G/D/P/H/_/bbgdph.pdf

http://ca.encarta.msn.com/sidebar_1741580110/1968_Drug_Industry.html

This might be of interest……..
“The pharmaceutical industry in particular bore much of Goddard's regulatory enthusiasm; drug recalls grew by nearly 75 percent in his first year.”
More here....click it
http://www.fda.gov/oc/commissioners/goddard.html

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by DonnaHar on Oct 14^th, 2005, 12:28am

Bob, thank you ever so much! I have my work cut out for me tomorrow.

Even more, I did get a response on my website with more to follow up (thank you, too, new member)......and some of the info even mentions Richmond Heights, Ohio, very near where John's docs office was!! In the beginning, 100 patients there were being used in the research and apparently John was one of them.

Anyone wanting to read this response can go to
www.letters-to.com

If you care to add to that thread, please feel free to do so.....and remember these threads/letters actually go to the addressee. The more who demand an answer, the greater the chances we'll get a reply.

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by DonnaHar on Oct 14^th, 2005, 9:18am

OK, now you'll REALLY know it existed. Take a look at AskJeeves and type in "rand vaccine 1967 Cleveland Press". There's more dead-end information including a few articles from Time Magazine. Check out this:

http://www.jfk-online.com/jpscpaonf.html

and go to the bottom to read the "BTW".

Does anyone know how to look up public records of years ago? I need to find out more about the court hearings.

Thanks

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Pinkfloyd on Oct 14^th, 2005, 12:32pm

on 10/13/05 at 12:04:19, Racer1_NC wrote:

FDA stops testing in this country?
Bill

Psilocybin and LSD for headache treatment? :-/
MJ for AIDS and cancer patients? :-/

Cancer vaccines have been in the news lately..anyone read newspapers anymore ;-)
I think you'd also find that vaccine research for cancer has been going on a long time.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/9609603/

Bobw

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Racer1_NC on Oct 14^th, 2005, 2:11pm

Bob...

I know they stop testing.....my comment was meant to read "if the FDA stopped testing on such a revolutionary drug, most docs would go outside the USA to continue research".

No defense of the FDA from me.....

Bill

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Pinkfloyd on Oct 14^th, 2005, 6:41pm

on 10/14/05 at 14:11:18, Racer1_NC wrote:

I know they stop testing.....my comment was meant to read "if the FDA stopped testing on such a revolutionary drug, most docs would go outside the USA to continue research".
Bill

Understood Bill. I believe you're right also.
I'm not sure how things were 40 years ago in Europe but I can't imagine Germany or Holland or England (or many others for that matter) turning a blind eye to this IF there was any clinical data in support.

BTW, vaccines usually (if not always) refer to something that immunizes against a disease or virus. Not something that would "cure" an existing disease.

There may not be anything to be found on this particular vaccine because maybe there never WAS anything "official." Were documents burned or was it all on a napkin.

The same people that own a million shares of Glaxo would LOVE to own a million shares of a new (or existing) pharmaceutical company that came out with a cancer cure. Hell, the guys that own a million shares of Exxon/Mobil would love to be in on THAT start-up.

Also, 40 years ago, cancer wasn't as large a money machine as it is today. Maybe I'm wrong but I'd think that if the FDA wasn't interested back then, Brown & Williamson would have been.

This was also around the time of the Thalidomide problems so I imagine the entire process of new drug testing and approvals would have been under a microscope. Maybe they asked the guy to prove it, and he couldn't. 30% is less than many placebos although seeing a tumor shrink isn't *usually" something a placebo can do. But, there are people in Mexico selling coffee enimas as cancer cures, claiming rates higher than 30%.

Sorry about your connections to this Donna. Believe me, working on what I am, I have a healthy skepticism of government agencies and can certainly sympathize and would also want to investigate this further.
Heck, the main purposse LSD was made illegal in the 60s was so the J. Edgar had a way to arrest the "subversives." Our health isn't always their number one concern, IMHO.

Bobw

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Jonny on Oct 14^th, 2005, 6:59pm

Sorry Bob, but your not allowed to type a post that long unless King Jonny has a mention ;;D

GO SOX!!!! ;)

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by DonnaHar on Oct 14^th, 2005, 7:42pm

Time Magazine archives.....

http://www.time.com/time/archive/preview/0,10987,836753,00.html

What they wrote doesn't sound good for Rand, but there is never a descriptive account of what transpired. To read more, I have to pay about $30.00 for (if I remember correctly) something like 520 pages.

I have many links to check out, so I'll just keep on doing so. I have the name somewhere of someone (who later joined the Rand Development Corp. after it was sold and assumed the name Systems Development Corporation), who was a witness against Rand in court.

Title: Re: Very important but not CH related
Post by Gator on Oct 14^th, 2005, 7:59pm

on 10/14/05 at 18:41:17, Pinkfloyd wrote:

Our health isn't always their number one concern, IMHO.

Maybe not. Okay, probably not, but in this case maybe there was a side effect or damage the drug was doing that no one was told about. That would explain why it would be so suddenly dropped and never mentioned again. It may also explain why others didn't rush in to take over the research. Legal liability has always been a thorn in the side of the medical community, though it has been amplified in our hyper-litigious society.