Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Resenje za rak?


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
185 replies to this topic

#31 Indy

Indy
  • Members
  • 21,392 posts

Posted 12 February 2007 - 12:49

QUOTE(snaja @ 12 Feb 2007, 22:45)
zato sto kad ti ne preostaje nista drugo, hvatas se za bilo kakvu slamku. :-(

Ne hvatam se ja ovde za slamke, vec ti propagiras sajtove nadrilekara koji su i osudjivani po USA... nema nista grdje od prevaranata koji bi da se okoriste o tesko bolesne ljude. To bi trebalo pijukom zatuci.

#32 snaja

snaja
  • Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 12 February 2007 - 13:15

slazem se ja u potpunosti sa tobom :-)
ali ja sam ta koja se hvata za bilo kakvu slamku....

#33 Paladin

Paladin
  • Members
  • 809 posts

Posted 12 February 2007 - 21:08

QUOTE(snaja @ 12 Feb 2007, 13:15)
slazem se ja u potpunosti sa tobom :-)
ali ja sam ta koja se hvata za bilo kakvu slamku....


Evo dokle je doveo bespotrebno agresivan nastup. Ne moraš iznositi svoju intimu da bi smirila nečiju ostrašćenost. Želim ti svako dobro.

#34 Indy

Indy
  • Members
  • 21,392 posts

Posted 12 February 2007 - 22:13

QUOTE(Chain Mail @ 13 Feb 2007, 07:08)
Evo dokle je doveo bespotrebno agresivan nastup. Ne moraš iznositi svoju intimu da bi smirila nečiju ostrašćenost.

Ma da, treba da sa duznom paznjom iscitavamo belosvetske prevarante i vucibatine, i to i na ovako "lakim" temama. A ti se to kao "sazaljevas" nad 'snajom' pa meni natrljavas nos? Kada bi ti do nje bilo stvarno stalo, onda bi procitao ono sto pise na linku koji sam "agresivno i ostrasceno" dao:
QUOTE(http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/ANSWERS/ANS01032.html)
FDA TAKES ACTION AGAINST FIRMS MARKETING UNAPPROVED DRUGS

The Food and Drug Administration is seeking a permanent injunction against the marketing of unapproved new drugs by three corporations and one individual.

The products, laetrile, in injectable and tablet form, and apricot seeds, are promoted and sold as cancer treatments by two Florida corporations, World Without Cancer, Inc. and The Health World International, Inc. of Bay Harbor Island, and one Arizona concern, Health Genesis Corporation, which also does business in Bay Harbor Island, Fla. In addition, the government's complaint names as defendant David E. Arjona, an officer of the three corporations.

In a complaint filed by the United States Department of Justice in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida on August 25, 2000, the government charged that the defendants unlawfully promote and market laetrile drug products for the treatment of cancer through their Internet web sites.
...


The complaint in the case asserts that FDA warned the defendants about the illegal nature of their promotion and marketing of laetrile in 1998 and that the defendants have continued promoting their products as remedies for cancer.

Edited by Indy, 12 February 2007 - 22:39.


#35 Indy

Indy
  • Members
  • 21,392 posts

Posted 12 February 2007 - 22:56

Inace, postoji i knjiga o navodnom antikancer dejstvu vitamina B17, ciji kriticki prikaz se moze procitati ovde:
http://www.pubmedcen...i?artid=1653400

World Without Cancer; The Story of Vitamin B17. G. Edward Griffin. American
Media, Thousand Oaks, CA, 1974, Parts I-II, 526 pages.

This book is written as an endorsement of Laetrile, which is also known as Vitamin B17, as a possible prophylactic and therapeutic agent against cancer. Laetrile is currently banned by the FDA in the United States for anti-cancer use.

The stated hypothesis is that cancer, like scurvy or pellagra. is a deficiency disease caused by the lack of an essential food element in the modern diet, specifically B17. Although it was not necessary for the purpose of this exposition. the author also defends the unaccepted anti-cancer drug, Krebiozen. (Yet, Krebiozen and Laetrile have nothin in common.) It should be stated that this reviewer, at the time that Krebiozen was being evaluated over a decade ago, was Head of the Laboratory and Clinical Trials Section of the National Cancer Institute and a member of the panel which disapproved the request for a clinical trial for Krebiozen. The grounds for rejection of Krebiozen were that, for specific sites of cancer, it was demonstrably less effective than accepted medical practice and thus prevented patients from receiving the best available mode of therapy.

The author maintains that the missing food nutrient is part of the nitriloside family which is found particularly in the seeds of the fruit family containing bitter almond, apricot, etc. It is also contained in grasses, maize, sorghum, millet and other foods generally not plentiful in the modern diet. The theory behind the claimed anti-carcinogenic activity of vitamin B,7 is as follows:

Cancer is an over-healing process. The body normally produces trophoblast cells to overcome specific damage to or to prevent the aging of normal tissues. However, under certain conditions, the trophoblast cells are allowed to undergo uncontrolled proliferation. One condition is when the pancreas is weak; the other is when the kinds of foods we eat consume all of the pancreatic enzymes for their digestion. The role of the pancreatic enzymes in cancer control is to digest away the electronically-charged protein coat covering the trophoblast cell thus exposing it to the white blood cells for disposal. According to the author, the B1, moleciUle contains four components: two units of glucose, a unit of benzaldehyde and orle of cyanide. These last two compounds act synergistically against the cancer cell and only the cancer cell contains an enzyme which breaks down this B17 molecule.

Of course, this is only one of several theories of the mechanism of carcinogenesis. The rest of Part I emphasizes the relative failure of conventional cancer therapy, (radiation, surgery and chemotherapy), to achieve significant remission rates and the markedly reduced quality of life which results from such therapy. Part II is devoted to the politics of cancer therapy and cancer research and of the organizations like the Food and Drug Administration, American Cancer Society and the American Medical Association which are opposed to the nutritional concept of the etiology of cancer. The author accepts the "conspiracy" theory, i.e. that policy-rtiakers in the medical, pharmaceutical, research and fund-raising organizations deliberately or unconsciously strive not to prevent or cure cancer in order to perpetuate their functions.

Unfortunately, in evaluating the scientific quality of the book, one must state that the use of the anecedotal reports of remissions makes it virtually impossible to justify a proper clinical trial of Laetrile. Also, there is no objective presentation of the results of valid animal experiments which have demonstrated the efficiency of this compound. Although the book is an emotional plea for the unrestricted use of the Laetrile as an anti-tumor agent, the scientific evidence to justify such a policy does not appear within it.

Emanuel Landau, Ph.D.
APHA Environmental Health Hazards
Project Director

Edited by Indy, 12 February 2007 - 23:00.


#36 Paladin

Paladin
  • Members
  • 809 posts

Posted 13 February 2007 - 10:30

QUOTE(Indy @ 12 Feb 2007, 22:13)
Ma da, treba da sa duznom paznjom iscitavamo belosvetske prevarante i vucibatine, i to i na ovako "lakim" temama. A ti se to kao "sazaljevas" nad 'snajom' pa meni natrljavas nos? Kada bi ti do nje bilo stvarno stalo, onda bi procitao ono sto pise na linku koji sam "agresivno i ostrasceno" dao:


Koliko njoj ne treba moje sažaljenje, toliko joj ne treba ni tvoja optužba da propagira nadrilekare i prevarante i da je još plaćena za to. Ja sam se potrudio da vidim sve njene postove (nije ih mnogo), pa sam video da na drugoj temi traži pomoć oko ovoga

Radilo se samo o mučnom utisku posle vaše diskusije, a ne o nameri da ti "natrljavam nos".

#37 snaja

snaja
  • Members
  • 8 posts

Posted 13 February 2007 - 10:53

e ljudi ja sam ok:-)
ne bih da se sad tu neka bespotrebna polemika vodi.
cilj mi je bio da se jos neke informacije u vezi sa ovim (neizlecivim bolestima - rak) prosire, cuju, procitaju,.....
ne podrzavam nadrilekare (ili kako ih ko zove), ali jako puni ljudi, koji su u slicnoj situaciji kao ja, "gladni i zedni" su bilo kakvih informacija!
a svako od njih (nas) odlucice se za nesto ... i/ili kombinaciju zvanicnih i nezavanicnih terapija.

#38 Indy

Indy
  • Members
  • 21,392 posts

Posted 13 February 2007 - 12:42

QUOTE(Chain Mail @ 13 Feb 2007, 20:30)
Koliko njoj ne treba moje sažaljenje, toliko joj ne treba ni tvoja optužba da propagira nadrilekare i prevarante i da je još plaćena za to.

Optuzba za propagandu nadrilekara je dokazana van svake sumnje, makar da je ta propaganda bila bez zadnjih namera. Over & out.

#39 bossanceros

bossanceros
  • Members
  • 11 posts

Posted 13 February 2007 - 13:09

Daj Boze smile.gif

#40 Vlaada

Vlaada
  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 13 February 2007 - 14:08

QUOTE(gaspod @ 8 Feb 2007, 15:23)
i proftabilne (1,6 bil $ za 7 god., malo li je) verujem da će se potruditi oko njega.


u textu pisu da su godisnji prihodi 1.6 biliona , a postoje lekovi koji prave i 10 biliona i vise godisnje svojim kompanijama , da je u pitanju suma od 1.6 biliona za 7 godina to bi bilo smesno za velike farmaceutske kompanije.

#41 Anduril

Anduril
  • Members
  • 5,593 posts

Posted 13 February 2007 - 21:41

Ne razumem u potpunosti zasto je ovoj vesti posvecena ovolika paznja. Ovakva i slicna otkrica se desavaju prilicno cesto u laboratorijama dok se jos uvek radi sa celijama u kulturi, tj. "in vitro".

Medjutim, kriticni momenti dolaze kasnije kad pocnu ispitivanja na zivotinjskom modelu, a posebno u klinickim fazama 1, 2 i 3. Od recimo stotinak supstanci koje recimo imaju neki delotvoran efekat protiv bilo cega samo mali postotak (ako ne i delici postotka) zaista prolazi i klinicka ispitivanja.

Problem je u tome sto se jos uvek suvise malo zna o detaljima kako funcionisu celije, organi i organizam, tako da je racionalni "drug design", koji bi znatno ubrzao i pospesio delotvornost medikamenata, jos uvek na pocetku razvoja.

Drugi problem je u tome sto se farmaceutske kompanije i nisu bas nesto proslavile u razvoju novih medikamennata poslednjih godina. Postoje studije koje jasno pokazuju da veliki broj novih medikamenata zapravo nije nov, vec stare supstance u novom pakovanju.

Dovoljno je samo pogledati u sta zapravo velike farmaceutske kuce ulazu. Ulaganja u marketing i slicne akcije su mnogo veca nego recimo ulaganja u "basic research". Problem je delimicno u menadzmentu koji misli ponekad suvise kratkorocno, a pri tome je pronalazak nekog efektivnog leka dugorocan proces bez garancije na profit.

#42 Uran

Uran
  • Members
  • 366 posts

Posted 28 April 2007 - 23:04

Evo jos jedne vesti na ovu temu:

QUOTE
Pronađen efikasniji lek protiv raka
28. april 2007. | 13:06 | Izvor: Beta
Prag -- Češki naučnici otkrili novi izuzetno efikasan lek protiv raka limfnih čvorova i uskoro počinje testiranje na ljudima.

Novi lek pod radnim nazivom GS9219 već je prošao vrlo obećavajuće testove na životinjama, a kod pasa je jedna jedina injekcija preparata za šest nedelja likvidirala ogromne tumore na vratu i u trbuhu.

Lek su otkrila i razvila tri češka tima, na čelu sa Antonjinom Holimom i Ivanom Votrubom iz češkog Instituta organske hemije i biohemije i Bertom Otovom sa Prvog medicinskog fakulteta Karlovog univerziteta u Pragu.

Od dosadašnjih lekova razlikuje ga pre svega to što ne dira zdrave ćelije u organizmu.

Terapija novim lekom, ako se pokaže da nema neke dalje negativne prateće efekte, ne bi bila drastična kao sa sadašnjim lekovima,
koji uništavaju imunitet organizma, rekao je dnevniku "Mlada fronta Dnes" direktor Instituta koji je otkrio lek Zdenjek Havlas.


Samo malo sturo... ne kazu ni kako ni sta ni zasto...

#43 revolucionar

revolucionar
  • Banned
  • 2,408 posts

Posted 12 May 2007 - 01:37

QUOTE(Anduril @ 13 Feb 2007, 21:41) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Dovoljno je samo pogledati u sta zapravo velike farmaceutske kuce ulazu. Ulaganja u marketing i slicne akcije su mnogo veca nego recimo ulaganja u "basic research". Problem je delimicno u menadzmentu koji misli ponekad suvise kratkorocno, a pri tome je pronalazak nekog efektivnog leka dugorocan proces bez garancije na profit.

Ovo ti je odlican zakljucak.
Dodao bih samo da ovo pravilo vazi i za kozmeticku industriju. Pogledaj TV (bilo gde u svetu).

#44 Kinik

Kinik
  • Members
  • 43,426 posts

Posted 12 May 2007 - 03:13

...

Lepo je rekao onaj cuveni poljski satiricar (Stanislav Jezi Lec) - "zivot ljudima oduzima isuvise vremena".

I sad, zamisli samo - pronadjeni neki lekovi - Hitler / Milosevic zive - doveka?
Wtf!?

To, sto bi "doveka" hteli da ziveli neke tupche - ne znaci da doveka treba da zive neki monstrumi.

Jerbo bi "doveka" zivot tupchi, bio zestoko opoganjen zivotom "doveka" raznoraznih perverznih majmuna.

Pa se s toga od ljudskih tupchi samo ocekuje da prihvate svoju tuznu sudbu.
A i sta bi vise?

...

#45 Nicol

Nicol
  • Members
  • 751 posts

Posted 12 May 2007 - 08:29

ali postoje valjda i specifičnije mjere za suzbijanje monstruma od skraćivanja ljudskog životnog vijeka? unsure.gif

edita: e da, kad se govori o lieku za rak- sumnjam da će se ikada otkriti jedinstvena supstanca koja djeluje na tako heterogenu skupinu bolesti. sruga stvar, ne vidim smisao u koncentriranju javnosti na iščekivanje mesijanske pojave novog lijeka, kad već dulje vrijeme postoje mjere prevencije i ranog otkrivanja kojima se može učiniti dosta...

Edited by Nicol, 12 May 2007 - 08:36.