patrick.net

I suspect that there are a ton of generic drugs that have been discovered to have significant impacts in diseases they weren't first used for.

And this information is kept back, and further studies NOT done, nor financed by the FDA which we were just reminded is funded mostly by Big Pharma (or the CDC revolving door) in order to keep less profitable generic drugs from being a treatment for these other conditions.

Ivermectin being a great example.

It's in India and Brazil and other places that aren't the creators or investors of the generic drugs that do some studies.

cowboy77 says

Do they not release it to the world because they know if they did it would lead to world overpopulation? I

We are no where close to over population. Maybe China and India, but most the planet has a trivial amount of people per acre. Sure there are cities, but most of the land isn't doing much. Drive through Montana. Real eye opener if you have concerns about over population.

There's not a cure for cancer. You don't think Steve Jobs, the crazy person that he was wouldn't pay for the cure? There wasn't one. Technically most forms of cancer are curable with nasty treatments, but they work to extend life.

A cure for heart disease would cause substantially more over population by a long shot. Curing cancer wouldn't move the needle much. It's not a major factor in deaths. My dad had cancer and died from it. My uncles have had it. MIL. They're all fine now with the treatment they got. Wife has had cancerous moles. Removed and she's fine. Heart disease is the 800lbs gorilla in the room, not cancer.

Our food is the biggest problem. It causes heart disease AND cancer. We exist as a civilization based on eating basic foods. That's the cure for it all. Yes, some may still get cancer. You lower the odds not eating like a turd raptor.

BOT WARNING - "secresy"