Christopher Hitchens Died Today. He was only 62 - Please Retweet This So We Can Cure Cancer

[mikesinner]

I don't make any money from this but maybe if everyone retweets one of the top 2 tweets here we can make a difference.
http://twitter.com/endthedisease

[TheSquealer]

Or... make the choice not to get cancer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christo...g_and_drinking

[PR_Glen]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Or... make the choice not to get cancer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christo...g_and_drinking

really? this is the stand you chose to make today?

[mikesinner]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Or... make the choice not to get cancer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christo...g_and_drinking

That would actually be a good reason to cure cancer. Then we can smoke and drink all we like.

[Barefootsies]

Dude was a riot on the talk shows, and Bill Maher's, "Real Time".

It always looked like he was sweating out the booze from the night before.



He definitely loved a spirited debate, and took some in your face positions....

Hence, "God Is Not Great".

[TheSenator]

"God is not Great".....legend lost... I will not pray for him instead I will raise my glass and honor the man.

[TheSquealer]

Originally Posted by PR_Glen

really? this is the stand you chose to make today?

1) diet
2) exercise
3) coping with stress
4) genetics

You can't eat, drink and smoke like an asshole and not expect adverse health consequences. This is not a new idea. He lived to be 61, living how he wanted to live. The consequence of living how he wanted to live was living to 61. He was aware of that. It was often discussed. He was not shy about talking about his choices and the consequences.

[TheSquealer]

Originally Posted by mikesinner

That would actually be a good reason to cure cancer. Then we can smoke and drink all we like.

Why smoke and drink (to excess) at all?

[Coup]

Here's to hoping he's getting curb stomped to infinity by those innocent folks that lost their lives in the war on terror he loved so much

[CaptainHowdy]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Why smoke and drink (to excess) at all?

"We have discovered happiness" ...

[devilspost]

Some good quotes in here lol

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

Or... make the choice not to get cancer

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christo...g_and_drinking

Maybe less people would be getting cancer if you conservatives would stop pushing for more arsenic in our water, more pollution in our air, and more pesticides in our food. Here's a thought; in 1950 half the population smoked yet the cancer rate was around 1 in 12, now less than a quarter of the population smokes and 1 out of 2 people will get cancer.

[porno jew]

good writer, but unforgivable politics and an adolescent obsession with atheism.

[TheSquealer]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Maybe less people would be getting cancer if you conservatives would stop pushing for more arsenic in our water, more pollution in our air, and more pesticides in our food. Here's a thought; in 1950 half the population smoked yet the cancer rate was around 1 in 12, now less than a quarter of the population smokes and 1 out of 2 people will get cancer.

"you conservatives"?
haha

Now even cancer is a republican conspiracy.

4 primary factors that influence cancer:

Diet
Exercise
Coping with stress
Genetics

The first 3 are the most important determining factors and all 100% a matter of choice. You could also argue that we have more computers or more [insert anything of convenience] and therefore, we have more cancer.

[NaughtyVisions]

A cancer cure may be on its way. This was the headline in my local paper a few months ago...surprised it didn't pick up more media attention.

http://live.psu.edu/story/55260

Virus kills breast cancer cells in laboratory
Thursday, September 22, 2011

HERSHEY, Pa. -- A nondisease-causing virus kills human breast cancer cells in the laboratory, creating opportunities for potential new cancer therapies, according to Penn State College of Medicine researchers who tested the virus on three different breast cancer types that represent the multiple stages of breast cancer development.

Adeno-associated virus type 2 (AAV2) is a virus that regularly infects humans but causes no disease. Past studies by the same researchers show that it promotes tumor cell death in cervical cancer cells infected with human papillomavirus. Researchers used an unaltered, naturally occurring version of AAV2 on human breast cancer cells.

"Breast cancer is the most prevalent cancer in the world and is the leading cause of cancer-related death in women," said Samina Alam, research associate in microbiology and immunology. "It is also complex to treat."

Craig Meyers, professor of microbiology and immunology, said breast cancer is problematic to treat because of its multiple stages. "Because it has multiple stages, you can't treat all the women the same. Currently, treatment of breast cancer is dependent on multiple factors such as hormone-dependency, invasiveness and metastases, drug resistance and potential toxicities. Our study shows that AAV2, as a single entity, targets all different grades of breast cancer."

Cells have multiple ways of dying. If damage occurs in a healthy cell, the cell turns on production and activation of specific proteins that allow the cell to commit suicide. However, in cancer cells these death pathways often are turned off, while the proteins that allow the cell to divide and multiply are stuck in the "on" position.

One way to fight cancer is to find ways to turn on these death pathways, which is what researchers believe is happening with the AAV2 virus.

In tissue culture dishes in the laboratory, 100 percent of the cancer cells are destroyed by the virus within seven days, with the majority of the cell death proteins activated on the fifth day. In another study, a fourth breast cancer derived cell line, which is the most aggressive, required three weeks to undergo cell death.

"We can see the virus is killing the cancer cells, but how is it doing it?" Alam said. "If we can determine which viral genes are being used, we may be able to introduce those genes into a therapeutic. If we can determine which pathways the virus is triggering, we can then screen new drugs that target those pathways. Or we may simply be able to use the virus itself."

Research needs to be completed to learn how AAV2 is killing cancer cells and which of its proteins are activating the death pathways. According to Meyers, the cellular myc gene seems to be involved. While usually associated with cell proliferation, myc is a protein also known to promote cell death. The scientists have observed increased expression of myc close to the time of death of the breast cancer cells in the study. They report their results in a recent issue of Molecular Cancer.

AAV2 does not affect healthy cells. However, if AAV2 were used in humans, the potential exists that the body's immune system would fight to remove it from the body. Therefore, by learning how AAV2 targets the death pathways, researchers potentially can find ways to treat the cancer without using the actual virus.

In ongoing studies, the Penn State researchers also have shown AAV2 can kill cells derived from prostate cancer, mesothelioma, squamous cell carcinoma, and melanoma. A fourth line of breast cancer cells -- representing the most aggressive form of the disease -- also was studied in a mouse breast tumor model, followed by treatment with AAV2. Preliminary results show the destruction of the tumors in the mice, and researchers will report the findings of those mouse studies soon.

Other researchers on this project are Brian S. Bowser and Mohd Israr, Department of Microbiology and Immunology; Michael J. Conway, Section of Infection Diseases, Yale School of Medicine; and Apurva Tandon, Department of Microbiology, Immunology and Pathology, Colorado State University.

The Pennsylvania Department of Health, Breast and Cervical Cancer Initiative supported this research. The researchers have filed for a U.S. patent on this work.

[baddog]

Originally Posted by mikesinner

That would actually be a good reason to cure cancer. Then we can smoke and drink all we like.

I guess that was a joke, which is about as funny as thinking twitter is going to cure cancer.

[ottopottomouse]

Originally Posted by baddog

I guess that was a joke, which is about as funny as thinking twitter is going to cure cancer.

it's a one-click way for people to feel good about themselves while doing nothing of any use.

[Deej]

Fuck! That sucks!

Well at least he can go punch reverend Fallwell in the nose now...

But what happens when he meets Jesus?

LoLs!

[PR_Glen]

Originally Posted by TheSquealer

1) diet
2) exercise
3) coping with stress
4) genetics

You can't eat, drink and smoke like an asshole and not expect adverse health consequences. This is not a new idea. He lived to be 61, living how he wanted to live. The consequence of living how he wanted to live was living to 61. He was aware of that. It was often discussed. He was not shy about talking about his choices and the consequences.

I agree that these things help prevent it, I follow them myself, but it doesn't justify you soap boxing here and saying he got what he deserved either.

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Maybe less people would be getting cancer if you conservatives would stop pushing for more arsenic in our water, more pollution in our air, and more pesticides in our food. Here's a thought; in 1950 half the population smoked yet the cancer rate was around 1 in 12, now less than a quarter of the population smokes and 1 out of 2 people will get cancer.

wow this is pretty delusional... cancer rates are higher because there are hundreds more chemicals used in them these days, that isn't a republican thing any way you sling it...

[uno]

Damn I didn't see this thread.

[mikesinner]

Originally Posted by Barefootsies

Dude was a riot on the talk shows, and Bill Maher's, "Real Time".

It always looked like he was sweating out the booze from the night before.



He definitely loved a spirited debate, and took some in your face positions....

Hence, "God Is Not Great".

I've seen many of his youtube debates but one of these days I will have to read some of his books.

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by PR_Glen

I agree that these things help prevent it, I follow them myself, but it doesn't justify you soap boxing here and saying he got what he deserved either.



wow this is pretty delusional... cancer rates are higher because there are hundreds more chemicals used in them these days, that isn't a republican thing any way you sling it...

Really? So cancer rates are much higher now because of more chemicals in cigarettes? You're calling me delusional?

Cancer rates are higher now because of environmental factors such as the shit in water, food and the air. All things republicans fight for any type of regulating.

[wehateporn]

Cancer industry wants $$$PROFITS$$$

"Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud and that the major cancer research organizations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them." - Linus Pauling PhD (the world's only two-time unshared Nobel Prize winner)

Cancer Research Today from here http://www.cancertutor.com/WarBetween/War_Research.html

The reason progress stopped in curing cancer is because pharmaceutical companies cannot patent natural substances, and it is patents that allow them to make their billions of dollars in profits. With a patent you have no competition, meaning you can charge whatever the "market" will pay. In other words, if a treatment for cancer came along that used only vitamins, minerals, enzymes, etc., all from nature, the pharmaceutical industry would not make any money on this treatment plan, or if they owned a vitamin company (which some of them do), they would not make very much.

They only make gigantic profits on treatment plans that use their man-made chemicals. Plus it is more profitable for them to treat symptoms than to treat causes. Thus the pharmaceutical industry uses their vast wealth to pay others to suppress and crush the truth about alternative treatments for cancer.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Really? So cancer rates are much higher now because of more chemicals in cigarettes? You're calling me delusional?

Cancer rates are higher now because of environmental factors such as the shit in water, food and the air. All things republicans fight for any type of regulating.

you are right.

[SuckOnThis]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

Cancer industry wants $$$PROFITS$$$

"Everyone should know that most cancer research is largely a fraud and that the major cancer research organizations are derelict in their duties to the people who support them."

Linus Pauling PhD (the world's only two-time unshared Nobel Prize winner)

Cancer Research Today from here http://www.cancertutor.com/WarBetween/War_Research.html

The reason progress stopped in curing cancer is because pharmaceutical companies cannot patent natural substances, and it is patents that allow them to make their billions of dollars in profits. With a patent you have no competition, meaning you can charge whatever the "market" will pay. In other words, if a treatment for cancer came along that used only vitamins, minerals, enzymes, etc., all from nature, the pharmaceutical industry would not make any money on this treatment plan, or if they owned a vitamin company (which some of them do), they would not make very much.

They only make gigantic profits on treatment plans that use their man-made chemicals. Plus it is more profitable for them to treat symptoms than to treat causes. Thus the pharmaceutical industry uses their vast wealth to pay others to suppress and crush the truth about alternative treatments for cancer.

Exactly correct. The average cancer treatment costs close to $300,000, some say if cancer was cured tomorrow it would throw the US economy into a depression. Any time something comes along that looks promising the pharmaceutical companies will buy the rights and bury it. There has not been one disease ever cured and with the current system we have there never will be.

[wehateporn]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Exactly correct. The average cancer treatment costs close to $300,000, some say if cancer was cured tomorrow it would throw the US economy into a depression. Any time something comes along that looks promising the pharmaceutical companies will buy the rights and bury it. There has not been one disease ever cured and with the current system we have there never will be.

[wehateporn]

Originally Posted by SuckOnThis

Exactly correct. The average cancer treatment costs close to $300,000, some say if cancer was cured tomorrow it would throw the US economy into a depression. Any time something comes along that looks promising the pharmaceutical companies will buy the rights and bury it. There has not been one disease ever cured and with the current system we have there never will be.

Also, as is often mentioned in these debates, the world cancer map correlates with the world vaccine map.

"Cancer was practically unknown until compulsory vaccination with cowpox vaccine began to be introduced. I have had to deal with at least two hundred cases of cancer, and I never saw a case of cancer in an unvaccinated person."--Eustace Mullins, Dr. W. B. Clarke of Indiana

No Cancer thread is complete without the Dr Maurice Hilleman interview

Dr. Maurice Hilleman, former chief of the Merck Vaccine Division, admits that Cancer has been in many vaccines

[porno jew]

no cancer thread is complete with wehateporn's delusional schizophrenic interpretation of the Dr. Maurice Hilleman video clip.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

"Cancer was practically unknown until compulsory vaccination with cowpox vaccine began to be introduced. I have had to deal with at least two hundred cases of cancer, and I never saw a case of cancer in an unvaccinated person."--Eustace Mullins, Dr. W. B. Clarke of Indiana

telling that you use a source eustace mullins, fascist, white supremacist, anti-semite and author of the "biological jew."

guess we know what kind of poison you read and propagate online.

[porno jew]

wehateporn you left out that mullins believes vaccines are a jewish conspiracy to weaken and destroy the white race. do agree with that theory?

[porno jew]

this is the shit wehateporn propagates online.

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/s/...r-mullins.html

In a 1955 article entitled, "Jews mass poison American children", Mullins claimed that the polio vaccine, invented by Jonas Salk, was a poison because it contains live polio germs. Other books depict Jews as parasites, living off their gentile hosts. In what has to be one of the most bizarre of Mullins' beliefs, it has been reported by L. J. Davis that Mullins has claimed that the phrase "Have a nice day" is a code for Jews to begin killing Christians.

[wehateporn]

Originally Posted by porno jew

this is the shit wehateporn propagates online.

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/people/s/...r-mullins.html

In a 1955 article entitled, "Jews mass poison American children", Mullins claimed that the polio vaccine, invented by Jonas Salk, was a poison because it contains live polio germs. Other books depict Jews as parasites, living off their gentile hosts. In what has to be one of the most bizarre of Mullins' beliefs, it has been reported by L. J. Davis that Mullins has claimed that the phrase "Have a nice day" is a code for Jews to begin killing Christians.

Wow, you're getting desperate. You only let yourself down by this type of childish behaviour

Anyway, the Vaccine/Cancer information is there for those who want to read it, and you've posted some anti Jew stuff too, which I and the majority of people here have no interest in

Grow Up!!

[mikesinner]

Cancer is a complex issue. Most people can not even begin to wrap their heads around the science of why people get cancer. It seems that many people who are incapable of doing the research on real peer reviewed science websites will turn to places like youtube.

Youtube is full of conspiracy nuts and bs videos that usually contain very little real science.

[porno jew]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

Wow, you're getting desperate. You only let yourself down by this type of childish behaviour

Anyway, the Vaccine/Cancer information is there for those who want to read it, and you've posted some anti Jew stuff too, which I and the majority of people here have no interest in

Grow Up!!

you use as a source someone who believes that that vaccines are a jewish conspiracy to poison and kill gentiles. since you are anti-vaccine and use mullins as a reference it is fair to ask if you also believe in that theory.

so do you also believe vaccines are a jewish conspiracy to kill gentiles? yes or no.

[Operator]

I could care way fucking less that

[Operator]

My signature hasn't died atleast

[Operator]

Rip.............

[wehateporn]

Originally Posted by porno jew

you use as a source someone who believes that that vaccines are a jewish conspiracy to poison and kill gentiles. since you are anti-vaccine and use mullins as a reference it is fair to ask if you also believe in that theory.

so do you also believe vaccines are a jewish conspiracy to kill gentiles? yes or no.

Your logic is like a great dragon; it doesn't exist! The other day I explained to you what an Ad Hominem was, but you clearly didn't take it on board. This is why your world view is fundamentally flawed and inaccurate, because you've built it up based on a logical fallacy i.e. incorrect logical principle.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...d-hominem.html

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

[wehateporn]

Originally Posted by mikesinner

Cancer is a complex issue. Most people can not even begin to wrap their heads around the science of why people get cancer. It seems that many people who are incapable of doing the research on real peer reviewed science websites will turn to places like youtube.

Youtube is full of conspiracy nuts and bs videos that usually contain very little real science.

The one above is an interview with Dr. Maurice Hilleman, former chief of the Merck Vaccine Division, whether it's on YouTube, TV, Radio, wherever, it's still him

[Operator]

Chemotherapy is not how you spell cannabis.

[TheSquealer]

Originally Posted by PR_Glen

I agree that these things help prevent it, I follow them myself, but it doesn't justify you soap boxing here and saying he got what he deserved either.

I didn't say he got what he deserved. He made a choice and knew that choice had consequences. Even he knew that. He willfully put himself at risk, he paid the price.

[uno]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

Wow, you're getting desperate. You only let yourself down by this type of childish behaviour

Anyway, the Vaccine/Cancer information is there for those who want to read it, and you've posted some anti Jew stuff too, which I and the majority of people here have no interest in

Grow Up!!

Yes, porno jew is quite the anti-semite.

[uno]

Originally Posted by wehateporn

Your logic is like a great dragon; it doesn't exist! The other day I explained to you what an Ad Hominem was, but you clearly didn't take it on board. This is why your world view is fundamentally flawed and inaccurate, because you've built it up based on a logical fallacy i.e. incorrect logical principle.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...d-hominem.html

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

Not only did you miss the point, but you managed to avoid his perfectly valid question.

[campimp]

it is sad to see anyone die that young, no matter what the cause.

as an ex-smoker i hope that someday, someone out there is able to figure this whole thing out.

it doesn't look very promising, but so many people, and families have been so badly affected by cancer over the years... its pretty sad.

[porno jew]

you use as a source someone who believes that that vaccines are a jewish conspiracy to poison and kill gentiles. since you are anti-vaccine and use mullins as a reference it is fair to ask if you also believe in that theory.

so do you also believe vaccines are a jewish conspiracy to kill gentiles? yes or no.

Originally Posted by wehateporn

Your logic is like a great dragon; it doesn't exist! The other day I explained to you what an Ad Hominem was, but you clearly didn't take it on board. This is why your world view is fundamentally flawed and inaccurate, because you've built it up based on a logical fallacy i.e. incorrect logical principle.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/falla...d-hominem.html

An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Typically, this fallacy involves two steps. First, an attack against the character of person making the claim, her circumstances, or her actions is made (or the character, circumstances, or actions of the person reporting the claim). Second, this attack is taken to be evidence against the claim or argument the person in question is making (or presenting). This type of "argument" has the following form:

1. Person A makes claim X.
2. Person B makes an attack on person A.
3. Therefore A's claim is false.

The reason why an Ad Hominem (of any kind) is a fallacy is that the character, circumstances, or actions of a person do not (in most cases) have a bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made (or the quality of the argument being made).

[porno jew]

more from eustace mullins who wehateporn feels is a legitimate source:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eustace_Mullins#Works

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eustace...iracy_Theories

Many of Mullins' writings show a preoccupation with the idea that the Jews of the world are in a state of war with Christianity and Western civilization, and that Communism, Zionism, and International finance were Jewish tools to subjugate gentile populations. He also believed that in general the interaction between Jews and gentiles was parasitic. He believed that gentiles like the Rockefellers were also parasitic, but that ultimately the World Order was controlled by Jews and that the end goal of this Jewish oligarchy is "World Zionism."[citation needed]
He believed that the French Revolution and the Congress of Vienna were key events in which Jews, via conspiratorial mechanations, overpowered Gentile governments.[citation needed] He believed that other key moments in the establishment of Jewish power were the creation of the Federal Reserve, the Bolshevik Revolution, and the establishment of the state of Israel.

His October, 1952 article "Adolf Hitler: An Appreciation" was mentioned in a report by the House Un-American Activities Committee[20] In it, he espoused anti-Semitic views and expressed the belief that America owes a debt to Hitler.[citation needed]

In a tract called The Secret Holocaust, Mullins stated that the account of the Nazi extermination of the Jews is implausible, and that it is a cover story for the Soviet massacres of Christians, which he believed was led by a conspiracy of "international Jews" and instigated for the purpose of killing Gentiles.[citation needed]
In 1968, Mullins authored the tract, The Biological Jew, which he claimed was an "objective" analysis of the forces behind the "decline" of Western Culture. He claimed that the main influence that people were overlooking in their analysis of world affairs was "parasitism". He began by describing parasitism in the animal kingdom. He then commented on the work of the macro-historians Oswald Spengler and Arnold Toynbee (who he said was a ripoff of Spengler and a "shabbez-goi historian"), and proposed that if we look at society as if it were an organism, then the Jews would be equivalent to parasites overtaking that organism. He states that Jews "instinctively" want to control the world. He spent the rest of the book attacking Americans for their supposed docility, ranting about America's subservience to the Jews, and predicting that America would be in total cultural decline by the 1980s.

[uno]

a short clip but still showed a lot, imo

[porno jew]

hitchens was a great entertainer. sullivan is a clown.

[porno jew]

hitchens was at his best with his literary reviews and writing. he was a literature geek at heart who liked to fight and get bloody with the great cultural currents of his time.

his center was combat. he liked to fight, and he picked sides often just to be the perceived underdog.

[uno]

Originally Posted by porno jew

hitchens was a great entertainer. sullivan is a clown.

What problem do you have with Sullivan?