This movie is a slap in the face to anyone whoever had cancer - 50/50 (2011) Discussion

[–] bmw728 13 years ago

I'm sure Seth Rogen's friend, the writer of this movie, who the character Adam is based off of and who is a cancer survivor himself, feels the exact same way. This isn't some frat boy, crude humor comedy laughing at cancer. It's a film about two friends struggling to deal with such heavy news as cancer and not being emotionally mature enough to do that well. Psychologically, when the mind can't handle something it's not ready to deal with, it protects itself in whatever ways it can. In this case, it's with comedy.

reply

[–] Suvorov928 13 years ago

You can laugh at and find humor in ANYTHING. You know, there is an old saying that "Laughter is the best medicine."

I have had several people in my family with cancer and we have made and cracked jokes about it, and yes, I am talking about the person suffering from it as well. Personally, if I had it, I would not want people moping around me and being all serious around me all the time. I am a humorous guy and nothing life delivers me would ever change that.

Get over yourself and grow up.

reply

[–] protolexis 13 years ago

As a 28 year old cancer survivor I see nothing offensive about this movie so shut it OP. I look forward to seeing it and having a good laugh.

"Join the army, see the world, meet interesting people - and kill 'em." - Woody Allen

reply

[–] EluriaSK 13 years ago

You can laugh at and find humor in ANYTHING. You know, there is an old saying that "Laughter is the best medicine."

I completely agree. I also make jokes when I want someone to feel better if he's not feeling well.

Avatar = Worldwide: $2,782,275,172

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] fourteenbc 12 years ago

poster is ignorant or didn't watch

reply

[–] blossomppf2003 13 years ago

I think it can be a mixture of feelings. Cancer is a gut-wrenching thing to go through, my dad went through it. And it's painful to watch and definitely much more painful to actually go through and experience. But you can also find the lighter side to a situation and make the most of it. Laughter is the best medicine. Everything doesn't have to be so deep and harsh.

I'm sure my dad would have appreciated the film a bit if he were here. I want to see the film as well, I'm sure I would cry my eyes out but I might laugh through some of it as well.

Currently Listening To: Closer-Drake
Last Book I Read: The Namesake

reply

[–] mckenziii 13 years ago

have you even seen the movie? It's heartbreaking. It's not a full out comedy. Seth Rogen is the comedic relief but even he is not all jokes the whole time, and when he makes a joke its appropriate and a welcome laugh from all the sadness. I've had family members with cancer, and I thought this movie was completely accurate. The denial, the anger, being scared....it was all there.

you need to see the movie before judging it.

reply

[–] thebananastand 13 years ago

LMAO Oh god, shut up.

1. You haven't seen the movie.

2. It's not a comedy. It's a drama with very funny parts.

3. The guy who wrote the movie survived cancer.

4. You're an idiot.

reply

[–] Gunslinger1919 13 years ago

I've had cancer several times, and not only do I laugh and joke about it, I think this film looks great. You can't take everything so deadly serious all the time. Life isn't worth living if you do.

\m/

reply

[–] jimmycurry01 13 years ago

I got through having cancer by having a sense of humor about it. Cancer sucks, it hurts you, it hurts the people around you, but it isn't the end of the world. Sometimes the best way to cope with tragedy is through comedy. Laughter truly is the best medicine.

As a cancer survivor, it is your comment that is a slap in the face. Perhaps you would rather focus on the darkness and solemnity of cancer, but for someone coping with it, they need to see the brighter, lighter side. Being down and depressed just makes you feel worse.

reply

[–] Wagmore_Barkless 13 years ago

This type of reaction would have reflected the overwhelming majority 40+ years ago.

Thankfully, a sizeable audience now exists that can handle emotional complexity.

Wiki on Norman Cousins:
Cousins also served as Adjunct Professor of Medical Humanities for the School of Medicine at the University of California, Los Angeles, where he did research on the biochemistry of human emotions, which he long believed were the key to human beings’ success in fighting illness. It was a belief he maintained even as he battled heart disease, which he fought both by taking massive doses of Vitamin C and, according to him, by training himself to laugh.[3][4] He wrote a collection of best-selling non-fiction books on illness and healing, as well as a 1980 autobiographical memoir, Human Options: An Autobiographical Notebook. Late in life Cousins was diagnosed with a form of arthritis then called Marie-Strumpell's disease (ankylosing spondylitis), although this diagnosis is currently in doubt and it has been suggested that Cousins may actually have had reactive arthritis. His struggle with this illness is detailed in the book and movie Anatomy of an Illness.

Told that he had little chance of surviving, Cousins developed a recovery program incorporating megadoses of Vitamin C, along with a positive attitude, love, faith, hope, and laughter induced by Marx Brothers films. "I made the joyous discovery that ten minutes of genuine belly laughter had an anesthetic effect and would give me at least two hours of pain-free sleep," he reported. "When the pain-killing effect of the laughter wore off, we would switch on the motion picture projector again and not infrequently, it would lead to another pain-free interval."

reply

[–] irish201 13 years ago

I'm 26 and have terminal breast cancer. I am anxiously awaiting this movie especially since it was written by a young cancer survivor. The hair shaving scene from the preview took me back to the first time I started losing my hair to chemo and let my friend shave the rest off for me. Deciding to return to our high school habit of smoking weed when I started getting home bound from bone pain from cancer mets and chemo. Messing with lazy nurses eveytime I was hospitalized. Dealing with cancer in your early 20's is a different expierence then an older adult. You are still young enough and immature enough that you should be out expierencing college, socializing on the bar scene and learning to be an adult with your first apartment and first serious jobs. Instead you try to balance a life of attempting to expierence a normal life and finding your way through a maze of doctors, treatments, scans and mental exhaustion. I'm so excited to see a movie that is raising awareness for young cancer patients and giving a voice to us.

reply

[–] Wagmore_Barkless 13 years ago

Beautiful post. I hope the OP reads it.

reply

[–] TheLevittion 13 years ago

Thanks for your post :')

reply

[–] Delirium-Tremens 13 years ago

Yes. I like this lol

reply

[–] sacflyzone 13 years ago

Praying for you.

reply

[–] MsKimmy 13 years ago

Thank you! Bravo! I so agree. Ppl who are/were sick do not understand they just this its a joke movie. I wasn't in my 20's when I was diagnosed but its all the same. I pray you get better.

"The greatest thing, you'll ever learn, is just to love and be loved in return"

reply

[–] Pixar_Fan 13 years ago

spayne201-39-427470,

I'm a 25 year old guy and have gone through 7 rounds of chemotherapy and have my final treatment next week. I agree with every word you said. I LOVED this movie.

reply

[–] Turfseer 12 years ago

I'm very sorry about your illness. I'm just wondering why you put so much faith in the doctors from the beginning. Unfortunately, chemotherapy is usually WORSE than the disease itself. Even if the cancer goes away at first, it usually comes back in a more deadly form, precisely because of the SIDE EFFECTS of chemotherapy. This is what happened to a very good friend of mine. I believe people at your age should investigate ALTERNATIVE treatments. Unfortunately, you're living proof that chemo doesn't work!

reply

[–] irish201 12 years ago

Turfseer, I'm so glad you were able to obtain my full medical history and make a sound judgement on how I've sentenced myself to death because of the choices I've made based on a short paragraph. While I don't feel the need to explain my disease and treatment choices to everyone on IMDB or anyone for that matter I will make a special exception for you seeing as I can't stand when people jump on a soapbox and preach based on their personal opinion.
First off I was diagnosed stage IV from the get go with no symptoms, the lump was found by me on accident (a lump the size of my pinky nail if you're curious). After that a routine scan before surgery revealed mets. Chemo didn't fail me.
Once diagnosed I did consider and research many methods of treatment as well as my choices to refuse treatment. The problem I had with almost every alternative treatment I researched was they were practically guaranteeing me a cure without providing me proof. No research studies, trials or patient follow up statistics. If you are really curing cancer or think you are on to something then put it out there, have some proof to show. I've been told everything from drinking pureed canned asparagus 3x's a day by a Chinese medicine doctor to drinking an herbal tea that a holistic healer made but no one could give me any proof other then their word that it worked.I also researched and talked to many people who had or were pursuing alternative treatment as a first line treatment. I did not like the low progression free survival times I was seeing and I even talked to a woman in length who had done holistic at stage I and how she regretted doing that because she was stage IV now. I also think about celebrities who chose alternative first such as Michael Landon and Linda McCartney as well as the recently deceased Steve Jobs. I'm not saying all alternative choices are bad. I believe things like Kanzius will make huge strides in how we treat cancer and I am a big supporter of them. And Dr. Robert Arnot studies in nutrition and diet are so fascinating and he even had a couple of long term stage IV survivors from his original group.
So yes I did chemo because contrary to your statements research shows chemo does work on a great number of cancers and if you or anyone would like studies to show it I'm more then happy to provide them, but just like alternative treatments it's not a guarantee. Yes the side effects suck and are often worse then the disease symptoms (though mine were managed greatly with acupuncture which is proven and documented to lessen SE's) and for me chemo was actually quite effective, nearly healing the mets to my spine and shrinking my tumor in half. A little over a year ago I was told I'd be dead in 18 months and now in March I will be having surgery to remove the remainder of the cancer in my breast, something that is not generally afforded to stage IV patients. I continue on hormone treatments and right now am leading a fairly normal life. Ultimately my condition is terminal but thanks to many new treatments available I will hopefully be buying extra time for quite awhile.
The treatment one chooses should be researched and tailored to their own specific case, it's such an intimate and personal decision. I can not stress enough how important it is to ask and research everything because even simple things like taking everyday vitamins can interfere with treatment (antioxidants actually lessens the effectiveness of radiation!)
So Turfseer I'm not sure if you made your ignorant assumptions based on my illness or my age or just because you wanted to push your own beliefs on others but I hope in the future you will investigate your own facts before making medical suggestions to others. Trust me I have done nothing but eat, breathe and $h!t cancer for a year now, I know I'm doing what's right for me.

reply

[–] Turfseer 12 years ago

Thank you for explaining the history of your situation. If you believe in a certain type of treatment, of course that's the way you should go. However, just because you have read "studies" that SUPPOSEDLY prove that chemo does work in a "great numbers of cancer", that doesn't mean those studies are true. There have already been a great number of cases of FRAUD committed by cancer researchers and this is a PROVEN FACT. What's more, the oncologists and their minions of course are going to highlight the success stories and never tell you all about the cases that have failed. What about all those people who were fairly normal to begin with and after the deadly side effects from chemo and radiation, got much, much worse? No, the doctors will never take responsibility for their own limitations and always blame it on the "progression of the disease". And what about those doctors who try to make you feel like you're a criminal, if you dare suggest that you want to investigate alternatives? For a good example of the kind of manipulative behavior one often sees in the medical profession, please go to: www.drmcdougall.com/misc/2011nl/oct/protect.htm. Actually I wouldn't waste time consulting 'statistics'; I believe that anecdotal stories are much more valuable since each cancer case is different. That's especially true in the cases of the celebrities you cited. I do know that Steve Jobs was working with toxic metals early in his career working on computers and probably had cancer for a very long time. So it's extremely unlikely any treatments would have made a difference in his case. Actually he wasn't a complete vegan after he was diagnosed, and resorted to eating fish and ice cream. Linda McCartney was a 'vegetarian' but I believe she never gave up cheese, which contains the naturally occurring growth hormone, IGF-1, which has been linked to cancer. In your case, I still wish you the best. However, it's my belief that if you do recover, it's not from the debilitating treatment you've chosen to employ, but from the body's own natural ability to heal itself!

reply

[–] stopbeinweird 12 years ago

I know I'm a bit late to this party and normally I wouldn't bother commenting on something like this but after reading this I can't not.

Turfseer, you should be ashamed of yourself. Trying to sow the seeds of doubt in the mind of someone who is actively trying to fight cancer through proven methods (that they've clearly thoroughly researched) with a positive attitude, thats probably one of the most disgusting things I've seen on the internet and thats saying something. Have all the conspiracy theories you want but in future get some common sense and try thinking before you speak.

And Spayne, you may never see this but I have to say fair play to you. I wish you all the best in kicking this things arse and would also add you're attitude is without doubt an inspiration.

"He is not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy"

reply

[–] Turfseer 12 years ago

NO it's you who should be ashamed of yourself! I am totally sick of people like you who try to convince people who have cancer that there is only one "PROVEN" method to fight the disease. You're basically a health FASCIST who believes people should follow one way. And it's even worse when these government officials try to make people undergo deadly chemo treatments against their will.

You can con as many people as you want, but the truth of the matter is that there is NO GUARANTEE that orthodox medicine cancer treatments will work. But you act as if they work most of the time. What happens if a doctor prescribes chemo and the treatment fails? Shouldn't the patient's family have the right to sue the doctor? It never happens because doctors will never take responsibility and admit maybe their treatments are responsible for people getting worse.

If you just happen to get cancer and decide to do chemotherapy, then you'll see what it's all about. Chemo is like pouring gasoline on a burning fire. In the end, it will destroy your immune system and make the cancer worse. And in the cases where the body manages to overcome both the illness and the chemo, there are invariable side effects where other organs are damaged in the long run.

More and more people are beginning to become aware of the coercive nature of the cancer establishment. One day, backward people such as yourself, will be in the minority.

reply

[–] stopbeinweird 12 years ago

Thats impressive, you've completely missed the point of what I've said.

But with regard to your ramblings, at no point did I claim to be a medical expert who's sole opinion is that chemo is a 100% guaranteed cure. Its not, everybody knows its not, the name of this feckin film is a clear indication that its not. But obviously the medical professionals seem to think it can be effective, as has been experienced by many many people. There are no guarantees when it comes to cancer, no doctor will ever say you're definitely going to be cured by chemo so no, you don't have the right to sue if it doesn't work. Unorthodox methods also wouldn't provide any guarantee so basically what you're implying is that anyone who recommends any course of treatment should be sued if it doesn't work.

And please don't put words in my mouth, I have not claimed chemo is the be all and end all to cancer treatment, I simply don't know enough the make any claims, I'm not a doctor. However I have had both family and friends who have had cancer, some survived through chemo, some didn't. In each case it was their choice of treatment after weighing up the options. You claim that its government officials forcing people to take chemo but Spayne for example has clearly stated that many many alternatives were looked into and checked out but in the end chemo was judged to be best. Yet you still ramble on about how its a death sentence. Thats why you should be ashamed of yourself, plain and simple.

Hopefully someday there will be a cure to cancer that won't involve chemo. Until then its up to each individual to find the treatment they think best and go with at it with as much determination and positive attitude possible. And once they make that decision you have no right to lecture them. You'd do well to remember that.

Edit: I forgot to add that I'm sorry to hear you lost a good friend. Cancer without doubt is a *beep* of a thing.

"He is not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy"

reply

[–] Turfseer 12 years ago

You're the one who used the word "proven" in regards to methods for treating cancer. You just contradicted your own post by conceding that there are no guarantees when it comes to cancer treatment.

When was I "lecturing" anybody? Certainly not people who have cancer. Rather, I was suggesting that the so-called "medical professionals" who you seem to put on a pedestal, should always be questioned and people who have cancer should be aware that there are treatment alternatives.

Whether you believe it or not, many physicians will try to make patients feel guilty if they don't go along with their proscribed treatments. In some cases, the guilt trip turns into outright threats; and don't forget, these doctors are making big bucks peddling their toxic brew! The chemo peddlers might not actually claim that undergoing chemo, radiation or surgery is a guarantee, but they often imply in subtle ways, that if you don't follow their path, you're a goner!

As far as government officials coercing people into taking chemo--this is particularly true in the case of children. There have been numerous cases where parents have been threatened by government social service agencies that they'll take their children away if they don't follow the recommendation of their physician who has prescribed chemo. These are the criminals who you're sticking up for.

And who is this Spayne you've referred to? I met a woman who had Stage IV Breast Cancer and was told she had six months to live. She went on a raw food diet and cured herself within a year. There are all kinds of alternative treatments, some of them good, and some ineffective.

What I do agree with you about is if a person believes in chemo, that's the treatment they should select. Nonetheless, you can continue to put me down as much as you want, claiming that what I'm saying are just a bunch of "ramblings". But I believe the majority of readers here will see you for what you are: a shill for the orthodox medical establishment who seeks to stifle free speech.

reply

[–] stonehenge11 12 years ago

Ah, you're right. Stopbeinweird WAS being a total health fascist and you were quite justified in insulting him/her this way. S/he IS a con, and a meanie pants and a bumface to boot! Health fascism is probably the LEAST fun form of fascism. After all, if I CHOOSE to let my child die, that should be MY CHOICE and has nothing to do with the government because that child is, of course, my property.

I'd like to invoke Randall Munroe and remind you that the universe does not care what you believe, so stop telling us like it matters. If you believe that the lady (my assumption, sorry if I'm wrong) should be using alt meds, if you believe the moon is made of old carpets from Mesopotamia, if you believe in life after love and you want to tell an audience: stop! Please resist! I wouldn't lie to you about this: nobody - not the universe or the cancer patients, not the lurkers who only weigh in when they're very bored and really can't sleep and not the scientists and doctors - not one person cares what you believe. By the way, Steve Jobs turned to alternative medicine before real medicine, you twit. By the time he returned to real medicine he had delayed treatment by ten months and significantly shortened his own life.

There is no guarantee that orthodox, or "evidence-based" treatments work, which is why patients who have the capacity to make these decisions are given a choice. However, there is a pretty good guarantee that most of the sugar water and muck mixed with stupidity that fools like you peddle doesn't work. The point is that the evidence-based - henceforth referred to as real - medicine is the stuff that works the best. Anything from the alternative medicine camp that is proved to work is assimilated into real medicine in quick order, as demonstrated neatly in the post by Spayne where she discussed acupuncture.
The generation of doctors that people complain about are virtually finished. There is a huge international shift of opinion and of practice towards healthcare professionals who listen to and work with their patients. A treatment that fails in such a scenario cannot be the cause for litigation as such things will have been and should be an informed team decision. The damage done by chemotherapy is actually a well known phenomenon - I know it's hard to believe, but doctors are aware that cytotoxic chemotherapy = bad for cells. That's a tragically unfunny joke if you're educated in the field, which I'll bet you're not. Also, in most enlightened societies nowadays doctors are not allowed to take kickbacks from the pharmaceutical companies and have to be able to justify everything they do to national councils, and anything they do that could be a conflict of interest has to be reported.

Regarding fraud in the scientific community, every case of fraud, every mistake and every ignorance that is discovered is added to the huge weaponry that the scientists have for fighting against lies and falsehoods. Fraud in the alt camp is, in my (not inconsiderable) experience, the main modus operandi.

(Your page that you linked to with the quack was interesting. The long anecdote was boring and pointless, and the guy was incapable of understanding the literature the other doc sent him, which though in many places outdated was totally relevant, especially the stuff about the efficacy of hormonal treatments. At the end of the day that was not his specialist area and he knew less than the other doctor, who was entirely in the right. That doctor endangered his patient's health, though not her life, by putting her on an almost certainly long-term regime of hormonal therapy with chemo and radio as fun adjuncts - exactly what you were complaining about but doubtless you will miss the irony because you're such a moron. This is terribly tangential, so anyone who is genuinely interested in this topic should pm me - I'm studying that area at the moment.)

I'm just going to quote you for fun, now: "Actually I wouldn't waste time consulting 'statistics'; I believe that anecdotal stories are much more valuable since each cancer case is different." Haha! WRONG! But I am so amused that you put 'statistics' in scare quotes.

reply

[–] Turfseer 12 years ago

When you get cancer, then you can have fun with your "evidence based" chemotherapy. Good luck!

reply

[–] sackartist340 12 years ago

And when you get cancer, you can die more quickly with the knowledge that you avoided such terrible fascism while drinking your chinese herbal tea. You *beep* retard.

reply

[–] Turfseer 12 years ago

The control freak has spoken! Enjoy your chemo as it destroys your immune system!

reply

[–] Nightstar_INC 11 years ago

After reading this whole thread and seeing what you have had to say, you are doing exactly what your preaching against. You are stuffing your own beliefs down people's throats AND you are making yourself as the high and might expert on EVERYTHING cancer related.

First off, as a cancer survivor, I liked this movie. This movie showed a lot of everything that affects a cancer patient's relationships during his cancer treatment.

Secondly, based on your posts, YOU are assuming that all doctors are stupid and corrupt AND that most cancer patients are idiots and lazy. Why do I say you assume that based on your comments? Because you keep reminding people that chemotherapy kills ones immune system. Guess, what! My oncologist told me there are other methods at other hospitals, but at the hospital where I went to, they only did radiation and chemotherapy. He also told me the dangers of it and I looked it up in any research material I could find. I CHOSE chemotherapy, and I knew the consequences. So remind me how stupid I am because I don't know it kills my immune system. Oh and btw, every day after a round of chemo I had, I was given a very expensive shot that boosted my immune system.

Thirdly, I also have a friend who also had cancer and chose alternative treatments. I only had 8-10 round of chemo. And was done and didn't even have to go through radiation. My chemo was a short period especially for a semi-agressive type of cancer. My friend who went through the alternative treatment, had that alternative treatment and had to do that for 2 years. And his cancer was even less aggressive and dangerous than mine. And they caught it earlier than mine.

Fourthly, if you think my immune system is better than my friend's you're dead wrong. I get sick at least 10-15 times a year with colds, fevers, etc. I'm not the healthiest person in the world, but I have begun working out and exercising over the last few months. My friend who went through the alternative treatment was a health nut. Won't eat or drink fast food, always runs at least 2 hours a day. He rarely got sick, and if he did, he'd be sick for half a day at most. On top of that, while I had my chemo rounds I still went to school full-time, and still worked part time. And if you think that was easy for me, I had black outs and sometime wouldn't remember what happened on certain days or if that day even existed, I failed classes because I could barely remember everything, I threw up a lot and had to leave class a lot. I missed at least 1/3rd of my classes. And this was me going to school at the university during the cold winter time. As stubborn as I was, I managed through it. My friend took the better route and took time off school and work, but again he had treatments lasting longer.

Fifthly, let's see if you have the money to pay for the alternative treatment. Depending on your insurance certain treatments or certain facilities aren't covered under your insurance depending on your insurance. Most people in the US aren't millionaires so don't assume it's easy to pick whatever treatment you want. Watch the movie SAW 6. I'm not telling you to watch that movie for the gore, but watch the situation for it. Jigsaw wanted to try an alternative treatment for his cancer and his insurance company said either you pay for it yourself fully or stick with what we will pay for.

Current treatments to various illnesses right now aren't fool-proof or perfect, but that doesn't mean NEWER treatments are the God-send. They aren't the almighty perfect treatment because they're "safer" and newer. How about we all stop taking current treatments and wait for newer ones? Is that what you're wanting everyone to do?

Apparently to you, this is a perfect world were anything can and will happen so everything is easy right? Check your facts before you mouth off. You think everything is just easy because you only want to talk about the treatment, but not anything else involved in a person's decision.

I'm not going to be like others here who wish for you to die of cancer, but if God-forbid you some how get it, I trust you to make whatever judgement is right for YOU and you only. If you don't want chemo, then try the other methods because YOU feel that's right for YOU. Because if you decide to chose chemo and/or radiation over alternative treatments, even though you feel its wrong for YOU, then you are giving into what you are trying to do for other people. Making them chose something that may not feel right for them.

reply

[–] Turfseer 11 years ago

First of all, I don't know where you come off saying that I said chemo is not good for everyone. Chemo IS GOOD FOR THE PEOPLE WHO BELIEVE IN IT (like you!). I never said alternative treatments are a guarantee, but I do know there a lot of doctors who will go out of their way to put the whole idea down. You're lucky that you had such an open-minded doctor who told you about the side effects of chemotherapy. But guess what, not all of them are so nice. I'm going to share with you an article from the Natural News newsletter which tells about how the multi-billion dollar cancer industry has a stranglehold on medicine that restricts individuals from making their own choices. You can deny all you want that this goes on but if you open your eyes, you'll see it's true:

(NaturalNews) As free as many Americans might think they are, there are certain glaring aspects of American life for which individuals are not free to make their own choices, and cancer treatment is one of them. In the sobering documentary Cut Poison Burn, filmmaker Wayne Chesler brings to light the sinister nature of the multi-billion dollar cancer industry, its suppression of any real pursuit of a cure, and its stranglehold on medicine that restricts individuals from choosing their own personalized, alternative forms of treatment.

The documentary follows the journey of the Navarro family, whose young son Thomas, then four years old, was diagnosed with medulloblastoma, a highly-malignant form of brain cancer that typically afflicts children. Rather than undergo conventional chemotherapy and radiation, the Navarros instead wanted to pursue an alternative route, which in their case was Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski's non-toxic antineoplaston treatment, which has been shown to be particularly effective at treating brain cancers.

But unless a child is of a proper age to make his own medical treatment decisions, which Thomas clearly was not, then he is required by the medical mafia to undergo the prescribed treatment regimen, which in Thomas' case was chemotherapy and radiation. Even though these forms of treatment are virtually useless at treating medulloblastoma, the state threatened Thomas' parents that if they did not subject him to these barbaric poisons, they would remove him from their custody.

After a long, drawn-out legal battle with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the ringleader of the phony cancer industry, and thousands of dollars in legal expenses, the Navarros were finally permitted to have their son see Dr. Burzynski. But by this point, Thomas had already had his life destroyed by many months of chemotherapy and radiation, which led to his death at the young age of six.

Cancer is big business for drug companies and the federal government
Thomas is not the only victim of the cancer industry, of course -- millions of Americans, including many children, have died on the altar of Big Pharma's cancer machine, and many more will follow unless the People wake up and take their freedoms back. And in order to wake people up to the truth, they need to hear and see the truth as it is plainly laid out in films like Cut Poison Burn.

Be sure to watch the official trailer for Cut Poison Burn at the following link, where you can also purchase a DVD or downloadable copy of the film:
http://cutpoisonburn.com/

Also, be sure to check out the related documentaries Burzynski The Movie and Dying to Have Known, both of which can be viewed for FREE:
http://www.burzynskimovie.com
http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/dying_to_have_known

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/035926_cancer_industry_poison_documentary.html#ixzz2IrOwmxxN

reply

[–] Nightstar_INC 11 years ago

Re-read your posts from telling people that people can go off enjoying the loss of their immune system because they chose chemo, force feeding the same "scary facts" about how chemo is an easy money making way for the US FDA and is forcing it upon people, and putting people down who may have found medical evidence that proves they made the right choice. Look at your responses to everyone that didn't agree with you.

You present yourself to be like those Evangelical Christians that say "what? you don't believe in God? Well, you can go on believing what you want then. Because I will feel sad for you when your suffering in hell, regardless if you're a good person or not."

And yes I've seen those documentaries, but the way you push them on us, you're practically saying "If we can, we should take down these government forced treatments and all refuse any chemo and radiation. We should rather die if they won't let us do other treatments than to go and do chemo and radiation.

Remember this post you responded to stonehenge11 with "When you get cancer, then you can have fun with your "evidence based" chemotherapy. Good luck!" And all he did was explain to you why evidence based treatments are more believed in than experimental treatments.

And remember your response to spayne201-39-427470. At least you responded in a nice way while saying that "...if you do recover, it's not from the debilitating treatment you've chosen to employ, but from the body's own natural ability to heal itself!" Really? Although it wasn't malicious, you again put down someone's own trust in a treatment by saying that they could go through that treatment, but it was 100% ineffective because it was your body that healed itself not the treatment.

Now, with the internet in this day and age and thankfully SOPA hasn't been passed yet, if there were great break throughs in alternative treatments, why are these doctors not working together to put together their evidence? We don't know for sure if a lot or a small amount of the evidence in the success of chemotherapy is fraudulent, but it is accessible to people. Now with our internet age, these doctors who come up with alternative treatments should work together and at least start small with 1 or 2 alternative treatments that they test over a long period of time and put their findings online. Not only that, but if they can get some proof that at least 1 or 2 of these treatments can be almost as successful if not equally or better than chemotherapy, then people will really start to listen.

Now I don't know if you are a religious person or not. I will admit that I am. But I'm also a wise enough person to know that people are programmed to trust mostly facts above faith, even those that believe in a religion. Everyone wants proof. It's harder to get an atheist to become a religious person, for example Christian, because religion is more based on belief or faith, and not worry about facts. It's easier to get a religious person to become an atheist by showing the "facts".
"Ok, so there is no way to really prove God exists, but I can prove that the Bible is wrong when it came to the birth of man. Science proves through studies that humans evolved from primates. Evolution gave birth to man, not God."

I've yet to read any articles or anything about large groups of medical practioners that agree on at least 1 or 2 alternative treatments and say they are equally as affective if not better than chemo. Why aren't there enough large groups? Easy, because there are tons of alternative treatments and they are still arguing which one of the alternative treatments are better than the other.

Btw, I really would be scared to hear what you believe in when it comes to treatments for those suffering with AIDS/HIV. Let me guess, use your own body's natural power to heal itself and staying on a special diet and exercise? That will cure you of AIDS/HIV? Or are you the type that thinks the US government is worse than China or even the Middle East because they already found a cure for AIDS but think it's better to let their own citizens die because they're still trying to think of a huge money making scheme for AIDS/HIV patients?

Choosing the treatment that's right for a person isn't like choosing a sports team. I can choose a sports team and you can put me down for choosing that team if you don't like the team I chose. However, trying to belittle people for their choice in treatment for their illness is both dangerous and sick. It's one thing to bring your side of evidence to people to give them alternatives, it's another thing to act like "you can choose what you want to do, but it's not my fault when you die because you chose the wrong thing. And if you don't die, just know that you're still wrong, you just got lucky and survived." God-forbid that someone here got intimidated and bullied into choosing your side without weighing all their options and ends up dying because they chose your choice because you spouted conspiracy this conspiracy that.

Another post I remember was you first said to spayne201-39-427470. You clearly said to them that spayne201-39-427470 was living proof that chemo doesn't work. So that means everyone that survived and is cancer free had stronger immune systems, including people who are fat lazy couch potatoes, people who do drugs on a daily basis (non perscription), people who smoke a lot (and only stopped smoking during chemo and radiation and then started smoking again after all treatments were done), those who don't exercise, those who eat fast food 90% of the time, yep as long as we do nothing to better our health, there's a good chance our bodies will heal themselves, possibly during chemo.

Now I've read your posts and I can clearly see that you're bitter about chemotherapy because of your friend who died am I correct? Truly think about that for a moment. WHAT IF, your friend had chosen alternative treatments and refused chemotherapy? Would you still be on this crusade? Or would you be defending chemotherapy? I'm not asking you to really answer that for us, but answer that for yourself. Honestly ask yourself, IF YOUR FRIEND CHOSE OTHER METHODS OF CANCER TREATMENT AND REFUSED CHEMOTHERAPY, BUT THE RESULTS MAY NOT HAVE BEEN THE SAME YET STILL HAD THE SAME GRAVITY OF WHAT HAPPENED TO YOUR FRIEND IN THE END, would you still be on this same crusade? Because if you say yes, you would be championing your friend for going against a fully approved treatment even if they are still suffering for making that choice as opposed to what your friend in reality chose.

Side note: Btw, ever heard of Fast B-Cell Lymphoma? Hmm, a body should be able to heal itself from this cancer right? Oh right, B-Cells actually are part of the immune system and they've gone haywire to a point where they're going after anything that looks dangerous in the body and going after it. Yeah, I want to heal my body by creating even more antibodies and increase the overloaded antibodies inside my body.

reply

[–] Turfseer 11 years ago

I presented a simple story about a four year old child who had cancer, whose parents were FORCED by the government and his doctors to take on a treatment that they believed would harm him, not help him. I’m not ‘pushing’ anything on anybody. Maybe you don’t realize it, but I’m in the MINORITY here. It’s the people WHO YOU SUPPORT who are dictating what kind of treatments people should be using.

As far as accusing me of being like an ‘Evangelical Christian’—I think it speaks volumes about you when you say you feel sad for me when I’m “suffering in hell”, regardless whether I’m a good person or not.

Yes, you are correct that I did “put down” someone’s “own trust” in the treatment they believe in. But guess what dude? That’s my OPINION! There’s something called freedom of speech in this country.

As far as your ‘brilliant’ suggestion that doctors who follow alternative treatments should “work together” (presumably with the orthodox medical establishment) to “put together their evidence”--you’ve got to understand a lot of alternative medicine relies on anecdotal testimony. This is because alternative practitioners attempt to treat each individual case on its own merits, as opposed to drawing conclusions from a large statistical sample. The few personal, anecdotal stories I’m aware of, where people have overcome cancer through alternative means is far more relevant and valuable to me than these ‘research studies’, which are inherently tainted by the lust for monetary profit (not to mention that there’s a good deal of fraud already exposed in the multi-billion dollar, cancer research industry).

Alternative treatments are actually being utilized today by orthodox practitioners in conjunction with traditional treatments including chemo, radiation and surgery. My belief is that for the most part, they should be separate.

You argue that the fact that large medical practitioners can’t even agree that there are at least one or two alternative treatments that are equally as effective as chemo and that amongst alternative treatment practitioners themselves, they can’t even agree which ones are effective. That’s because alternative treatments are based on anecdotal cases and not subject to the kinds of studies, orthodox practitioners rely on. It’s incumbent on someone who is suffering from cancer, to do the research themselves, and find alternative treatments that worked in cases similar to their own. The reality is that even orthodox medical practitioners themselves, can’t guarantee more than a year or so additional life expectancy from traditional treatments. What many don’t want you to focus on, is the quality of life you might have, while on those traditional treatments. And from your own description, it sounds like it sure isn’t easy!

You say that I’m intimidating and bullying people, not allowing people to weigh options. Isn’t that exactly what the doctors and government are doing when it comes to giving people the option of seeking alternative treatments? I just gave you an example of what was done to parents who didn’t want their four year old child to undergo deadly chemotherapy. They were forced to and of course the kid didn’t make it. Do they have the right to sue the doctors and the government for forcing them to undergo the treatments they didn’t want for their son? Of course not. The treatment itself might have made the kid worse, but the medical establishment won’t concede that one bit. They’ll always blame it on the disease itself, without acknowledging that the treatment could have exacerbated the illness.

If there’s bullying going on, it’s not from the likes of me. People like you, who buy everything the doctors tell you, don’t want people to consider alternative treatments. They say ‘it’s not scientifically proven’. Of course who sets the standards for something to be ‘scientifically proven’? The answer is obvious.

No I am not “bitter” about my friend who died of cancer. And I’m not so naïve to believe that had he taken an alternative path, he would be guaranteed a cure. But I do know how debilitating the traditional treatment was for him during the course of his treatment. When I asked right before he died, whether he was sick from the cancer itself or the side effects of his medication, he was unable to give me an answer.

Finally, I want to make it clear that it’s my firm belief that whatever a person decides, they should go with the therapy that they feel comfortable with. Unfortunately, in this time of great intimidation by many members of the orthodox medical establishment, many cancer victims end up not being able to look at all their options, precisely because of the intimidating tactics they are subject to, by their own orthodox medical practitioners.

reply

[–] Nightstar_INC 11 years ago

You obviously didn't even ready ANYTHING I had said. First off, did I say that if your friend had chosen an alternative path he would be guaranteed a cure? No. Let me explain this to your paranoid mind. WOULD YOU STILL BE ON A CRUSADE AGAINST CHEMOTHERAPY IF YOUR FRIEND CHOSE TO USE ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS AND STILL DIED NONETHELESS? That is my question to you. Think while reading for once. I'm asking you, what made you distrust chemotherapy. I'm not saying that this is the end all saving grace, but did you have this hatred for chemotherapy and belittle your friend for choosing it before he died or did this come about after he died? Again, think about that for a moment. But since you don't seem to fully comprehend what I'm asking you, then tell us all here WHEN AND WHY you chose to begin your crusade against Chemotherapy. Because nobody suddenly has a strong believe against something without having something else happen to cause that change whether good or bad, unless they just read and believe anything they feel is right.

And again I know you are delusional now because you totally forgot everything I had said to you from the beginning. I told you my doctor gave me all the options and told me to make my own decisions. He let me have time to weigh my options and decide what treatment I want. Unfortunately, the hospital he worked at only works with Chemotherapy. He has now since moved to a hospital on the outskirts of the city which deal with the alternative treatments. And how much of an idiot can you be? Me not letting people chose alternative treatments? Now I know you don't read anything I said and are talking out of your ass because like I said earlier to you, if you God-Forbid get cancer yourself, I would rather you stick with whatever treatment you felt was right for you and only you. But apparently you read at a 1st grade level and totally forgot about that too in my first post.

Let's talk about my Evangelical Christian comments. I know you are too stupid to have even understood something as simple as what I have said. I said that the way you explain things to everyone is SIMILAR TO AN EVANGELICAL CHRISTIAN. What do some Evangelical Christians say to people? "You can believe in what you want, but I feel sorry for you when you're suffering in hell regardless of whether you are a good person or not". Guess what, THAT IS YOU IN ESSENCE SAYING THAT TO ALL OF US. I never said that I would feel sorry for you if when you're suffering in hell regardless of whether you are a good person or not. I'm saying that YOU ARE TELLING US THAT. The way you attack people's choices.

Oh and let's see, you say that doctors and the government are intimidating people? Well guess what, if the doctors and government are doing that to us, you can sit with them because you are just as bad as they are with the way you are acting. You are so one-minded that you don't even see that the way your are presenting your case is equal to the people you are against, if not worse. A lot of these people that are arguing against you might actually be on your side when it comes to alternative treatments, but they go against you instead because you are metaphorically saying "THE GOVERNMENT AND DOCTORS ARE FORCE FEEDING YOU THE WRONG TREATMENTS AND WON'T LET YOU LOOK AT ALTERNATIVE TREATMENTS!!! IF YOU WON'T AGREE WITH ME, I WILL BEAT YOU WITH A BASEBALL BAT UNTIL YOU LEARN OR IF YOU'RE ALREADY SUFFERING FROM CANCER AND CHEMOTHERAPY IS NOT WORKING FOR YOU I'LL JUST BE THE PERSON SAYING 'I TOLD YOU SO' RATHER THAN OFFER MY CONDOLENCES AND LEAVE IT AT THAT."

*sighs*

How about we make this debate simpler. I'm going to explain why you are pissing me off so much. And believe me, I have a feeling you won't understand any of this AND you will not even read all of this and you will argue your point without even knowing what the hell is going on. Oh wait, you'll even misunderstand that previous sentence. Let's get started then.

1.) You are 1-track minded and don't even take the time to think. What do I mean by that? All you care about is just your point and only one way to explain it. You don't take the time to read first and prepare a true counter argument. If this were a debate and we were presidential candidates, reporters would be asking me "Why were you trying to help your opponent?" and my answer would be "because when I would make a counter argument I would ask them a question back or would make a counter statement and their response would be the answer to an earlier question in the same way." This would be like me eventually asking you later on in this discussion about alternative treatments versus chemotherapy

"Well what're your thoughts on neutering your household pets like cats and dogs"

and your response would be "my thoughts would be that it's people like you that kill everyone because you refuse to believe that alternative treatments to cancer work."

"But what about my question about neutering pets? and controlling the animal population"

"I already told you the government is trying to keep you all from learning about other treatments of cancer."

"nevermind. I could ask him what is the answer to 1+1 and he will still say the government and doctors are lying to us. And I'd still be wondering about what this has to do with whatever I ask."

2.) The way you describe the government and doctors and others that believe in chemotherapy is that they are bullies and force one treatment down people's throats. You on the other hand say you're against that way of doing things, however you are doing exactly the same. You are bullying people into NOT doing the chemotherapy treatments. Guess what, I can make a better representative for alternative treatments than you. Do you know why? Because if I were in your shoes, I would present the pros and cons of each side, then explain why I believe in my side, and then say it's up to them to decide and there is no 100% fool-proof answer. You on the other hand would like to rather decide for them or tell people like spayne201-39-427470 that you feel sorry for them, but it's THEIR FAULT FOR CHOOSING A TREATMENT that you are against and that they listened to doctors. Btw, in that same post you said you don't know why spayne201-39-427470 put so much faith in doctors. You made that statement as if to say ALL doctors are wrong. How can all doctors be wrong if you believe alternative treatments are right? Who came up with those alternative treatments? Accountants? Teachers? Musicians? Oh right doctors. You didn't even ask if spayne201-39-427470's doctors even brought up alternative treatments and if spayne201-39-427470 got to choose which one. But then again if spayne201-39-427470 was given choices by the doctor and still chose chemotherapy then you'd just be saying "I'm sorry to hear about your situation, but if you had listened to me you wouldn't be in this position. Sorry, but that's your fault."
You didn't even ask the right questions and you ended up insulting spayne201-39-427470.

3.) This reason really takes the cake. You see, I agree with you wholeheartedly that everyone needs to do their research and find the treatment they feel would be best for them. However, not everyone is in the medical field. That's why you ask your doctor, then go for a 2nd opinion else where, and then a 3rd and maybe a 4th and 5th. Ask doctors who are for chemotherapy and those against it. Get their medical sides directly. Then in the end pick a side you want. However, the way you presented your evidence and the way you are talking to people in a malicious manner just to feed your own ego made me not want to defend you from some of the people here because you started by insulting someone who has cancer. And the way you talk to me as if I don't know anything about chemotherapy. Guess what buddy, I went through it. I suffered through it. I know what chemotherapy does to a person. Would I wish that on anyone? No, but I know it's dangers and if there was a way my family could afford or had the proper insurance that would help pay for a possible proven alternative treatment, then I would rather have that then throw up for days straight, have a hard time eating and losing my appetite for weeks or more, be constantly tired, lose all my hair, have black outs, get depression, feel weak, prone to illness, etc. Don't treat me as if I don't know anything about chemo.

4.) Finally, you don't even know how to argue your point the right way. Here's a small story of what happened to me after chemo. I must've gotten warts from somewhere, but I started developing warts on my hand after all my chemo rounds were done and my cancer was in remission. Doctors told me there are two main treatments that are acceptable, freezing them off, or burning them with acid. I did my research and found another alternative. I decided to try all three. Freezing them didn't do much. They kind of shrunk but not by much. Same thing with the acid. The third remedy wasn't a doctor treatment, it was a do it yourself treatment. I wrapped my warts up with duct tape. The special chemicals on the duct tape reduced and helped kill the warts in a less painful way than the freezing and the acid. If I had spoken to you, you would've taken away all my choices except the one you wanted and would shove that down my throat. You'd say the doctors are lying to me, making me waste my time and money, etc. etc. etc. So instead of me having 3 options you will preach "THERE IS THIS OPTION AS BEING THE ONLY REAL ONE BECAUSE IT DOES THE JOB WITHOUT THE SUFFERING OF THE OTHER TWO. YOU SHOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO HAVE THOSE OTHER TWO OPTIONS, BUT IF YOU CHOSE THOSE OTHER TWO, IT'S YOUR FAULT NOT MINE, COULD CARE LESS."

And you talk about anecdotal cases over the tried and true method that science employes in everything? Test Test Test and see results?
I don't even understand how you can make that argument because do you know what anecdotal evidence is? It's stories told by witnesses or people in the story. In other words anecdotal evidence actually is part of the same studies. It's just what's published that is different. Now if that's what you're talking about that's a horse of a different color. Because I can offer my own anecdotal evidence of how Chemotherapy does work. And if I were a doctor I could use the practical studies that orthodox doctors use to prove that alternative treatments can or do work.

Now give examples of all these supposed alternative treatments you believe in because I'll bet you most of these have been used before chemotherapy was invented, and are things you are supposed to be doing while undergoing chemo treatment.

reply

[–] Turfseer 11 years ago

I am not going to reply to any of your comments. No one should tolerate the kind of childish insults you're expectorating out toward me. We are done. Go and insult someone else.

reply

[–] Nightstar_INC 11 years ago

You insulted everyone else, and you didn't even read anything I said so you don't even know how to respond other than the same diatribe that you keep spouting.

And if you think that I spouted out childish insults, then I'd rather spout out childish insults rather than look down on people who have cancer and chose chemotherapy over your preferred treatment and keep telling them "I told you so."

reply

[–] Nightstar_INC 11 years ago

First off, I hope everything is going well for you. I'm sorry for your situation. And I kind of know how you feel now because I went through my own cancer battle when I was about 21 years old while going to school full time with dual majors (2 majors in different colleges of study), and working a part-time job.

After seeing what Turfseer had said to you, I couldn't take it and I had to rip into him for it. He is truly ignorant and doesn't even know half the stuff he is talking about. I do believe that alternative treatments have the possibility of working, but I still chose chemo due to my financial and insurance situation at the time.

Anyway, hopefully everything is going better for you.

reply

[–] irish201 10 years ago

I haven't logged into IMDB in a LONG time and was surprised to see I had responses on here and PM's long after I made my posts. Funny to read through this thread and see that Turf dude never coincided that alternative and western can work together or that western meds offer any benefit. It's been nearly 4 years since my diagnosis and I'm doing fairly fantastic. I work full time and then some, I bike, I travel, etc. Honestly, I never slow down it seems. Just today I spent half my day landscaping my yard and climbing on my house to paint shutters. I did the chemo, I did experimental surgery and an experimental radiation protocol. I continue on aromatase inhibitors and hormone therapy. Thanks to advances in treatments I have virtually no side effects and thanks to the radiation I have nearly no pain these days in my bones (though I learned the hard way I will never be a runner d/t scar tissue). And I'm happy to report that I'm the only person at my work with two years in a row of perfect attendance (guess chemo didn't trash my immune system too bad) I honestly do not believe I would be alive today if it weren't for the treatments I received. Though it could just have been my body's own way of healing itself eh? I doubt it because knowing I wouldn't have long I decided to do whatever I felt like. I smoked like a chimney and ate like a glutton with a penchant for nachos. Something tells me that the alternative docs wouldn't approve of that unless I was aligning my chi and burning sage at the same time. So I guess this post is just to say I'm still alive, I'm still here and I'm honestly doing just fine. Thanks for everyone's well wishes and thoughts, thanks for telling the turf dude to suck it for me. :)

reply

[–] sweetlovenstein 12 years ago

Best wishes from me as well.

reply