Cure For HIV/AIDS?

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-09-2015, 06:57 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: HOLY SHEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeetttttttttt!!!!!!!  When did you figure that out, Brad?

Brad, how much would you pay to "cure" your injuries?  Is there any amount of money you wouldn't pay?  How much would be too much?  What is the break point at which you would say, "Screw it, that's too much.  I'll live with the disabilities."?

How much do you think your parents would pay if a "cure" was available for their son?

Do you think any of your doctors would withhold a "cure" because they would make more money by just treating your injuries instead of "curing" your injuries?

Brad, any answers?

[Tiger Teeth]

(11-16-2015, 05:02 PM)Au165 Wrote: The same flaw in massive conspiracy theories applies here as well, someone would leak it, either to the public or a competitor. While the "company" attitude may work for the execs it doesn't work for random guy in a lab who, while making good money, isn't a millionaire.

This sums it up.  If someone developed a cure for cancer, and tried to cover it up, someone would talk.  However I don't know why they've been trying to find a cure in the first place if they weren't going to announce it.  Makes NO sense.

[*rfaulk34*]

(11-22-2015, 10:55 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: Makes NO sense.

Conspiracy theories never do. 

[fredtoast]

(11-22-2015, 01:27 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Brad, any answers?

I have been thinking a lot about why Brad is so sure that people would be able to commit so much evil in the name of money.

And then it hit me.  Have you ever noticed that the people in relationships that are the most suspicious of their partner cheating are people who cheat themselves?

If what Brad claims is true then it is perfectly logical to assume that he is not crippled at all and is just putting on an act in order to draw a check and get everyone to fawn over him.  I kind of doubt that is true, but based on his own arguments it is a perfectly logical conclusion.

[Harmening]

Well, we know the love for people fawning over him to be true.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-09-2015, 06:57 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: HOLY SHEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeetttttttttt!!!!!!!  When did you figure that out, Brad?

Brad, how much would you pay to "cure" your injuries?  Is there any amount of money you wouldn't pay?  How much would be too much?  What is the break point at which you would say, "Screw it, that's too much.  I'll live with the disabilities."?

How much do you think your parents would pay if a "cure" was available for their son?

Do you think any of your doctors would withhold a "cure" because they would make more money by just treating your injuries instead of "curing" your injuries?

Brad, I'm starting to think you're ignoring these questions.  It's like you aren't even trying.

[*PhilHos*]

(11-16-2015, 01:03 PM)XenoMorph Wrote: why print out the CURE for a 1 time charge 

(11-21-2015, 11:26 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:  a cure is a one time thing

A cure for cancer is NOT a one time thing. They could find a cure for cancer RIGHT NOW and, guess what? People will STILL get cancer in the future.

Cancer is not a disease that you get from other people with cancer. There has ALWAYS been cancer and there will ALWAYS be cancer (at least, until we start genetically modifying human beings ). Therefore a cure for cancer will be ALWAYS be more profitable because people will pay whatever it takes for a cure AND there will ALWAYS be a need for a cure for cancer.

[MrRager]

Anyone who thinks there is some crazy conspiracy needs to read this article. It was posted by someone on this board in the past and really opened my eyes!

[fredtoast]

(11-24-2015, 06:02 PM)MrRager Wrote: Anyone who thinks there is some crazy conspiracy needs to read this article. It was posted by someone on this board in the past and really opened my eyes!

Thanks.  I am bookmarking this because no matter how many times we beat down this silly theory some people just keep bringing it back up.  This artcle pretty much covers all the bases.  I especially like this part



For those who think the profit motive is sufficient explanation, not all of the people and institutions named are for profit. And what about countries with socialized medicine who could dramatically reduce their health care costs if a cancer cure were found? Is Canada, the UK, all of the European Union, in fact, in on the conspiracy to protect American cancer treatment profits? It’s as if hidden cure conspiracy theorists forget that there are other countries in the world.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-09-2015, 06:57 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: HOLY SHEEEEEEEEEEEeeeeeeeeeetttttttttt!!!!!!!  When did you figure that out, Brad?

Brad, how much would you pay to "cure" your injuries?  Is there any amount of money you wouldn't pay?  How much would be too much?  What is the break point at which you would say, "Screw it, that's too much.  I'll live with the disabilities."?

How much do you think your parents would pay if a "cure" was available for their son?

Do you think any of your doctors would withhold a "cure" because they would make more money by just treating your injuries instead of "curing" your injuries?

Hello?  Is there anybody in there? Is there anyone home?

[Tiger Teeth]

(11-26-2015, 02:26 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Hello?  Is there anybody in there? Is there anyone home?

Uh, I don't think he's coming back.  He doesn't like it when he get's proven wrong, you know that.

[BFritz21]

(11-22-2015, 01:27 AM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Brad, any answers?

Yes, but they've been answered a thousand times.

I would pay any amount of money to cure my injuries, but guess what?  Normal families can't pay any extensive amounts for the cure, even if it were available, and the treatment is valuable to the drug companies, so they're the ones that keep it suppressed.

Another reason why no cure has come out is companies will just start making it cost less and less, until finally it doesn't cost much money at all, which would stop revenue in the billions of drug companies.

(11-22-2015, 02:44 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I have been thinking a lot about why Brad is so sure that people would be able to commit so much evil in the name of money.

And then it hit me.  Have you ever noticed that the people in relationships that are the most suspicious of their partner cheating are people who cheat themselves?

If what Brad claims is true then it is perfectly logical to assume that he is not crippled at all and is just putting on an act in order to draw a check and get everyone to fawn over him.  I kind of doubt that is true, but based on his own arguments it is a perfectly logical conclusion.

Completely logical conclusion......  about as logical as saying that you're not a liar (don't even try to deny that one because you called me a liar and posted a link as proof of me lying when the link actually proved that you had posted what I stated you posted) and that I've never proven you wrong (which how many times has your story changed about that one?  The latest one was that it was sarcasm, as if that made any sense).

(11-23-2015, 08:39 PM)oncemoreuntothejimbreech Wrote: Brad, I'm starting to think you're ignoring these questions.  It's like you aren't even trying.

(11-24-2015, 05:17 PM)PhilHos Wrote: A cure for cancer is NOT a one time thing. They could find a cure for cancer RIGHT NOW and, guess what? People will STILL get cancer in the future.

Cancer is not a disease that you get from other people with cancer. There has ALWAYS been cancer and there will ALWAYS be cancer (at least, until we start genetically modifying human beings ). Therefore a cure for cancer will be ALWAYS be more profitable because people will pay whatever it takes for a cure AND there will ALWAYS be a need for a cure for cancer.

You're missing the point and taking it out of context.  

A cure for cancer is a one time thing because you need many treatments of chemo, radiation, or any other means to treat your cancer, whereas a cure you only need the one time cure.

(11-26-2015, 10:57 AM)Tiger Teeth Wrote: Uh, I don't think he's coming back.  He doesn't like it when he get's proven wrong, you know that.

I just was ignoring this thread because we're pretty much going in circles.  I haven't been proven wrong.

[oncemoreuntothejimbreech]

(11-26-2015, 11:10 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Yes, but they've been answered a thousand times.

I would pay any amount of money to cure my injuries, but guess what?  Normal families can't pay any extensive amounts for the cure, even if it were available, and the treatment is valuable to the drug companies, so they're the ones that keep it suppressed.

Another reason why no cure has come out is companies will just start making it cost less and less, until finally it doesn't cost much money at all, which would stop revenue in the billions of drug companies.


Completely logical conclusion......  about as logical as saying that you're not a liar (don't even try to deny that one because you called me a liar and posted a link as proof of me lying when the link actually proved that you had posted what I stated you posted) and that I've never proven you wrong (which how many times has your story changed about that one?  The latest one was that it was sarcasm, as if that made any sense).



:rolleyes:

You're missing the point and taking it out of context.  

A cure for cancer is a one time thing because you need many treatments of chemo, radiation, or any other means to treat your cancer, whereas a cure you only need the one time cure.

I just was ignoring this thread because we're pretty much going in circles.  I haven't been proven wrong.

So people can afford more expensive treatments, but not the less expensive cures even though people like you would pay anything?  And the insurance companies and the government (Medicare/Medicaid) just pay for these more expensive treatments?  And if companies will just make the cost of a cure less and less then why haven't they made the cost of a treatment less and less?

[fredtoast]

(11-26-2015, 11:10 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: Completely logical conclusion......  about as logical as saying that you're not a liar (don't even try to deny that one because you called me a liar and posted a link as proof of me lying when the link actually proved that you had posted what I stated you posted) and that I've never proven you wrong (which how many times has your story changed about that one?  The latest one was that it was sarcasm, as if that made any sense).

Here is why you fail all the time around here.  I made a post about the basis of your argument i.e. the theory that people will do anything for profit.  And then I said that if that applied to EVERY situation even when there was no other evidence to back it up, then it could be argued that you are faking your injury.  That argument would be based on the logic that people will do anything for money even though there is nothing else to back it up.

Then instead of addressing my logic you went straight to the silly attack that everyone has already seen before.

And that is why you fail here.

Now, do you care to address this post.  .  .  

(11-24-2015, 07:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Thanks.  I am bookmarking this because no matter how many times we beat down this silly theory some people just keep bringing it back up.  This artcle pretty much covers all the bases.  I especially like this part



For those who think the profit motive is sufficient explanation, not all of the people and institutions named are for profit. And what about countries with socialized medicine who could dramatically reduce their health care costs if a cancer cure were found? Is Canada, the UK, all of the European Union, in fact, in on the conspiracy to protect American cancer treatment profits? It’s as if hidden cure conspiracy theorists forget that there are other countries in the world.

[Beaker]

(11-26-2015, 11:10 PM)BFritz21 Wrote: You're missing the point and taking it out of context.  

A cure for cancer is a one time thing because you need many treatments of chemo, radiation, or any other means to treat your cancer, whereas a cure you only need the one time cure.

The point you're missing is that finding a cure would not likely eliminate cancer. There are so many types, and so many contributing causes that finding out how to rid it from a person's body would not likely prevent it from occurring in others in the future. Therefore, your argument of a "cure" being a one time treatment vs on-going treatment for a patient as strictly a dollar issue loses steam. Drug companies would not be less profitable since future cases in future people would not eliminate the need for their cure. And since it would cure cancer in a given individual, the price of the treatment could be made to bring the same amount or more than in a patient who is not cured but receives continued treatment with current conventional means.

[Harmening]

(11-26-2015, 11:10 PM)BFritz21 Wrote:   I haven't been proven wrong.

wrong