| Page 1 of 2 |
|
|
 Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 07:52 Post subject: Is there anything that DONT give you cancer? |
|
 |
So yea i was reading the paper today and i found out that some food can give me cancer WTF?.At first i was skeptical but after falling assleep on the couch and waking up to a news report about the same report.I was wondering what dosent give me cancer?.For the last 2-3 years since the cancer nazi propaganda began iv been told that sun (wtf) some milk products food and other products give me cancer.So they are saying that i cant eat drink milk or go out when its sunny which is most of the time..
/Extreem0
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 08:15 Post subject: |
|
|
all cancer are are bad cells that grow at a very fast rate. so as your normal cells die they cancer is faster at reporudcing and eventually taking over the body.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
razor1394
VIP Member
Posts: 3571
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 08:23 Post subject: |
|
|
The only food that causes cancer from what I've read about is chips, french fries and burnt food, like toasts and so on. Where have you heard about milk? The sun is understandable as many people get skin cancer from sun bathing. And It's a fact that the Ozon layer is failing so It's not really a coincidence.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 08:56 Post subject: |
|
|
btw it wasnt just food it was a form of food colouring
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 09:33 Post subject: |
|
|
| razor1394 wrote: | | The only food that causes cancer from what I've read about is chips, french fries and burnt food, like toasts and so on. Where have you heard about milk? The sun is understandable as many people get skin cancer from sun bathing. And It's a fact that the Ozon layer is failing so It's not really a coincidence. |
Yep there are carcinogens in any burnt food, and the majority of milk contains such a cocktail of pesticides, antibiotics and hormones that it's no wonder that it can be a nucleic irritator. Some studies;
A study of 250 women with breast cancer in Vercelli, Italy, found that they tended to consume considerably more milk, high-fat cheese and butter than 499 healthy women.
Harvard University researchers asked hundreds of women with ovarian cancer to record in detail what they normally ate. There was one thing that they had eaten much more frequently than women without cancer – dairy products, especially the supposedly “healthy” dairy products such as yoghurt and milk.
But I wouldn't really consider it such a risk as to stop drinking milk. Sun, is a major factor in the formation of skin cancer, if you're a caucasian in equatorial regions the ultra violet radiation penetrates almost directly into the nucleus of your cells. Damage central.
Sublime, in laymans terms I suppose you're correct, although remember, the real problem with cancerous cells is that they're anaplastic, that is, undifferentiated.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
razor1394
VIP Member
Posts: 3571
Location: Sweden
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 10:06 Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting. Thanks. Milk is not really needed when you are grown-up. From what I've heard Calcium is mostly needed when you are like 10 or less.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
[mrt]
[Admin] Code Monkey
Posts: 1338
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 13:32 Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah you'd almost get too frightened to drink some water or even walk outside! Everything is hazardous these days...
| Injurious wrote: | | And then Mabel tripped over a rock and landed in a well and was trapped there with Timmy. Sadly I shot Lassie so no one is saving that bitch! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dirtpaw
Posts: 225
Location: sLappland
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 14:56 Post subject: Re: Is there anything that DONT give you cancer? |
|
|
| Extreem0 wrote: | | I was wondering what dosent give me cancer? [/Extreem0 |
porn. porn is good. atleast so far, dunno about tomorrow. but today porn is good. good porn.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 15:09 Post subject: |
|
|
porn can cause impotency during intercourse  if you masturbate a lot w/o having annual intercourse with your partner you will become dependant on your hand thus when intercourse actually happens you will not be able to achieve an erection because your hand isn't 'rubbing' it 
I read that on some site  masturbation is bad cause it stimulates false intercourse  fooling the mind 
the more you masturbate the more fucked up your sex life will be
i dunno aboot you guys but i would rather have a brain tumor the size of a golf ball than not be able to fuck me missus.
-edit
and off note i just tried looking for the article and i found something interesting
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=dn4861
We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year, running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears. Wish you were here.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 15:16 Post subject: |
|
|
| ApeX PredatoR wrote: | | Yeah you'd almost get too frightened to drink some water or even walk outside! Everything is hazardous these days... |
No not that i am scared to drink milk or something just saying that soon everything that you can eat drink or use the scientists will say its dangerus for your body.
| Sublime wrote: | | all cancer are are bad cells that grow at a very fast rate. so as your normal cells die they cancer is faster at reporudcing and eventually taking over the body. |
How fast dose it grow or it depends or what kind of cancer?
| razor1394 wrote: | | Interesting. Thanks. Milk is not really needed when you are grown-up. From what I've heard Calcium is mostly needed when you are like 10 or less. |
From what iv heard its preatty important to drink milk to strenghten your bones when your young btw i read it in a newspaper that about milk is dangerus
| Dirtpaw wrote: |
porn. porn is good. atleast so far, dunno about tomorrow. but today porn is good. good porn. |
Haha yea i just hope that they discover that tv or internet can give you cancer
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 15:25 Post subject: |
|
|
it depends on what kind and how bad. its like gamma and x rays. too many of them and they start "sticking" to your body and killing your other cells. thats why there's always a 3 foot lead wall when u have an xray etc.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 15:26 Post subject: |
|
|
we all have cancer cells the chemicals we indulge ourselves found in /cigarettes etc.../ weaken the normal cells allowing cancer to take over... so it depends on the body not just the cancer. If you’re a weak bastard then you’ll get cancer sooner than the man of zeal himself.
So the more you smoke the more at risk you are of strengthening your cancer… but it doesn’t mean it’ll happen… it’s just a possibility. 'injuns' smoked a lot of tobacco shit in their days and look at em
We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year, running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears. Wish you were here.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 17:43 Post subject: |
|
|
| Extreem0 wrote: |
Yea i understand that but how come other cultures dosent have higher death rates then your from tobacco inhalation. |
They have the same rates just a different number. In America you got 300 million people and a year about 25000 die in Jamaica (I don't know) you got about 30 million people and about 2500 people die a year from smoking it all depends how many people live in that country  in China you got 1.3+ billion  an in Canada you got 30... The accidents in the workplace are higher in china than in Canada... and people think that Chinese are just dumb when it comes to protecting them selves
We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year, running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears. Wish you were here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 18:51 Post subject: |
|
|
no but im sure young babies could die that quickly. you'll die from liver cancer before testicular it just depends where and how bad.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Wed, 2nd Mar 2005 21:17 Post subject: |
|
|
| Extreem0 wrote: |
I know its a longshot but do you maybe know whats the shortest and longest time.Like could sombody die after a week after the cancer starts |
No, you couldn't die after a week. You might get someone die a week after they were diagnosed with cancer, but not a week after the cancerous tissue has begun to form.
The lethality of cancer depends on multple factors, the most important being the location of the primary tumour. If it's located in a vital organ, or an area thats extremely delicate (i.e. the brain) then the potential of death occuring is alot higher then if it's in a non-vital organ e.g. A breast, or testicle, as the whole offending area can be removed. Another major factor is the malignancy of the primary infection. That is, it's tendecy to metastasise, forming seconday tumours. Iterations of cancer with a high metastasis potential have a much higher mortality rate e.g. bowl cancer.
Cancer cells do not 'reproduce' any faster then ordinary skin cells. But they do not exhibit contact inhibition (that is, when a cell is surrounded on all sides by neighbour cells, they stop dividing) so they continue to divide regardless of how many cells are produced. Also cancer cells do not refrain from dividing no matter how many generations of division have already occured (normal cells stop after about 20-50 divisions). This is because after every division tiny errors occcur in the genetic code of each daughter cell. Cancer continues to divide, regardless of mutation and/or overpopulation of cells. Resulting in a large, hard to destroy tumour.
Any clarifications, just ask. 
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 3rd Mar 2005 04:20 Post subject: |
|
|
| AnimalMother wrote: | | Extreem0 wrote: |
I know its a longshot but do you maybe know whats the shortest and longest time.Like could sombody die after a week after the cancer starts |
No, you couldn't die after a week. You might get someone die a week after they were diagnosed with cancer, but not a week after the cancerous tissue has begun to form.
The lethality of cancer depends on multple factors, the most important being the location of the primary tumour. If it's located in a vital organ, or an area thats extremely delicate (i.e. the brain) then the potential of death occuring is alot higher then if it's in a non-vital organ e.g. A breast, or testicle, as the whole offending area can be removed. Another major factor is the malignancy of the primary infection. That is, it's tendecy to metastasise, forming seconday tumours. Iterations of cancer with a high metastasis potential have a much higher mortality rate e.g. bowl cancer.
Cancer cells do not 'reproduce' any faster then ordinary skin cells. But they do not exhibit contact inhibition (that is, when a cell is surrounded on all sides by neighbour cells, they stop dividing) so they continue to divide regardless of how many cells are produced. Also cancer cells do not refrain from dividing no matter how many generations of division have already occured (normal cells stop after about 20-50 divisions). This is because after every division tiny errors occcur in the genetic code of each daughter cell. Cancer continues to divide, regardless of mutation and/or overpopulation of cells. Resulting in a large, hard to destroy tumour.
Any clarifications, just ask. |
Wow thanks i learnt alot today  you really know about cancer what are you a doctor or something
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 3rd Mar 2005 04:57 Post subject: |
|
|
I work in the R&D department of GRI, a UK biotechnology company. It's actually my placement for university, but I get paid well and already have a job offer once I finish uni.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu, 3rd Mar 2005 05:23 Post subject: |
|
|
| Extreem0 wrote: | | I know its a longshot but do you maybe know whats the shortest and longest time.Like could sombody die after a week after the cancer starts |
Well ... if you need to pick a winner for the one that will kill you the fastest ... the award should go to pancreatic cancer. I guess the organ is so small yet so vital that is doesn't take much for it to fail ..
| Quote: | | Conventional medicine's inability to effectively treat pancreatic cancer is evidenced by survival rates of only 18% at 1 year and 4% at 5 years--one of the poorest 5-year survival rates of any cancer. Pancreatic cancer results in the death of more than 90% of afflicted patients within 12 months. |
so yeah .. serious business ...
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 3rd Mar 2005 05:32 Post subject: |
|
|
| nouseforaname wrote: |
Conventional medicine's inability to effectively treat pancreatic cancer is evidenced by survival rates of only 18% at 1 year and 4% at 5 years--one of the poorest 5-year survival rates of any cancer. Pancreatic cancer results in the death of more than 90% of afflicted patients within 12 months.
so yeah .. serious business ... |
Those figures don't make sense. If it has a survival rate of 18% at 1 year, how can the mortality rate be 90% at 12 months?
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Thu, 3rd Mar 2005 05:57 Post subject: |
|
|
| Injurious wrote: | | in China you got 1.3+ billion an in Canada you got 30... |
Finally, someone with the balls to give the true population of canada: 30 people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nouseforaname
Über-VIP Member
Posts: 21306
Location: Toronto, Canada
|
| Posted: Thu, 3rd Mar 2005 13:28 Post subject: |
|
|
| AnimalMother wrote: | | Those figures don't make sense. If it has a survival rate of 18% at 1 year, how can the mortality rate be 90% at 12 months? |
Yeah looking at it again (with sober eyes this time), and it doesn't make sense ... it did come from the National Pancreas Association ...
Perhaps they just got their information from two different sources (so like the 1 and 5 year survival rates from yearly cancer statistics and the 90% @ 12 months from study data) and just jumbled them together.
eMedicine (which actually references journals) says the collective median survival time of all patients is 4-6 months. At any rate, it's a scary diagnosis to get.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Fri, 4th Mar 2005 16:41 Post subject: Re: Is there anything that DONT give you cancer? |
|
|
| Dirtpaw wrote: | | Extreem0 wrote: | | I was wondering what dosent give me cancer? [/Extreem0 |
porn. porn is good. atleast so far, dunno about tomorrow. but today porn is good. good porn. |
No and again no !
"In l950, America's illegitimacy and divorce rates were low, but today they are off the charts. In l950, there were two main venereal diseases; today there are around 40, some incurable or even lethal. More than 13 million cases of VD are reported each year, 3.8 million of them among teens. One in four adults now carries VD, and almost 45% of our young people contract VD or AIDS by their mid-20s. Perhaps 40-50% of all U.S. college girls now carry human papilloma virus (HPV), which causes nearly all cervical cancer. More people die annually from HPV-caused cancer in the United States than from AIDS.
Porn addiction, too, is approaching epidemic levels, psychotherapists report. One therapist has counseled more than 700 porn addicts. Even women are becoming hooked.
link: http://www.fradical.com/Porn_crackdown.htm
Maybe Porn is the root of all cancer ! Think about it.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dirtpaw
Posts: 225
Location: sLappland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 5th Mar 2005 18:22 Post subject: Re: Is there anything that DONT give you cancer? |
|
|
| Voodoo-child wrote: | | wtf is wrong with some wanking |
Everything because...
| Quote: | Every sperm is sacred!
Every sperm is great!
If a sperm is wasted!
God gets quite irate!
Every sperm is sacred!
Every sperm is good!
Every sperm is needed!
In your neighborhood!
Every sperm is useful
Every sperm is fine
God needs everybody's |
Cancer is gods punishment for our dirty deeds
We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year, running over the same old ground. What have we found? The same old fears. Wish you were here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 5th Mar 2005 21:10 Post subject: |
|
|
actually its good against cancer in your balls (teelbalkanker) if you come. and it has been proven from a poll with over a million people
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 5th Mar 2005 21:21 Post subject: |
|
|
| JeanPerrier wrote: | | actually its good against cancer in your balls (teelbalkanker) if you come. and it has been proven from a poll with over a million people |
Actually, it's prostate cancer not testicular cancer.
"Techniclly speaking, Beta-Manboi didnt inject Burberry_Massi with Benz, he injected him with liquid that had air bubbles in it, which caused benz." - House M.D
"Faith without logic is the same as knowledge without understanding; meaningless"
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| Posted: Sat, 5th Mar 2005 23:37 Post subject: |
|
|
| AnimalMother wrote: | | JeanPerrier wrote: | | actually its good against cancer in your balls (teelbalkanker) if you come. and it has been proven from a poll with over a million people |
Actually, it's prostate cancer not testicular cancer. |
yes thats the one. so that means that you have heard/read it to |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
| Page 1 of 2 |
All times are GMT + 1 Hour |
