<!–

–>

February 12, 2024

“Cure” and “Cancer” seem to appear together in mainstream reports these days only when lowering expectations or hedging bets. Health reports typically indicate either that trials of new treatments have failed or that they may show a narrow zone of promise.

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609268089992-0’); }); document.write(”); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.pubads().addEventListener(‘slotRenderEnded’, function(event) { if (event.slot.getSlotElementId() == “div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3028”) { googletag.display(“div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3028”); } }); }); }

In its heyday, though, the idea that we were “on the verge of the cure” within a generation was seen as an imperative, fueling federal policy and money allocation. It greased government spending on the school system despite families increasingly finding government schools of no advantage to bringing out the best in their children.

Per the motto, “Curiosity creates cures,” spending flowed readily into biomedical experimentation. Many grants were legislated, and we were always “only a generation away” from being cancer-free.

Data from Harvard, the National Vital Statistics System, and other sources pour water on the hopes behind pink ribbons. Cancer is increasing at younger ages, and is catching up to heart disease as the number one cause of death.

‘); googletag.cmd.push(function () { googletag.display(‘div-gpt-ad-1609270365559-0’); }); document.write(”); googletag.cmd.push(function() { googletag.pubads().addEventListener(‘slotRenderEnded’, function(event) { if (event.slot.getSlotElementId() == “div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3035”) { googletag.display(“div-hre-Americanthinker—New-3035”); } }); }); }

Public faith in scientific institutions is at a low, coming off their exploitation of emergency rule. Cancer remains since 1933 one of the two leading causes of death in the U.S.A., and this country is one of the five highest in the world in cancer incidence. Americans’ lifespans fell last year to 1990s levels. Even the Biden White House was forced to call its own 2022 funding for cancer biomedical research a “moonshot.”

The approaches via which the system has been searching for “a cure” are proving ruinous to science’s reputation.

A generational goal that would slice away many root causes of cancer, and in the process decentralize financial power while stabilizing the “unexplained” crash in mental health, would be an initiative addressing economic policies that thrust carcinogens upon Americans.

According to the government’s own “Report on Carcinogens,” of the eight cited carcinogens recently discovered:

  • Six are by-products from human water disinfection systems called haloacetic acids (HAAs).
  • One is mixed into common textiles and plastics used in clothing, furniture, and carpets, antimony trioxide.
  • One is from a bacteria with proven links to the gut biome, diet, and ulcers.

Efforts to impact cancer-causing agents, then, should focus on the quality, or lack thereof, of our water, clothing, and food. Citizens never requested that water management districts introduce carcinogens, nor did they ask for antimony trioxide to be added to offshored mass-produced clothing priced to move.

Water districts espouse the six HAAs they leave in the drinking water as part of “safety” and “purification.” At the same time, in much of America the private capture and storage of the rainwater for local usage and economic activity is restricted. As a result, entire communities, cities and counties become dependent on water districts, trapping people effectively into consuming the six carcinogens.