oh okay gotcha, all they need to do is harness that.

I do believe they do have the cure for certain cancers but it's not profitable to cure people. Much more profitable to string them along with expensive medication.

I highly doubt it tbh, since you can sell the cure just as easily and mark it up if you're bent on that. PLus, they already have cured some cancers, like the HPV vaccine for example.

Though it does vary from laboratory to laboratory, "they" is not a singular thing in the slightest when it comes to cancer research.

"they" as in the powers that be that have control over such things. Yes I'm creeping slowly into that territory but I'm talking about other cancers that are more popular.

Any examples of "they" or their actions that's a little more substantiated? Like I said, a good majority of these companies are owned and operated by entirely different people, so which group has control over all of them?

You're fired if you say the FDA.

Why would I say FDA when I can say NWO?

:rofl:

And yes I drank the Koolaid it was tasty okay? I couldn't resist. What black person can resist Koolaid?

Bummer you don't have anything. It's an anti-corporate conspiracy and my leftist tendencies really want me to believe it.

okay hold on. I'll connect the dots for you one sec.


Just need to find some water first.

Edit:

All the greedy people that have control over certain medications and what not. The same thing that Martin Shrkeli did or however you say his name.

Also recently the same people or person that is behind the increase in price for ****ing Epipens. Epipens that people need. I guess it's a big **** you to the people that decided they didn't need insurance and now they have to pay 600 bucks for one pen.

Don't you think that it'd be worth having another product to overcharge for and monopolize? You could argue that people need a cure for cancer too, but there's also a massive number of people who are going to get it once it becomes readily available due to the notoriety of the disease.

Also, still not seeing anything that counteracts my point that these owners of those companies aren't interconnected enough to pull off this shakedown as an industry.

It would be worth having another product to overcharge for but you are forgetting the biggest point of it all. Why end something when you can end up overcharging for the a product that a person will consistently need for decades to come. It doesn't make sense to just take one quick sum and run away. Think about the long run and the bigger picture.


I don't have the answer to that one at all but why do you think they haven't done it yet if it's such an easily obtainable thing to just shakedown the whole industry?

It would also be a lot more profitable for American Apparel if they used sweatshops to produce their clothing, therefore American Apparel uses sweatshops? I don't think so. Your argument is based on too much speculation and what-iffing for me to take it seriously.

Is it easy? I certainly don't think so, and that's kind of my point.