MOBILE USERS: m.isthmus.com
Connect with Isthmus on Twitter · Facebook · Flickr · Newsletters 
Wednesday, April 16, 2014 |  Madison, WI: 46.0° F  Partly Cloudy and Breezy
Collapse Photo Bar

Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

If it's news, but not politics, then it goes here.

Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby Carol » Fri Apr 09, 2010 8:37 pm

From the latest mass media propaganda: "Then with Dr. Andrea Bild of the University of Utah, Spira analyzed cells from 129 current and former smokers and found the genes involved were part of a well-known cancer-causing pathway named the PI3K pathway. When PI3K-related genes are too active, too much cell growth can occur, but most studies have examined those genes only in tumors." It's dressed up with deceitful rhetoric that "Smoking bathes the entire respiratory tract in toxins." (Developing test to warn smokers of cancer danger. By Lauran Neergaard, Ap Medical Writer, Apr. 8, 2010.)

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100408/ap_ ... ancer_test

BUT - What they're testing for, activation of the PI3K system, is actually a sign of virus infection.

"A number of viruses including EBV, HPV, HBV and HCV have the ability to establish long-term infections in the host, either through the establishment of latent or chronic infections, which can ultimately lead to cellular transformation. It appears that the gene products of these viruses stimulate PI3K–Akt-mediated cell survival and thereby block apoptosis of the cells they infect. This contributes to both virus survival and oncogenic transformation..." (The pivotal role of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase–Akt signal transduction in virus survival. S Cooray. J Gen Virol 2004;85:1065-1076.)

http://vir.sgmjournals.org/cgi/content/full/85/5/1065

And among that list of viruses, HPV is implicated in at least a quarter of non-small cell lung cancers. The Surgeon General et al. are guilty of fraud for ignoring the role of HPV in order to falsely blame smoking and passive smoking.

http://www.smokershistory.com/hpvlungc.htm

But those anti-smoker charlatans don't admit this anywhere!
Carol
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:59 pm

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby butters » Sat Apr 10, 2010 5:05 am

(a) There is no conspiracy to hide the role that viruses can play in promoting lung cancer. This information is readily available and easy to find.

(b) Just because viruses can cause cancer doesn't exclude the possibility that other carcinogens can do the same. They are not mutually exclusive. Numerous factors have the ability to block apoptosis, influence G-protein and PI3 kinase pathways, and trigger oncogenic tranformation. HPV and other viruses are not the only ones.

(c) What about the other 75% of non-small cell lung cancer cases?

(d) Since when are the Science Translational Medicine journal and the Department of Medicine and Pulmonary Center at the Boston University Medical Center considered "mass media propaganda"? If they are, then do you also consider the Journal of General Biology and the Department of Virology at the Imperial College Faculty of Medicine in London propaganda-generating machines?

(e) By your own reasoning, you are also committing scientific fraud for not mentioning everything on the long list of carcinogens that can cause lung cancer. And by your incoherent argument and seemingly lack of understanding, if i were you, I would not be pointing fingers at the Surgeon General for being a scientific fraud.
butters
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 540
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:30 pm

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby friendofafriend » Sat Apr 10, 2010 8:35 am

Your body has its own survival mechanisms, thats why you throw up when you have food poisoning and its why you cough your ass off when you take your first ever drag of a ciggy. You can condition your body to accept all kinds of abuse but it doesnt mean its not bad for you.
friendofafriend
Member
 
Posts: 18
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 10:55 am

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby gargantua » Sat Apr 10, 2010 11:27 am

I know I will be sorry I mentioned this, but just for the sake of argument, assuming this massive fraud is occurring, what on earth could be the motivation? The lack of plausible motive is a big part of why all the vitriol about fraud seems so nutty.
gargantua
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3836
Joined: Sat Apr 13, 2002 1:30 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby HeyZeus » Sat Apr 10, 2010 1:21 pm

Carol, take your meds. Seriously.
HeyZeus
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 651
Joined: Sun Aug 19, 2007 1:52 pm

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby massimo » Sat Apr 10, 2010 4:39 pm

HeyZeus wrote:Carol, take your meds. Seriously.

I prescribe the smooth taste of a Salem Light 100.

Seriously, smoke yourself into the grave. Just don't:
--do it around me or people I give a shit about.
--siphon off my tax dollars to fight your, ahem, viral-induced cancer.
--post anymore of this nonsense.

Do:
--take your meds. Seriously.
massimo
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1669
Joined: Tue Oct 11, 2005 5:52 pm
Location: Madison

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby Carol » Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:20 pm

butters wrote:(a) There is no conspiracy to hide the role that viruses can play in promoting lung cancer. This information is readily available and easy to find.


Why wasn't that information in this article? The fact is, what they were testing for is a well-known effect of viral infections. Instead, they misled the public to think that it was "smoking-related."

butters wrote:(b) Just because viruses can cause cancer doesn't exclude the possibility that other carcinogens can do the same. They are not mutually exclusive. Numerous factors have the ability to block apoptosis, influence G-protein and PI3 kinase pathways, and trigger oncogenic tranformation. HPV and other viruses are not the only ones.


The anti-smokers, particularly including the Surgeon General, are guilty of flagrant scientific fraud for ignoring more than 50 studies which implicate HPV as the cause of at least a quarter of non-small cell lung cancers, in order to inflate the supposed death toll of smoking and passive smoking.

butters wrote:(c) What about the other 75% of non-small cell lung cancer cases?


The anti-smokers should rescind all their reports until their fraudulent "science" is corrected, and there are satisfactory answers to questions like that.

butters wrote:(d) Since when are the Science Translational Medicine journal and the Department of Medicine and Pulmonary Center at the Boston University Medical Center considered "mass media propaganda"? If they are, then do you also consider the Journal of General Biology and the Department of Virology at the Imperial College Faculty of Medicine in London propaganda-generating machines?


First of all, the page I linked to was by Lauran Neergaard, medical writer for the Associated Press, which is in fact the main instrument of mass propaganda. Second, the main study author, Avrum Spira, does not admit in any of the abstracts of his work that viruses play a key role in the enzyme they're testing for, nor that they play any role in lung cancer. Therefore, what he created was deceitful mass media propaganda.

butters wrote:(e) By your own reasoning, you are also committing scientific fraud for not mentioning everything on the long list of carcinogens that can cause lung cancer. And by your incoherent argument and seemingly lack of understanding, if i were you, I would not be pointing fingers at the Surgeon General for being a scientific fraud.


There is no scientific fraud involved in not reciting a laundry list of supposed "carcinogens," which are based on the same defective pseudo-science that I'm criticizing, and furthermore, which cannot cause confounding because of their low odds ratios.
Last edited by Carol on Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:22 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Carol
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:59 pm

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby Carol » Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:21 pm

friendofafriend wrote:Your body has its own survival mechanisms, thats why you throw up when you have food poisoning and its why you cough your ass off when you take your first ever drag of a ciggy. You can condition your body to accept all kinds of abuse but it doesnt mean its not bad for you.


Just because you're irrationally prejudiced against smoking doesn't mean that it's bad for you.
Carol
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:59 pm

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby Carol » Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:26 pm

gargantua wrote:I know I will be sorry I mentioned this, but just for the sake of argument, assuming this massive fraud is occurring, what on earth could be the motivation? The lack of plausible motive is a big part of why all the vitriol about fraud seems so nutty.

:roll: :roll: :roll: :roll:
The mass media have engaged in a hate propaganda campaign for the last six decades, and YOU play a dirty little game of denialism and pretend it doesn't exist. That's like pretending Nazi Germany couldn't have done what it did because YOU, in your deluded majesty, think there's no plausible motive.
Carol
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:59 pm

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby Henry Vilas » Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:27 pm

Carol wrote:Just because you're irrationally prejudiced...

Projecting.
Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 19128
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby Carol » Sat Apr 10, 2010 6:31 pm

massimo wrote:
HeyZeus wrote:Carol, take your meds. Seriously.

I prescribe the smooth taste of a Salem Light 100.

Seriously, smoke yourself into the grave. Just don't:
--do it around me or people I give a shit about.
--siphon off my tax dollars to fight your, ahem, viral-induced cancer.
--post anymore of this nonsense.

Do:
--take your meds. Seriously.


YOU:
--stop violating our rights by committing scientific fraud, spreading lies and defamations, and censoring the media - and revoke all those laws that are the result of your criminal acts.
--YOUR KIND are the economic burden to smokers, not vice versa. Your "smoking cost" studies are just as corrupt as everything else you do.
--don't post any more of YOUR lying spew, you crypto-Nazi.
Carol
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:59 pm

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby Average Joe » Sat Apr 10, 2010 7:40 pm

I'm going to come clean. I admit it. I'm a member of the National Socialist Program for the purity of the race from the smoking scum. I'm breaking a code of silence, but it is our duty and calling to purify the human race from the rat scourge of smokers. I have ordered Isthmus and The Daily Page to hand over the IP address of this malcontent "Carol" so that we can relocate her to one of our "re-education" camps. Hopefully she will not get any funny ideas and go and hide quietly in an closet, that might make it difficult for us to find her.
Average Joe
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 1609
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 9:33 am

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby butters » Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:15 am

Carol wrote:Why wasn't that information in this article? The fact is, what they were testing for is a well-known effect of viral infections. Instead, they misled the public to think that it was "smoking-related."

Because the journal article was about the cells from cigarette smokers. You can't expect the author to mention ALL of the other known oncogenic factors involved in PI3 kinase activation and their potential roles in regulating the myriad pathways and the ultimate expression of the multiple genes that are involved in apoptosis and transformation. There is simply not enough space and time to include this information. It would be considered superfluous by the editors who must consider the scientists, the actual readers of this information who must take in and digest this new data as part of their jobs. I don't think you appreciate the complexity of the scientific inquiry that you are belly aching about.

Carol wrote:The anti-smokers, particularly including the Surgeon General, are guilty of flagrant scientific fraud for ignoring more than 50 studies which implicate HPV as the cause of at least a quarter of non-small cell lung cancers, in order to inflate the supposed death toll of smoking and passive smoking.
The anti-smokers should rescind all their reports until their fraudulent "science" is corrected, and there are satisfactory answers to questions like that.

I don't think you have the slightest clue how science works.

Carol wrote:First of all, the page I linked to was by Lauran Neergaard.

Look again. Look at the primary article. Not the AP dumbfuck who is reporting on it. AP science writers reported on the HPV article that you cited as well, but i don't see you calling them propagandists or conspiracy contributors.

It is very clear that you don't have the slightest idea what you are talking about. Sorry. Just my opinion. And just trying to help.
butters
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 540
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 1:30 pm

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby Carol » Sun Apr 11, 2010 12:53 am

butters wrote:
Carol wrote:Why wasn't that information in this article? The fact is, what they were testing for is a well-known effect of viral infections. Instead, they misled the public to think that it was "smoking-related."

Because the journal article was about the cells from cigarette smokers. You can't expect the author to mention ALL of the other known oncogenic factors involved in PI3 kinase activation and their potential roles in regulating the myriad pathways and the ultimate expression of the multiple genes that are involved in apoptosis and transformation. There is simply not enough space and time to include this information. It would be considered superfluous by the editors who must consider the scientists, the actual readers of this information who must take in and digest this new data as part of their jobs. I don't think you appreciate the complexity of the scientific inquiry that you are belly aching about.


The only reason for the existence of their test is that this PI3K activation is NOT present in all smokers. Despite their deceitful rhetoric, the mere fact that they are looking only at smokers does not constitute evidence that it is "smoking related." Furthermore, if it's a "well-known" pathway, why don't they state what it's "well-known" from? This is of more scientific importance than the anti-smoking crap that "the editors who must consider the scientists, the actual readers of this information who must take in and digest this new data as part of their jobs." (By the way, actual scientists would not get their information from mass propaganda on Yahoo News.)

What I am demanding is that they state what this pathway is THE MOST WELL-KNOWN FROM, namely viruses, not "ALL of the other known oncogenic factors involved." So desist from your fatuous and disingenuous attempts to blow verbal smoke in our faces. These charlatans have not demonstrated that they are measuring anything other than the effects of viruses. But they, and YOU, are making it abundantly clear that you want to duck the issue altogether. Spare us your smarmy and patronizing lectures that I supposedly don't appreciate the "complexity of the scientific inquiry." This is a crucial part of genuine scientific inquiry, and this is a clear case of dishonesty.

butters wrote:
Carol wrote:The anti-smokers, particularly including the Surgeon General, are guilty of flagrant scientific fraud for ignoring more than 50 studies which implicate HPV as the cause of at least a quarter of non-small cell lung cancers, in order to inflate the supposed death toll of smoking and passive smoking.
The anti-smokers should rescind all their reports until their fraudulent "science" is corrected, and there are satisfactory answers to questions like that.

I don't think you have the slightest clue how science works.


Your garbage isn't science. It's fraud.

butters wrote:
Carol wrote:First of all, the page I linked to was by Lauran Neergaard.

Look again. Look at the primary article. Not the AP dumbfuck who is reporting on it.


The only thing their abstract proves is that they're just as dishonest in their own words. Which also proves that the AP dumbfuck (who is the AP Medical Writer, and has been entrenched in that job for decades) is no journalist.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20375364
Carol
Forum Addict
 
Posts: 297
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 2:59 pm

Re: Conspiracy to hide virus lung cancer role

Postby Michael Patrick » Sun Apr 11, 2010 5:42 am

Smoking is good for you. Cigarette smoke is all filled with 25 essential vitamins and nutrients. All of the smokers I know are the healthiest people on the planet.

And smoking is glamorous...

Image
Michael Patrick
Forum God/Goddess
 
Posts: 3912
Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2003 8:56 am
Location: Around here somewhere

Next

Return to Headlines

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

moviesmusiceats
Select a Movie
Select a Theater


FacebookcommentsViewedForum
  ISTHMUS FLICKR

Promotions Contact us Privacy Policy Jobs Newsletters RSS
Collapse Photo Bar