RagnarofranciscoMD

Hi, I read your post and find it interesting.  Dr Mercola is not insinuating that there is a conspiracy.  He is suggesting that there may be a an inexpensive, non-toxic, cancer treatment that is more effective than chemotherapy.  We should all be interested in this.  If it even helped one person wouldn't that be worth it.?  It is clearly non-toxic, so who could possibly have a problem with this.  And like you say, Drug companies are always looking for cancer treatments, of course they'd want this to be available to all of their customers.  Except just one thing we've forgotten.  This treatment is so common and simple to produce it wilil never become a 100, 300, 500 or $1000 pill like many chemo formulas.  Because it is so inexpensive to produce, it will never be a "blockbuster drug."  To me a blockbuster drug is one that is effective and safe first, and profitable second, but unfortunately that's not the way it works with Cancer therapy…..I know you want there to be an effective/safe cancer treatment right?  Then when one is presented why do you call it a hoax?  Maybe you would rather beleive groups with a financial interest in keeping big drug companies in charge of your health, and the FDA making sure nothing other than big drug companies get a chance to complete their research, but Mercola doesn't make anything on any of the inexpensive therapies he talks about, nobody does, because their inexpensive and easy to produce with known compounds that already exist.  So if nobody is making any  money here who would have a problem?…..Oh I get it, the ones who have money to lose.  If you don't want to use it, that's fine, I have no problem with you haveing personal doubts, but don't you believe that as Americans, we should all get to choose for ourselves?

Dr Ragnar O Francisco

Hi, I read your post and find it interesting.  Dr Mercola is not insinuating that there is a conspiracy.  He is suggesting that there may be a an inexpensive, non-toxic, cancer treatment that is more effective than chemotherapy.  We should all be interested in this.  If it even helped one person wouldn't that be worth it.?  It is clearly non-toxic, so who could possibly have a problem with this.  And like you say, Drug companies are always looking for cancer treatments, of course they'd want this to be available to all of their customers.  Except just one thing we've forgotten.  This treatment is so common and simple to produce it wilil never become a 100, 300, 500 or $1000 pill like many chemo formulas.  Because it is so inexpensive to produce, it will never be a "blockbuster drug."  To me a blockbuster drug is one that is effective and safe first, and profitable second, but unfortunately that's not the way it works with Cancer therapy…..I know you want there to be an effective/safe cancer treatment right?  Then when one is presented why do you call it a hoax?  Maybe you would rather beleive groups with a financial interest in keeping big drug companies in charge of your health, and the FDA making sure nothing other than big drug companies get a chance to complete their research, but Mercola doesn't make anything on any of the inexpensive therapies he talks about, nobody does, because their inexpensive and easy to produce with known compounds that already exist.  So if nobody is making any  money here who would have a problem?…..Oh I get it, the ones who have money to lose.  If you don't want to use it, that's fine, I have no problem with you haveing personal doubts, but don't you believe that as Americans, we should all get to choose for ourselves?

Dr Ragnar O Francisco

Hi, I read your post and find it interesting.  Dr Mercola is not insinuating that there is a conspiracy.  He is suggesting that there may be a an inexpensive, non-toxic, cancer treatment that is more effective than chemotherapy.  We should all be interested in this.  If it even helped one person wouldn't that be worth it.?  It is clearly non-toxic, so who could possibly have a problem with this.  And like you say, Drug companies are always looking for cancer treatments, of course they'd want this to be available to all of their customers.  Except just one thing we've forgotten.  This treatment is so common and simple to produce it wilil never become a 100, 300, 500 or $1000 pill like many chemo formulas.  Because it is so inexpensive to produce, it will never be a "blockbuster drug."  To me a blockbuster drug is one that is effective and safe first, and profitable second, but unfortunately that's not the way it works with Cancer therapy…..I know you want there to be an effective/safe cancer treatment right?  Then when one is presented why do you call it a hoax?  Maybe you would rather beleive groups with a financial interest in keeping big drug companies in charge of your health, and the FDA making sure nothing other than big drug companies get a chance to complete their research, but Mercola doesn't make anything on any of the inexpensive therapies he talks about, nobody does, because their inexpensive and easy to produce with known compounds that already exist.  So if nobody is making any  money here who would have a problem?…..Oh I get it, the ones who have money to lose.  If you don't want to use it, that's fine, I have no problem with you haveing personal doubts, but don't you believe that as Americans, we should all get to choose for ourselves?

Dr Ragnar O Francisco