Archive for November 28th, 2007

   It seems like these days you don’t hear the words slippery or slick without hearing Bill and Hillary Clinton in the same sentence. The pair should be running Waffles-R-Us. Slick’s newest waffle, “I was against the Iraq war “from the beginning”. I’m sure that if by devine intervention the war spins into something positive, he will have been FOR it “from the beginning” and it was his hand that brought us to this momentous occasion in history. Washington needs a few degrees of separation from it’s past and a good political cleansing. Apparently over the last 30 years our illustrious administrations have decided that ”of the people”, “for the people”, and “by the people” were just nice sounding words.

   Barrack Obama is eloquent and good looking, but fortunately I don’t equate a well spoken, good looking president with experience and good politicing. The republicans aren’t much better. A Giuliani/Thompson ticket maybe? Thompson would make a great VP – we’d never see him then either.

   I don’t know what the answers are, but I do wonder what would happen if you could strip away all the generational uplines for party affiliation and start over. Would you be a Democrat or a Republican? I can’t think of anything either party has done for me personally. The real question is, has a bi-partisan system done anything for anyone, ever? Do you think Kennedy said “I’m going to have a showdown with the Russians today because by God, I’m a Democrat!”. I don’t think so.  My point is, the really important decisions are made by people – not parties. To that end, which person is going to clean up OUR backyard, and then worry about sweeping the up the mess down the street.

   I challenge you to go ask your neighbors and friends why they chose their party, and what they’ve derived from that affiliation. Then examine your own house of cards.

           According to information provided by Health Sciences Institute they are here already. However, major drug firms have been unable to synthesize proteins close to those responsible for the beneficial cures from the natural substances. Until they can, much of the work they have been doing is not patentable. In other words, until the derivatives from the research can be protected financially, the benefits will continue to be unavailable to the public, or a least very slow in coming.         

           About 30 years ago an extract from the bark of the yew tree called taxol was determined to reduce or eliminate a half a dozen types of cancer, without the serious after effects of chemotherapy treatments. However, it took 30 years to reach the market. Recently,  promising products from a tree called the graviola tree are demonstrating even more potent cancer fighting abilities. After 10 years and millions of dollars the main antihumorous chemical annonacin has been synthesized. Scientists finally recreated this chemical and several other active acetogenins in the lab. The next step is to change these chemicals enough for them to be “novel” so they can be awarded patents, but not enough that they loose their beneficial properties. So far these attempts have failed. It seems as soon as the chemicals are altered they loose their potent antihumorous action.          

          Unless, or until, the government takes direct action via the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute of Health a full scale assault on cancer with this promising therapy will not be available in a timely fashion. The risk is too great and the cost too large for a single drug company to assume. The drug companies cannot be faulted for failing to release their results for free. That would be a form of corporate suicide. Research of this nature, which would truly benefit all mankind, should be a government mandate. That way the cost would be easily affordable and the products which resulted would be affordable by rich and poor alike. Unfortunately, here in the USA, our ruling elite is focused on wasting trillions on a war machine, which leaves precious little for improving the health and welfare of it’s citizens.

I am ambivalent about the harvesting of herbal or tribal remedies from sources such as the Amazon. The tree at the root of a modern day cure for most cancers comes from one of the most delicate and critical environments on the planet, the rain forest. Should a world wide demand for a cancer cure spur yet another mauling of the tropical forests, global warming will certainly shift into a higher gear. Synthetic products will eventually be discovered and become available without the devastation of our forests. We must demand that our government reorder it’s priorities and provide adequate funds for health research so future generations don’t have to pay the price of our lack of responsible fiscal management.         

 Bob Parmelee

For more information on the graviola tree or to review the complete reports go to http://www.newcancerfacts.com/graviolacancer.