9 votes

EXPOSED: Angelina Jolie part of a clever corporate scheme to protect billions in BRCA gene patents

EXPOSED: Angelina Jolie part of a clever corporate scheme to protect billions in BRCA gene patents

Thursday, May 16, 2013
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) Angelina Jolie's announcement of undergoing a double mastectomy (surgically removing both breasts) even though she had no breast cancer is not the innocent, spontaneous, "heroic choice" that has been portrayed in the mainstream media. Natural News has learned it all coincides with a well-timed for-profit corporate P.R. campaign that has been planned for months and just happens to coincide with the upcoming U.S. Supreme Court decision on the viability of the BRCA1 patent.

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/040365_Angelina_Jolie_gene_patent...



Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Check out what Ben Fuchs says about Angelina Jolie.

http://podcast.gcnlive.com/podcast/brightSide/052013.mp3

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

I'm going to

have my ears preemptively removed in case Justin Bieber comes out with a new album.

When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign: that the dunces are all in confederacy against him. ~J. Swift

and now it begins

man has jolie gene and has prostate removed
http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/468834/20130519/cancer-pro...

Just maybe

the boobs at Natural News need to be removed.

Ĵīɣȩ Ɖåđşŏń

"Fully half the quotations found on the internet are either mis-attributed, or outright fabrications." - Abraham Lincoln

SteveMT's picture

Jolie was a "cutter." That explains a lot about the surgery.

BY Dr. Jody Overland on July 8, 2012 |
"Angelina was high-strung, foul-mouthed, and given to dark moods and fits of tempers. She used hard drugs. She had a fondness for tattoos, piercings, and S&M (“It’s a weird cleansing of self”). She was a self-confessed “cutter” — someone whose self-esteem was so low that she coped by making small cuts in her arms and legs."
http://www.celebdirtylaundry.com/2012/angelina-jolie-was-a-c...

Hacked off her boobs as part of corporate profit scheme

That seems really likely--not.

Take back the GOP and Restore America Now.

I don't know if

Angelina fell for the "87% chance" lie (which percentage is WRONG anyway), or if as hypothesized, she's "in on it"...but I do know that what "that home-wrecking weirdo" does or doesn't do will in no way influence any decisions I may make. And before others get on my case, I no longer like Brad Pitt, either. The honorable thing to do would have been that he tell Jennifer Aniston he no longer loved her, leave her, THEN start dating Jolie. That is not what happened.

Anyway, Jolie, when with Billy Bob Thorton, used to wear vials of blood tied around her upper arms--so did he....therefore, I don't really respect nor give credence to much of anything she thinks, feels, says, does...

Others are, of course, free to think otherwise!

And no matter what some court may say, my genes are my own!

O.P.O.G.G. - Fighting the attempted devolution of the rEVOLution
Ron Paul 2012...and beyond
BAN ELECTRONIC VOTING!!

I don't know the real story ...

... but I know Angelina ain't no damn hero.

When a person elects to commit a radical surgical procedure when nothing is wrong with them at all ... that person is NOT a hero.

I am sickened to see all the lemmings jump on board talking about how great it is to mutilate one's body for no reason at all.

Disgusting.

Angie's Been Drinkin Too Much Of The "Holly" Wood Alcohol

Yep! I knew it.. Look, Her lips are all swollen..

If you claim you don't know the real story...

Then how can you claim that she undertook the procedure "for no reason at all"?

Do you have no idea what a preventive mastectomy is?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preventive_mastectomy

Would you say that trying to prevent an 87% chance of developing breast cancer is "no reason at all"?

Would you prefer that a mother of six take those odds at the risk of leaving her children motherless?

Who are you to cast judgement, especially when you admit to not knowing what went on?

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

re: 87%

She has plenty of money ...

... to be tested for cancer every damn day, if she wants. Every hour on the hour, if she is so terrified.

Mutilating one's body when there is NO EVIDENCE OF ANYTHING WRONG AT THE MOMENT is a vile thing to do.

And to champion it is just disgusting.

Here, Here Tommy...

...agreed.

Keep your eye on the prize! - Ending legal tender laws in order for the Federal Reserve System to self-destruct is of the upmost importance.
What in the World are They Spraying https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jf0khstYDLA
http://geoengineeringwatch.org

Angelina, If You Want To Cut Your Head Off Too..Go Ahead!

Angelina Jolie, the rebellious daughter of a fine conservative actor..

Angie: Cut your boobs, your lips and your booty and your head down to size for all I care...SLUT!

Wild speculation and sensationalism

Mike Adams did not expose anything. This is speculation based on speculation based on speculation mixed with pseudoscience.

Mike Adams has demonstrated time and time again to have an extremely poor grasp on biomedical science. He uses scientific terms and makes accusations that sound plausible to the layman, but all he is doing is taking scientific journals and twisting them around to fit his "natural" narrative. He cites scientific research, only he twists around the results and conclusions so that he gives his own conflicting interpretation. The problem with this is that the scientists are basing their conclusions on the scientific method, evidence, and years training, and Mike Adams is basing his interpretation on his imagination, alternative medicine textbooks, and the natural fallacy.

Inevitably I will be called a shill because "I have been brainwashed by the medical establishment," like every time I comment in these threads.

The BRCA mutation is not a lie. It is not a conspiracy. It is one of the most documented and understood neoplastic pathologies. Prophylactic mastectomy has been shown to greatly reduce the risk of developing cancer.

If human beings lived long enough and did not die of infection or other systemic diseases such as heart failure, every single one of us would die of cancer. It is inevitable. There is no magic diet, there is no magic alternative medicine protocol. It is a matter of genes, environmental factors, and chance. The mutation of certain genes, especially those like BRCA which code for DNA protecting proteins, predictably increase the risk.

I do not agree with patents, especially on disease genes, but to accuse physicians and the medical establishment of a massive conspiracy and to risk the lives of Jolie and other women to protect the patent is quite ridiculous. Where is the evidence? Saying Jolie's picture on Time magazine is suspicious is not evidence.

Mike Adams presents a fairy tale, and I encourage everyone to use extreme caution when reading any of his work. Everything I have ever read by him was filled with fear-mongering, pseudoscience, and logical fallacies. He has made cartoons in which he gloats that he is destined to live longer than those evil allopathic practitioners. Unfortunately for him he seems to have gotten a combination of genes that causes diabetes type II. Diabetes type II is a disease that can be controlled with careful dieting (something in which alternative medicine and mainstream medicine agree on) but he is still at risk for long-term complications, and much of it is out of his control.

And what are your medical credentials?

You seem quite confident that you are an expert.

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

How predictable. This has been sent to me 100 times.

You personally have sent this to me a dozen times at least.

I watched it. Massimo Mazzucco is completely full of shit. He is selling quackery and you bought it.

Sodium bicarbonate does not cure cancer. Cancer pathology is not as simple as acid-base homeostasis. Cancer is not caused by a fungus.

I study medicine full time. I should be studying for my medical boards as I type this. I have a Master of Science in the Biomedical Sciences and a soon to be DDS.

You are so far off of the deep end I don't know how to explain medicine to you. There are no 1 hour Youtube videos that explain everything. There are no miracle cures. There is no massive paranoid conspiracy to latch onto and blame everything on. It takes years to learn to think like a scientist and to understand medicine. I'm still learning massive amounts everyday. It is a life-long process. Start reading about genetics, pathology, physiology, pharmacology, immunology. Study some inorganic, organic, and biochemistry. Study some statistics so you can appreciate the research. Then start delving into specifics in oncology.

You think you are proving me wrong and teaching me something by linking to this flagrant quack propaganda, and I'm just laughing at you in frustration. Honestly, the only reason I respond so often to you guys is to practice. I use advocates of the natural fallacy to practice medicine like I use progressives to practice libertarian arguments.

I didn't "send it to you."

I posted it as a response on this thread. What an ego you have. I could say more about you, but as I'm not like you, I won't.

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

You posted it in a reply to him.

Don't make any more of an ass out of yourself than you already have.

Check out the Laissez-Faire Journal at LFJournal.com


"The State is a gang of thieves writ large." - Murray Rothbard

Yet with more name calling and insults.

And hey, the other one shows up! The gang's all here, right guys? Yet with more name calling and insults. Priceless.

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

Occasionally, some people

feel the need to call it like it is.

Also, you're just as guilty for preemptively labeling those who disagree with you as "pro-establishment trolls".

A signature used to be here!

well while we;re on the subject

What are yours? .

We're waiting.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."-- Albert Einstein

I'm not the one acting like a

I'm not the one acting like a know it all. Go ahead, keep waiting.

This thread is like flypaper to you guys. It's fun to watch.

Resist the temptation to feed the trolls.

I thought you know the cure to cancer?!

Now I'm confused. I thought Simoncini and Burzynski and a bunch of other rogue scientists have all found the cure for cancer? I mean every one of them proposes a different "mechanism," if you can even call it that, from sodium bicarbonate to proper diet to antineoplastins to drinking bleach, but don't all of them work as long as they aren't advocated by mainstream, evidence-based medicine?

Don't get me wrong, I do think the FDA and NIH and other regulatory agencies abuse the system and waste tax money on nonsense, and I openly call for their abolition. I distrust the medical establishment, as many other medical professionals do. But my criticism of the "medical establishment," which shouldn't even be considered cohesive to begin with, is rooted in politics.

Government has too much control over the medical industry, but this does not nullify science. Government has way too much control over space travel, but does this mean that space science is a bunch of bullshit? Are astronauts just brainwashed shills of the government? Are the engineers and scientists just part of a massive conspiracy to suppress things like time travel?

I mean come on man, distrusting the government is one thing, but accepting the premise that there is a massive, coordinated conspiracy to suppress the cure for cancer is just ridiculous.

deacon's picture

here is a post for you

to debunk.
it has been up for over a year and going strong
even going so far as to use testimonials
http://www.dailypaul.com/226732/alternative-cancer-therapies...
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

We have gone over this before, deacon

Testimonials are not scientific evidence. Every commercial has testimonials. Does that mean every product works like is claimed?

Read QuackWatch and Science-Based Medicine.

I'm in a hurry and don't have time find specific articles, but pretty much all of them debunk the alternative cancer claims.

deacon's picture

them alternative cures

as you put it,were the ones used before big pharma
along with help from the fed gov stepped in and shut them down
through coercion and threats of death
follow the money is what i use to find who is involved,if there money to be made,then there will be people bought off and arms twisted so they get their way
this is no different than when anslinger used propaganda at the behest of big money to get marijuana illegal,this was done for the likes of dupont,big oil and the wood industry
before that took place hemp was used for clothes,oil ect ect
the first ford could be ran off hemp oil
after the smoke cleared big money won out,hemp along with marijuana
was illegal,and all done with a stroke of a pen
it is no different with most pieces of legislation coming out of washington(big money always wins)
and i do not put my trust in people or things when theres a conflict of interest involved,such as monsanto/big pharma working hand in hand with washington(sitting on their respective boards and at the same time having a job in washngton protecting their bottom lines,and helping draft laws to protect themselves and cutting the legs off the small guys and closing them down)
this is called a monopoly
No i do not believe testimonials from the ones i see on tv
again money is involved,so them paid actors are just that
but i am inclined to believe in personal testimony from ones who i know,they aren't paid,have nothing at stake,save for getting cured
and have a lot to lose if them cures do not work,and are blessed when they do
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence

I didn't say "them alternative medicine cures."

"Them" was referring to the articles on the Science-Based Medicine blog and Quackwatch. As I told Muscians and ... below, I am not claiming Gorski and Barrett are infalliable, and I strongly disagree with some of their political positions. I too despise the government and corporatism. However, political intervention does not invalidate science, and alternative medicine isn't valid just because it is free from government or being attacked by government.

It should be about evidence derived from the scientific method. Testimonials must be taken with a grain of salt, as there are many glaring potential compounding factors, particularly the placebo effect.

Also I wish you would use traditional punctuation. I usually don't bother reading your comments because your style is hard to read.

deacon's picture

your statements here

differ from what you have told me in the past
such as,when you told me you were coming around to my way of thinking
now you say i should use traditional punctuation??
which is now,do you read what i say or not?

should i hold what i think about you now?
and that is thinking you lied to me
it cannot be both ways at the same time
have a good day
deacon

If we deny truth before your very eyes,then the rest of what we have to say,is of little consequence