A young, fit and perfectly healthy accountant, housewife and
mother is about to have a double mastectomy; she will have both her breasts surgically
removed. Louise Preece from Grove in Oxfordshire will undergo the operation at
my old hospital, the John Radcliffe, see: http://www.oxfordmail.co.uk/news/10689978.Healthy_mum_to_have_both_of_her_breasts_removed/
(another silver lining on my dismissal from Hospital Portering!). This is being
done despite the fact that she does not have cancer and never has had it. The
reason she has taken this drastic decision is to prevent herself from developing
breast cancer in the future, a disease from which her own mother is currently
dying. Mrs Preece's family history of the disease increases her own chances of
getting it manyfold and she can't bear to think of her own son enduring what
she had to with her own mum. She has already had her ovaries removed, the
equivalent operation to castration in males. This will result in her
experiencing premature menopause and possibly problems like osteoporosis,
psychological illness and many other conditions caused by hormonal upset. It's
difficult to know what to say to people like Mrs Preece, who is faced with this
situation in her personal life, with a husband and child to look after and the
trauma of watching her own mother's predicament. Inevitably there are aspects of
this matter that I would never raise with her in person, but they need to be
said nonetheless.
This kind of treatment is highly controversial and some
doctors will refuse to carry it out even if their patient demands it. However
it is becoming far less controversial every day thanks to the publicity generated
by the actress Angelina Jolie. Last February, at the age of just 37, Jolie
underwent her own prophylactic double mastectomy amidst a media furore. The
result of this has become known as "The Angelina Effect" and it has
had a major impact on medical ethics. She had known for some time that the
tendency towards breast cancer was in her family because her mother,
grandmother and aunt had all died of it, but it was when she had her DNA tested
that the clincher emerged. Angelina Jolie has a sequence of DNA in her genome
called BRCA1, pronounced "bracker-one", and it is this gene which is
said to be the cause of her hereditary tendency to suffer from breast cancer.
By one of those strange coincidences that so often occur, Jolie's announcement
and subsequent treatment just happened to come at the same time that an unusual
court case was underway; the scientific team that had first isolated BRCA1, the
National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences together with a private company
called Myriad Genetics, were applying for a patent on the gene. The reason was
so that they could then "own" the gene and therefore charge a licence
fee for the BRCA1 medical test. This was a unique situation in scientific
history; for the first time, a part of the human genome would become the intellectual
property of a government and corporation. If they won then they were looking to
make billions of dollars. In fact as soon as Jolie made her announcement Myriad
Genetics' stock prices skyrocketed! Their case was heard at the US Supreme Court
and they lost; however the US
application was only one of many around the world, and the Federal Court of
Australia ruled in Myriad's favour. Therefore in Australia
the company does own this part of the human genome. This means if you're an
Australian doctor and you carry out a BRCA1 test on a patient you must buy
rights from Myriad or you'll be in breach of Copyright!
The most interesting part of the Oxford Mail article was where Mrs Preece says: "the
geneticists fear my mum and I may carry a cancer gene, but one they cannot test
us for." But they can, in the sense that they are able to, they're just not allowed
to yet in this country because Myriad Genetics will lose their cut! I feel
infuriated at this situation and I'm frankly more than suspicious about the
origins of this article. But this wouldn't be the first time corporate greed
has taken advantage of somebody's tragedy; they did it with Angelina Jolie and
now they're doing it to Mrs Preece. The difference here is that Jolie can
afford the most expensive reconstructive surgery so her feminine appearance
will be restored after her mutilation. Mrs Preece will probably have to make do
with the off-the-shelf NHS ones which don't look as good. What will the next stage
be? Well firstly, they're not going to stop with women; already there are
already some men considering having their prostate gland removed prophylactically,
see: http://www.cancerforums.net/threads/7774-There-Are-Positives-About-Prostate-Removal.
Do you want to bet we'll soon see Richard Gere or George Clooney having this
done? The evil irony is that the same industry behind this media fest is also
sitting on very effective anti-cancer treatments because they work too well, see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QeYMduufa-E.
Apart from the avarice of this emerging "genetics industry" there's a
sinister undertone of transhumanism here. They're effectively saying that our
own natural bodies might kill us. This is a recurring theme in the
transhumanist agenda, it's dressed up as medicine. Nature is not good enough so
it must be replaced with something artificial. The end goal of this trend
doesn't bear thinking about, but we must do it. I've spoken before about how the
Illuminati want to depopulate the Earth, see: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/earths-population-reaches-7-billion.html,
but don't consider yourself lucky if you're in the one-in-ten permitted to live
in the New World Order. You will not be living as a natural human, but instead
as a cyborg, a genetic modified and semi-mechanical monster, see here for
background: http://hpanwo-voice.blogspot.co.uk/2013/09/bases-project-live-in-london.html.
Miles Johnston is right; we are indeed probably the last generation which has
the power to put a stop to this.
No comments:
Post a Comment