Over the past year, increased regulatory pressure in multiple regions like UK OFCOM and Australia's eSafety has led to higher operational costs, including infrastructure, security, and the need to work with more specialized service providers to keep the site online and stable.
If you value the community and would like to help support its continued operation, donations are greatly appreciated. If you wish to donate via Bank Transfer or other options, please open a ticket.
Donate via cryptocurrency:
Bitcoin (BTC):
Ethereum (ETH):
Monero (XMR):
Rapid Carcinogens?
Thread starterTowerUpright
Start date
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly. You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
I have no idea. I imagine a death via untreated cancer wouldn't be particularly pleasant. Are you sure you can't find a quicker and less painful method? I'm sorry if this isn't any help.
NP. I would get treatment, but only at the palliative stage. It would be horrible to me. But, much easier on the family. Cancer frequently brings together family and friends. Suicide has far worse ramifications to the family.
None are quick acting , hate to say it , you really need to do a serious rethink about your method.
Just seen you posted before I could reply ; you would suffer for years and your family would know very quickly that you have cancer but you forgot one thing, depending on the cancer medics could reverse the symptoms and you suffered for nothing . You apply the same method as before and medics aren't stupid , probably find yourself in a psych ward then how would your family react ?
I've considered this too. If I would contract terminal cancer, most people wouldn't blame me if I chose to die by my own hand. I've abandoned this idea completely, though. There's simply no realistic way of obtaining fast-acting carcinogens. The least unrealistic option is to get hold of radioactive components or substances from hospitals, which actually can be outright lethal. Even if it was possible, there wouldl always be a high risk of contamination and harming other people.
I've considered this too. If I would contract terminal cancer, most people wouldn't blame me if I chose to die by my own hand. I've abandoned this idea completely, though. There's simply no realistic way of obtaining fast-acting carcinogens. The least unrealistic option is to get hold of radioactive components or substances from hospitals, which actually can be outright lethal. Even if it was possible, there wouldl always be a high risk of contamination and harming other people.
Or you could try boarding a nuclear vessel which is just as outrageous ! I admire creative thinking and in both scenarios you would end up being shot so I guess it would be a win win situation !
Reactions:
charlottewilts, Circles, Sensei and 2 others
Or you could try boarding a nuclear vessel which is just as outrageous ! I admire creative thinking and in both scenarios you would end up being shot so I guess it would be a win win situation !
Ha ha! Yes, I guess. Actually, you wouldn't necessarily have to break into or rob a hospital. You could perhaps settle for sneaking into a waste disposal facility for medical equipment. Probably not high-security.
Reactions:
Circles, forever21, LegaliseIt! and 1 other person
Ha ha! Yes, I guess. Actually, you wouldn't necessarily have to break into or rob a hospital. You could perhaps settle for sneaking into a waste disposal facility for medical equipment. Probably not high-security.
Hospital waste goes into an incinerator , same place they destroy drug seizures and they do have security 24hr . Unless you're James Bond I wouldn't recommend it LOL Wait....you're not a Bond villain ? Are you ? You wouldn't admit it anyway !!!
Hospital waste goes into an incinerator , same place they destroy drug seizures and they do have security 24hr . Unless you're James Bond I wouldn't recommend it LOL
Good point. I'm primarily thinking of machines, which would have to be dismantled by experts. I'd imagine that they would be stored separately and not as tightly guarded. That's just speculation on my part, though.
Good point. I'm primarily thinking of machines, which would have to be dismantled by experts. I'd imagine that they would be stored separately and not as tightly guarded. That's just speculation on my part, though.
That's an interesting option I haven't thought about. It needs to be very radioactive to be fast-acting, though. I wonder if the natural reactor in Oklo is still radioactive? It just struck me that you simply could visit a highly radioactive place. The most radioactive areas in Chernobyl, Fukushima, and Hanford are of course closed off, but there might be other places. Until only a couple of years ago, it was possible to visit Lake Karachay in Russia. No guards and certain death after spending an hour or two on the shore.
Asbestos is deadly , being strapped to an iron lung would be no fun , also , would you be able to enforce DNR since the brain would still be functional ? Personally I have no idea ! Wouldn't be the way I would like to exit but...each to their own !
Hospital waste goes into an incinerator , same place they destroy drug seizures and they do have security 24hr . Unless you're James Bond I wouldn't recommend it LOL Wait....you're not a Bond villain ? Are you ? You wouldn't admit it anyway !!!
Asbestos is deadly , being strapped to an iron lung would be no fun , also , would you be able to enforce DNR since the brain would still be functional ? Personally I have no idea ! Wouldn't be the way I would like to exit but...each to their own !
I have 13,000 hours over 24 months of medium risk (occupational-unprotected 24/7/365) exposure to several types of asbestos (1984-1986) and absolutely no consequences. So, I am thinking that it would be a long shot.
Last edited:
Reactions:
_PRETTYLIGHTS, Circles, Sensei and 1 other person
Cancers are caused by your cells overly producing and continuing to do so until the mass becomes so dependent on your bodily resources that the other ones that need the resources (integral to life) lose and your body shuts down.
There is no instant way to essentially make your cells 'defect'. Carcinogens are not a guaranteed method to incite this defect but rather a way to raise the risk (some more substantially than others). It also takes in other factors such as generic and environmental - plenty of people know of an elderly relative who smoked all their lives but did not die from cancer.
I don't mean to be so negative, I understand why it seems easier just in practice it's quite hard to achieve.
OK... we can combine this with the rabies idea from a few days ago and make a protocol.
1. Consume as much asbestos every day as possible while smoking cigerettes to enhance the effect for at least 1 year
2. Find a rabid dog and annoy it
3. Get bitten
4. Die a horrible death from rabies
5. If this fails, spend years dying a horrible agonising death from cancer hurting everyone around you greatly regretting every moment you followed this terrible protocol
Disclaimer: this protocol is for educational purposes only.
Last edited:
Reactions:
Circles, CynicalHopelessness and Sensei
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.