My questions are practical rather than theoretical. I am caught in this catch 22 now.
A question I have not seen answered is whether these products cause the liver enzyme readings to go up, or whether the toxic waste generated by powerful anti-parasitics causes those readings to go up. If it is the former, we have to discontinue use for some unspecified period of time (pulsing), but if it is the latter, we have to support and protect the liver while the anti-parasitic continues to kill parasites (and even more significantly, destroys toxic biofilm). This process can take months and according to Lee Merritt, even years.
I am caught in this dilemma now, but with raised liver enzymes due to artemisinin rather than Ivermectin of Fenbendazole. I don't know how to manage this - what is too high, when should I stop the medication, how long to "rest" the liver for, etc.? I have a doctor who will order the tests, but monthly not weekly, and I do not want to stop cancer treatment for a month waiting for the next test to see if the readings have gone down.
All those recommending the protocols variously recommend milk thistle, TUDCA and dandelion to help the liver do its job, but I am taking all of those and my readings are still going up.
When I get some usable information for those of us actually using these products for cancer, I will publish it.
Thanks for the mention, and the warning about Fenbendazole damage to the liver. Maybe someday I will go back to North East India and find out from the forest doctors their take on the cause of cancer.
That would be very interesting to hear from their perspective. Perhaps they are trained by their own observations of life and nature as opposed to western medicine, which has become a chemotherapy scam to create disease for profit. To find doctors who understand true nature and medicine in an environment with unknown cures would be an amazing study.
This is a very good article Charles. Back in November of 2021, I talked with Dr. Ryan Cole at an Early Treatment Conference in Anchorage about some flaws in studies, on all sides, that I simply could not reconcile. Specifically, use of the PCR to confirm or deny diagnosis of said COVID. Even though Ivermectin showed positive results in several studies, all the studies I read were using this severely flawed modality. There were no references to cycle thresholds or anything else in any of these studies that would give me confidence on the ability to clearly discern disease from no disease. It's similar to using corrupt media sources to prove a point that you agree with, while in the same breath bemoaning that same media outlet for promoting propaganda.
I'm not saying that Ivermectin, or any other early treatment options do not work. I've observed it work in many of my own patients. It's just that I don't trust data, period. Until this get's remedied (I won't hold my breath), I'll stick to observation...
Maybe this makes sense, and maybe it doesn't. I don't think that tests using cultured cancer cells are a good s approximation of cancer in the human body. There may be some mild anti-cancer effects on the cells, but I still think that the primary benefit of ivermectin in the human body is killing the pathogens that feed on the cancer cells, allowing the body's own immune system to function better. What do you think?
That's an interesting thought, and perhaps. Here are a few of my thoughts on cancer:
At its core, cancer is quite simply dysregulated energy metabolism. Instead of cells feeding off their primary energy source, oxygen, they revert to a primitive metabolic pathway, fermentation, using amino acid (glutamine) and sugar (glucose) as their primary fuel source.
The source of the cells natural energy pathway becoming dysregulated very well could be parasitic or viral in nature, though I tend to lean more towards toxins (smoking, chemicals, etc.), poor diet and poor lifestyle choices as the primary drivers for this change.
As far as ivermectin supporting immune function:
When cancer cells develop, there is likely hypoxia within the environment since oxygen is no longer being used as fuel. This leads to the production of lactic acid. Lactic acid signals the immune cells to come in and heal the wound by releasing growth factors and cytokines. Now, if this was any other type of wound, we would likely see growth of normal tissue and healing, but in the case of cancer, we see proliferation of a dysfunctional system. How ivermectin would help with that, I don't know. Maybe by killing the virus or parasites, the source of the cancer is removed. Or maybe, if the pathogen is leading to proliferation of these abnormal cells, ivermectin simply discontinues this process.
In the end, you still have a metabolic pathway that has not been properly rectified if one is still consuming glucose and glutamine, providing the already developed cancer with fuel to survive and potentially grow.
I would submit that addressing the metabolic pathway of cancer should be part of the treatment plan, whatever that may be.
I'm not quite the writer you are, and I hope that makes some sense.
In any case whether we understand the micro effects or not, it's a consensus that avoiding high-sugar diets and consuming more uncooked plant material is beneficial to the body. I think you're on to something big there with the different energy source of cancer cells.
I do think that "carcinogens" (like tobacco smoke) were certainly the main drivers of cancer, until perhaps today, when the mad scientists have affected our genome to shut down turmor-fighting genes. Diet is another huge factor. Bacteria are left to multiply more rapidly in a diet devoid of plant nutrition which contains antibiotic compounds, and as you say, it all feeds on sugars. Ivermectin can at least knock these bacterria out.
I found something on bacteria I intend to write about in more detail later. It is from the Nobel lecture of Peyton Rous, 1966. He won the Nobel for describing how viruses cause cancer, (which I'm not convinced of, I think the word "virus" has been misused, but that's a different topic). . Interestingly, Peyton Rous, the Rockereller's cancer researcher, said thisin his 1966 Nobel lecture, which I believe is a very strong confirmation of the role of bacteria in cancer. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1966/rous/lecture/
"An exceedingly important trait of most neoplastic cells is their unnatural excitability which sometimes renders them extremely active on what seems slight encouragement. Infection with inflammatory bacteria often has this effect."
So what I suggest is that numerous metabolic pathways described work better after killing bacteria. That could be the title of a study?
There are a lot of carcinogen chemicals, much worse then tobacco smoke. One of them is dioxin. How many dioxin spills can you count in the USA? What’s the half life of dioxin? How many ppl consume dioxin unbeknownst to them?
I am so thankful you turned me on to the anticancerous benefits of the smart enzyme found in the raw milk of mammals, namely lactoferrin. Its ability to distinguish between normal & abnormal cells & to modulate the body's iron levels at the cellular level is miraculous to me. It withholds iron from abnormal (i.e. cancerous cells) affectively destroying them & regulates therapeutic iron levels in normal cells resulting in homeostasis. I've been taking the lactoferrin for a year now. After taking it for only a couple of months, 2 imaging studies in January 2023, one to confirm an adrenal adenoma was benign & one as a follow-up thyroid ultrasound on the status of previously diagnosed benign thyroid nodules, showed shrinkage of the lesion(s) from previous studies, with the thyroid ultrasound showing the absence of nodules previously identified 2 years prior in addition to shrinkage of some of the other nodules. I was diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer in August 2021, had surgery to remove the lesion & 4 axillary lymph nodes, then had 6 weeks of radiation. Thankfully, my oncotype was <10, so chemo not recommended, however I'm taking tamoxifen for 5-10 years to help prevent recurrence. I'm very fortunate in that my tumor was E+P+ & one of the easiest types to treat. So far, no cancer recurrence on diagnostic mammograms. I consider myself very blessed to have been introduced to the wondrous lactoferrin by Charles Wright, as I am totally convinced this little enzyme is continuously providing me "an ace in the hole" against cancer recurrence. Thank you, Charles, for your relentless research & critical thinking skills, despite having to constantly contend with the muck of the pervading Medical Industrial Complex fog, that allows you the objective discernment to cut to the chase & see clearly all the slights of hand by Big Pharma & Big Medicine. You're saving lives in your own way & I'm grateful that one of those lives is mine! God Bless, Charles!!
That was just telling a friend something. I thank you for all the information you provided as well. I'm still hoping you will write up your case history and publish it to Substack. If it's working we should keep spreading the news. And even if it wasn't, we would still need to publish the truth so that others can know. Thank you so much again Suzanne and we should talk soon.
From Amazon. Initially, was buying the Jarrow brand that the Prostate Community Trial was using (along with ivermectin) to do observational medical trials on response of cancerous tumors to ingesting these 2 substances, either alone or in conjunction with each other, as reported by Charles last year in some of his articles. Jarrow increased their cost however, so I've been buying Double Wood brand, lactoferrin 250 mg capsules & I take one twice daily. Costs about $18 per bottle. I think Jarrow is about double that price now. I imagine one could find lactoferrin at a local vitamin/supplement store though or you may have access to raw milk in your state & could drink that as an alternative.
If you order directly from the Double Wood website, you can get a discount for buying muktiple bottles at once and for subscribing. I use a few of their other supplements and may have to try lactoferrin as well.
It looks like they have a lot that I order from several different places because most don’t have everything I use. The prices are lower as well. I’d rather get everything from one place. I’ll have to look into them. Do you know much about them, the quality of their products?
According to their website, they manufacture in the US at an FDA-registered facility. They are Good Manufacturing Practices certified and employ third party testing. They have certificates of analysis for each product linked on the product page. I first discovered them by reading reviews on Amazon, where they were highly rated. Here’s the link to the certificate for lactoferrin: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0756/3867/files/F-141_Double_Wood_Lactoferrin.pdf
I buy Jarrow as well. Do you think the Double Wood brand is comparable? Obviously it’s working for you. I have always trusted Harrow’s products, but I’ll look into the other company as well. I can always use another way to save money. There isn’t much to go around and since I’ve become my own physician, having lost all faith in the medical establishment (slowly over many years as they made me worse rather than better), it’s expensive to maintain health and treat issues.
There are few alternative medicine physicians near me, waiting lists, and high fees, all of which complicate matters. So I’m mostly on my own.
The Double Woods lactoferrin is the only one of their supplements I use at the moment. My research shows the lactoferrin from their supplement is no different from the Jarrow product, except for price. I'll have my follow-up mammogram for breast cancer monitoring at the end of December & my yearly thyroid ultrasound in January, most likely, so I'll know better how the LF is working after that. Double Woods did send me a complimentary free bottle this summer for taking a short survey about their product. I'm with you on becoming your own physician. I don't trust Big Medicine any longer either & I spent 31 years right in the middle of it when I worked as an RN. My trust has eroded & I've pretty much done a 180° turn away from today's medical practices. That's why I declined the offer of Pfizer's new estrogen blocking medicine & opted for the older tamoxifen. Don't trust what Pfizer put in their medicine.
Fully agree Charles. Huber does everything but provide data for or against the most important part: is there efficacy against some cancer types at particular stages, and is the disease worse than the cure?
QC of non approved drugs is a joke argument - look at the confirmed oncogenic plasmid DNA adulteration and the FDCs refusal to even think about pulling the lines.
Good point. But I have had concerns about all medications, especially generic brands. Some of the fillers & crap they are formulated with. I have purchased ivermectin at the Medicine Counter pharmacy in Tn. It is a compounding pharmacy. They do allow ivermectin without a prescription per state law but the pharmacist there changed the policy and will now only fill it with a prescription. The reason being they are short staffed and high demand.
On bacteria and cancer, I am reading up on one of the Rockefeller's first cancer man, Peyton Rous, who won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1966. His Prize was for "his discovery of tumour-inducing viruses.” I'm not so sure about the role of viruses in inducing viruses. I think they are associated with viruses, but correlation is not causation. It's unclear to me.
In any case, Peyton Rous did mention bacteria during his Nobel Lecture, December 13, 1966, which he titled: "The Challenge to Man of the Neoplastic Cell." Here's the part about bacteria:
"An exceedingly important trait of most neoplastic cells is their unnatural excitability which sometimes renders them extremely active on what seems slight encouragement. Infection with inflammatory bacteria often has this effect."
I read recently that the elevated liver markers were due theoretically to the flushing of toxic cancer debris and associated bodily responses, which returned to normal levels after treatment: More study needed.
The cures for cancer (or any other disease, even if rare), could be found in days, if already in use: all we need is the physicians, hospitals, ministries of health, patients or their survivors, to upload the clinical records of what they already used to treat their patients to a standardized database which applies real-time multi-linear regression:
• disease stage when treatment begun
• not the prescribed but real life dose/kg and uptake frequency of medicines/food/nutrients/nutraceuticals
• changes in relevant lifestyle data (exercise, sleeping, etc.)
• disease evolution
• survival phases
Also, the platform will help discard current treatments which actually harm or kill patients (e.g. remdesivir, injections).
There could be prizes for the most effective treatments, reproduced by other doctors.
There should be a procedure to eliminate or reduce fake data, for example, to check the uploaded photos of documents proving the data.
There should be a medical social network for collaboration and dissemination.
We could have done it with COVID treatments! We should prepare the platform for the next PLANNEDemics.
How about crowdfunding?
One sure way to avoid cancer is to avoid haccines:
Wow. It says "In summary, we have three patients with different primary genitourinary tumors who demonstrated complete response after receiving FBZ therapy. This raises the question of how effective FBZ can be as an anti-oncogenic agent and merits further investigation. To our knowledge, there has not been a similar case series reported." Thanks for sharing.
I have not read the full article carefully but would just like to say that of all the horse wormers - Panacur - fenbendazole - is the number 1 most safe for pregnant mares and baby foals...its the one recommended for newborns.
My questions are practical rather than theoretical. I am caught in this catch 22 now.
A question I have not seen answered is whether these products cause the liver enzyme readings to go up, or whether the toxic waste generated by powerful anti-parasitics causes those readings to go up. If it is the former, we have to discontinue use for some unspecified period of time (pulsing), but if it is the latter, we have to support and protect the liver while the anti-parasitic continues to kill parasites (and even more significantly, destroys toxic biofilm). This process can take months and according to Lee Merritt, even years.
I am caught in this dilemma now, but with raised liver enzymes due to artemisinin rather than Ivermectin of Fenbendazole. I don't know how to manage this - what is too high, when should I stop the medication, how long to "rest" the liver for, etc.? I have a doctor who will order the tests, but monthly not weekly, and I do not want to stop cancer treatment for a month waiting for the next test to see if the readings have gone down.
All those recommending the protocols variously recommend milk thistle, TUDCA and dandelion to help the liver do its job, but I am taking all of those and my readings are still going up.
When I get some usable information for those of us actually using these products for cancer, I will publish it.
Thanks for the mention, and the warning about Fenbendazole damage to the liver. Maybe someday I will go back to North East India and find out from the forest doctors their take on the cause of cancer.
That would be very interesting to hear from their perspective. Perhaps they are trained by their own observations of life and nature as opposed to western medicine, which has become a chemotherapy scam to create disease for profit. To find doctors who understand true nature and medicine in an environment with unknown cures would be an amazing study.
I still want to buy and read Herbal Secrets of the Rainforest by Leslie Taylor. $243 on Amazon. https://www.amazon.com/Herbal-Secrets-Rainforest-Powerful-Medicinal/dp/0761517340. I know of one section pulled from her book on maytenus ilicifolia. The NCI discovered maytenus ilicifolia and repressed it. I think it has tremendous potential for women's cancers. Here is the technical report. http://ns1.rain-tree.com/reports/espinheira-tech.pdf. I wrote about it here. https://charleswright1.substack.com/p/epifriedelanol-aphytoestrogen-with
This is a very good article Charles. Back in November of 2021, I talked with Dr. Ryan Cole at an Early Treatment Conference in Anchorage about some flaws in studies, on all sides, that I simply could not reconcile. Specifically, use of the PCR to confirm or deny diagnosis of said COVID. Even though Ivermectin showed positive results in several studies, all the studies I read were using this severely flawed modality. There were no references to cycle thresholds or anything else in any of these studies that would give me confidence on the ability to clearly discern disease from no disease. It's similar to using corrupt media sources to prove a point that you agree with, while in the same breath bemoaning that same media outlet for promoting propaganda.
I'm not saying that Ivermectin, or any other early treatment options do not work. I've observed it work in many of my own patients. It's just that I don't trust data, period. Until this get's remedied (I won't hold my breath), I'll stick to observation...
Maybe this makes sense, and maybe it doesn't. I don't think that tests using cultured cancer cells are a good s approximation of cancer in the human body. There may be some mild anti-cancer effects on the cells, but I still think that the primary benefit of ivermectin in the human body is killing the pathogens that feed on the cancer cells, allowing the body's own immune system to function better. What do you think?
That's an interesting thought, and perhaps. Here are a few of my thoughts on cancer:
At its core, cancer is quite simply dysregulated energy metabolism. Instead of cells feeding off their primary energy source, oxygen, they revert to a primitive metabolic pathway, fermentation, using amino acid (glutamine) and sugar (glucose) as their primary fuel source.
The source of the cells natural energy pathway becoming dysregulated very well could be parasitic or viral in nature, though I tend to lean more towards toxins (smoking, chemicals, etc.), poor diet and poor lifestyle choices as the primary drivers for this change.
As far as ivermectin supporting immune function:
When cancer cells develop, there is likely hypoxia within the environment since oxygen is no longer being used as fuel. This leads to the production of lactic acid. Lactic acid signals the immune cells to come in and heal the wound by releasing growth factors and cytokines. Now, if this was any other type of wound, we would likely see growth of normal tissue and healing, but in the case of cancer, we see proliferation of a dysfunctional system. How ivermectin would help with that, I don't know. Maybe by killing the virus or parasites, the source of the cancer is removed. Or maybe, if the pathogen is leading to proliferation of these abnormal cells, ivermectin simply discontinues this process.
In the end, you still have a metabolic pathway that has not been properly rectified if one is still consuming glucose and glutamine, providing the already developed cancer with fuel to survive and potentially grow.
I would submit that addressing the metabolic pathway of cancer should be part of the treatment plan, whatever that may be.
I'm not quite the writer you are, and I hope that makes some sense.
Your comments make a lot of sense. I'm not a good writer either. I just try to make sense and use plain English. I'm the opposite of a writer. I'm just now beginning to contemplate the role of sugars, bacteria, and our metabolic processes as they relate to cancer. I found this article: https://sydneygastroenterologist.com.au/blog/how-too-much-sugar-affects-the-gut-microbiome/#:~:text=Bacteria%2C%20however%2C%20need%20energy%2C,the%20balance%20in%20the%20microbiome.
In any case whether we understand the micro effects or not, it's a consensus that avoiding high-sugar diets and consuming more uncooked plant material is beneficial to the body. I think you're on to something big there with the different energy source of cancer cells.
I do think that "carcinogens" (like tobacco smoke) were certainly the main drivers of cancer, until perhaps today, when the mad scientists have affected our genome to shut down turmor-fighting genes. Diet is another huge factor. Bacteria are left to multiply more rapidly in a diet devoid of plant nutrition which contains antibiotic compounds, and as you say, it all feeds on sugars. Ivermectin can at least knock these bacterria out.
I found something on bacteria I intend to write about in more detail later. It is from the Nobel lecture of Peyton Rous, 1966. He won the Nobel for describing how viruses cause cancer, (which I'm not convinced of, I think the word "virus" has been misused, but that's a different topic). . Interestingly, Peyton Rous, the Rockereller's cancer researcher, said thisin his 1966 Nobel lecture, which I believe is a very strong confirmation of the role of bacteria in cancer. https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1966/rous/lecture/
"An exceedingly important trait of most neoplastic cells is their unnatural excitability which sometimes renders them extremely active on what seems slight encouragement. Infection with inflammatory bacteria often has this effect."
So what I suggest is that numerous metabolic pathways described work better after killing bacteria. That could be the title of a study?
There are a lot of carcinogen chemicals, much worse then tobacco smoke. One of them is dioxin. How many dioxin spills can you count in the USA? What’s the half life of dioxin? How many ppl consume dioxin unbeknownst to them?
It is vital that we have these conversations
Thank you!
I am so thankful you turned me on to the anticancerous benefits of the smart enzyme found in the raw milk of mammals, namely lactoferrin. Its ability to distinguish between normal & abnormal cells & to modulate the body's iron levels at the cellular level is miraculous to me. It withholds iron from abnormal (i.e. cancerous cells) affectively destroying them & regulates therapeutic iron levels in normal cells resulting in homeostasis. I've been taking the lactoferrin for a year now. After taking it for only a couple of months, 2 imaging studies in January 2023, one to confirm an adrenal adenoma was benign & one as a follow-up thyroid ultrasound on the status of previously diagnosed benign thyroid nodules, showed shrinkage of the lesion(s) from previous studies, with the thyroid ultrasound showing the absence of nodules previously identified 2 years prior in addition to shrinkage of some of the other nodules. I was diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer in August 2021, had surgery to remove the lesion & 4 axillary lymph nodes, then had 6 weeks of radiation. Thankfully, my oncotype was <10, so chemo not recommended, however I'm taking tamoxifen for 5-10 years to help prevent recurrence. I'm very fortunate in that my tumor was E+P+ & one of the easiest types to treat. So far, no cancer recurrence on diagnostic mammograms. I consider myself very blessed to have been introduced to the wondrous lactoferrin by Charles Wright, as I am totally convinced this little enzyme is continuously providing me "an ace in the hole" against cancer recurrence. Thank you, Charles, for your relentless research & critical thinking skills, despite having to constantly contend with the muck of the pervading Medical Industrial Complex fog, that allows you the objective discernment to cut to the chase & see clearly all the slights of hand by Big Pharma & Big Medicine. You're saving lives in your own way & I'm grateful that one of those lives is mine! God Bless, Charles!!
That was just telling a friend something. I thank you for all the information you provided as well. I'm still hoping you will write up your case history and publish it to Substack. If it's working we should keep spreading the news. And even if it wasn't, we would still need to publish the truth so that others can know. Thank you so much again Suzanne and we should talk soon.
Where do you get your lactoferrin?
From Amazon. Initially, was buying the Jarrow brand that the Prostate Community Trial was using (along with ivermectin) to do observational medical trials on response of cancerous tumors to ingesting these 2 substances, either alone or in conjunction with each other, as reported by Charles last year in some of his articles. Jarrow increased their cost however, so I've been buying Double Wood brand, lactoferrin 250 mg capsules & I take one twice daily. Costs about $18 per bottle. I think Jarrow is about double that price now. I imagine one could find lactoferrin at a local vitamin/supplement store though or you may have access to raw milk in your state & could drink that as an alternative.
If you order directly from the Double Wood website, you can get a discount for buying muktiple bottles at once and for subscribing. I use a few of their other supplements and may have to try lactoferrin as well.
It looks like they have a lot that I order from several different places because most don’t have everything I use. The prices are lower as well. I’d rather get everything from one place. I’ll have to look into them. Do you know much about them, the quality of their products?
According to their website, they manufacture in the US at an FDA-registered facility. They are Good Manufacturing Practices certified and employ third party testing. They have certificates of analysis for each product linked on the product page. I first discovered them by reading reviews on Amazon, where they were highly rated. Here’s the link to the certificate for lactoferrin: https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/0756/3867/files/F-141_Double_Wood_Lactoferrin.pdf
I’ve been taking their NAC, magnesium, benfotiamine, and berberine for quite some time and have been very pleased with them.
I buy Jarrow as well. Do you think the Double Wood brand is comparable? Obviously it’s working for you. I have always trusted Harrow’s products, but I’ll look into the other company as well. I can always use another way to save money. There isn’t much to go around and since I’ve become my own physician, having lost all faith in the medical establishment (slowly over many years as they made me worse rather than better), it’s expensive to maintain health and treat issues.
There are few alternative medicine physicians near me, waiting lists, and high fees, all of which complicate matters. So I’m mostly on my own.
The Double Woods lactoferrin is the only one of their supplements I use at the moment. My research shows the lactoferrin from their supplement is no different from the Jarrow product, except for price. I'll have my follow-up mammogram for breast cancer monitoring at the end of December & my yearly thyroid ultrasound in January, most likely, so I'll know better how the LF is working after that. Double Woods did send me a complimentary free bottle this summer for taking a short survey about their product. I'm with you on becoming your own physician. I don't trust Big Medicine any longer either & I spent 31 years right in the middle of it when I worked as an RN. My trust has eroded & I've pretty much done a 180° turn away from today's medical practices. That's why I declined the offer of Pfizer's new estrogen blocking medicine & opted for the older tamoxifen. Don't trust what Pfizer put in their medicine.
Fully agree Charles. Huber does everything but provide data for or against the most important part: is there efficacy against some cancer types at particular stages, and is the disease worse than the cure?
QC of non approved drugs is a joke argument - look at the confirmed oncogenic plasmid DNA adulteration and the FDCs refusal to even think about pulling the lines.
Good point. But I have had concerns about all medications, especially generic brands. Some of the fillers & crap they are formulated with. I have purchased ivermectin at the Medicine Counter pharmacy in Tn. It is a compounding pharmacy. They do allow ivermectin without a prescription per state law but the pharmacist there changed the policy and will now only fill it with a prescription. The reason being they are short staffed and high demand.
On bacteria and cancer, I am reading up on one of the Rockefeller's first cancer man, Peyton Rous, who won the Nobel Prize for Medicine in 1966. His Prize was for "his discovery of tumour-inducing viruses.” I'm not so sure about the role of viruses in inducing viruses. I think they are associated with viruses, but correlation is not causation. It's unclear to me.
In any case, Peyton Rous did mention bacteria during his Nobel Lecture, December 13, 1966, which he titled: "The Challenge to Man of the Neoplastic Cell." Here's the part about bacteria:
"An exceedingly important trait of most neoplastic cells is their unnatural excitability which sometimes renders them extremely active on what seems slight encouragement. Infection with inflammatory bacteria often has this effect."
Link to the Lecture from Nobel: https://www.nobelprize.org/prizes/medicine/1966/rous/lecture/
I read recently that the elevated liver markers were due theoretically to the flushing of toxic cancer debris and associated bodily responses, which returned to normal levels after treatment: More study needed.
I think I heard this as well from the Nutrition Detective.
Interesting. Seems to make sense.
The cures for cancer (or any other disease, even if rare), could be found in days, if already in use: all we need is the physicians, hospitals, ministries of health, patients or their survivors, to upload the clinical records of what they already used to treat their patients to a standardized database which applies real-time multi-linear regression:
• disease stage when treatment begun
• not the prescribed but real life dose/kg and uptake frequency of medicines/food/nutrients/nutraceuticals
• changes in relevant lifestyle data (exercise, sleeping, etc.)
• disease evolution
• survival phases
Also, the platform will help discard current treatments which actually harm or kill patients (e.g. remdesivir, injections).
There could be prizes for the most effective treatments, reproduced by other doctors.
There should be a procedure to eliminate or reduce fake data, for example, to check the uploaded photos of documents proving the data.
There should be a medical social network for collaboration and dissemination.
We could have done it with COVID treatments! We should prepare the platform for the next PLANNEDemics.
How about crowdfunding?
One sure way to avoid cancer is to avoid haccines:
https://scientificprogress.substack.com/p/system-failure-ai-exposes-zero-government
2SG has cited Joe Tippens and his protocol in many of his articles on this subject, so now you
have no reason not to like him. :-)
Here is peer reviewed data from Stanford Dr's on three cases of patients at deaths door with a
positive outcome from Fenbendazole.
Hopefully it does not get retracted as the success of this compound threatens the big pharma cancer industry.
https://www.scitechnol.com/peer-review/fenbendazole-enhancing-antitumor-effect-a-case-series-2Kms.php?article_id=14307
Direct link to the pdf: https://www.scitechnol.com/peer-review/fenbendazole-enhancing-antitumor-effect-a-case-series-P3SV.pdf
Saved it as a pdf. In case it gets taken down. Thanks for sharing.
Wow. It says "In summary, we have three patients with different primary genitourinary tumors who demonstrated complete response after receiving FBZ therapy. This raises the question of how effective FBZ can be as an anti-oncogenic agent and merits further investigation. To our knowledge, there has not been a similar case series reported." Thanks for sharing.
I have not read the full article carefully but would just like to say that of all the horse wormers - Panacur - fenbendazole - is the number 1 most safe for pregnant mares and baby foals...its the one recommended for newborns.
now I read and thanks for the article - !!
Thank you.