YouTube CEO dies of Cancer after Censoring Information that could have Saved her Life
From NPR:
In 1998, Wojcicki rented her garage to Larry Page and Sergey Brin, a pair of Stanford grad students on the cusp of building the search giant Google.
Later, Wojcicki played a major role in Google's purchase of YouTube in 2006 when it was just a small startup. She was appointed YouTube's CEO in 2014 and led its explosive growth over the past decade. She also oversaw the platform as it grappled with hate speech, misinformation and inappropriate content.
Wojcicki was also known for her compelling graduation speech at Johns Hopkins University in 2014. There, she reflected on her career and the nature of opportunities.
Susan Wojcicki, a Silicon Valley visionary who helped shape Google and YouTube, died Friday after a two-year battle with non-small cell lung cancer, according to her husband. She was 56.
Transcript of Wojcicki discussing Censorship at the World Economic Forum, June 4, 2022: Video here on Rumble: YouTube CEO Susan Wojcicki, dead of Cancer, discusses YouTube Censorship at WEF, June 4, 2022. Click on that and make me a few more pennies please. I mean hey, it’s still slightly better than YouTube. I mean who cares if Peter Thiel, who took over Google’s Artificial Intelligence “Project Maven” assassination program that is now obviously used by Israel to target women and children, is invested in Rumble, or that Rumble’s “picks” and “categories” on the home page are absolute crap and cannot be adjusted, or that Rumble obviously promotes narratives that suit Globalist interests and suppresses ones that Globalists don’t like- same as YouTube (sarcasm). At least I can publish stuff on Rumble without them deleting it, and I give them credit for it. The same video of Tippens talking about Fenbendazole that YouTube deleted is still available on my Rumble channel.
Wojcicki at the WEF:
“We're definitely investing a huge amount to make sure that we're fighting misinformation. And there are a number of different ways that we look up at this so the first would be from a policy standpoint. We would look at content that we would think about in terms of being violative of our policies. So if you look at COVID for example we came up with 10 different policies that we said would be violative. Like an example of that would be saying that COVID came from something other than a virus. And we did see people attacking 5g equipment for example because they thought that it was causing COVID and so that would just be an example of a policy that would remove. So we do remove content based on those policies. We actually publish that on in a transparency report.
The second one would be really raising up authoritative information. so if you are dealing with a sensitive subject like news, health, science. We are going to make sure that what we're recommending is coming from a trusted well-known publisher that can be reliable.
If you think about how Google works it’s very similar. Like if you type in cancer; you type in COVID, what you're going to get are going to be names that you recognize. They're not going to be someone that just published a web page yesterday. So it's very similar with regard to how we handle that on YouTube.
The third is making sure that we- if there's content that's borderline content, that technically means our policy but is lower quality. That’s content that we basically will not recommend to our users. Our users could still access it but they will not recommend it.
And then lastly we're just really careful about what we monetize. So we always want to make sure that there's no incentive. So, for example, with regard to climate change, we don’t monetize any kind of climate change material. So there's no incentive for you to keep publishing that material that is propagating something that is generally understood as not accurate information.”
Youtube deleted information on how Fenbendazole helped Joe Tippens cure his terminal cancer. I will reiterate some important aspects about this.
Initally I thought YouTube had removed Tippen’s video simply because he said what cured cancer for him. After further thought, I have formed an opinion that it was the method by which Fenbendazole cured cancer which was so important for YouTube to censor.
After I published an article with a summary of Joe Tippens comments, Dr. William Makis, “2nd Smartest Guy in the World,” and even Joe Rogan, followed up with their own take on Tippen’s report on Fenbendazole around 6-9 months after mine.
I had previously referenced what I believed was the most important part of the report by Joe Tippens, that a Merck scientist discovered the anti-cancer effect of Fenbendazole while trying to rid her test mice of parasites.
This was my summary of the case study of Joe Tippens which I published in January 2023:
August 2019. Case Study: Joe Tippins was diagnosed with small cell lung cancer in September 2016 with a tumor the size of his fist in his lower left lung and in his lymph nodes. He went to MD Anderson in Houston who used radiation and chemotherapy. The radiation caused harm to him. He lost weight from 200 pounds to 105, and lost all his hair. The radiation and chemotherapy worked to an extent. The tumor disappeared, but the cancer metasticized throughout his body. A veterinarian in Oklahoma, a family friend, informed Tippins about a scientist from Merck who had been creating cancer in mice for studies. Her mice became infested with intestinal parasites. She gave the mice Fenbendazole to kill the intestinal parasites. The Fenbendazole also cured all the cancer in her mice. The scientist came to be diagnosed with cancer herself. She took Fenbendazole and cured her cancer. Tippens began taking Fenbendazole 3 days a week at a dosage recommended by his veterinarian friend: 1.2 grams of Fenbendazole per day, 3 days a week. Tippens did that for January, February, March and April of 2017. By May of 2017, Tippens was free of cancer.
Notice the difference? OK, maybe not, so let me make this clear. The Merck scientist was creating cancer in mice. Her mice got worms. She tried to kill the worms with Fenbendazole and cured the cancer too. It’s not a coincidence. It also works with Ivermectin and Artemisia by the same method of killing parasites that feed on cancer cells.
Now once again, sorry to be repetitive, “2nd Smartest Guy,” an Ivermectin (Petmectin) salesman who has now blocked me,
also did a review of Tippen’s video, and chose not to report anything on how the Merck scientist intended to kill parasites with Fenbendazole, and wound up killing the cancer at the same time. I can’t let go of the theory of cancer and parasites. There are too many informed people who believe it, and although it wasn’t my theory, it makes sense.
Let me go over some of the foundation and background here. I’m not trying to take credit for this theory of Cancer and Parasites. It’s an old one.
I was first made aware of it by A.M. Gonzalez, an engineer from Spain, who deserves the most credit for reawaking an old medical theory.
I spoke with Gonzalez several times in 2022. I wrote about the Ivermectin trials of Gonzalez in September 2022.
I remember at one point that Gonzalez tried to get Pierre Kory to report say something positive about the study, so that it could get more attention, and Kory essessentially blew him off. I didn’t have the same very low opinion of Kory then that I have now. All I had seen in my social media news was how Kory described how Ivermectin cured a virus to Congress. It’s clear to me now that Ivermectin reversed the effects of what doctors were doing to hospitalized patients. When I first heard his Kory’s testimony to the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs on Dec 8, 2020, I was shocked and angered that the information on Kory’s high death rate in COVID ICUs had not been reported by these outlets, and began to report it myself. I wish I had viewed the original testimony earlier and not relied others to report it.
Gonzalez is the one who first told me of the theory of how killing cancer cells was a two-part process. First, kill the parasites that feed on cancer cells and form a “bioshield.” Second, kill the exposed cancer cells. At one point, he told me he spoke with an author of a paper in 1994 on Lactoferrin and Cancer. In the phone call the author explained the theory to Gonzalez, as best I can remember. I’m just trying to give credit where it is due. I just reported this information; it wasn’t my theory initially.
Later in fact Gonzalez study did pivot to Lactoferrin, and Stefan Hartmann, of Iron Direct Primary Care, came on board. I listened in on a conference call and reported it in November 2022.
There has been some significant development on trials of Ivermectin and Cancer. Dr. Paul Marik, co-founder of the FLCCC with Kory, was to lead the trials, the FLCCC announded on February 2, 2024.
“We hope that our research will bring attention to often overlooked methods for treating cancer as well as managing the symptoms from conventional treatment,” said Paul E. Marik, M.D., FCCM, FCCP, lead author of the study, chief scientific officer of the FLCCC and former Chief, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School. “Our research is intended to advance a better understanding of how cancer can be treated more efficiently, with fewer side effects, through using well-studied approaches that include readily available medications that are well-studied and known to have minimal side effects.”
Mary Beth Pfeiffer, of TrialSite News, published an article on the FLCCC’s study on February 2, 2024, and refernced Paul Mann, who recovered from Cancer by using Ivermectin.
Ivermectin Squares Off in a New War on Cancer
Mann, a government intelligence analyst from Fenton, Missouri, received a call from a doctor he had heard about from a friend; the doctor had treated breast cancer for thirty years. They talked for three hours in calls that became a Tuesday routine. Early on, a drug named ivermectin came up. It was approved, had few side effects, and had been shown in laboratory and animal studies to kill several kinds of cancer cells.
Mann got some of it himself, making an eight-hour round-trip drive to Tennessee, the only state where ivermectin can be bought over-the-counter. He took it every day. And two months later, this man with almost no chance of survival was in remission.
“We hope that our research will bring attention to often overlooked methods for treating cancer as well as managing the symptoms from conventional treatment,” said Paul E. Marik, M.D., FCCM, FCCP, lead author of the study, chief scientific officer of the FLCCC and former Chief, Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine at Eastern Virginia Medical School. “Our research is intended to advance a better understanding of how cancer can be treated more efficiently, with fewer side effects, through using well-studied approaches that include readily available medications that are well-studied and known to have minimal side effects.”
Dr. Marik summarized literature on the methods of action by which Ivermectin cured cancer on March 29, 2024. None of them referenced any role of Ivermectin in destroying parasites as far as I can tell. Also as far as I can tell, many of the effects of Ivermectin as described in the literature referenced by Dr. Marik, at least in vivo, meaning not a petri dish, occur downstream of the elimination of parasites in tumors by the body’s own natural processes.
So that’s my opinion on where things stand as undeniable reports of various compounds that cure Cancer emerge. The debate and disinformation will center around the method of action.
I wish I could trust Dr. Marik more to explain the method of action, but I just can’t because I believe he has a serious conflict of interest. Again, Ivermectin reversed sepsis (and probably blood clots) resulting from the use of ventilators, opioids, tranquilizers and other drugs.
Dr. Marik’s position on how Ivermectin treated COVID is that Ivermectin cured a virus, not bacterial pneumonia created by doctors like himself who were using ventilators. He says that sepsis is normally induced by bacteria, but in the case of “COVID,” there was a sepsis-like effect. He says it is the body’s immune response that causes the symptoms associated with pneumonia, which may be true to some extent, but I also believe that bacteria which cannot be discarded by the body through coughing or sneezing can also secrete a toxin.
In any case though, Marik describes bacterial-induced sepsis as “sepsis-like,” caused by a virus, in COVID patients. I strongly disagree. It was simply bacterial sepsis. The transcript below of an interview of Dr. Marik published on July 19, 2020 by Sean Burke.
Burke: We should talk a little bit about sepsis here, just just briefly, because I did bring it up. First of all Dr Marik, what is sepsis?
Marik: Yeah so probably the best description is it's a patient, generally we talk about bacterial sepsis is a patient who develops systemic signs and symptoms from a bacterial infection. So in most patients who have sepsis, it's due to a bacteria, and the commonest is pneumonia or urinary tract infection. When it comes to viruses, viruses generally don't cause sepsis. It's a condition pretty much confined to bacteria. However, COVID's an interesting beast and it does cause a sepsis-like syndrome, although it's not sepsis. So in essence and sepsis is the hosts the person's response to a bacterial infection.
Burke: And it's the host, the the immune system really going crazy trying to fight off that bacteria, is that it?
Marik: Yeah, and that's where this very similar parallels between bacteria and COVID. Because it aid the manifestations of bacterial sepsis, and Osler knew this 100 years ago, was not the bacteria per se, but the host's response to the bacteria.
And who's that you're talking about?
William Osler who’s considered the father of medicine. (Aside: Actually the word “Medicine” is Greek and dates to Hippocrates and earlier, and Hippocrates is far more widely considered the father of Medicine, something I wrote about in December 2020 here). You know he he he noted this in his writings over a hundred years ago when we couldn't really understand stuff. But he was kind of astute enough to pick that up. And as it so happens COVID is very similar in that respect to bacterial infection.
There is much more I could report on the issue of how Ivermectin cured bacterial pneumonia, and sepsis and why I believe that Dr. Marik damned-well knew that it did. If you are interested in learning more, as background, I recommend reading a paper co-authored by Pierre Kory on a study of ventilated patients and sepsis conducted in Wisconsin and published in Critical Care Shock in 2020:
Early hydrocortisone, ascorbate and thiamine therapy for severe septic shock.
I will probably have to break down the statistics in this paper for you so you can understand my concerns on the statistics reported in this study. Not too many people have a formal education on lies, damned lies, and statistics, which was the first lecture I heard in an Econometrics class. It’s tricky. Once you learn how to do things the right way from scratch, however, you can pick up where people are being deceptive in statistics very quickly by simply noting the statistics that they choose to report and not report. I was sitting in that same classroom when the Professor walked in late on September 11, 2001, and told us what had happened, by the way.
Another thing I notice, is there’s never a data set. Another Professor told us that if you didn’t publish your data set with a paper using statistics, it was an automatic F. He said he didn’t care how well it was written, or how conclusive it sounded. “Anyone can make up numbers.” I remember that we all kind of laughed because we thought, who in the hell would do that? Now I review lots of medical papers quoting statistics and I never see one data set to check their conclusions. That’s two years of post-grad education for you right there, for free. That’s why I said there should be complete transparancy between doctors and patients in trials with real-time, public, statistics in a “double see” model.
Read that paper co-authored by Kory and see if you can figure out what my concerns are, if you like. I’ll try to report it later.
I wish the FLCCC the best results in their cancer study, which I believe will be successful. For now, however, I cannot accept Marik’s judgements on the methods of action of Ivermectin and Cancer due to his conflict of interest on the effects of Ivermectin on bacteria (COVID), the large numbers of deaths resulting from willful and repetitive malpractice of doctors at the FLCCC, which should result in criminal charges in my estimation, and my reporting previous to the FLCCC study which described the role of bacteria in Cancer. There’s just too much to ignore.
There is some further reporting on biofilms and cancer. Here’s one: Intracellular bacteria in cancer—prospects and debates, October 9, 2023:
Recent evidence suggests that some human cancers may harbor low-biomass microbial ecosystems, spanning bacteria, viruses, and fungi.
That’s definitely an interesting paper and worth a read, even though I haven’t had time. I’m especially interested to learn more about fungi.
They even mentioned William Russell, which I also mentioned in my “Symbiotic” article of January 2023.
The prospect of bacteria potentially impacting cancer gained traction in the late 19th century, with reports such as that of William Russell and colleagues suggesting that microorganisms may reside within tumors1,2
But let me get back to trying to stop Netanyahu from nuking American cities in the name of Iran. Ever heard the song: “We didn’t start the fire. It was always buring since the world’s been turning.” Priorities change, unfortunately. It’s best to get out in front of some things. Hopefully one day years from now you’ll say “damn Charles that was a crazy conspiracy theory about Netanyahu and nukes. Nothing happened.” Sometimes I want to be wrong.
I’ll also try to get back to reporting the “death spike” of Governor Cuomo in New York. I made my first effort at a video about it on Rumble, which is really an awkward format for me at this point. I know I need to step my tech game up. But if you can understand what I’m saying it is much faster and convenient to report in video format, and I made few observations along the way that I did not report earlier.
Charles Wright