Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

I verified this and it’s true “This is a class Group 1 carcinogen. The new study warns there's NO SAFE amount of ham, bacon, or even pepperoni for human consumption” Processed meats including ham, bacon, pepperoni are now definitively linked to cancer (Group 1), and newer 2025–2026 studies reinforce...

WallStreetApes's profile picture

Wall Street Apes

1,402,590 subscribers

618,271 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Здоровье и велнесНовости и политикаНаука и технологии
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

American are saying that Dunkin' Donuts bacon looks so fake it’s essentially turned into those bacon strips you give to your dogs The way it looks is almost identical to the bacon strips made for dog treats The reason for this is at Dunkin' Donuts the bacon is extremely processed. According to their website, it’s real bacon but the look of it comes from the processing It’s also a carcinogen which is very concerning. The bacon contains Sodium Nitrite, when heated it forms nitrosamines, which are classified as probable carcinogens colorectal cancer risk. It also contains - Sodium Erythorbate, a synthetic antioxidant used alongside nitrite to speed up curing and help reduce nitrosamine formation. - Sodium Phosphate, high phosphate intake from processed foods is associated with potential kidney strain, bone health issues, and cardiovascular concerns. - And lots of added Sugars
1:24

American are saying that Dunkin' Donuts bacon looks so fake it’s essentially turned into those bacon strips you give to your dogs The way it looks is almost identical to the bacon strips made for dog treats The reason for this is at Dunkin' Donuts the bacon is extremely processed. According to their website, it’s real bacon but the look of it comes from the processing It’s also a carcinogen which is very concerning. The bacon contains Sodium Nitrite, when heated it forms nitrosamines, which are classified as probable carcinogens colorectal cancer risk. It also contains - Sodium Erythorbate, a synthetic antioxidant used alongside nitrite to speed up curing and help reduce nitrosamine formation. - Sodium Phosphate, high phosphate intake from processed foods is associated with potential kidney strain, bone health issues, and cardiovascular concerns. - And lots of added Sugars

Wall Street Apes

224,221 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

This is crazy. American Doctor David Morris exposing lunch meats sold in the US are classified as a Class 1 Carcinogens We have been poisoned for decades “There is convincing evidence that ingredients in these meats cause cancer” “Lunch meats are classified as a Class I carcinogen. I'm going to read this to you just so you know what the World Health Organization says about lunch meats, deli meats here: "Considered a Class I carcinogen by the World Health Organization because it is a type of processed meat which is a Group 1 carcinogen in humans. Eating processed meats, including deli meats, increases the risk of colorectal cancer, with the risk growing with the amount consumed. There is convincing evidence that ingredients in these meats cause cancer." So, they can train- contain nitrates and nitrites that turn into a substance called NOCs in your gut, which significantly increase your risk of colorectal cancer, and then even other cancers. So, it would be my advice to people to s- significantly reduce or eliminate their consumption of deli meats and lunch meats. They're convenient, they might even be tasty and they might make a good sandwich, but the curing and the processing and the salting and the smoking and all these things that are done to these meats increases the toxic chemicals in them and the cancer-growing potential in them.” “You can continue to do what you want, if you live in a free country here in the United States, if you want to live long and you don't want to be subject to cancers, lots of things can cause cancers”
1:56

This is crazy. American Doctor David Morris exposing lunch meats sold in the US are classified as a Class 1 Carcinogens We have been poisoned for decades “There is convincing evidence that ingredients in these meats cause cancer” “Lunch meats are classified as a Class I carcinogen. I'm going to read this to you just so you know what the World Health Organization says about lunch meats, deli meats here: "Considered a Class I carcinogen by the World Health Organization because it is a type of processed meat which is a Group 1 carcinogen in humans. Eating processed meats, including deli meats, increases the risk of colorectal cancer, with the risk growing with the amount consumed. There is convincing evidence that ingredients in these meats cause cancer." So, they can train- contain nitrates and nitrites that turn into a substance called NOCs in your gut, which significantly increase your risk of colorectal cancer, and then even other cancers. So, it would be my advice to people to s- significantly reduce or eliminate their consumption of deli meats and lunch meats. They're convenient, they might even be tasty and they might make a good sandwich, but the curing and the processing and the salting and the smoking and all these things that are done to these meats increases the toxic chemicals in them and the cancer-growing potential in them.” “You can continue to do what you want, if you live in a free country here in the United States, if you want to live long and you don't want to be subject to cancers, lots of things can cause cancers”

Wall Street Apes

165,508 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

Subway launched hot dogs called the SubDog and people are noticing it looks very unappetizing and the color seems very dark I looked up the ingredients. They are: “Beef, water, corn syrup solids, modified corn starch, salt, potassium lactate, sodium phosphate, sodium diacetate, dextrose, sodium erythorbate, garlic powder, spice extractives, sodium nitrite, smoke” These are dangerous ones Sodium nitrite (curing/preservative): Prevents bacterial growth (e.g., botulism) and gives the pink color. When heated or in the body, it can form nitrosamines, which the World Health Organization and IARC classify processed meats as carcinogenic (Group 1). Linked to increased colorectal cancer risk with frequent consumption Yes you read that right, LINKED TO CANCER Sodium phosphate / Potassium lactate / Sodium diacetate: Used for texture, moisture retention, and preservation. High phosphate intake is sometimes associated with kidney strain or bone health issues in excess, but levels here are typical for processed foods. Sodium erythorbate: Antioxidant that speeds curing and prevents spoilage. GRAS loophole It’s launched mainly in Canada right now but man does this thing look questionable
1:55

Subway launched hot dogs called the SubDog and people are noticing it looks very unappetizing and the color seems very dark I looked up the ingredients. They are: “Beef, water, corn syrup solids, modified corn starch, salt, potassium lactate, sodium phosphate, sodium diacetate, dextrose, sodium erythorbate, garlic powder, spice extractives, sodium nitrite, smoke” These are dangerous ones Sodium nitrite (curing/preservative): Prevents bacterial growth (e.g., botulism) and gives the pink color. When heated or in the body, it can form nitrosamines, which the World Health Organization and IARC classify processed meats as carcinogenic (Group 1). Linked to increased colorectal cancer risk with frequent consumption Yes you read that right, LINKED TO CANCER Sodium phosphate / Potassium lactate / Sodium diacetate: Used for texture, moisture retention, and preservation. High phosphate intake is sometimes associated with kidney strain or bone health issues in excess, but levels here are typical for processed foods. Sodium erythorbate: Antioxidant that speeds curing and prevents spoilage. GRAS loophole It’s launched mainly in Canada right now but man does this thing look questionable

Wall Street Apes

130,356 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

I am sorry but Dr Pal Manickam, the Gastroenterologist from California, is becoming not just a health misinformation menace, but also a subtle "hate-monger" with his divisive attitude towards dietary choices in India, also known as Bharat, a Union of States and marriage of [dietary] cultures and traditions. Claims: 1. Eating red meat (beef and pork) causes colon cancer 2. Nitrosamines (from nitrites/nitrates) in red meat causes colon cancer 3. Cancer screening in USA above age of 50, but not in India 4. Kerala has maximum number of colon cancers in India 5. Kerala has maximum number of colon cancers because Malayalees eat a lot of beef. A lot. Response: 1. Eating red meat does not cause colon cancer Higher red meat consumption was shown to have a correlation with increased risk for colon cancer, but the evidence for independent association was weak and remains weak Eating red meat does not increase risk of colon cancer. Excessive consumption of red meat/ processed meat (excessive not yet fully defined across populations) was confusingly correlated with increased risk of colon cancer 2. Studies have only looked at nitrites and nitrates [and hence nitrosamine formation] causing stomach cancer and not colon cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) also focussed on nitrosamines and stomach cancer, but the potential role for dietary nitrate/nitrite in colon cancer is not conclusively proven. Meat-based diets (specifically processed meat, not fresh meat) have a well described higher risk for cancer, but it is not readily attributable to nitrite consistently in all studies. Most studies are on ground and well water and not meat. And the strongest study to show cancer link and nitrite consumption is in mice, not humans The biggest source of nitrate exposure is dietary consumption of certain types of vegetables that are naturally high in nitrate. This is a clear case of investigator bias, looking at any possible way to force the data into a specific conclusion (like Dr. Pal is doing in the video). The IARC maintains the tone of its conclusion, but only to reiterate its validity in a theoretical state, while acknowledging that the epidemiology does to support these conclusions. Nitrites are just one reason processed meats may contribute to bowel cancer, and their relative importance is uncertain. Other factors that may contribute include iron; PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) which are formed in smoked meats; and HCAs (heterocyclic amines), which are created when meat is cooked over an open flame – and which also are tumour-promoting. So its not just red meat, but the cooking method signficantly affecting health outcomes. 3. India does not have a national level screening protocol because the proportion of colon cancer among all cancers in India is only 3% which would lead to wastage of medical resources on a low-incidence cancer detection protocol. But in the USA, colon cancer is the second most common cause of cancer death. Overall, the lifetime risk of developing colorectal cancer is about 1 in 23 for men and 1 in 26 for women - which is much much higher compared to India and that is why they have screening protocols in place - not because they eat more red meat than Indians. 4. Kerala has the highest crude incidence rate of all cancers followed by Mizoram. Not colon cancer. All cancers. Highest colon cancer rates and burden of colon cancer are observed in Goa and Orissa, not Kerala. & While the discussion on beef and colon cancer is ongoing in the video, a segment of the clip shows a news item "concerning increasing cases of colon cancer in Kerala" - this is that news piece - - and read what it says: it talks about only younger age group and colon cancer. "Experts opine that underlying factors leading to the rise in cases, especially at this age, could be lifestyle, environment and genetic factors" - they do not mention beef at all. The report also says: "Though we have no authentic records to show the statistics of rising cases, we have been observing a trend here. Our changing lifestyle is most likely to blame for the rise in colorectal cancer cases amongst younger people, though hereditary reasons are also a major cause." - again, no mention of beef eating. 5. Lakshwadeep is India's biggest meat eater followed by north-east states such as Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Nagaland and Manipur followed by Kerala. MEAT EATING. Not beef eating. Specifically looking at the largest beef consuming state - it is Meghalaya, where more than 80% of the population consumes this meat, not Kerala. Kerala is the largest beef consuming state in the context of male population only. [ 6. Oh by the way, about pork and colon cancer --> the risk was not increased consuming high amounts of pork: and there is only one study showing colon cancer risk in women in Japan, not India and that too who consumed pork >/= 3 times/week compared to </=1 time: Add-on: The risk for colon cancer is not red meat alone (with weak evidence), but more importantly (with stronger evidence), alcohol use, smoking, family history of cancer, presence of inflammatory bowel disease, obesity and polyps or adenoma of colon. These have been very conviniently ignored by the Gastroenterologist from California. Summary - red meat causing colon cancer is not convincingly proven. Increased intake of processed red meat more than higher intake of unprocessed red meat is weakly linked from evidence point of view to colon cancer risk. Nitrosamine in red meat as cancer causing in humans is not proven. Kerala does not have the largest burden of colon cancer in India, nor it is the largest consumer of beef. There is no realistic evidence that eating pork increases risk of colon cancer. These are actual facts. And I am not even a Gastroenterologist from California. I am a Hepatologist. From India.
0:28

I am sorry but Dr Pal Manickam, the Gastroenterologist from California, is becoming not just a health misinformation menace, but also a subtle "hate-monger" with his divisive attitude towards dietary choices in India, also known as Bharat, a Union of States and marriage of [dietary] cultures and traditions. Claims: 1. Eating red meat (beef and pork) causes colon cancer 2. Nitrosamines (from nitrites/nitrates) in red meat causes colon cancer 3. Cancer screening in USA above age of 50, but not in India 4. Kerala has maximum number of colon cancers in India 5. Kerala has maximum number of colon cancers because Malayalees eat a lot of beef. A lot. Response: 1. Eating red meat does not cause colon cancer Higher red meat consumption was shown to have a correlation with increased risk for colon cancer, but the evidence for independent association was weak and remains weak Eating red meat does not increase risk of colon cancer. Excessive consumption of red meat/ processed meat (excessive not yet fully defined across populations) was confusingly correlated with increased risk of colon cancer 2. Studies have only looked at nitrites and nitrates [and hence nitrosamine formation] causing stomach cancer and not colon cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) also focussed on nitrosamines and stomach cancer, but the potential role for dietary nitrate/nitrite in colon cancer is not conclusively proven. Meat-based diets (specifically processed meat, not fresh meat) have a well described higher risk for cancer, but it is not readily attributable to nitrite consistently in all studies. Most studies are on ground and well water and not meat. And the strongest study to show cancer link and nitrite consumption is in mice, not humans The biggest source of nitrate exposure is dietary consumption of certain types of vegetables that are naturally high in nitrate. This is a clear case of investigator bias, looking at any possible way to force the data into a specific conclusion (like Dr. Pal is doing in the video). The IARC maintains the tone of its conclusion, but only to reiterate its validity in a theoretical state, while acknowledging that the epidemiology does to support these conclusions. Nitrites are just one reason processed meats may contribute to bowel cancer, and their relative importance is uncertain. Other factors that may contribute include iron; PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons) which are formed in smoked meats; and HCAs (heterocyclic amines), which are created when meat is cooked over an open flame – and which also are tumour-promoting. So its not just red meat, but the cooking method signficantly affecting health outcomes. 3. India does not have a national level screening protocol because the proportion of colon cancer among all cancers in India is only 3% which would lead to wastage of medical resources on a low-incidence cancer detection protocol. But in the USA, colon cancer is the second most common cause of cancer death. Overall, the lifetime risk of developing colorectal cancer is about 1 in 23 for men and 1 in 26 for women - which is much much higher compared to India and that is why they have screening protocols in place - not because they eat more red meat than Indians. 4. Kerala has the highest crude incidence rate of all cancers followed by Mizoram. Not colon cancer. All cancers. Highest colon cancer rates and burden of colon cancer are observed in Goa and Orissa, not Kerala. & While the discussion on beef and colon cancer is ongoing in the video, a segment of the clip shows a news item "concerning increasing cases of colon cancer in Kerala" - this is that news piece - - and read what it says: it talks about only younger age group and colon cancer. "Experts opine that underlying factors leading to the rise in cases, especially at this age, could be lifestyle, environment and genetic factors" - they do not mention beef at all. The report also says: "Though we have no authentic records to show the statistics of rising cases, we have been observing a trend here. Our changing lifestyle is most likely to blame for the rise in colorectal cancer cases amongst younger people, though hereditary reasons are also a major cause." - again, no mention of beef eating. 5. Lakshwadeep is India's biggest meat eater followed by north-east states such as Arunachal Pradesh, Mizoram, Nagaland and Manipur followed by Kerala. MEAT EATING. Not beef eating. Specifically looking at the largest beef consuming state - it is Meghalaya, where more than 80% of the population consumes this meat, not Kerala. Kerala is the largest beef consuming state in the context of male population only. [ 6. Oh by the way, about pork and colon cancer --> the risk was not increased consuming high amounts of pork: and there is only one study showing colon cancer risk in women in Japan, not India and that too who consumed pork >/= 3 times/week compared to </=1 time: Add-on: The risk for colon cancer is not red meat alone (with weak evidence), but more importantly (with stronger evidence), alcohol use, smoking, family history of cancer, presence of inflammatory bowel disease, obesity and polyps or adenoma of colon. These have been very conviniently ignored by the Gastroenterologist from California. Summary - red meat causing colon cancer is not convincingly proven. Increased intake of processed red meat more than higher intake of unprocessed red meat is weakly linked from evidence point of view to colon cancer risk. Nitrosamine in red meat as cancer causing in humans is not proven. Kerala does not have the largest burden of colon cancer in India, nor it is the largest consumer of beef. There is no realistic evidence that eating pork increases risk of colon cancer. These are actual facts. And I am not even a Gastroenterologist from California. I am a Hepatologist. From India.

TheLiverDoc™

1,924,232 просмотров • 2 лет назад

The World Health Organization classifies deli meats like ham, turkey, salami and hot dogs as a Group 1 carcinogens Here’s the insane part, eating just 2 slices of deli meat a day increase your risk of cancer by 18% Read that again The International Agency for Research on Cancer analysis of multiple studies found that 50 grams of processed meat per day (roughly 2 slices of ham or similar deli meat) is associated with an 18% increased relative risk of colorectal cancer There’s something else you should know about and its nitrates added “People do not want to have nitrates in their food. So you'll see all of these turkeys say no nitrates or nitrites added. But if you flip it over and you read the label, you'll see celery powder. Celery powder is nitrates, and it actually has a higher concentration of nitrates” Again, this is true This is a common labeling loophole. USDA rules allow products cured with celery powder or juice which is naturally high in nitrates to be labeled “no nitrates or nitrites added” Our food is literally poison
0:36

The World Health Organization classifies deli meats like ham, turkey, salami and hot dogs as a Group 1 carcinogens Here’s the insane part, eating just 2 slices of deli meat a day increase your risk of cancer by 18% Read that again The International Agency for Research on Cancer analysis of multiple studies found that 50 grams of processed meat per day (roughly 2 slices of ham or similar deli meat) is associated with an 18% increased relative risk of colorectal cancer There’s something else you should know about and its nitrates added “People do not want to have nitrates in their food. So you'll see all of these turkeys say no nitrates or nitrites added. But if you flip it over and you read the label, you'll see celery powder. Celery powder is nitrates, and it actually has a higher concentration of nitrates” Again, this is true This is a common labeling loophole. USDA rules allow products cured with celery powder or juice which is naturally high in nitrates to be labeled “no nitrates or nitrites added” Our food is literally poison

Wall Street Apes

206,966 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

The Dangerous Cult of 'Fasting' Influencers. Fasting has its anecdotal benefits, yes. But it is overrated. And water fasting is highly overrated. But this video featuring a Cardiologist is amusingly nonsense. There is no study from Boston (from a "University?" - how vague!) that says 7-days water fasting reduces risk of cancer (what cancer?) by 70%. And there is no proof that fasting kills cancer cells in humans. Here is what fasting does to cancers in humans. Nothing. Fasting is now become a sort of religion-like cult for wellness influencers to rake in views and engagement. From a scientific standpoint, there are no realistically good human studies to prove anything from fasting that benefits cancers. I know, I know, "autophagy" and all that. Autophagy: Autophagy is the natural, conserved degradation of the cell that removes unnecessary or dysfunctional components. Yes, its a legit term and all. But in the context of cancer reduction and fasting in humans, it sounds like "immunity boosting," another wellness fraud term. The effects of fasting on cancer cells are all based on MOUSE studies, and none explicitly translated to humans. See this paper: everything is based on cells and tissues and small animal experiments: "While research on the subject is tantalizing, there’s little clinical evidence involving humans to substantiate the claims. Studies on the potential impacts on cancer treatment from various forms of fasting or calorie restriction, including the possibility that they reduce side effects, have been limited." "Fasting may not be appropriate for malnourished individuals or those with cancer cachexia, which results in a continuing loss of skeletal muscle mass, or for people with chronic diseases. Those with diabetes need to be very careful, because of the risk of hypoglycemia." "Based on our systematic review and meta-analysis, there is currently no evidence supporting the superiority of therapeutic fasting over non-fasting in preventing chemotherapy toxicity." - see here: Even intermittent fasting (IF) is overrated in cancer. "IF may be considered in adults seeking cancer-prevention benefits through means of weight management, butwhether IF itself affects cancer-related metabolic and molecular pathways remains unanswered. See here: Also this: "Fasting for short periods does not have any beneficial effect on the quality of life of cancer patients during treatment. Evidence on fasting regimes reducing side effects and toxicities of chemotherapy is missing." See here: The whole aspect of "fasting reducing cancer incidence" in the real world is just due to weight loss. Obesity is associated with at least 13 types of cancers and reversing obesity reduces risk of cancer - nothing to do with fasting killing off cancers cells in the body. And one can lose weight even without fasting. See here: Everything from prevention of adverse events of cancer, to reduction in side effects from chemotherapy, to slowing cancer growth by reducing glucose levels, to promoting cell regeneration by affecting autophagy is all LAB BASED MOLECULAR LEVEL HYPOTHESIS that has not been proven conclusively in humans. See here: Cancer patients must not starve. They must remain hydrated and they must eat a well balanced diet because cancer condition is highly demanding. And dont water fast for 7 days. Easy for people to make reels on it, but in real life, it may prove disastrous. Water fast does make you lose weight (because of starvation) but it is not at all a healthy way to lose weight. Stop with this fasting and cancer madness already.
0:21

The Dangerous Cult of 'Fasting' Influencers. Fasting has its anecdotal benefits, yes. But it is overrated. And water fasting is highly overrated. But this video featuring a Cardiologist is amusingly nonsense. There is no study from Boston (from a "University?" - how vague!) that says 7-days water fasting reduces risk of cancer (what cancer?) by 70%. And there is no proof that fasting kills cancer cells in humans. Here is what fasting does to cancers in humans. Nothing. Fasting is now become a sort of religion-like cult for wellness influencers to rake in views and engagement. From a scientific standpoint, there are no realistically good human studies to prove anything from fasting that benefits cancers. I know, I know, "autophagy" and all that. Autophagy: Autophagy is the natural, conserved degradation of the cell that removes unnecessary or dysfunctional components. Yes, its a legit term and all. But in the context of cancer reduction and fasting in humans, it sounds like "immunity boosting," another wellness fraud term. The effects of fasting on cancer cells are all based on MOUSE studies, and none explicitly translated to humans. See this paper: everything is based on cells and tissues and small animal experiments: "While research on the subject is tantalizing, there’s little clinical evidence involving humans to substantiate the claims. Studies on the potential impacts on cancer treatment from various forms of fasting or calorie restriction, including the possibility that they reduce side effects, have been limited." "Fasting may not be appropriate for malnourished individuals or those with cancer cachexia, which results in a continuing loss of skeletal muscle mass, or for people with chronic diseases. Those with diabetes need to be very careful, because of the risk of hypoglycemia." "Based on our systematic review and meta-analysis, there is currently no evidence supporting the superiority of therapeutic fasting over non-fasting in preventing chemotherapy toxicity." - see here: Even intermittent fasting (IF) is overrated in cancer. "IF may be considered in adults seeking cancer-prevention benefits through means of weight management, butwhether IF itself affects cancer-related metabolic and molecular pathways remains unanswered. See here: Also this: "Fasting for short periods does not have any beneficial effect on the quality of life of cancer patients during treatment. Evidence on fasting regimes reducing side effects and toxicities of chemotherapy is missing." See here: The whole aspect of "fasting reducing cancer incidence" in the real world is just due to weight loss. Obesity is associated with at least 13 types of cancers and reversing obesity reduces risk of cancer - nothing to do with fasting killing off cancers cells in the body. And one can lose weight even without fasting. See here: Everything from prevention of adverse events of cancer, to reduction in side effects from chemotherapy, to slowing cancer growth by reducing glucose levels, to promoting cell regeneration by affecting autophagy is all LAB BASED MOLECULAR LEVEL HYPOTHESIS that has not been proven conclusively in humans. See here: Cancer patients must not starve. They must remain hydrated and they must eat a well balanced diet because cancer condition is highly demanding. And dont water fast for 7 days. Easy for people to make reels on it, but in real life, it may prove disastrous. Water fast does make you lose weight (because of starvation) but it is not at all a healthy way to lose weight. Stop with this fasting and cancer madness already.

TheLiverDoc™

269,527 просмотров • 2 лет назад

🚨 Dr. Paul Marik sounds the alarm on rising cancer rates. “The risk of getting cancer is increasing exponentially.” “Currently 1 in 2 people… will develop cancer during a lifetime.” “That’s like half the population.” “That is a staggering statistic, and is far going to exceed the risk of cardiac disease.” “What we know is that to some degree, it’s preventable.” “You can’t change your genes, but you can change your lifestyle.” “And there are enormous lifestyle factors and environmental factors that increase the risk.” “Most Americans are addicted to processed foods, are sugar addicts, and have insulin resistance.” “Apart from insulin resistance underlying many diseases, one of which is cancer, there’s no question that people who are insulin resistant have an increased risk of cancer.” “But it’s also important in other diseases such as heart disease.” “There’s this myth that it’s cholesterol.” “It’s not cholesterol, it’s insulin resistance.” “And then there’s diabetes, pre-diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and Alzheimer’s disease.” “We know one of the first steps in reducing one’s risk of getting cancer is to deal with insulin resistance.” “And it’s not difficult.” “What you need to do is change from eating processed food to real food.” drpaulmarik CHDTV Live MERYL NASS, MD
2:41

🚨 Dr. Paul Marik sounds the alarm on rising cancer rates. “The risk of getting cancer is increasing exponentially.” “Currently 1 in 2 people… will develop cancer during a lifetime.” “That’s like half the population.” “That is a staggering statistic, and is far going to exceed the risk of cardiac disease.” “What we know is that to some degree, it’s preventable.” “You can’t change your genes, but you can change your lifestyle.” “And there are enormous lifestyle factors and environmental factors that increase the risk.” “Most Americans are addicted to processed foods, are sugar addicts, and have insulin resistance.” “Apart from insulin resistance underlying many diseases, one of which is cancer, there’s no question that people who are insulin resistant have an increased risk of cancer.” “But it’s also important in other diseases such as heart disease.” “There’s this myth that it’s cholesterol.” “It’s not cholesterol, it’s insulin resistance.” “And then there’s diabetes, pre-diabetes, metabolic syndrome, and Alzheimer’s disease.” “We know one of the first steps in reducing one’s risk of getting cancer is to deal with insulin resistance.” “And it’s not difficult.” “What you need to do is change from eating processed food to real food.” drpaulmarik CHDTV Live MERYL NASS, MD

Children’s Health Defense

14,949 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

I do not know who the guy is on the podcast with Raj Shamani, but he is absolutely wrong. There seems to be a section of "health influencers" who fearmonger the public on "dangers of whey protein or protein supplementation." Ammonia production is not a side effect of whey protein metabolism, but is a normal metabolic product of any protein metabolism. Ammonia is natural, generated as a by-product of protein ingestion through the breakdown of amino acids. Of the amino acids, glutamate is the one that has maximal free ammonia generation. In normal healthy persons, excessive ammonia generation is handled by the body and it does not affect brain function. This is done via the "urea cycle" in the liver: In patients with liver disease such as acute liver failure or chronic liver failure, the excess ammonia cannot be cleared out by the weak/failing liver or utilized in the muscles (because of muscle loss in liver patients) and affects brain functioning, leading to a condition called hepatic encephalopathy. This does not happen if you are healthy and taking additional protein. In fact, animal meats are more ammonia generating than plant-based or dairy-based protein and in those chronic liver failure patients with recurrent or persistent ammonia related brain dysfunction, the dietary advise is to limit animal meats and include more or switch to dairy+plant-based protein to keep ammonia generation low. Whey protein and scoops of additional whey protein to target protein requirement is perfectly safe and does not affect brain function or make the person slow like what is discussed in this video. Even advanced cirrhosis patients are supplemented with whey based protein formulations to target additional protein requirements and improve quality of life and immune functions Eg: and I hope we develop a law to deport brain dead misinformation peddling sub-standard "health influencers," like this guy in suit.
0:39

I do not know who the guy is on the podcast with Raj Shamani, but he is absolutely wrong. There seems to be a section of "health influencers" who fearmonger the public on "dangers of whey protein or protein supplementation." Ammonia production is not a side effect of whey protein metabolism, but is a normal metabolic product of any protein metabolism. Ammonia is natural, generated as a by-product of protein ingestion through the breakdown of amino acids. Of the amino acids, glutamate is the one that has maximal free ammonia generation. In normal healthy persons, excessive ammonia generation is handled by the body and it does not affect brain function. This is done via the "urea cycle" in the liver: In patients with liver disease such as acute liver failure or chronic liver failure, the excess ammonia cannot be cleared out by the weak/failing liver or utilized in the muscles (because of muscle loss in liver patients) and affects brain functioning, leading to a condition called hepatic encephalopathy. This does not happen if you are healthy and taking additional protein. In fact, animal meats are more ammonia generating than plant-based or dairy-based protein and in those chronic liver failure patients with recurrent or persistent ammonia related brain dysfunction, the dietary advise is to limit animal meats and include more or switch to dairy+plant-based protein to keep ammonia generation low. Whey protein and scoops of additional whey protein to target protein requirement is perfectly safe and does not affect brain function or make the person slow like what is discussed in this video. Even advanced cirrhosis patients are supplemented with whey based protein formulations to target additional protein requirements and improve quality of life and immune functions Eg: and I hope we develop a law to deport brain dead misinformation peddling sub-standard "health influencers," like this guy in suit.

TheLiverDoc™

241,731 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Oncologist Dr. William Makis: "Johns Hopkins quietly secured a patent in 2021 on mebendazole for treatment in cancer...[and is] running, quietly, several clinical trials with mebendazole in cancer...So this is not fringe... There's... real science behind it, patents behind it." This clip of Dr. Makis (William Makis), a radiologist, oncologist, and cancer researcher, is taken from an interview with Seth Holehouse () posted to Rumble on November 21, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "For the past year and a half, I've been working with antiparasitics that are being repurposed for cancer. This is ivermectin, mebendazole and fenbendazole. And the reason is because there's a big body of research. There are over 400 published papers on ivermectin in cancer. There are over 240 published papers on mebendazole in cancer. "In fact, Johns Hopkins quietly secured a patent in 2021 on mebendazole for treatment in cancer, specifically the most aggressive cancer, which is glioblastoma, brain cancer, extremely aggressive cancer. Johns Hopkins has the patent. They are also running quietly several clinical trials with mebendazole in cancer. There's colon cancer, gastric cancer and brain cancer, including children, children with brain cancers as well. So this is not fringe, this is not, something that is far out. There's actually real science behind it, patents behind it. "And when you search a lot of the AIs, for example Perplexity AI and you ask what are the most promising repurposed drugs for terminally ill cancer patients today, it will give you in its search, in the top three, you will get ivermectin as number one, mebendazole and fenbendazole, there's other antiparasitics like hydroxychloroquine will be in the top 10, you will have curcumin in the top 10, you will have EGCG, which is from green tea extract in the top 10, resveratrol in the top 10, metformin, which is a diabetes drug but also has anti-cancer activity in the top 10 as well. "And what I have found working with these antiparasitics, is that there is a benefit to patients in at least 75% of the cases."
1:59

Oncologist Dr. William Makis: "Johns Hopkins quietly secured a patent in 2021 on mebendazole for treatment in cancer...[and is] running, quietly, several clinical trials with mebendazole in cancer...So this is not fringe... There's... real science behind it, patents behind it." This clip of Dr. Makis (William Makis), a radiologist, oncologist, and cancer researcher, is taken from an interview with Seth Holehouse () posted to Rumble on November 21, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "For the past year and a half, I've been working with antiparasitics that are being repurposed for cancer. This is ivermectin, mebendazole and fenbendazole. And the reason is because there's a big body of research. There are over 400 published papers on ivermectin in cancer. There are over 240 published papers on mebendazole in cancer. "In fact, Johns Hopkins quietly secured a patent in 2021 on mebendazole for treatment in cancer, specifically the most aggressive cancer, which is glioblastoma, brain cancer, extremely aggressive cancer. Johns Hopkins has the patent. They are also running quietly several clinical trials with mebendazole in cancer. There's colon cancer, gastric cancer and brain cancer, including children, children with brain cancers as well. So this is not fringe, this is not, something that is far out. There's actually real science behind it, patents behind it. "And when you search a lot of the AIs, for example Perplexity AI and you ask what are the most promising repurposed drugs for terminally ill cancer patients today, it will give you in its search, in the top three, you will get ivermectin as number one, mebendazole and fenbendazole, there's other antiparasitics like hydroxychloroquine will be in the top 10, you will have curcumin in the top 10, you will have EGCG, which is from green tea extract in the top 10, resveratrol in the top 10, metformin, which is a diabetes drug but also has anti-cancer activity in the top 10 as well. "And what I have found working with these antiparasitics, is that there is a benefit to patients in at least 75% of the cases."

Sense Receptor

228,469 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

Oncologist Dr. William Makis: "Johns Hopkins quietly secured a patent in 2021 on mebendazole for treatment in cancer...[and is] running, quietly, several clinical trials with mebendazole in cancer...So this is not fringe... There's... real science behind it, patents behind it." "For the past year and a half, I've been working with antiparasitics that are being repurposed for cancer. This is ivermectin, mebendazole and fenbendazole. And the reason is because there's a big body of research. There are over 400 published papers on ivermectin in cancer. There are over 240 published papers on mebendazole in cancer. "In fact, Johns Hopkins quietly secured a patent in 2021 on mebendazole for treatment in cancer, specifically the most aggressive cancer, which is glioblastoma, brain cancer, extremely aggressive cancer. Johns Hopkins has the patent. They are also running quietly several clinical trials with mebendazole in cancer. There's colon cancer, gastric cancer and brain cancer, including children, children with brain cancers as well. So this is not fringe, this is not, something that is far out. There's actually real science behind it, patents behind it. Dr. Sulack Pete "And when you search a lot of the AIs, for example Perplexity AI and you ask what are the most promising repurposed drugs for terminally ill cancer patients today, it will give you in its search, in the top three, you will get ivermectin as number one, mebendazole and fenbendazole, there's other antiparasitics like hydroxychloroquine will be in the top 10, you will have curcumin in the top 10, you will have EGCG, which is from green tea extract in the top 10, resveratrol in the top 10, metformin, which is a diabetes drug but also has anti-cancer activity in the top 10 as well. "And what I have found working with these antiparasitics, is that there is a benefit to patients in at least 75% of the cases." Follow me for more Bombshell. #Fenbendazole #Ivermectin #Cancercure
3:49

Oncologist Dr. William Makis: "Johns Hopkins quietly secured a patent in 2021 on mebendazole for treatment in cancer...[and is] running, quietly, several clinical trials with mebendazole in cancer...So this is not fringe... There's... real science behind it, patents behind it." "For the past year and a half, I've been working with antiparasitics that are being repurposed for cancer. This is ivermectin, mebendazole and fenbendazole. And the reason is because there's a big body of research. There are over 400 published papers on ivermectin in cancer. There are over 240 published papers on mebendazole in cancer. "In fact, Johns Hopkins quietly secured a patent in 2021 on mebendazole for treatment in cancer, specifically the most aggressive cancer, which is glioblastoma, brain cancer, extremely aggressive cancer. Johns Hopkins has the patent. They are also running quietly several clinical trials with mebendazole in cancer. There's colon cancer, gastric cancer and brain cancer, including children, children with brain cancers as well. So this is not fringe, this is not, something that is far out. There's actually real science behind it, patents behind it. Dr. Sulack Pete "And when you search a lot of the AIs, for example Perplexity AI and you ask what are the most promising repurposed drugs for terminally ill cancer patients today, it will give you in its search, in the top three, you will get ivermectin as number one, mebendazole and fenbendazole, there's other antiparasitics like hydroxychloroquine will be in the top 10, you will have curcumin in the top 10, you will have EGCG, which is from green tea extract in the top 10, resveratrol in the top 10, metformin, which is a diabetes drug but also has anti-cancer activity in the top 10 as well. "And what I have found working with these antiparasitics, is that there is a benefit to patients in at least 75% of the cases." Follow me for more Bombshell. #Fenbendazole #Ivermectin #Cancercure

Joe Tippens

46,807 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

RFK Jr. just issued a global demand — it’s time to remove mercury from every vaccine worldwide. “Thimerosal is a mercury-based preservative that has never undergone proper safety testing in humans.” “Hundreds of peer-reviewed studies identify it as a potent neurotoxin, a mutagen, a carcinogen, and an endocrine disruptor.” “Thimerosal’s own label requires it to be treated as hazardous material and warns against ingestion.” “There is not a single study that proves it’s safe.” “Now that America has removed mercury from all vaccines, I call on every global health authority and every party to this convention to do the same.” “There is no excuse for inaction or holding stubbornly to the status quo.” “Let’s ensure that no child anywhere in the world is ever exposed to this deadly neurotoxin again.”
1:24

RFK Jr. just issued a global demand — it’s time to remove mercury from every vaccine worldwide. “Thimerosal is a mercury-based preservative that has never undergone proper safety testing in humans.” “Hundreds of peer-reviewed studies identify it as a potent neurotoxin, a mutagen, a carcinogen, and an endocrine disruptor.” “Thimerosal’s own label requires it to be treated as hazardous material and warns against ingestion.” “There is not a single study that proves it’s safe.” “Now that America has removed mercury from all vaccines, I call on every global health authority and every party to this convention to do the same.” “There is no excuse for inaction or holding stubbornly to the status quo.” “Let’s ensure that no child anywhere in the world is ever exposed to this deadly neurotoxin again.”

End Tribalism in Politics

90,146 просмотров • 10 месяцев назад

Mainstream Media Reporting On TOXIC Chemicals In Our Food That Are Legal To Use In America But Illegal In Europe, China & India 🌱☣️ Chemicals Widely Known To Produce Tumors In Humans Are Just Fine In America But Banned Overseas Professor Eric Milstone is an expert on food additives “It's not just potassium bromate, but many other chemicals and substances that are banned here in Europe over health concerns, but considered safe by the FDA.” “All of the food tested in this study contain chemicals that have been found to be hazardous to health, and shopping for organic food isn't a surefire way to avoid these chemicals.” “Researchers found that 99% of grocery store foods and fast foods they tested contain phthalates. Additionally, 79% of the food samples also contain bisphenol, an industrial chemical that's used in plastic manufacturing.” “It’s bread, but one ingredient is missing. Potassium bromate is a suspected carcinogen that's banned for human consumption in Europe as well as China and India, but legal in the US where it's used by some food makers to strengthen dough” Evidence It’s “Toxic to human consumers, that it may even either initiate or promote the development of tumors.”
3:22

Mainstream Media Reporting On TOXIC Chemicals In Our Food That Are Legal To Use In America But Illegal In Europe, China & India 🌱☣️ Chemicals Widely Known To Produce Tumors In Humans Are Just Fine In America But Banned Overseas Professor Eric Milstone is an expert on food additives “It's not just potassium bromate, but many other chemicals and substances that are banned here in Europe over health concerns, but considered safe by the FDA.” “All of the food tested in this study contain chemicals that have been found to be hazardous to health, and shopping for organic food isn't a surefire way to avoid these chemicals.” “Researchers found that 99% of grocery store foods and fast foods they tested contain phthalates. Additionally, 79% of the food samples also contain bisphenol, an industrial chemical that's used in plastic manufacturing.” “It’s bread, but one ingredient is missing. Potassium bromate is a suspected carcinogen that's banned for human consumption in Europe as well as China and India, but legal in the US where it's used by some food makers to strengthen dough” Evidence It’s “Toxic to human consumers, that it may even either initiate or promote the development of tumors.”

Wall Street Apes

236,076 просмотров • 2 лет назад

It’s no surprise that over 70% of Americans are obese and overweight when over 60% of our calories come from ultra-processed foods like these… The ingredient list of McDonald’s foods is proof that not all calories will have the same metabolic effects in humans… The seed oils, synthetic additives, and preservatives in these foods impact our hormones and metabolic functions negatively, making it harder for our bodies to produce energy and function properly… This leads to constant hunger, overeating, low energy, poor hormonal health and ultimately weight gain… Humans aren’t meant to consume these processed foods… Our health and well-being depend on many essential nutrients exclusively found in animal foods… Meat, organs, eggs, fruit, honey and raw dairy are the most nutrient dense foods for humans… These foods allowed us to thrive and evolve for hundreds of thousands of years… It's easy to find quality animal-based foods almost anywhere... It's always meat / organs / fruit / honey / raw dairy… This is an ANIMAL-BASED diet, and I believe this is the most optimal diet for humans on the planet...
13:50

It’s no surprise that over 70% of Americans are obese and overweight when over 60% of our calories come from ultra-processed foods like these… The ingredient list of McDonald’s foods is proof that not all calories will have the same metabolic effects in humans… The seed oils, synthetic additives, and preservatives in these foods impact our hormones and metabolic functions negatively, making it harder for our bodies to produce energy and function properly… This leads to constant hunger, overeating, low energy, poor hormonal health and ultimately weight gain… Humans aren’t meant to consume these processed foods… Our health and well-being depend on many essential nutrients exclusively found in animal foods… Meat, organs, eggs, fruit, honey and raw dairy are the most nutrient dense foods for humans… These foods allowed us to thrive and evolve for hundreds of thousands of years… It's easy to find quality animal-based foods almost anywhere... It's always meat / organs / fruit / honey / raw dairy… This is an ANIMAL-BASED diet, and I believe this is the most optimal diet for humans on the planet...

Paul Saladino, MD

36,998 просмотров • 4 дней назад

Big Pharma Is Profits Over People, Killing You For Profit & Vacations. Everyone In America Needs To See This ⛔️ “Cancer — Well, I will talk about that a better thing to talk about, however, is the relationship between profits and cancer in the United States. And there was a study that was published, I believe it was in 1994. It was a 12-year program, 12-year study. They looked at adults who had developed cancer as an adult, not childhood cancer, but adult cancer, right? And this is the main types of cancer that we get here in the United States. They did a meta-analysis of these people all around the world who developed cancer as adults for 12 years and were treated with chemo. And they looked at the results. And they published the results in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. And the results? 97%. Of the time, chemotherapy does not work. 97% of the time, it doesn't work. So why is it still used? It's one reason and one reason only, money. If you go to a medical doctor, an MD, with a sinus infection, and that doctor prescribes an antibiotic, he gets no financial kickback. Now, if he prescribes 5,000, you know of that antibiotic in one month, the drug company that makes it might send him to Cancun for a conference, right? But he gets no direct remuneration. It's not with chemotherapeutic drugs. It's different. Chemotherapeutic drugs are the only classification of drugs that the prescribing doctor gets a direct cut of. So if your doctor prescribes chemotherapy for you, here's how it goes more or less. The doctor buys it from the pharmaceutical company for $5,000, sells it to the patient for $12,000, insurance pays $9,000, and the doctor pockets the $4,000 difference. And there ought to be a lot. The only reason chemotherapy is used is because doctors make money from it. Period. It doesn't work. 97% of the time. If Ford Motor Company made an automobile that exploded 97% of the time, would they still be in business? No. This is the tip of the iceberg of the control that the pharmaceutical industry has on us.”
2:43

Big Pharma Is Profits Over People, Killing You For Profit & Vacations. Everyone In America Needs To See This ⛔️ “Cancer — Well, I will talk about that a better thing to talk about, however, is the relationship between profits and cancer in the United States. And there was a study that was published, I believe it was in 1994. It was a 12-year program, 12-year study. They looked at adults who had developed cancer as an adult, not childhood cancer, but adult cancer, right? And this is the main types of cancer that we get here in the United States. They did a meta-analysis of these people all around the world who developed cancer as adults for 12 years and were treated with chemo. And they looked at the results. And they published the results in the Journal of Clinical Oncology. And the results? 97%. Of the time, chemotherapy does not work. 97% of the time, it doesn't work. So why is it still used? It's one reason and one reason only, money. If you go to a medical doctor, an MD, with a sinus infection, and that doctor prescribes an antibiotic, he gets no financial kickback. Now, if he prescribes 5,000, you know of that antibiotic in one month, the drug company that makes it might send him to Cancun for a conference, right? But he gets no direct remuneration. It's not with chemotherapeutic drugs. It's different. Chemotherapeutic drugs are the only classification of drugs that the prescribing doctor gets a direct cut of. So if your doctor prescribes chemotherapy for you, here's how it goes more or less. The doctor buys it from the pharmaceutical company for $5,000, sells it to the patient for $12,000, insurance pays $9,000, and the doctor pockets the $4,000 difference. And there ought to be a lot. The only reason chemotherapy is used is because doctors make money from it. Period. It doesn't work. 97% of the time. If Ford Motor Company made an automobile that exploded 97% of the time, would they still be in business? No. This is the tip of the iceberg of the control that the pharmaceutical industry has on us.”

Wall Street Apes

339,878 просмотров • 2 лет назад

🚨WHOA! Florida Quietly Drops $140 Million Bombshell: State Backs “Unthinkable” Cancer Research Into Ivermectin, Fasting, and Nutrition-Based Therapies That Could Change Everything While federal agencies continue to guard the pharma-dominated “cut, poison, and burn” model, Florida is moving in the opposite direction — fast. Through its Cancer Innovation Fund, the state has now directed an astonishing $140 million toward high-impact cancer research, funding projects that would be unthinkable in other states — including studies on ivermectin, fasting, and nutrition-based therapies for cancer prevention and treatment. This marks year three of the initiative, and the shift is seismic. For decades, doctors who explored integrative or non-pharmaceutical cancer treatments risked losing their licenses. Now one of America’s largest states is not only protecting that research but funding it. Florida’s message is clear: stop criminalizing innovation, and let science — not pharma — lead. These are 12-month turnaround studies, designed to get data to the public quickly — not buried in bureaucracy or stalled for grants. Vitamin D, metabolic therapies, exercise, and nutrient-based interventions — once dismissed as “alternative” — are now being put under the microscope with state support. If successful, Florida could rewrite the rules of cancer care — proving that healing doesn’t have to come from a pill bottle or a radiation beam. This is the kind of medical independence the rest of the country should be watching.
1:32

🚨WHOA! Florida Quietly Drops $140 Million Bombshell: State Backs “Unthinkable” Cancer Research Into Ivermectin, Fasting, and Nutrition-Based Therapies That Could Change Everything While federal agencies continue to guard the pharma-dominated “cut, poison, and burn” model, Florida is moving in the opposite direction — fast. Through its Cancer Innovation Fund, the state has now directed an astonishing $140 million toward high-impact cancer research, funding projects that would be unthinkable in other states — including studies on ivermectin, fasting, and nutrition-based therapies for cancer prevention and treatment. This marks year three of the initiative, and the shift is seismic. For decades, doctors who explored integrative or non-pharmaceutical cancer treatments risked losing their licenses. Now one of America’s largest states is not only protecting that research but funding it. Florida’s message is clear: stop criminalizing innovation, and let science — not pharma — lead. These are 12-month turnaround studies, designed to get data to the public quickly — not buried in bureaucracy or stalled for grants. Vitamin D, metabolic therapies, exercise, and nutrient-based interventions — once dismissed as “alternative” — are now being put under the microscope with state support. If successful, Florida could rewrite the rules of cancer care — proving that healing doesn’t have to come from a pill bottle or a radiation beam. This is the kind of medical independence the rest of the country should be watching.

War Correspondent

129,837 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Alex Jones breaks down the latest nutritional science, and it confirms what he's said for years. A major new study finds that eating meat may not be linked to a higher risk of death and may even protect against cancer. He highlights that this aligns with what was known decades ago when the American Heart Association promoted processed seed oils—"engine lubricants"—over natural foods. Now, research reveals unprocessed red meat has no adverse effect on obesity, and within a high-quality diet, it supports mental health, helps grow the brain, and can improve your mood. The narrative is finally catching up to the truth: meat is a foundational part of a healthy human diet, despite the agendas of figures like Bill Gates who continue to attack it.
1:02

Alex Jones breaks down the latest nutritional science, and it confirms what he's said for years. A major new study finds that eating meat may not be linked to a higher risk of death and may even protect against cancer. He highlights that this aligns with what was known decades ago when the American Heart Association promoted processed seed oils—"engine lubricants"—over natural foods. Now, research reveals unprocessed red meat has no adverse effect on obesity, and within a high-quality diet, it supports mental health, helps grow the brain, and can improve your mood. The narrative is finally catching up to the truth: meat is a foundational part of a healthy human diet, despite the agendas of figures like Bill Gates who continue to attack it.

Camus

23,515 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

This one is from September 2, 2023. It is another case study on Fauci's method of prevarication. After devastating study citations from the interviewer showing that masks don't work, Fauci responded: "but masks work on an individual level". This is nonsense. Here's why. To do science on masks, you have a masked group and an unmasked group. You compare the rate of infection in each group. This is called a randomized trial. This is how science is done. If the rate of infection is the same, then masks don't work. This was what the studies on masks showed. No difference. Now, there is simply no such thing as scientific studies showing that "masks work at the individual level". Fauci either didn't understand how science works or he was lying and making things up. It really is that simple. Fauci said gobbledygook in order to keep the idea of masks alive. He did it throughout the pandemic, but especially with masks. It's incredibly shameful for Fauci to abuse science in this way. But it's par for the course in the way he communicated science throughout the entire pandemic. Sad.
2:18

This one is from September 2, 2023. It is another case study on Fauci's method of prevarication. After devastating study citations from the interviewer showing that masks don't work, Fauci responded: "but masks work on an individual level". This is nonsense. Here's why. To do science on masks, you have a masked group and an unmasked group. You compare the rate of infection in each group. This is called a randomized trial. This is how science is done. If the rate of infection is the same, then masks don't work. This was what the studies on masks showed. No difference. Now, there is simply no such thing as scientific studies showing that "masks work at the individual level". Fauci either didn't understand how science works or he was lying and making things up. It really is that simple. Fauci said gobbledygook in order to keep the idea of masks alive. He did it throughout the pandemic, but especially with masks. It's incredibly shameful for Fauci to abuse science in this way. But it's par for the course in the way he communicated science throughout the entire pandemic. Sad.

Kevin Bass

56,102 просмотров • 22 дней назад

Florida Quietly Drops $140 Million Bombshell: State Backs “Unthinkable” Cancer Research Into Ivermectin, Fasting, and Nutrition-Based Therapies That Could Change Everything While federal agencies continue to guard the pharma-dominated “cut, poison, and burn” model, Florida is moving in the opposite direction — fast. Through its Cancer Innovation Fund, the state has now directed an astonishing $140 million toward high-impact cancer research, funding projects that would be unthinkable in other states — including studies on ivermectin, fasting, and nutrition-based therapies for cancer prevention and treatment. This marks year three of the initiative, and the shift is seismic. For decades, doctors who explored integrative or non-pharmaceutical cancer treatments risked losing their licenses. Now one of America’s largest states is not only protecting that research but funding it. Florida’s message is clear: stop criminalizing innovation, and let science — not pharma — lead. These are 12-month turnaround studies, designed to get data to the public quickly — not buried in bureaucracy or stalled for grants. Vitamin D, metabolic therapies, exercise, and nutrient-based interventions — once dismissed as “alternative” — are now being put under the microscope with state support. If successful, Florida could rewrite the rules of cancer care — proving that healing doesn’t have to come from a pill bottle or a radiation beam. This is the kind of medical independence the rest of the country should be watching.
1:32

Florida Quietly Drops $140 Million Bombshell: State Backs “Unthinkable” Cancer Research Into Ivermectin, Fasting, and Nutrition-Based Therapies That Could Change Everything While federal agencies continue to guard the pharma-dominated “cut, poison, and burn” model, Florida is moving in the opposite direction — fast. Through its Cancer Innovation Fund, the state has now directed an astonishing $140 million toward high-impact cancer research, funding projects that would be unthinkable in other states — including studies on ivermectin, fasting, and nutrition-based therapies for cancer prevention and treatment. This marks year three of the initiative, and the shift is seismic. For decades, doctors who explored integrative or non-pharmaceutical cancer treatments risked losing their licenses. Now one of America’s largest states is not only protecting that research but funding it. Florida’s message is clear: stop criminalizing innovation, and let science — not pharma — lead. These are 12-month turnaround studies, designed to get data to the public quickly — not buried in bureaucracy or stalled for grants. Vitamin D, metabolic therapies, exercise, and nutrient-based interventions — once dismissed as “alternative” — are now being put under the microscope with state support. If successful, Florida could rewrite the rules of cancer care — proving that healing doesn’t have to come from a pill bottle or a radiation beam. This is the kind of medical independence the rest of the country should be watching.

Camus

356,709 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад