Загрузка видео...
Не удалось загрузить видео
Study says Intermittent fasting can starve cancer cells pushing them into cell death. இன்பநிதிக்கு கக்கா கழுவும் உனக்கு எதுக்கு டா இந்த அறிவியல் பேச்சு மடப்பயலே.😂 #Annamalai
27,169 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)
Комментарии: 0
Нет доступных комментариев
Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста
![Can people in power/ authority kindly stop with this absolute BS on "fasting killing cancer cells" and citing religious nonsense to appeal to peoples emotions? Fasting is really quite dangerous for cancer patients in real life. Let me explain and bury this myth once and for all, especially for science illiterates like this guy. [1] The most common argument is that fasting "starves" cancer by cutting off its sugar (glucose) supply. While it is true that cancer cells consume vast amounts of glucose, they are biologically aggressive survivalists. If you stop eating, your body eventually switches to burning fat and breaking down muscle for energy. Cancer cells are highly adaptable; when glucose is low, many types of cancer can mutate to feed on other fuel sources, such as lactate, amino acids (from your muscles), or fatty acids. You cannot simply "starve" a tumor without starving the patient first. [2] Fasting is dangerous for cancer patients because of cancer cachexia - a wasting syndrome where the body loses muscle and fat rapidly. Cachexia is responsible for up to 30% of cancer deaths. Cancer puts the body in a hyper-metabolic state (burning energy fast). If a patient fasts, they risk accelerating muscle loss and weakening their immune system. A weak body cannot tolerate life-saving treatments like chemotherapy or radiation, nor can it fight off infections. [3] Most claims about fasting curing cancer come from studies on mice or cells in a petri dish. In a dish: You can kill cancer cells with almost anything (lemon juice, bleach, starvation, even shooting a bullet at it at close point or using a grenade to destroy the entire lab) because they have no immune system or body to protect them. In a human: The biology is infinitely more complex. Human metabolism, hormonal fluctuations, and tumor micro-environments mean that what shrinks a tumor in a mouse often fails completely in human trials. [4] Proponents often cite "autophagy" (the body's cellular recycling process triggered by fasting) as the cure. They claim it cleans out cancerous cells. Science shows that autophagy is a double-edged sword. -In all people, autophagy is a normal physiological process - whether fasting or not, which help in cleaning up damaged cells. -But in patients with cancer, once a tumor exists, cancer cells can actually hijack autophagy to survive stress (like chemotherapy) and repair themselves. In this context, fasting could theoretically help the cancer survive the treatment intended to kill it. [5] "Cancer" is not one disease; it is over 200 different diseases characterized by uncontrolled cell growth. Some cancers are driven by hormones, some by genetic mutations, and some by viruses. A fasting protocol that slows down one specific type of breast cancer might have zero effect on pancreatic cancer, or worse, accelerate a different type. The most lethal aspect of this misinformation is the delay in treatment. Cancer is a time-sensitive disease. While a patient spends months trying to fast the cancer away based on religious or alternative advice, the cancer often metastasizes (spreads) to other organs. Once cancer spreads, it often moves from being curable to being terminal. Relying solely on fasting wastes the critical window where medical intervention could have saved a life. Suggesting a single "ancient cure" for 200 complex genetic diseases is scientifically illogical... ...and generally stupid, as this video proves.](https://image.24vids.com/tw-2011663028648026498/amplify_video_thumb/2011661209100304388/img/DJHOW69erAX5Hmbo.jpg)
![Oncologist Dr. William Makis: "The turbo cancers after the COVID vaccines do respond to the antiparasitics, and they respond very well... [And] why do these antiparasitics work?" Todd Callender: "Cancer's a parasite?" Makis: "That's one possibility." This clip of Dr. Makis (William Makis), a radiologist, oncologist, and cancer researcher, is taken from an interview with attorney Todd Callender posted to the VaxxCHOICE (VaxxCHOICE) Rumble channel on November 21, 2025. ---------------Partial transcription of clip---------------- Dr. Makis: "The turbo cancers after the COVID vaccines do respond to the antiparasitics and they respond very well. This is, you know, whether it's ivermectin, fenbendazole or mebendazole, these patients are responding. "Now this is very important because patients who've developed cancer after taking Covid vaccines, they don't respond usually to conventional treatments. That's one of the hallmarks of turbo cancer is they present at a very late stage. These are extremely rapidly growing tumors. They're coming in at stage four. And it's whether it's young women with breast cancer, women in their 20s, something we've never seen before, young women with, men and women with colon cancer in their 20s and 30s. "Again, we've never seen—" Callender: "Two- year-olds, I've heard of two- year-olds with colon cancer—" Dr. Makis: "—we've never seen this before. That's the incredible part. And they're not responding to conventional treatments. So, they're not responding to chemo, they're not responding to radiation therapy, immunotherapy, or if they do response, they have a very, very short response time or remission time. And then the cancer comes roaring back. "And in a lot of these tragic cases, the patient dies within six months. This is another one of the features of turbo cancer is the prognosis is extremely poor if you go the conventional route. So you need something else. Now when you're using antiparasitics, for cancer, the dose is higher than the dose you would use to treat parasites or to treat Covid. So I give just a rule of thumb for ivermectin, for example, it's about five times the dose that you would need for cancer, about 5 to 10 times the dose than if you were just treating parasites or viruses. "And to go into the— why does it work? Why do these antiparasitics work?" Callender: "Cancer's a parasite?" Dr. Makis: "Well, that's one possibility. But there's more to it than that because, out of the 400 papers that have been published, a lot of those researchers look at the mechanisms. They are trying to identify the mechanisms of how ivermectin is treating these cancers. "And you've got, for example, there was one study published a few years ago, Mexican researchers, again, you're not going to see this done in the United States, Mexico. Mexican researchers took 28 different cancer cell lines, applied ivermectin to them, and all of them responded. Now to various degrees, you had breast cancer and ovarian cancer actually responding the most to ivermectin. You had the most cancer cell killing when they were exposed to ivermectin. "But when they look at the mechanisms, they've identified a number of interesting things. For example, ivermectin shuts down and kills cancer stem cells. Now, this is important because cancer stem cells are the reason chemotherapy doesn't work. When you have stage four pancreatic cancer, stage four ovarian cancer, and you go to your oncologist, they will tell you, we will give you chemo, but we can't cure you. It's palliative chemo. It'll buy you an extra six months, an extra 12 months of life. "The reason why they say that is why the chemo is palliative, not curative. It's is because chemo cannot kill cancer stem cells, which are not rapidly dividing. Chemo will kill everything that's rapidly dividing, but cancer stem cells are not rapidly dividing. And so the chemo will kill the rapidly dividing tumor cells, and it'll leave the cancer stem cells alone, while the cancer stem cells will start rapidly dividing a year later, two years later, they're going to spread to other parts of the body. Suddenly you've got recurrence, you've got metastases. Ivermectin will shut down and kill cancer stem cells. "So imagine you, added to your chemo regimen, and now you've essentially turned what's palliative chemo or a palliative situation to potentially a curative situation. And I really do believe I've come to the point, having helped over 7,000 cancer patients in the last year, I've come to the point where I could confidently say that stage 4 pancreatic cancer is curable, stage 4 ovarian cancer is curable, stage 4 colon cancer, lung cancer. These cancers are curable. I think if you add repurposed drugs, you add antiparasitics, you can turn these into curable situations. "Now, of course, we have to prove that. We have to do the research, do the publications. But in the meantime, I say stage 4 cancer patients don't have 10 years to wait for mainstream oncology or mainstream medicine to catch up with what we're seeing already clinically, in practice."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1993127013713166353/amplify_video_thumb/1993124339852754944/img/m5izGyXtNBTWkWd4.jpg)
![BRAVO! to Dr. Mark Trozzi for being one of the few Health Freedom MDs with the guts to openly call the Covid jabs what they are: bioweapons. "This genetic bioweapon is really a biological bull in a china shop... we know 28 mechanisms by which it causes cancer alone... [and the jabs are] permanently genetically modifying and damaging the genetic code of [humanity]." This clip of Trozzi (Dr Mark Trozzi MD), a veteran E.R. physician with 25 years of experience, as well as a human rights activist, is taken from an interview with Dr. Joe Sansone (Dr. Joseph Sansone (JosephSansone.com)) posted to Rumble on December 11, 2025. ----------------Partial transcription of clip--------------- "This genetic bioweapon is really a biological bull in a china shop. I mean it does so many damage. And I mean, I've given lectures. We were together last January, I gave a lecture in Florida on the mechanisms of injury. And the reality is you can't keep up. I mean, we know 28 mechanisms by which it causes cancer alone. "But you know, and this is, I mean it was shocking from the moment we looked at the ingredients before anyone was injected. Shocking enough to like basically set down my entire life's work to try to stop it. That's not because I'm super courage. It's, that's how serious this is. But you genetically, they're genetically modifying people, claiming they're giving them a vaccine and then genetically modifying them so that they will produce a variety of poisons. Mostly the spike protein of the man-made design, SARS-CoV-2 virus, which is the most toxic part of it. "And normally, nobody's body would be producing it. And then they're producing this, this random splay of protein junk which can trigger autoimmune diseases in every direction. And so, but then what's worse is, you know, they claimed that what was in it was modified messenger RNA, modified both so that it would screw up and create all these random proteins as well as spike protein, but modified so that it would persist and nobody knew how long. "In other words, oh, so my body is going to start producing foreign proteins and identifying itself as a foreigner to be attacked by my own immune system. But for how long? Well, nobody knows because this is completely experimental, this new N1 methyl pseudouridinated version of messenger RNA. "But as you know, and as Dr. Speicher, Dr. McKernan and others have revealed through repeated analysis around the world, 30% of the genetic material in there is DNA and it includes plasmid DNA and it includes, in the case of Pfizer, completely covered up that it could even possibly be there. And the fraud they committed to the FDA and the public health agency, european agency, et cetera, that they put in these genetic sequences which were derived from the simian virus, not the virus, but some specific genetic sequences which we've known since 1990 research. "These are genetic hacking tools. When you put foreign DNA with something like a pegylated nanoparticle into a human cell or any mammal cell, and if you deliver as well these little SV40 promoter enhancer sequences... I mean, and this is pre-existing research, that will cause the DNA to be moved into the nucleus and cause it to be incorporated. "So you're permanently genetically modifying and damaging the genetic code of the humans. And we have evidence of this now, Joseph. Some of the most shocking evidence. And I think what you've pointed out is really important. This is not just an attack on the people health that are alive right now. This is attack on our possibility to produce viable offspring and have the continuation of the human race. "We now have tests on male sperm cells where the sperm cells contain in their DNA the genetic code of the spike protein. So men's sperm has been genetically modified so they will pass this toxic genetic flaw into their children if they're able to reproduce. Every sperm cell, we don't know, we don't know how many, but many. We have evidence that 30% of a woman's eggs die shortly following the injections as a result of these injections. Assault on the ovaries where they're particularly drawn to go and deposit the genetic code. "We have cancers that have now been taken out of people. And when you look at the DNA in the cells of the cancer, that DNA has been modified by these injections. So you're looking at permanent genetic modification of human beings without their consent based on a lie that they're getting a safe and effective vaccine for a disease claiming there's no treatment for which there was good treatments. And the whole thing from the virus through the bioweapon death shot were brought to you by the same people. And we're talking about people like Fauci, Gates, Tedros, Daszak, etc."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1999981480609771767/amplify_video_thumb/1999973124109135873/img/_-pgQjEEo3VUxA2r.jpg)
!["We do it again. We do it again. We do it again. Because, this can't be. The problem is..it be. No matter how skeptical you are, be as skeptical as you'd like, but there it is." ~Bengston (This is what Mick West said he doesn't find interesting and thus, he doesn't want to interview Bengston. The truth? IMO, he's scared shitless to take on Bengston as there's too much data to refute. Psi (or whatever this is) is real and this is one of the more interesting claims in the world. How could you NOT be interested in this? How about you, Michael Shermer?) "We re-injected the mice without any treatment, and the mice were immune to cancer." ~Bengston (It's the 1970s on Long Island. A skeptical Bill Bengston is working as a lifeguard at the town pool and meets a guy, Ben, who claims to be psychic. No matter what tests Bengston comes up with, Ben passes with flying colors. Then Ben starts healing people. But how to know if they were being healed with Ben's psi or something more prosaic? Did they change their diet? Supplements? Conventional medicine? Not everybody came back so it was very hard to know. So Bengston moves to the lab where Ben would try to cure mice of a cancer that has killed every mouse ever injected within 27 days max. At the last minute, Ben drops out and Bengston is forced to be the healer.) ~ Bill Bengston: "If you watch a few hundred healings, at first it's exhilarating, but after a while it's frustrating. Because you don't know what, why, where, when, any of those things that someone interested in serious inquiry might be interested in. You were just looking at people coming in, some benefit occurred. People leaving. Sometimes they didn't come back. Sometimes it took more than one treatment. Sometimes it happened pretty quick. I think I was the fastest ever (Bengston says Ben healed his back after one short treatment). But what did? "So you come in, you have x, it's a famous algebraic disease. You have x, and you leave better. Now maybe it's the multiple treatments, you know, whatever it may be. But you leave better. What did it? Was it time? Because people get better over time. Was it belief? I didn't think it was belief, because I wasn't a believer. I was an experiencer, but not a believer. Was it the food you ate, the food you stopped eating, the grapefruit you had in the morning? I can't...I don't have the head to wrap myself around clinical questions like that. I never know why something happens, because there's too many variables and such. "And so, after watching a couple hundred healings, taking part in a couple hundred healings, I decided to...I gotta go past this. And I ran into another guy who was watching this, somewhat parallel to me. A geologist, pretty well known (David Krinsley ~Joe). And we said, 'What can we do to test this? You know, the phenomenon is seriously interesting. What could we do to really test it so that if healing occurs, there's no viable counter hypothesis.' "And at the time, he was the head of the geology department at City University of New York, and he said, 'I got some favors owed me, let me see what I can find out in the biology department. I'm pretty good friends with the chairman of the biology department there.' "And so he met with the biology chair, and he said, 'Well, let me poke around in my department and see what we can do.' And he said, 'I got the perfect study. There's a mouse model of cancer that has 100% fatality. Never been an extension of life past a month after it's been injected with cancer. There's thousands of journal articles written about this mouse and this cancer. Everybody around the world knows this mouse and this cancer. If you're in oncology, you know this mouse and this cancer, and [there] has never been a cure.' "I said, 'Let's do it. Let's find out what we can do.' "And at the time, I had no idea what to expect. So I was thinking, 'Well, maybe we can extend the life towards a month. Maybe it won't be a normal curve distribution, maybe it'll be a negatively-skewed distribution. And maybe the mouse will live to the end of their lifespan and all that. "We had no idea what to expect. "So we got a cage of mice. I held the cage of mice for an hour at a time in the lab at Queens College, City University, and we watched as the tumors grew. And I was sure this was failing. And incidentally, I'm almost always wrong. I expected, if we got to the mice right after injection and we treated them a couple times, enough, every day - we didn't know - if we treated them every day, they wouldn't develop cancer. I was thinking, you know, it's something like radiation. You know, you go, 'Zzt, zzt,' and you zap the mice and the tumors, or the cancer cells die, or something along those lines. I was thinking conventional oncology. "And so, I put my hands around the cage of mice, treated them every day, the tumors started to grow anyway, and I wanted to call off the experiment. You know, it shows you how much I believe. I got talked into going a couple extra days, and the tumors developed these blackened areas. And I said, 'Let's call it off, didn't work. You know, we tried it. Didn't work.' "Go a couple more days. Tumors started to ulcerate, and so there was this raw part of a tumor. And I said, 'Would you pay attention? It doesn't work!' Couple more days. And then the tumors suddenly imploded, and the mice were cured. They weren't remitted, they were cured. And by that, I mean it wasn't a suppression of symptoms, it wasn't a temporary reduction in symptoms. It was...there was no cancer in the mouse at all. "And it's farther than that. We re-injected the mice without any treatment, and the mice were immune to cancer. Now that's reasonably interesting. "So, first thing you do is, I, as a skeptic, go, 'Umm, this doesn't make any sense (laughs). Let's do it again. But let's not do it with just me, let's do it with some volunteers.' "So I had a couple of faculty volunteers who thought this thing was insane, and they were right. So I had a couple of faculty volunteers, they got a couple of student volunteers. All non-believers, no experience in any of this hocus pocus. Taught 'em the little technique that I had developed. They treated the mice, the exact same pattern: Tumor grows, blackened area, ulceration, implosion, full lifespan cure. "We do it again. We do it again. We do it again. Because, this can't be. The problem is..it be." (Both laugh) "It's just, you know, no matter how skeptical you are, be as skeptical as you'd like, but there it is. You know, I deny this gravity, you know? I don't believe in gravity. There is gravity. I don't believe in this healing. There is healing. "I just finished, recently, my twentieth mouse experiment, I'm a little slow. I've done it in, I think, six medical schools, equal number of other biology labs. And I just finished at Tokyo University, multiple strains of cancer and details you don't care about. "And so, I have done, at this point, twenty mouse experiments, multiple medical schools, many cell experiments. I've done many experiments. That's the really short version. A hundred years truncated into a couple of paragraphs."](https://image.24vids.com/tw-1891577612453179483/ext_tw_video_thumb/1891542527817469952/pu/img/SlWpIJFWshTl1l69.jpg)