Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

Go Home

What if one of cancer’s most devastating side effects could be reversed? Cancer cachexia is a debilitating wasting syndrome that affects many people with cancer, yet treatment options remain limited. Team CANCAN has published new research in Science Magazine that highlights a previously underappreciated driver of cancer cachexia: localised...

CancerGrand's profile picture

Cancer Grand Challenges

5,447 subscribers

42,126 views • 2 months ago •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

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

46,883 views • 2 months ago

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.
1:47

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.

TheLiverDoc™

193,755 views • 8 months ago

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™

269,683 views • 2 years ago

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

228,635 views • 10 months ago

"It will turn cancer from one of this country's biggest killers into a chronic condition that is treatable and manageable for three in four patients." Ashley Dalton MP on why the new National Cancer Plan is so important 👇
0:56

"It will turn cancer from one of this country's biggest killers into a chronic condition that is treatable and manageable for three in four patients." Ashley Dalton MP on why the new National Cancer Plan is so important 👇

Department of Health and Social Care

14,641 views • 7 months ago

FENBENDAZOLE IS MAKING PEOPLE ASK BIGGER QUESTIONS Why are so many cancer patients suddenly talking about a dewormer? Because fenbendazole-originally used as an anti-parasitic -has shown promising early research in laboratory settings for its potential anti-cancer effects. That should make people pause. Not because it's a miracle cure. #cancer #research #fenbendazol #chemo #healing Not because it replaces treatment. But because when an overlooked compound starts showing unexpected potential... it forces a bigger question: « What else are we not paying attention to? Some studies suggest fenbendazole may interfere with how cancer cells grow and divide. And yet- most people never hear about it until they start digging for answers themselves. That's the pattern. The most interesting conversations in cancer care often happen outside the mainstream spotlight. This doesn't mean every claim is true. But it does mean this: If patients are being forced to search this hard for emerging options... the conversation is incomplete. Because people facing cancer deserve to know what research is evolving— not just what's already standardized. Stop reacting - and start making informed decisions.
2:07

FENBENDAZOLE IS MAKING PEOPLE ASK BIGGER QUESTIONS Why are so many cancer patients suddenly talking about a dewormer? Because fenbendazole-originally used as an anti-parasitic -has shown promising early research in laboratory settings for its potential anti-cancer effects. That should make people pause. Not because it's a miracle cure. #cancer #research #fenbendazol #chemo #healing Not because it replaces treatment. But because when an overlooked compound starts showing unexpected potential... it forces a bigger question: « What else are we not paying attention to? Some studies suggest fenbendazole may interfere with how cancer cells grow and divide. And yet- most people never hear about it until they start digging for answers themselves. That's the pattern. The most interesting conversations in cancer care often happen outside the mainstream spotlight. This doesn't mean every claim is true. But it does mean this: If patients are being forced to search this hard for emerging options... the conversation is incomplete. Because people facing cancer deserve to know what research is evolving— not just what's already standardized. Stop reacting - and start making informed decisions.

Joe Tippens

10,415 views • 2 months ago

🔬An international research team catalogued 25 tumor types from thousands of patient donors as part of a long-term NIH-funded cancer study. This is a major win for cancer research since previous collections only captured a fraction of cancer’s biological diversity. I look forward to seeing how these models accelerate discoveries and bring us closer to more precise, effective treatments for patients everywhere. Read the full story. ➡️
1:12

🔬An international research team catalogued 25 tumor types from thousands of patient donors as part of a long-term NIH-funded cancer study. This is a major win for cancer research since previous collections only captured a fraction of cancer’s biological diversity. I look forward to seeing how these models accelerate discoveries and bring us closer to more precise, effective treatments for patients everywhere. Read the full story. ➡️

Jay Bhattacharya, MD, PhD

17,636 views • 1 month ago

"1,700 People In The US Die Everyday From Cancer...That's 70 Every Hour." Dr Thomas Seyfried, PhD "Cancer Is A very Preventable Disorder. It's Within Your Control...It Is Not Genetic, Cancer Is A Metabolic Disease." Toxic Chemotherapy & Radiation Will Never Lower Cancer Rates. "The Problem Is Our Modern Lifestyle & Habits, We're Doing Everything Wrong. We're Inducing Cancer." "Cancer Is A Very Preventable Disorder. It's Within Your Control, Your Lifestyle, Your Habits." "When The Medical Establishment Acknowledges What I Know About This Disorder, What's Causing It & What We're Not Doing To Prevent It Or Treat It...It Will Be Recognized As The Greatest Tragedy In The History Of Medicine." "We Can Prevent It & Treat It With Metabolic Therapy. You Can Take Away The Risk & Fear Of Getting Cancer." Chemotherapy & Radiation have not reduced cancer rates. 1,700 people die everyday from cancer, that's 70 people every hour. Ketogenic Metabolic Cancer Prevention/Treatment: 1: Fasting For Autophagy & Mitochondrial Health 2: Carbohydrate Restriction/Glucose Elimination 3: Remove Inflammatory Toxic Seed Oils 4: Remove Processed Foods 5: Exercise To Induce Ketosis 6: Targeted Protocol For Cancer(Linked Below) Dr Thomas Seyfried Thomas N. Seyfried is a Professor of Biology, Genetics & Biochemistry at Boston College. He has over 150 peer-reviewed publications & the author of "Cancer as a Metabolic Disease: On the Origin, Management & Prevention of Cancer." "All Major Research Centers Believe Cancer Is A Genetic Disease. But That Belief Is In Stark Contrast To The Data. The Evidence Is Massive To Support That Cancer Is A Metabolic Disorder." "Wolves In The Wild Don't Die Of Cancer, Yet Our Pets #1 Killer Is Cancer. Their Food & Lifestyle Is Killing Them Too." "The Greatest Tragedy In The History Of Medicine Is Knowing The Cause Of Cancer & Yet The Medical Establishment Is Not Advising Changing Lifestyle To Prevent It Or As A Treatment." 👇Fasting/Ketogenic/Ivermectin Cancer Protocol👇 👇Dr Seyfried Case Report Curing Canine Cancer👇 👇Ketogenic Diet Lung/Brain Cancer Remission👇 Podcast: DiaryOfaCEO Video: @superfoodmood
1:00

"1,700 People In The US Die Everyday From Cancer...That's 70 Every Hour." Dr Thomas Seyfried, PhD "Cancer Is A very Preventable Disorder. It's Within Your Control...It Is Not Genetic, Cancer Is A Metabolic Disease." Toxic Chemotherapy & Radiation Will Never Lower Cancer Rates. "The Problem Is Our Modern Lifestyle & Habits, We're Doing Everything Wrong. We're Inducing Cancer." "Cancer Is A Very Preventable Disorder. It's Within Your Control, Your Lifestyle, Your Habits." "When The Medical Establishment Acknowledges What I Know About This Disorder, What's Causing It & What We're Not Doing To Prevent It Or Treat It...It Will Be Recognized As The Greatest Tragedy In The History Of Medicine." "We Can Prevent It & Treat It With Metabolic Therapy. You Can Take Away The Risk & Fear Of Getting Cancer." Chemotherapy & Radiation have not reduced cancer rates. 1,700 people die everyday from cancer, that's 70 people every hour. Ketogenic Metabolic Cancer Prevention/Treatment: 1: Fasting For Autophagy & Mitochondrial Health 2: Carbohydrate Restriction/Glucose Elimination 3: Remove Inflammatory Toxic Seed Oils 4: Remove Processed Foods 5: Exercise To Induce Ketosis 6: Targeted Protocol For Cancer(Linked Below) Dr Thomas Seyfried Thomas N. Seyfried is a Professor of Biology, Genetics & Biochemistry at Boston College. He has over 150 peer-reviewed publications & the author of "Cancer as a Metabolic Disease: On the Origin, Management & Prevention of Cancer." "All Major Research Centers Believe Cancer Is A Genetic Disease. But That Belief Is In Stark Contrast To The Data. The Evidence Is Massive To Support That Cancer Is A Metabolic Disorder." "Wolves In The Wild Don't Die Of Cancer, Yet Our Pets #1 Killer Is Cancer. Their Food & Lifestyle Is Killing Them Too." "The Greatest Tragedy In The History Of Medicine Is Knowing The Cause Of Cancer & Yet The Medical Establishment Is Not Advising Changing Lifestyle To Prevent It Or As A Treatment." 👇Fasting/Ketogenic/Ivermectin Cancer Protocol👇 👇Dr Seyfried Case Report Curing Canine Cancer👇 👇Ketogenic Diet Lung/Brain Cancer Remission👇 Podcast: DiaryOfaCEO Video: @superfoodmood

Valerie Anne Smith

198,768 views • 1 year ago

Cancer is “all a big money game, and it’s dollars first, patient outcome second.” Dr Thomas Seyfried, Professor of Biology “The current idea that cancer is a genetic disease is based on ideology—not on the science.” “Our American society... doesn’t care about prevention because if they did, there would be no obesity epidemic. But there is. So that tells us the society doesn’t really care about cancer prevention.” In Seyfried’s book, “Cancer as a Metabolic Disease,” he argues we should hit cancer where it hurts most by messing with its fuel supply, like using ketogenic diets to cut off the energy that cancer cells need. It’s a way of thinking about the disease that poses bad news to the profits of the cancer treatment industry.
2:46

Cancer is “all a big money game, and it’s dollars first, patient outcome second.” Dr Thomas Seyfried, Professor of Biology “The current idea that cancer is a genetic disease is based on ideology—not on the science.” “Our American society... doesn’t care about prevention because if they did, there would be no obesity epidemic. But there is. So that tells us the society doesn’t really care about cancer prevention.” In Seyfried’s book, “Cancer as a Metabolic Disease,” he argues we should hit cancer where it hurts most by messing with its fuel supply, like using ketogenic diets to cut off the energy that cancer cells need. It’s a way of thinking about the disease that poses bad news to the profits of the cancer treatment industry.

The Vigilant Fox 🦊

618,845 views • 2 years ago

"People passing away from non-communicable diseases is 84%. This is a big number. Among these people passing away from NCDs, cancer is the second leading cause. Since cancer is a treatable illness through early detection and treatment, the huge number of people [in the Maldives] passing away from this illness is a huge concern to us,“ says Juwairiya Saeed, Chairperson of the Cancer Society of Maldives (CSM). In this interview, Juwey highlights the core goal of CSM and the work the NGO is doing in cancer prevention, early detection, and support for cancer patients, survivors, and caregivers. She also touches on tobacco-control policies, the importance of patient-centric treatment, and what it means.
13:55

"People passing away from non-communicable diseases is 84%. This is a big number. Among these people passing away from NCDs, cancer is the second leading cause. Since cancer is a treatable illness through early detection and treatment, the huge number of people [in the Maldives] passing away from this illness is a huge concern to us,“ says Juwairiya Saeed, Chairperson of the Cancer Society of Maldives (CSM). In this interview, Juwey highlights the core goal of CSM and the work the NGO is doing in cancer prevention, early detection, and support for cancer patients, survivors, and caregivers. She also touches on tobacco-control policies, the importance of patient-centric treatment, and what it means.

MV+

124,211 views • 1 year ago

Mr. Annamalai is a great politician, however, his claims suggesting that 24-hour or 7-day fasting can "kill all cancer cells" are scientifically inaccurate and potentially harmful to patients. 1. The Warburg Effect: It is true that many cancer cells consume more glucose than normal cells. However, they are highly adaptable. Simply "starving" them through fasting does not consistently kill them, as they can often find alternative ways to survive. 2. Fasting is not a Standalone Cure: While research (like that of Dr. Valter Longo) explores how fasting-mimicking diets can assist chemotherapy by protecting healthy cells, it is not a replacement for medical treatment. A 24-hour fast is not a "kill switch" for cancer. 3. The Danger of Misinformation: Claiming a 7-day fast can eliminate "all cancer" is a dangerous overreach. For many patients, prolonged fasting can lead to severe muscle loss (cachexia) and weakened immunity, which are leading causes of death in cancer patients. Conclusion: Nutrition plays a vital role in cancer care, but medical advice should come from oncologists and registered dietitians. Cultural practices like fasting have spiritual value but should not be mistaken for a medical cure for a complex disease like cancer. (Source of video: Sun News)
2:14

Mr. Annamalai is a great politician, however, his claims suggesting that 24-hour or 7-day fasting can "kill all cancer cells" are scientifically inaccurate and potentially harmful to patients. 1. The Warburg Effect: It is true that many cancer cells consume more glucose than normal cells. However, they are highly adaptable. Simply "starving" them through fasting does not consistently kill them, as they can often find alternative ways to survive. 2. Fasting is not a Standalone Cure: While research (like that of Dr. Valter Longo) explores how fasting-mimicking diets can assist chemotherapy by protecting healthy cells, it is not a replacement for medical treatment. A 24-hour fast is not a "kill switch" for cancer. 3. The Danger of Misinformation: Claiming a 7-day fast can eliminate "all cancer" is a dangerous overreach. For many patients, prolonged fasting can lead to severe muscle loss (cachexia) and weakened immunity, which are leading causes of death in cancer patients. Conclusion: Nutrition plays a vital role in cancer care, but medical advice should come from oncologists and registered dietitians. Cultural practices like fasting have spiritual value but should not be mistaken for a medical cure for a complex disease like cancer. (Source of video: Sun News)

Dr Sudhir Kumar MD DM

57,795 views • 8 months ago

Jimmy Dore: Groundbreaking South Korean Study Reveals Alarming Link Between COVID Vaccines and Cancer A massive new study from South Korea, utilizing the national health insurance database of over 8.4 million people, has uncovered a deeply disturbing trend. The research, which tracked patients from 2021-2023, found a statistically significant increase in cancer risk among the vaccinated population. The data paints a devastating picture: - 27% higher risk of overall cancer. - 53% higher risk of lung cancer. - 69% higher risk of prostate cancer. - 34% higher risk of gastric cancer. - 28% higher risk of colorectal cancer. - 35% higher risk of thyroid cancer. - 20% higher risk of breast cancer. As commentator Jimmy Dore highlighted, the probability this result occurred by chance is less than one in a thousand. He points out the critical context the mainstream media refuses to cover: Why was this crucial, large-scale analysis only conducted in South Korea? Why have other nations with similar databases not released such findings? This same research group has previously published data showing vaccines linked to a 68% increase in depression and a 93% increase in sleep disorders. This is the information being systematically suppressed. The very platforms that censored open debate about vaccine efficacy, early treatment, and origins of the virus are now ignoring peer-reviewed science that contradicts the official narrative. The public is demanding answers. Why the silence?
3:23

Jimmy Dore: Groundbreaking South Korean Study Reveals Alarming Link Between COVID Vaccines and Cancer A massive new study from South Korea, utilizing the national health insurance database of over 8.4 million people, has uncovered a deeply disturbing trend. The research, which tracked patients from 2021-2023, found a statistically significant increase in cancer risk among the vaccinated population. The data paints a devastating picture: - 27% higher risk of overall cancer. - 53% higher risk of lung cancer. - 69% higher risk of prostate cancer. - 34% higher risk of gastric cancer. - 28% higher risk of colorectal cancer. - 35% higher risk of thyroid cancer. - 20% higher risk of breast cancer. As commentator Jimmy Dore highlighted, the probability this result occurred by chance is less than one in a thousand. He points out the critical context the mainstream media refuses to cover: Why was this crucial, large-scale analysis only conducted in South Korea? Why have other nations with similar databases not released such findings? This same research group has previously published data showing vaccines linked to a 68% increase in depression and a 93% increase in sleep disorders. This is the information being systematically suppressed. The very platforms that censored open debate about vaccine efficacy, early treatment, and origins of the virus are now ignoring peer-reviewed science that contradicts the official narrative. The public is demanding answers. Why the silence?

Camus

68,017 views • 11 months ago

A Physicians Survey Revealed 88.3% Of Doctors Would Refuse Chemotherapy For Their Own Cancer Treatment. The 5 Year Chemo Survival Rate Is Only 2.1%, Yet Most Oncologists Only Offer 'Standard Of Care' To Patients. Dr Seyfried Would Choose The Protocol With Ivermectin & Fasting. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Board of Directors has data that oncologists THEMSELVES would not take chemotherapy for cancer even though they advise chemo & radiation as the only 'approved' treatment to their patients. MacKillop & colleagues found that a survey of Canadian doctors who treat lung cancer, only 16% would want chemotherapy for their own treatment if they had a cancer diagnosis. Lind & colleagues interviewed teaching oncologists in Boston & found that only 27% would take chemo for lung cancer. "The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies" cites...The overall contribution of curative & adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults is only 2.3% in Australia & 2.1% in the USA. Cancer treatment is a multi-billion dollar industry. Most oncologists believe that cancer is genetic, but cancer is a metabolic disease. Doctors don’t study nutrition or metabolic therapy & don't even know that chemotherapy historically was a 'weapon of war' mustard gas. Banned from use in war because it is cytotoxic & too inhumane, even against war enemies. The system profits more from lifelong chemo & radiation than natural intervention. Chemotherapy is not the answer to heal the body of cancer. GKI Glucose Ketone Index & Cancer Eradication Based On Otto Warburg's Groundbreaking Research: Cancer cells are metabolically inflexible & cannot use ketone bodies for energy when glucose is limited, unlike healthy cells. A low GKI is achieved by restricting carbohydrates, which lowers blood glucose & increases ketone production. This starves cancer cells of glucose while providing normal cells with an alternative energy source. Research shows a low glucose environment promotes our Natural Killer (NK) cells & T-cells to become even stronger which are crucial for killing cancer. Chemotherapy & radiation actually kills our NK Natural Killer Cells allowing cancer to return even stronger than before conventional treatment. 15 expert physicians & oncologists have published...'Targeting the Mitochondrial-Stem Cell Connection in Cancer Treatment: A Hybrid Orthomolecular Protocol.' This is the step by step protocol of fasting, high fat ketogenic diet (eliminating glucose) & using ivermectin, fenbendazole & supportive nutrients with lifestyle changes for cancer treatment remission. This protocol, along with cited research is linked in the replies. Have you used non traditional methods to reverse cancer? Is your cancer in remission thanks to fasting, ivermectin or other alternative protocols?
1:25

A Physicians Survey Revealed 88.3% Of Doctors Would Refuse Chemotherapy For Their Own Cancer Treatment. The 5 Year Chemo Survival Rate Is Only 2.1%, Yet Most Oncologists Only Offer 'Standard Of Care' To Patients. Dr Seyfried Would Choose The Protocol With Ivermectin & Fasting. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Board of Directors has data that oncologists THEMSELVES would not take chemotherapy for cancer even though they advise chemo & radiation as the only 'approved' treatment to their patients. MacKillop & colleagues found that a survey of Canadian doctors who treat lung cancer, only 16% would want chemotherapy for their own treatment if they had a cancer diagnosis. Lind & colleagues interviewed teaching oncologists in Boston & found that only 27% would take chemo for lung cancer. "The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies" cites...The overall contribution of curative & adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults is only 2.3% in Australia & 2.1% in the USA. Cancer treatment is a multi-billion dollar industry. Most oncologists believe that cancer is genetic, but cancer is a metabolic disease. Doctors don’t study nutrition or metabolic therapy & don't even know that chemotherapy historically was a 'weapon of war' mustard gas. Banned from use in war because it is cytotoxic & too inhumane, even against war enemies. The system profits more from lifelong chemo & radiation than natural intervention. Chemotherapy is not the answer to heal the body of cancer. GKI Glucose Ketone Index & Cancer Eradication Based On Otto Warburg's Groundbreaking Research: Cancer cells are metabolically inflexible & cannot use ketone bodies for energy when glucose is limited, unlike healthy cells. A low GKI is achieved by restricting carbohydrates, which lowers blood glucose & increases ketone production. This starves cancer cells of glucose while providing normal cells with an alternative energy source. Research shows a low glucose environment promotes our Natural Killer (NK) cells & T-cells to become even stronger which are crucial for killing cancer. Chemotherapy & radiation actually kills our NK Natural Killer Cells allowing cancer to return even stronger than before conventional treatment. 15 expert physicians & oncologists have published...'Targeting the Mitochondrial-Stem Cell Connection in Cancer Treatment: A Hybrid Orthomolecular Protocol.' This is the step by step protocol of fasting, high fat ketogenic diet (eliminating glucose) & using ivermectin, fenbendazole & supportive nutrients with lifestyle changes for cancer treatment remission. This protocol, along with cited research is linked in the replies. Have you used non traditional methods to reverse cancer? Is your cancer in remission thanks to fasting, ivermectin or other alternative protocols?

Valerie Anne Smith

262,935 views • 9 months ago

🚨🚨🚨🇮🇹 Dr. Tullio Simoncini is an Italian oncologist who has proposed a hypothesis regarding the cause and treatment of cancer : •According to his hypothesis, cancer is not a result of genetic mutations or uncontrolled cell growth, but rather a fungal infection caused primarily by the fungus Candida albicans. •Dr. Simoncini believes that cancer cells are actually fungal cells that have adapted to the body's internal environment. •His proposed treatment for cancer involves the use of sodium bicarbonate, also known as baking soda (Nahcolite), which he claims can effectively neutralize the acidic environment in which cancer cells thrive. •By raising the pH level of the tumor environment, Dr. Simoncini suggests that sodium bicarbonate can effectively kill the fungus and halt the progression of cancer. •Some studies have shown that sodium bicarbonate can have anti-cancer effects in certain in vitro and animal models. “Dr. Simoncini treat his patients with Sodium Bicarbonate” Can Cancer be treated with Baking Soda? What does that tell us about cancer? #Cancer #BakingSoda
2:39

🚨🚨🚨🇮🇹 Dr. Tullio Simoncini is an Italian oncologist who has proposed a hypothesis regarding the cause and treatment of cancer : •According to his hypothesis, cancer is not a result of genetic mutations or uncontrolled cell growth, but rather a fungal infection caused primarily by the fungus Candida albicans. •Dr. Simoncini believes that cancer cells are actually fungal cells that have adapted to the body's internal environment. •His proposed treatment for cancer involves the use of sodium bicarbonate, also known as baking soda (Nahcolite), which he claims can effectively neutralize the acidic environment in which cancer cells thrive. •By raising the pH level of the tumor environment, Dr. Simoncini suggests that sodium bicarbonate can effectively kill the fungus and halt the progression of cancer. •Some studies have shown that sodium bicarbonate can have anti-cancer effects in certain in vitro and animal models. “Dr. Simoncini treat his patients with Sodium Bicarbonate” Can Cancer be treated with Baking Soda? What does that tell us about cancer? #Cancer #BakingSoda

Kevin - WE THE PEOPLE🦁

836,459 views • 2 years ago

Long, but DEFINITELY worth a listen: #Mizzou receiver Logan Muckey was an OBVIOUS pick for one of the team captains this year. In April, he was diagnosed with papillary thyroid cancer: "It was a shocker." The former walk-on has since beaten that cancer and is now not taking any moment for granted. He explained what it means to be a team captain, before going into his diagnosis ⤵️
2:23

Long, but DEFINITELY worth a listen: #Mizzou receiver Logan Muckey was an OBVIOUS pick for one of the team captains this year. In April, he was diagnosed with papillary thyroid cancer: "It was a shocker." The former walk-on has since beaten that cancer and is now not taking any moment for granted. He explained what it means to be a team captain, before going into his diagnosis ⤵️

Nathalie Jones

122,623 views • 1 year ago

Megyn Kelly sat down with Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong to discuss his revolutionary cancer protocol—a treatment that has already extended lives by years for patients with terminal diagnoses, including the late Senator Harry Reid. The Science Behind the Breakthrough Dr. Soon-Shiong’s approach challenges conventional cancer treatments like chemotherapy and radiation, which destroy the immune system’s natural killer (NK) cells and T-cells—critical for fighting cancer. His BioStripe treatment works by rebuilding the immune system, even in patients who have exhausted all other options. Real Patients, Miraculous Results Merkel cell carcinoma (5th-line treatment): Complete remission—patient lived 6+ years and didn’t die from cancer. Bladder cancer: Patients still alive 10-11 years later. Triple-negative breast cancer: Multiple complete remissions. Metastatic pancreatic cancer: One patient disease-free after 5 years, now 6+ years and counting. FDA Roadblocks & Lost Time Despite undeniable success, Dr. Soon-Shiong faced years of resistance from regulators. In 2015, he proposed testing his method before chemo/radiation—but the FDA insisted on starting with end-stage patients. After 700,000 pages of submissions, approval finally came in late 2024. The Future: Beyond Cancer This treatment isn’t just for cancer—it’s showing promise against sepsis and severe infections. One recent case: A Valley Fever patient on a ventilator, given last rites—fully recovered after treatment. The Urgent Question Why is bureaucracy slowing down a therapy that could save millions? With pancreatic cancer, glioblastoma, and lung cancer patients still dying every day, how many more lives could have been saved if this had been fast-tracked?
3:46

Megyn Kelly sat down with Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong to discuss his revolutionary cancer protocol—a treatment that has already extended lives by years for patients with terminal diagnoses, including the late Senator Harry Reid. The Science Behind the Breakthrough Dr. Soon-Shiong’s approach challenges conventional cancer treatments like chemotherapy and radiation, which destroy the immune system’s natural killer (NK) cells and T-cells—critical for fighting cancer. His BioStripe treatment works by rebuilding the immune system, even in patients who have exhausted all other options. Real Patients, Miraculous Results Merkel cell carcinoma (5th-line treatment): Complete remission—patient lived 6+ years and didn’t die from cancer. Bladder cancer: Patients still alive 10-11 years later. Triple-negative breast cancer: Multiple complete remissions. Metastatic pancreatic cancer: One patient disease-free after 5 years, now 6+ years and counting. FDA Roadblocks & Lost Time Despite undeniable success, Dr. Soon-Shiong faced years of resistance from regulators. In 2015, he proposed testing his method before chemo/radiation—but the FDA insisted on starting with end-stage patients. After 700,000 pages of submissions, approval finally came in late 2024. The Future: Beyond Cancer This treatment isn’t just for cancer—it’s showing promise against sepsis and severe infections. One recent case: A Valley Fever patient on a ventilator, given last rites—fully recovered after treatment. The Urgent Question Why is bureaucracy slowing down a therapy that could save millions? With pancreatic cancer, glioblastoma, and lung cancer patients still dying every day, how many more lives could have been saved if this had been fast-tracked?

Camus

615,893 views • 1 year ago

🚨Dr. William Makis: Ivermectin Dosing for Cancer Explained In one of his recent talks, Dr. William Makis shared what he considers the most important dosing guide for using Ivermectin in cancer. According to Dr. Makis, the starting dose for most cancers is 1 mg per kilogram of body weight per day For example, a person weighing 60 kg would take 60 mg daily, that’s five 12 mg pills or roughly one teaspoon (6 ml) of liquid ivermectin. He mentioned that Ivermectin has shown positive effects in many types of cancer, including: - Breast cancer - Colon cancer - Lung cancer - Pancreatic cancer - Gastric cancer - Renal cell carcinoma - Leukemias He noted that there is very little research on lymphomas, but that doesn’t mean it won’t work, it simply hasn’t been studied much yet. Important points from Dr. Makis: 1) The anti-cancer effect of Ivermectin appears to be dose dependent. 2) Higher doses may offer better results in more aggressive cancers. 3) For very aggressive cancers (such as pancreatic, leukemia, or brain cancers), he suggests considering 2 mg/kg or even up to 2.5 mg/kg per day. Some patients have used these higher doses for many months with only temporary side effects (such as mild visual disturbances that usually resolve within a few days). Real-world examples include a prostate cancer patient whose PSA dropped from 89 to 11 on 45 mg daily, and a terminal gallbladder cancer case that resolved after 14 months on 2 mg/kg. Dr. Makis emphasizes that Ivermectin is a very safe drug with no reported long-term side effects at 1 mg/kg. He recommends starting at this dose and adjusting upwards depending on the individual case and cancer type. He also stresses that people can safely stay on Ivermectin for months as long as there is active disease. If you're researching Ivermectin for cancer protocols, many people are choosing GENIX MEDS for clean, pharmaceutical-grade Ivermectin with straightforward worldwide delivery. #Ivermectindosage #MakisMD #Genixmeds
5:47

🚨Dr. William Makis: Ivermectin Dosing for Cancer Explained In one of his recent talks, Dr. William Makis shared what he considers the most important dosing guide for using Ivermectin in cancer. According to Dr. Makis, the starting dose for most cancers is 1 mg per kilogram of body weight per day For example, a person weighing 60 kg would take 60 mg daily, that’s five 12 mg pills or roughly one teaspoon (6 ml) of liquid ivermectin. He mentioned that Ivermectin has shown positive effects in many types of cancer, including: - Breast cancer - Colon cancer - Lung cancer - Pancreatic cancer - Gastric cancer - Renal cell carcinoma - Leukemias He noted that there is very little research on lymphomas, but that doesn’t mean it won’t work, it simply hasn’t been studied much yet. Important points from Dr. Makis: 1) The anti-cancer effect of Ivermectin appears to be dose dependent. 2) Higher doses may offer better results in more aggressive cancers. 3) For very aggressive cancers (such as pancreatic, leukemia, or brain cancers), he suggests considering 2 mg/kg or even up to 2.5 mg/kg per day. Some patients have used these higher doses for many months with only temporary side effects (such as mild visual disturbances that usually resolve within a few days). Real-world examples include a prostate cancer patient whose PSA dropped from 89 to 11 on 45 mg daily, and a terminal gallbladder cancer case that resolved after 14 months on 2 mg/kg. Dr. Makis emphasizes that Ivermectin is a very safe drug with no reported long-term side effects at 1 mg/kg. He recommends starting at this dose and adjusting upwards depending on the individual case and cancer type. He also stresses that people can safely stay on Ivermectin for months as long as there is active disease. If you're researching Ivermectin for cancer protocols, many people are choosing GENIX MEDS for clean, pharmaceutical-grade Ivermectin with straightforward worldwide delivery. #Ivermectindosage #MakisMD #Genixmeds

GENIX MEDS

20,168 views • 3 months ago

A Physicians Survey Revealed 88.3% Of Doctors Would Refuse Chemotherapy For Their Own Cancer Treatment. The 5 Year Chemo Survival Rate Is Only 2.1%, Yet Most Oncologists Only Offer 'Standard Of Care' To Patients. Dr Seyfried Would Choose The Protocol With Ivermectin & Fasting. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Board of Directors has data that oncologists THEMSELVES would not take chemotherapy for cancer even though they advise chemo & radiation as the only 'approved' treatment to their patients. MacKillop & colleagues found that a survey of Canadian doctors who treat lung cancer, only 16% would want chemotherapy for their own treatment if they had a cancer diagnosis. Lind & colleagues interviewed teaching oncologists in Boston & found that only 27% would take chemo for lung cancer. "The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies" cites...The overall contribution of curative & adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults is only 2.3% in Australia & 2.1% in the USA. Cancer treatment is a multi-billion dollar industry. Most oncologists believe that cancer is genetic, but cancer is a metabolic disease. Doctors don’t study nutrition or metabolic therapy & don't even know that chemotherapy historically was a 'weapon of war' mustard gas. Banned from use in war because it is cytotoxic & too inhumane, even against war enemies. The system profits more from lifelong chemo & radiation than natural intervention. Chemotherapy is not the answer to heal the body of cancer. GKI Glucose Ketone Index & Cancer Eradication Based On Otto Warburg's Groundbreaking Research: Cancer cells are metabolically inflexible & cannot use ketone bodies for energy when glucose is limited, unlike healthy cells. A low GKI is achieved by restricting carbohydrates, which lowers blood glucose & increases ketone production. This starves cancer cells of glucose while providing normal cells with an alternative energy source. Research shows a low glucose environment promotes our Natural Killer (NK) cells & T-cells to become even stronger which are crucial for killing cancer. Chemotherapy & radiation actually kills our NK Natural Killer Cells allowing cancer to return even stronger than before conventional treatment. 15 expert physicians & oncologists have published...'Targeting the Mitochondrial-Stem Cell Connection in Cancer Treatment: A Hybrid Orthomolecular Protocol.' This is the step by step protocol of fasting, high fat ketogenic diet (eliminating glucose) & using ivermectin, fenbendazole & supportive nutrients with lifestyle changes for cancer treatment remission. This protocol, along with cited research is linked in the replies. Have you used non traditional methods to reverse cancer? Is your cancer in remission thanks to fasting, ivermectin or other alternative protocols? Share and repost this message to increase awareness. It is essential for the public to be informed. Follow my page for further motivational and educational content.
0:59

A Physicians Survey Revealed 88.3% Of Doctors Would Refuse Chemotherapy For Their Own Cancer Treatment. The 5 Year Chemo Survival Rate Is Only 2.1%, Yet Most Oncologists Only Offer 'Standard Of Care' To Patients. Dr Seyfried Would Choose The Protocol With Ivermectin & Fasting. American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) Board of Directors has data that oncologists THEMSELVES would not take chemotherapy for cancer even though they advise chemo & radiation as the only 'approved' treatment to their patients. MacKillop & colleagues found that a survey of Canadian doctors who treat lung cancer, only 16% would want chemotherapy for their own treatment if they had a cancer diagnosis. Lind & colleagues interviewed teaching oncologists in Boston & found that only 27% would take chemo for lung cancer. "The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies" cites...The overall contribution of curative & adjuvant cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adults is only 2.3% in Australia & 2.1% in the USA. Cancer treatment is a multi-billion dollar industry. Most oncologists believe that cancer is genetic, but cancer is a metabolic disease. Doctors don’t study nutrition or metabolic therapy & don't even know that chemotherapy historically was a 'weapon of war' mustard gas. Banned from use in war because it is cytotoxic & too inhumane, even against war enemies. The system profits more from lifelong chemo & radiation than natural intervention. Chemotherapy is not the answer to heal the body of cancer. GKI Glucose Ketone Index & Cancer Eradication Based On Otto Warburg's Groundbreaking Research: Cancer cells are metabolically inflexible & cannot use ketone bodies for energy when glucose is limited, unlike healthy cells. A low GKI is achieved by restricting carbohydrates, which lowers blood glucose & increases ketone production. This starves cancer cells of glucose while providing normal cells with an alternative energy source. Research shows a low glucose environment promotes our Natural Killer (NK) cells & T-cells to become even stronger which are crucial for killing cancer. Chemotherapy & radiation actually kills our NK Natural Killer Cells allowing cancer to return even stronger than before conventional treatment. 15 expert physicians & oncologists have published...'Targeting the Mitochondrial-Stem Cell Connection in Cancer Treatment: A Hybrid Orthomolecular Protocol.' This is the step by step protocol of fasting, high fat ketogenic diet (eliminating glucose) & using ivermectin, fenbendazole & supportive nutrients with lifestyle changes for cancer treatment remission. This protocol, along with cited research is linked in the replies. Have you used non traditional methods to reverse cancer? Is your cancer in remission thanks to fasting, ivermectin or other alternative protocols? Share and repost this message to increase awareness. It is essential for the public to be informed. Follow my page for further motivational and educational content.

Joe Tippens

47,858 views • 7 months ago

“You see pink ribbons everywhere... events designed to make large amounts of money” 🚨Before you donate to a cancer charity, hear this. World Renowned Cancer Biologist Professor Thomas Seyfried reveals how fundraising efforts prop up a failed system. Hard earned and well intentioned money goes into “debunked” areas of research.... unknowingly contributing to a system stuck on the old story of cancer. SEYFRIED - “The more money we raise for breast cancer, the more people dying from breast cancer we get.... the money is being misspent on a therapy, or a strategy that's already been debunked” “You have to ask the organizations that raise money... what do you do with the money? Are you investing it in the therapies based on the somatic mutation gene theory? Or are you investing it in programs that recognize cancer as a metabolic mitochondrial metabolic disease.... ” “When you find out that most of the money is going to cancer research involving gene mutations, now you can understand why we have no progress... and we get more and more de-d people year in and year out”.
3:01

“You see pink ribbons everywhere... events designed to make large amounts of money” 🚨Before you donate to a cancer charity, hear this. World Renowned Cancer Biologist Professor Thomas Seyfried reveals how fundraising efforts prop up a failed system. Hard earned and well intentioned money goes into “debunked” areas of research.... unknowingly contributing to a system stuck on the old story of cancer. SEYFRIED - “The more money we raise for breast cancer, the more people dying from breast cancer we get.... the money is being misspent on a therapy, or a strategy that's already been debunked” “You have to ask the organizations that raise money... what do you do with the money? Are you investing it in the therapies based on the somatic mutation gene theory? Or are you investing it in programs that recognize cancer as a metabolic mitochondrial metabolic disease.... ” “When you find out that most of the money is going to cancer research involving gene mutations, now you can understand why we have no progress... and we get more and more de-d people year in and year out”.

Humanspective

20,892 views • 7 months ago