Archive for the ‘Cancer’ Category

The Daily Pills That Stop Cancer

https://justusrhope.substack.com/p/the-daily-pills-that-stop-cancer

The Daily Pills that Stop Cancer

AI Refines the Root Detox™ Protocol

Justus R. Hope

Apr 02, 2025

∙ Paid

Thursday Dr. Paul E. Marik and I announced an all-supplement daily cocktail that reduced cancer risk by some 60%. We improved on this with Metformin, Ivermectin, and Mebendazole to reduce risk to the 70 to 80% range.

Today we announce revisions accomplished over the past few days with the assistance of AI.

Without this time-saving help, these revisions would have taken months. But we do not have months to spare as the world is dealing with an unprecedented uptick in cancers. Everyone needs this information now.

We will begin at the beginning, starting with our first 3-Supplement AI search on Cancer Risk that established the baseline. We will end with the 90 to 95 percent Optimal Cancer Risk Reduction Protocol, that we display above and once again, with analysis, at the conclusion. (See link for article)

________________

**Comment**

I learned something new. (Well, to be fair I’m always learning something new!)

I learned that it’s important to take enteric capsules of berberine, for the same reasons your proteolytic enzymes need to be enteric: to protect the supplement from stomach acid, allowing it to be dissolved in the intestines to enhance absorption and effectiveness. Berberine also outperformed Metformin.

Users in berberine clinical literature consistently report effects on energy metabolism and AMPK activation beginning to appear at the 6-8 weeks mark with consistent daily use. The most significant observations typically occur in the 6-12 week window. Source

Enter the Root6™ OTC Protocol:

Root6™ is nothing more than our basic four + Berberine and Sulforaphane. But because of synergy, the Cancer Risk Reduction is magnified, which is why cocktails of repurposed drugs work so well against cancer (very similar to how effectively they work against HIV compared with monotherapy).

Keep in mind the Root6™ is all OTC. Source

Category:

Cancer, diet and nutrition, Herbs, Inflammation, research, Supplements, Treatment

Evidentiary Review: Mebendazole, Fenbendazole and Ivermectin for Astrocytoma

EVIDENTIARY REVIEW: Mebendazole Fenbendazole and Ivermectin for Astrocytoma

Evidence as of October 12, 2026

James Lyons-Weiler, PhD

Article Excerpts:

Mebendazole has reached human brain-tumor trials, while the astrocytoma case for fenbendazole and ivermectin still rests chiefly on preclinical research. It then explains why current molecular diagnoses matter, especially the distinction between IDH-mutant astrocytoma and IDH-wildtype glioblastoma, and traces the experimental rationale from the original benzimidazole observations to newer studies in IDH-mutant and pediatric glioma models.

The clinical appraisal examines five mebendazole reports, separating dose-finding from efficacy testing and identifying what missing control groups, historical comparisons, post-treatment selection, and mixed diagnoses prevent us from concluding. The laboratory appraisal distinguishes fenbendazole from flubendazole, includes the published figure correction, and examines ivermectin’s mitochondrial and autophagy findings without treating a molecular mechanism as a clinical outcome. The final argument connects drug exposure, neurological and hepatic safety, disclosure, reproducibility, and meaningful endpoints to a concrete research program. The conclusion calls for controlled, independently auditable studies that can earn a therapeutic claim or retire it.

Doctors are being peppered with questions about a new category of drugs for use in cancer. A patient who asks whether mebendazole, fenbendazole, or ivermectin might help treat astrocytoma has asked a legitimate scientific question. The answer requires considerably more care than a declaration that these are antiparasitic drugs, because a molecule’s original indication does not determine every biological action it can exert. It also requires more care than a collection of favorable laboratory results, because an effect in cultured cells must survive a demanding sequence of tests before it can support a claim about a person with a brain tumor. The published record contains enough substance to justify serious investigation, and enough unresolved questions to make confident therapeutic promises premature.

The evidence reviewed here does not establish that institutions suppressed an effective astrocytoma treatment. It does establish that the decisive treatment comparisons remain incomplete. We should direct criticism toward that demonstrable gap and ask who will close it. Public and philanthropic funding can support trials whose value lies in answering a clinical question even when the eventual product offers limited commercial reward. Funding decisions should account for disease burden, biological plausibility, and the information a study can produce. Investigators and advocates should disclose relevant patents, equity, product sales, and referral arrangements, while sponsors should commit in advance to reporting unfavorable results.

A defensible next program would begin with molecularly characterized patient-derived models and independent replication across laboratories. It would test each candidate separately, then justify each proposed combination with concentration-response and interaction experiments. The investigators should include normal neural and hepatic systems to examine selectivity, use exposure ranges that a human development program could realistically investigate, and report failures alongside successes. For mebendazole, formulation and polymorph require explicit characterization. For every candidate, the relevant question concerns active, sustained exposure at the tumor site, which requires evidence beyond an administered dose or a transient concentration in plasma. (See link for article)

_______________

For more:

Category:

Cancer, research, Testing, Treatment

The Great Prostate Hoax

https://unbekoming.substack.com/p/the-great-prostate-hoax

The Great Prostate Hoax

By Richard Ablin and Ronald Piana – Unbekoming Book Summary

Unbekoming

Oct 16, 2024

An expressive oil painting focused on the human prostate and its surgical removal, symbolizing the impact of PSA testing and prostate cancer treatment. The central image is a detailed representation of the prostate surrounded by surgical tools and hands preparing to perform the removal. The prostate is depicted with vulnerable, soft textures, while the background is dark and somber, with muted tones of blue, grey, and red, emphasizing the gravity of the procedure. Bold, dramatic brushstrokes highlight the intensity and emotional weight of the scene, evoking a sense of medical intervention and loss.

It’s not just women that Cartel Medicine feeds on, although it does prefer them.

Men are also meat for the grinder, especially when their privates are involved.

The screening hoax we witnessed with mammograms has a counterpart with prostates and the PSA test.

The predation here is especially synergistic as the maiming and destruction caused by prostate interventions feed two sub-Cartels: those of erectile dysfunction and incontinence. The adult diaper business is thriving because of this butchery.

Urologists, not wanting to be left behind by pediatricians, psychiatrists, cardiologists, dermatologists and dentists have their own cozy racket.

With thanks to Richard Ablin and Ronald Piana for telling the truth. [in their book ‘The Great Prostate Hoax.’]

12-point summary

Here’s a 12-point summary of the book, including key data and statistics for those that don’t want to read the longer Q&A below.

PSA (Prostate-Specific Antigen) is not cancer-specific. It’s present in normal, benign, and cancerous prostate tissue. There is no specific PSA level that definitively indicates cancer.
Routine PSA screening leads to significant overdiagnosis and overtreatment. For every 1,000 men screened, only 1 man may avoid death from prostate cancer, while many others suffer unnecessary biopsies and treatments.
Prostate cancer is age-related. About 40% of men aged 40-49, 70% of men 60-69, and 80% of men over 70 have prostate cancer. Most of these cancers are slow-growing and unlikely to cause death.
The lifetime risk of dying from prostate cancer is only 3%, meaning 97% of men will die from other causes, even if they have prostate cancer.
Radical prostatectomy, a common treatment resulting from PSA screening, often leads to significant side effects. Up to 60-80% of men experience erectile dysfunction and 10-20% have long-term urinary incontinence.
PSA screening has not significantly reduced prostate cancer mortality. Studies show similar death rates between screened and unscreened populations.
The PSA test has a high false-positive rate of up to 80%, leading to many unnecessary biopsies and treatments.
Active surveillance is increasingly recognized as an appropriate option for many men with low-risk prostate cancer, potentially avoiding unnecessary treatments and their side effects.
The U.S. healthcare system spends an estimated $3 billion annually on PSA tests alone, with billions more on subsequent procedures and treatments.
New technologies like robotic surgery and proton beam therapy, while heavily marketed, have not shown superior outcomes to traditional treatments but are significantly more expensive.
Conflicts of interest are prevalent in prostate cancer care. Many researchers and physicians promoting PSA screening have financial ties to companies that profit from increased screening and treatment.
The FDA approved the PSA test for screening in 1994 despite significant reservations from its own advisory panel. This decision, along with aggressive marketing by medical companies, led to widespread adoption of PSA screening before its benefits and harms were fully understood.

(See link for article)

Category:

Activism, Cancer, Testing

The Mammography Deception: Why RFK Jr. is Right for the Wrong Reasons

https://sayerji.substack.com/p/the-mammography-deception-why-rfk?

The Mammography Deception: Why RFK Jr. Is Right for the Wrong Reasons

How a screening tool became a political battleground — and why the real crisis in breast cancer care has nothing to do with who sits on a government task force

Sayer Ji

May 23, 2026

In May 2026, RFK Jr. fired two vice chairs of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) — the body whose letter grades legally determine what preventive care your insurance must cover — and the medical establishment and its media apparatus erupted in performative outrage. The concern was presented to the public in the following terms: that political operatives would replace evidence-based scientists, that mammograms and colonoscopies would go the way of vaccine recommendations. But in the ensuing media storm, almost no one stopped to ask a harder question. What if the evidence base for mammography screening was already contested, complicated, and in some dimensions, quietly devastating — long before any politician arrived to interfere?

“Doctors are furious that RFK Jr. touched mammography.

But the Cochrane Collaboration — medicine’s gold standard — found that for every woman mammography saves, 10 are unnecessarily treated.

The outrage is real. It’s just aimed in exactly the wrong direction.” Sayer Ji Source

(See link for article)

________________

**Comment**

1.3 MILLION women are over-diagnosed by mammography screening over a 30 year period and treated for cancers that would never have caused symptoms or death according to a 2012 analysis.

Let that sink in for a moment.

Ji points out that ‘finding is not the same thing as saving,’ and that for a majority of women their body’s immune system is managing this cluster of abnormal cells which would never cause symptoms, spread, or kill them. But today a ‘breast cancer’ diagnosis results in the institutional logic of oncology which demands biopsy, surgery, radiation, and often years of hormone suppression. Similarly to weather modifying geoengineering creating a self-fulfilling prophecy and then turning around and blaming ‘climate change’ for what it actually caused, these diagnosed women with ”breast cancer’ are told mammograms saved them and the system counts her a success despite never addressing the abnormal cell population.

Lastly, the fourth most common breast cancer in women is ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) which is abnormal cells within the milk duct – not invasive cancer. It is merely a finding of a tissue-level change yet standard care for it has been lumpectomy or mastectomy, followed by radiation, and often years of tamoxifen. RCTs are showing the majority of low and intermediate-grade DCIS do not progress to invasive cancer.

Never forget: mammography delivers ionizing radiation to breast tissue.

This accumulates with each mammogram.

Also, the entire breast cancer awareness month was co-founded by Imperial Chemical Industries – a manufacturer of carcinogens! who profits from every mammogram! See: “Stop Pinkwashing: The Truth Breast Cancer Charities Bury,” and “The Cancer Deception: How Modern Medicine’s Fundamental Misunderstanding of Cancer’s True Causes Created a $43 BILLION Overdiagnosis Industry.”

Ji points out the drivers of breast cancer which include diet and endocrine disrupting chemicals. (See top link for article)

_______________

For more:

Category:

Activism, Cancer

Parasites, Biowarfare & Cancer

Parasite, Biowarfare & Cancer

Go here to listen to Dr. Lee Merritt discuss the history of parasites, biowarfare and cancer.

According to Merritt, the story of the CIA covering up the cure for cancer is pure bunk. The CIA didn’t exist when the truth about cancer was covered up. Merritt shows the proof–what we knew about cancer before 1930, and how Cancer research has been used–not just by us–as a cover for bioweapons research. And she believes it is actively being used as a bioweapon against us today.

The silver lining of COVID tyranny is that it affected nearly everyone in some form or fashion. Suffering has a way of opening eyes to the fact our government is not our friend, does not care about our well-being, and is in bed with Big Pharma – actually peddling their products for financial gain. Once you know this, things start making a lot more sense. Further, research institutions are beholden to this very corrupt, conflict riddled government for research grants which means they can’t be trusted either. The same goes for the academic publishing cartel. And lastly, the media is essentially a prostitute who will do anything for money, including accepting money from drug makers.

So, there you have it. The current lovely state of things.

With all of this said, it would be prudent to question everything our government, research, and media tells us because if they lie in one area, rest assured – they aren’t above lying in another area.

Our government health ‘experts’ attack anything that they don’t have their fingers on. There’s been a long, sordid history of the FDA attacking natural supplements, hormones, and anything Big Pharma considers a threat. Rather than addressing real issues like the excess levels of electromagnetic radiation, or ending the decades long addition of fluoride to water after research proves it lowers intelligence, our tax dollars are at work attacking safe treatments like homeopathy, supplements like NAC, natural thyroid hormones, and ivermectin – a proven, safe drug on the WHO list of essential medicines.

Which brings us to cancer – the massively lucrative elephant in the room.

Recently, a published cancer study linking the COVID shot to cancer simply disappeared. That’s right. Poof! Another cancer journal was hit with cyberattacks after confirming over 300 peer-reviewed COVID shot cancer cases across 27 countries. The evidence continues to pile up but no admissions are forth-coming, so don’t hold your breath.

But, there is some good news in this muddy pig-pen. Red-pilled, frustrated doctors are finding many alternative cancer treatments that appear to be working and have a much higher safety profile than current new treatments, which according to a new review only help fewer than 2% of patients.

A few of these successful cancer treatments are anti-parasitic medications.

It’s important to learn about the history and Merritt is highly qualified to give that lesson. Go to top link to hear it.

Category:

Activism, Cancer, Parasites, research

Madison Area Lyme Support Group

Archive for the ‘Cancer’ Category