Archive for the ‘Cancer’ Category

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

1 in 3 Cancer-Free: Ivermectin Trial Stuns, but RESET-5 Aims Even Higher

https://zenodo.org/records/19455636

Real-World Clinical Outcomes of Ivermectin and Mebendazole in Cancer Patients: Results from a Prospective Observational Cohort

Authors/Creators

Nicolas Hulscher, MPH1, 2, Kelly Victory, MD2, James A. Thorp, MD2, Drew Pinsky, MD2, Alejandro Diaz-Villalobos, MD2, Peter Gillooly, MSc2, Foster Coulson2, Melissa Annazone2, Chloe Radesi2, Jessica Brooks2, Peter A. McCullough, MD, MPH1, 2, Harvey Risch, MD, PhD3, 2

April 7, 2026

Description

Abstract

Background: Drug repurposing offers a pathway to identify accessible, low-toxicity cancer therapies. Ivermectin and mebendazole have demonstrated multi-target anti-cancer activity in preclinical models, including the inhibition of cancer cell proliferation and the targeting of cancer stem cells. This paper evaluates real-world patient-reported outcomes, safety, and adherence in a cohort of cancer patients utilizing this combination protocol.

Methods: We analyzed a prospective observational cohort of 197 cancer patients who were prescribed ivermectin and mebendazole off-label through a telemedicine platform by licensed U.S. healthcare providers. Participants received compounded oral capsules containing 25 mg ivermectin and 250 mg mebendazole. As part of a clinical program evaluation, data were collected via voluntary, standardized digital surveys at baseline and at approximately 6-month follow-up. Of the initial cohort (N = 197), baseline characteristics, including cancer type and disease status, were assessed. A total of 122 participants completed the follow-up survey (61.9% response rate) to evaluate self-reported cancer outcomes, medication adherence, and adverse events. 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for primary outcome measures using the Wilson score method. Dose-stratified analyses for outcomes and safety were conducted using Chi-square statistics.

Results: The cohort represented a diverse clinical profile of cancer patients, with mean age of 67 years and nearly balanced sex distribution (52.3% male, 47.7% female). Cancer types included prostate (27.9%), breast (18.3%), lung (8.6%), colon (5.1%), urologic (4.6%), pancreatic (3.0%), liver (2.5%), gynecologic (2.5%), and hematologic (2.5%) malignancies. At enrollment, participants had a median duration since initial diagnosis of 1.2 years, with 37.1% experiencing active disease progression. At 6-month follow-up, medication adherence was high with 86.9% of participants completing the full initial 90-capsule ivermectin-mebendazole prescription and 66.4% remaining on the protocol at 6 months. The Clinical Benefit Ratio (CBR) was 84.4% (95% CI: 77.0–89.8%). Notably, 48.4% (95% CI: 39.7–57.1%) of the cohort reported the strongest positive outcomes, consisting of regression (15.6%; 95% CI: 10.2–23.0%) or no current evidence of disease (NED, 32.8%; 95% CI: 25.1–41.5%). Disease stability was reported to be maintained in 36.1% (95% CI: 28.1–44.9%) of participants, while 15.6% (95% CI: 10.2–23.0%) reported disease progression. While 25.4% reported mild side effects (primarily gastrointestinal), 93.6% of those affected continued treatment through minor dose adjustments. Some participants reported concurrent conventional therapies, including chemotherapy (27.9%), radiation therapy (21.3%), and surgery (19.7%), as well as adjunctive interventions such as supplement use (49.2%), dietary modification (37.7%), and other integrative approaches.

Conclusions: In this prospective real-world cohort, the combination of ivermectin and mebendazole was associated with high rates of self-reported clinical benefit, with nearly half of participants reporting tumor regression or no current evidence of disease across a heterogeneous population of cancer patients. These findings provide a compelling clinical signal that these well-tolerated, repurposed agents may offer therapeutic benefit. However, given the observational design, reliance on self-reported outcomes, and potential for selection bias and uncontrolled confounding, these findings should be interpreted as hypothesis-generating. Urgent prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled clinical trials are warranted to validate these observations and further define optimal dosing strategies. (Go to link for full-length study)

_____________

**Comment**

http://

Could These Overlooked Drugs Be a Cancer Game-Changer?

Dr. Ken Stoller, April 12, 2026

For a wonderful breakdown of the study:  https://justusrhope.substack.com/p/1-in-3-cancer-free-ivermectin-trial?  Excerpt:

Dosages and Concurrent Therapies

Patients were prescribed the medications off-label through a telemedicine platform. They received compounded oral capsules containing:

  • 25 mg of Ivermectin
  • 250 mg of Mebendazole

The study noted that these were not strictly monotherapies. Many patients were undergoing concurrent conventional treatments, including chemotherapy (27.9%), radiation therapy (21.3%), and surgery (19.7%). Additionally, many used adjunctive interventions such as supplements (49.2%) and dietary modifications (37.7%).

Study Completion and Attrition

Of the initial 197 patients, 75 patients failed to complete the study (meaning they did not complete the 6-month follow-up survey).

  • A total of 122 participants completed the 6-month follow-up survey, resulting in a 61.9% response rate.
  • Among the 122 who responded, adherence was high: 86.9% completed the full initial 90-capsule prescription, and 66.4% chose to remain on the protocol at the 6-month mark.

Clinical Outcomes and Tolerability

The authors reported an overall Clinical Benefit Ratio (CBR) of 84.4% among the 122 patients who completed the survey. The self-reported outcomes broke down as follows:

  • No Evidence of Disease (NED): 32.8%
  • Disease Stabilization: 36.1%
  • Tumor Regression: 15.6%
  • Disease Progression: 15.6%

Within the article, Justuserhope asked AI to evaluate the benefit of adding one agent at a time from the RESET-5 Protocol (Mebendazole, ivermectin, sulforaphane, metformin, and aged garlic extract) to the Hulscher et. al study.  The full RESET-5 reduces the likelihood of resistance development, enhances immune function, and depletes tumors of a critical survival tool – compensatory glutathione production.

The full RESET-5 Protocol boosts improvement even further by 30-40%.

_____________

**Comment**

For those of you studying this, 25 mg of ivermectin and 250mg of Mebendazole are considered pretty low dosages.  Many patients are taking much more than that, so the fact they are getting such great improvement with such low dosages is fairly amazing.  Lower dosages typically mean lower side-effects so this should be safe for nearly all to take.  Share with your doctor and work together to get the best fit.

For more:

Category:

Cancer, research, Treatment

A New Ivermectin/Mebendazole Cocktail for Cancer Treatment

https://justusrhope.substack.com/p/a-new-ivermectinmebendazole-cocktail?

A New Ivermectin/Mebendazole Cocktail for Cancer Treatment

Announcing the RESET-5™ Protocol
Justus R. Hope
Apr 05, 2026

Article Excerpts:

Resistance to chemotherapy and radiation is a well-documented challenge in oncology. Clinicians have increasingly reported that resistance can also emerge even when core repurposed drug metabolic cocktails are added to standard treatment regimens.

The Care Oncology Clinic’s 4-Drug COC Protocol — comprising Doxycycline, Atorvastatin, Mebendazole, and Metformin — represents a strong foundational approach to metabolic cancer therapy. In the METRICS trial, adding this protocol to standard of care in Glioblastoma was associated with nearly a one-year increase in survival.

The Problem of Resistance in Metabolic Protocols

Despite these promising results, resistance to the COC Protocol has been reported as well. The core problem lies in the nature of Cancer Stem Cells (CSCs): these cells are remarkably adaptable. When placed under primarily metabolic pressure, CSCs exploit alternative fuel sources and, given enough time, appear to reliably escape any single-axis metabolic attack.

Building a more powerful, resistance-prevention protocol requires a broader strategy — one that targets far more than cancer’s metabolism alone.

The RESET-5™ Protocol (Redox, Epigenetic, and Stem-cell Eradication Therapy)

Why it works:

The word “reset” profoundly captures what this protocol does compared to COC. While COC essentially attempts to starve the tumor, this protocol chemically resets the cancer’s mutated epigenome (via SFN), resets the gut microbiome (via AGE), and eradicates the root stem cells.

  • The RESET-5 Protocol (Mebendazole, Ivermectin, Sulforaphane, Metformin, Aged Garlic Extract) represents a significant improvement over the traditional 4-drug Care Oncology Clinic (COC) protocol (Doxycycline, Atorvastatin, Metformin, Mebendazole).
  • While the COC protocol relies on broad metabolic starvation and mitochondrial toxicity, the RESET-5 protocol systematically targets cancer stem cell (CSC) networks, reverses epigenetic mutations, and modulates the redox environment without destroying the host’s immune system or microbiome.

(See link for article and charts)

For more:

Category:

Cancer, Treatment

The Lyme Lie: How Hidden Infections Sabotage Immunity & Cancer Healing

http://  Approx. 18 Min

The Lyme Lie

How Hidden Infections Sabotage Immunity & Cancer Healing

Dr. Dio Prato

What You’ll Learn in This Episode:

  • Why Lyme disease is frequently missed
  • What “chronic Lyme disease complex” really means
  • How co-infections suppress immunity and drive inflammation
  • The link between infections, autoimmunity, and cancer recurrence
  • Why false-negative Lyme tests are common
  • How neuroborreliosis affects the brain and nervous system
  • Why infections must be treated before repair and recovery
  • The right questions to ask your doctor about testing

📍 Envita Medical Centers – Scottsdale, AZ 🌐 Learn more: https://www.envita.com/?utm_source=Dr… 📞 Speak with a care coordinator: 866-830-4576

Chapters:

0:00 – Understanding Lyme Disease and Its Hidden Dangers

2:00 – The Complexity of Tick-Borne Infections

4:45 – Testing and Diagnosis Lyme Disease

6:47 – The Link Between Lyme Disease and Cancer

9:10 – Real Patient Cases and Treatment Success

14:00 – Questions to Ask Your Doctor

For more:

 

 

Category:

Cancer, Lyme, research, Testing