Cancer
Researchers at the TATA Institute have developed a medicine that could prevent the recurrence of cancer and reduce the side effects of treatment by 50%
https://www.rt.com/india/593318-india-cancer-medicine-research
Feb 29, 2024
The TATA Institute in India has developed a low-cost medicine that could prevent the recurrence of cancer © Getty Images/lakshmiprasad S
The TATA Institute in Mumbai has developed a pill that could prevent the recurrence of cancer and reduce the side effects of treatment by 50%, the Economic Times reported on Wednesday. The development comes after a decade of research.
The new drug, ‘R+Cu’, contains pro-oxidants such as resveratrol and copper which could generate cancer-fighting ‘oxygen radicals’. They prevent dying cells from turning healthy ones cancerous, while also restraining the movement of cancer cells from one part of the body to another, known as ‘metastasis’.
The drug could be effective in treating pancreatic, lung, and oral cancers, researchers have suggested.
The medicine is expected to cost a mere 100 rupees ($1.2) at a time when the price of cancer treatment is soaring. The R+Cu is awaiting approval from the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India (FSSAI), and is likely to be released to the market in June-July.
India’s Modi gives ‘wings’ to Russian-trained astronauts
“The side effects were tested on both rats and humans, but the prevention test was done only on rats. It will take about five years to complete the human trials for this,” surgeon Dr Rajendra Badve from the Tata Memorial Hospital revealed in an interview with NDTV. He added “There were challenges during the research” but eventually it was “a big success.”
The Tata Memorial Center is amongst the world’s oldest and largest cancer research facilities and is funded and controlled by India’s Department of Atomic Energy.
The development was reported weeks after Russian President Vladimir Putin claimed that his country is on the cusp of developing anti-cancer vaccines. “We have reached a significant milestone in the development of cancer vaccines and next-generation immunomodulatory drugs,” the Russian leader stated.
India has added 30 new cancer hospitals in the last nine years, and work is underway on ten more, Prime Minister Narendra Modi said last month. The government has also developed 150,000 wellness centers, called ‘Ayushman Arogya Mandirs’, to help the early detection of cancer among rural populations.
READ MORE: Russia close to ‘cancer vaccines’ – Putin
India, the most populous nation in the world, has some of the highest cancer rates in Asia, and the disease is seen as a major cause of worry by the government. The number of cases in the country is projected to rise from 1.46 million in 2022 to 1.57 million in 2025, according to the Indian Council of Medical Research-National Cancer Registry Programme.
Dr. Paul Marik recently quoted a prospective clinical trial where the participants were given 4000 international units of Vitamin D, and omega 3’s and told to exercise and the risk of cancer dropped 50%.
If you think Big Pharma had good reasons to censor ivermectin during COVID-19 how about now when we know it is likely effective against all chronic diseases associated with aging?
JAN 14, 2024
This Substack recently wrote about the powerful anticancer properties of Fenbendazole:
PetDazole: Pharmaceutical Grade Pure Fenbendazole
JUNE 6, 2023
Just like they went after one of the very best cures for PSYOP-19 in Ivermectin… …the Medical Industrial Complex does not want the truth to come out about a powerful cancer cure in Fenbendazole. Thanks to the deployment of the DEATHVAX™, we are now seeing parabolic increases in “turbo cancers.” Those responsible for these slow kill bioweapon injections…
I also mentioned in passing that one of the reasons Ivermectin was so viciously maligned and suppressed was that if society were taking it to cure PSYOP-19 one of the side effects would be “sudden” plummeting cancer rates, and thus BigPharma et al. went all out to destroy this Nobel prize miracle drug.
What would happen if one did a combination therapy for both the prevention and treatment of cancer using BOTH Ivermectin and Fenbendazole? The synergistic pairing would be far more effective than just using one of these miraculous drugs.
For many years now the cure for cancer was in plain sight right in front of everyone all this while, yet society was socially engineered to mindlessly “Trust the Science” such that they would undergo incredibly expensive (read: exorbitant profit margins) medical treatments that are toxic and deadly, instead of taking two inexpensive (read: minuscule profit margins) drugs that have zero adverse side effects.
It also turns out that Ivermectin is a powerful anti-aging drug!
This is precisely why the war on Ivermectin (and soon Fenbendazole) has only just begun…
Dr. Paul Marik recently quoted a prospective clinical trial where the participants were given 4000 international units of Vitamin D, and omega 3’s and told to exercise and the risk of cancer dropped 50%.
In another post, Dr. Marik says it is highly unlikely cancer is genetically determined.
I wanted to talk about both in this post.
In July 1994, I published a new theory of cancer in Molecular Carcinogenesis which implied while tumors were genetically determined, the malignant nature of tumors (ie., the thing we call cancer) was not [1].
This notion that malignancy was a phenotype and not a genotype was heretical at the time and so the paper was ignored (only the editors of Molecular Carcinogenesis and myself were excited). It was an exciting idea because it meant one can control the malignant potential of tumors pharmacologically. No more need for slash and burn, which I have always regarded as barbaric.
However, subsequently, it became widely accepted that the malignant phenotype of cancers called ‘epithelial mesenchymal transition’ (EMT) was real [2]. So I was vindicated, although it seems no one noticed except for myself.
The reason I had proposed cancer as a phenotype was that I had just finished the characterization of the 67 kD alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) receptor for my Ph.D. thesis [3]. The AFP receptor (AFPr) was expressed on macrophages and highly overexpressed on the common cancers of the adenocarcinomas (breast, prostate, lung, colon, etc) implying a dual role in immunosuppression of the host and in tumor malignant potential. In fact, I wrote the theory to explain how immunosuppression of the host relates to tumor malignant potential.
Figure 1. From Giannelli G et al, Cancer Research 2014 [4]. AFP is recognized as a malignancy progression factor in a very common cancer in the world, hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) often associated with a viral origin.
Thus, the malignant potential of tumors known as cancer was amenable to pharmacological intervention.
AFP exists in active and inactive states. Things that bind to and inactivate AFP (zinc, DHEA, flavonoids etc) are entities that may help promote innate immunity (of macrophages) and which also diminish the malignant potential of tumors.
At the time I called this malignant phenotype of cancers “anti-cellular senescence” [1]. This was because the tumor was refractory to new signalling and thus changes were not visible, because AFP binding to the AFPr on tumors blocked incoming signals. So it seemed the tumor did not age.
While the malignant phenotype is now recognized as ‘epithelial-mesenchymal transition’ (EMT), fortunately, Dr. Robert Weinberg has also defined it to block senescence [5] or is also a phenotype involving anti-cellular senescence (whew!).
Then in 2015, I wrote the new immunosenescence paradigm of macrophages published in Discovery Medicine which attempts to explain the cause of chronic illness associated with aging including diseases such as cancer and cardiovascular diseases [6]. Subsequently I validated this paradigm specifically for explaining the initiation and progression of cardiovascular diseases [7] (it is not cholesterol but elevated stress does increase cholesterol).
Figure 2. The New Immunosenescence Paradigm of Macrophages
defined as the failed (lytic) release of protector HERV-K102 from foamy macrophages. When the DHEA/cortisol ratio is low, there is a higher risk of immunosenescence when the host encounters a virus due to inadequate levels of DHEA to bind and inactivate AFP. We reported in 1994 that AFP blocks apoptosis of macrophages [8].
P53 along with TGF-beta, represses AFP expression, and p53 is a tumor suppressor commonly deleted or at least dysfunctional in tumors/cancers.
ZBTB20 is a zinc finger credited with post-natal down-regulation of AFP. However, when functional p53 is absent, it upregulates AFP [9].
Did you know that ZBTB20 is required for the induction of NFKB1 [10] such as when SARS-CoV-2 infects foamy macrophages in vivo by ADE [11]which contributes to cytokine storm? AFP is significantly upregulated by SARS-CoV-2 infection at the protein and mRNA levels in cell lines [12].
Referring back to Figure 2, AFP antagonists reverse and prevent immunosenescence. Immunosenescence causes age-associated chronic diseases [6,7]. This means AFP antagonists like zinc, flavonoids, DHEA/7ketoDHEA, Vitamin D over 60 ng/ml, and now also Ivermectin [13] are likely AFP antagonists which are predicted to reduce the risks of age-associated chronic illness including cancer and cardiovascular disease, etc.
There are now in addition to many reports on how Ivermectin behaves as a potent antiviral, emerging evidence for its reversion of the malignant phenotype particularly by inducing apoptosis [14] and blocking metastasis [15].
So if you think the war on Ivermectin is over, in fact, it is just getting STARTED.
REFERENCES
- Laderoute MP. A new perspective on the nature of the cancer problem: anti-cellular senescence. Mol Carcinog. 1994 Jul;10(3):125-33. doi: 10.1002/mc.2940100303.
- Zhang Y, Weinberg RA. Epithelial-to-mesenchymal transition in cancer: complexity and opportunities. Front Med. 2018 Aug;12(4):361-373. doi: 10.1007/s11684-018-0656-6.
- Laderoute MP. The Characterization of a Novel, Widespread, PNA-Reactive Tumor Associated Antigen: the Alpha-fetoprotein Receptor/Binding Protein. Ph.D. Thesis. The University of Alberta. Canada 1991, pp 256. https://era.library.ualberta.ca/items/6f548eb6-49a2-456c-b472-41f68976077f.
- Giannelli G, Villa E, Lahn M. Transforming growth factor-β as a therapeutic target in hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Res. 2014 Apr 1;74(7):1890-4. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-14-0243.
- Weinberg RA. Twisted epithelial-mesenchymal transition blocks senescence. Nat Cell Biol. 2008 Sep;10(9):1021-3. doi: 10.1038/ncb0908-1021.
- Laderoute MP. A new paradigm about HERV-K102 particle production and blocked release to explain cortisol mediated immunosenescence and age-associated risk of chronic disease. Discov Med. 2015 Dec;20(112):379-91.
- Laderoute M. The paradigm of immunosenescence in atherosclerosis-cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Discov Med. 2020 Jan-Feb;29(156):41-51.
- Laderoute MP, Pilarski LM. The inhibition of apoptosis by alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) and the role of AFP receptors in anti-cellular senescence. Anticancer Res. 1994 Nov-Dec;14(6B):2429-38.
- To JC, Chiu AP, Tschida BR, Lo LH, Chiu CH, Li XX, Kuka TP, Linden MA, Amin K, Chan WC, Bell JB, Moriarity BS, Largaespada DA, Keng VW. ZBTB20 regulates WNT/CTNNB1 signalling pathway by suppressing PPARG during hepatocellular carcinoma tumourigenesis. JHEP Rep. 2020 Dec 19;3(2):100223. doi: 10.1016/j.jhepr.2020.100223.
- Liu X, Zhang P, Bao Y, Han Y, Wang Y, Zhang Q, Zhan Z, Meng J, Li Y, Li N, Zhang WJ, Cao X. Zinc finger protein ZBTB20 promotes Toll-like receptor-triggered innate immune responses by repressing IκBα gene transcription. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013 Jul 2;110(27):11097-102. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1301257110.
- Ren X, Wen W, Fan X, et al. COVID-19 immune features revealed by a large-scale single-cell transcriptome atlas. Cell. 2021 Apr 1;184(7):1895-1913.e19. doi: 10.1016/j.cell.2021.01.053.
- Appelberg S, Gupta S, Svensson Akusjärvi S, et al. Dysregulation in Akt/mTOR/HIF-1 signaling identified by proteo-transcriptomics of SARS-CoV-2 infected cells. Emerg Microbes Infect. 2020 Dec;9(1):1748-1760. doi: 10.1080/22221751.2020.1799723.
- Laderoute M. Ivermectin may prevent and reverse immunosenescence by antagonizing alpha-fetoprotein and downmodulating PI3K/Akt/mTOR hyperactivity. Open Heart. April 29, 2021. https://openheart.bmj.com/content/8/1/e001655.responses#ivermectin-may-prevent-and-reverse-immunosenescence-by-antagonizing-alpha-fetoprotein-and-downmodulating-pi3k-akt-mtor-hyperactivity.
- Tang M, Hu X, Wang Y, Yao X, Zhang W, Yu C, Cheng F, Li J, Fang Q. Ivermectin, a potential anticancer drug derived from an antiparasitic drug. Pharmacol Res. 2021 Jan;163:105207. doi: 10.1016/j.phrs.2020.105207.
- Jiang L, Sun YJ, Song XH, Sun YY, Yang WY, Li J, Wu YJ. Ivermectin inhibits tumor metastasis by regulating the Wnt/β-catenin/integrin β1/FAK signalling pathway. Am J Cancer Res. 2022 Oct 15;12(10):4502-4519.
They want you dead.
Do NOT comply.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-12-27-swiss-data-increase-people-cancer-treatment-2020.html
Data from major Swiss health insurance company Helsana showed that in 2021, there was a dramatic increase of 73 percent in the number of patients receiving cancer treatments compared to 2020. This trend persisted in 2022.
Not surprisingly, it coincided with the rollout of Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) vaccines in Switzerland, which began on December 2020.
“We have a doubling of cancer cases,” concluded University of Lucerne health economist Konstantin Beck, after analyzing data from the Federal Statistical Office (BfS) and the Helsana Drug Report of 2022.
How healthy was Switzerland in 2020?
Beck addressed the question “How healthy was Switzerland in 2020?” in a video presentation – with the background of his analysis coming from the 2022 Helsana report and the figures from the “official” health survey the BfS published on Nov. 3.
The video begins by pointing out that the BfS conducts its health survey every five years. The health economist commented: “What is surprising is that the BfS published statistics in its database with detailed information about the health survey of Swiss citizens were deleted a few days after [they were released].”
Before the data was unpublished, BfS gave the following statement regarding its 2022 health survey: “In 2022, 85 percent of the Swiss population aged 15 and over felt healthy and 83 percent felt happy. At the same time, more than a third live with a permanent health problem. Psychological stress has increased compared to 2017. The 15 to 24 year old age group is particularly affected, especially young women.”
However, this assessment by the BfS did not match the data it published. (Related: Insurance data confirms sharp increase in “sudden deaths” following COVID jab rollout.)
The deleted health survey results were responses to the question “Have you ever had one of the following illnesses or health problems in your life?” with heart attack, stroke and cancer included in the listed disease. A tally of the responses showed that:
- 170,000 people said they had a heart attack – from 33,339 in 2017 (an increase of more than 19 percent)
- 124,515 people said they had a stroke – from 27,584 in 2017 (an increase of more than 22 percent)
- 344,166 people said they had cancer – from 116,603 in 2017 (an increase of almost 34 percent)
Beck calculated that based on the expunged BfS statistics, the cases in 2022 would have “increased by a factor of four to five” even if aging and immigration were taken into account and subtracted from the data.
The BfS also made a noticeable change to the question on its health survey, which raises even more suspicion. In 2017, participants were asked if they’d had a heart attack, stroke or cancer the previous year, but the 2022 survey asked participants if they’d had any of the illnesses in their lifetime.
Given the question, Beck noted that the numbers from 2022 would understandably be higher. But he questioned why the BfS saw it fit to compare recent data with data from five years earlier in the first place, only to delete the incorrect comparison after releasing a contradictory statement.
To get to the bottom of things, Beck used the Helsana Drug Report to make a proper comparison. Published annually in Switzerland, the Helsana Drug Report “analyses the Swiss pharmaceutical market and provides insights into the cost and consumption of drugs.” Its data for the year 2022 was published on November 30, 2023.
Using the Helsana data, Beck came up with a table showing that in 2020, the number of cancer patients receiving treatment was nine percent higher than the trend established using data from 2013 to 2019. But this difference skyrocketed to 95 percent in 2021 and to 106 percent in 2022, prompting Beck to wonder whether COVID vaccinations had something to do with it.
Since the increase in cancer cases in 2020 was very small, Beck reasoned that the pandemic couldn’t have caused the massive jump in number in the succeeding years. Only Switzerland’s COVID vaccination campaign coincided with the sudden rise in cancer cases among the Swiss population.
Was the BfS trying to cover up COVID-19 vaccine injuries?
Following the unpublishing of its 2022 health statistics, the BfS justified its action by simply stating that “the surveys from 2017 and 2022 are not comparable.”
According to Beck, this simple admission without further explanation “does not help strengthen trust in the BfS” because the numbers “could reflect the negative effects of the coronavirus vaccinations. And it doesn’t make a good impression if the office first publishes such data and then deletes it.”
“If you have such a serious mistake, then it would be desirable for the mistake to be better communicated,” said Beck.
Beck’s video, where he explains his analysis, was published in German and had no English subtitles. However, Transition News has published an article on Beck’s video, which is also in German but can be translated into English using an online translation tool.
Visit VaccineDamage.news for more stories about the dangers of COVID-19 vaccines.
Watch the following video to learn about Swiss health insurance: Explaining how it works, the costs and how to pick your policy.
https://www.brighteon.com/embed/e3b00db0-071f-4c5c-a5db-5ccbeb4579da
This video is from the Daily Videos channel on Brighteon.com.
More related stories:
HEALTH INSURANCE could be outlawed for the unvaccinated in Illinois.
Farmers Insurance lays off 2,400 employees in the name of “long-term profitability.”
Cigna Healthcare used AI to deny hundreds of thousands of valid insurance claims, lawsuit alleges.
Sources include:
An Edward Dowd-led analysis of UK government data shows that cancer deaths among 15- to 44-year-olds following the rollout of COVID injections increased so substantially that only the jabs could have been responsible for the timely increase.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-12-03-government-data-young-people-dying-cancer.html
There is no denying, based on available data, that cancer rates massively spiked following the release of Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “vaccines” through Operation Warp Speed.
Between 2021 and 2022 when most of the now-fully vaccinated world got jabbed, cancer deaths skyrocketed, particularly among young people, according to data from the United Kingdom’s Office for National Statistics (ONS).
The same government entities that pretended to care about everyone’s health in 2020 when they shut down businesses and schools and told everyone to stay at home in isolation suddenly could not care less once 2021 arrived and the jabs started to cause widespread health problems.
One of those health problems is cancer, but alas this is no longer of concern to the powers that be because it was never about “saving lives” during the “pandemic,” but rather about tricking as many people as possible into taking chemical injections that we now know are linked to so-called “turbo” cancers.
(Related: Dowd believes that America is currently in the throes of an unfolding “slow Mad Max” scenario that will end in total collapse.)
UK government officials trying to hide excess deaths among young people
An Edward Dowd-led analysis of UK government data shows that cancer deaths among 15- to 44-year-olds following the rollout of COVID injections increased so substantially that only the jabs could have been responsible for the timely increase.
Younger people in their 20s, 30s, and 40s are reportedly now dying from rapidly metastasizing and terminal cancers – and this was not the case prior to the COVID jab rollout, just to be clear.
Dowd told The Defender that his research partners included a handful of high-level scientists, data analysts, and financial experts who examined all International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, (ICD-10) codes for cause of death in the UK between 2010 and 2022. They looked specifically at trends in malignant neoplasms (C00 to C99 codes).
ICD-10 codes are used internationally by physicians to classify health conditions, as well as for processing insurance claims. The World Health Organization (WHO) created ICD-10, as well as previous iterations of it.
A striking pattern that Dowd and his research team noticed is that excess deaths among young people in Wales and England are not being properly coded, which points to a coverup.
“When you die in a hospital, you leave a trail of life and death with indications of what led to the death,” Dowd explained. “When a young person dies at the wheel of a car, walking down the street or in their sleep, there’s an investigation.”
Though nearly all deaths among older people in 2021 and 2022 in these two countries were properly coded, just eight percent of deaths among 15- to 44-year-olds in 2021, and 30 percent of deaths in that same age range in 2022, were coded properly, with most still not properly coded.
According to Dowd, the missing codes are “indicative of the problem” of a large number of excess deaths among young people that are not being included in the official numbers.
Despite the missing codes, those that do exist still point to “a strong signal of cancer deaths in the young,” Dowd and his team said.
“We show a large increase in mortality due to malignant neoplasms that started in 2021 and accelerated substantially in 2022.”
“The increase in excess deaths in 2022 is highly significant (extreme event),” Dowd further wrote in his report. “The results indicate that from late 2021 a novel phenomenon leading to increased malignant neoplasm deaths appears to be present in individuals aged 15 to 44 in the UK.”
Dowd says the purpose of his study is not to examine individual claims and anecdotes, but rather to provide a statistical analysis at a population level to determine whether or not the anecdotal evidence is abnormal.
The latest news about the cancer epidemic can be found at Cancer.news.
Sources for this article include:
A 2021 study involving 7,000 patients found a correlation between sugar intake and increased cancer risk. Cancer incidence increased by 8 percent for every additional 5 grams of liquid sugar consumed per day. To put that in perspective, a can of soda typically contains 30 to 45 grams of sugar. The people with the highest sugar intake suffered a 46 percent increase in cancer incidence by study’s end.
https://www.naturalnews.com/2023-12-01-high-sugar-diet-correlated-with-increased-risk-cancer.html
As another year of “breast cancer awareness” fades away into a pile of pink trash, researchers continue to bring forth evidence that SUGAR is one of the biggest culprits behind this modern-day wave of cancer.
Excess sugar intake, especially high fructose corn syrup, is driving this public health crisis. Daily consumption of sugary beverages and fake foods is causing systemic inflammation, immunodeficiency, obesity, metabolic disorders, Type-2 diabetes, and a host of cancers.
Excess sugar intake is a public health crisis
Mingyang Song, associate professor of clinical epidemiology and nutrition at the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health spoke with The Epoch Times about the correlation between sugar intake and cancer. Mingyang said there is strong epidemiological evidence to suggest that “sugar intake can indeed nourish cancer cells.”
A seven-year study that involved 1,011 colon cancer patients found a direct correlation between sugar intake and cancer prognosis. Those who consumed two or more servings of sugar per day experienced a 67 percent increased risk of colon cancer recurrence or mortality. The excess sugar in juices, sodas and energy drinks differ from the natural sugars found in fruits. Fruits also contain fiber, which slows digestion and allows the cells to properly utilize the small amount of sugar in the fruit.
A 2021 study involving 7,000 patients found a correlation between sugar intake and increased cancer risk. Cancer incidence increased by 8 percent for every additional 5 grams of liquid sugar consumed per day. To put that in perspective, a can of soda typically contains 30 to 45 grams of sugar. The people with the highest sugar intake suffered a 46 percent increase in cancer incidence by study’s end.
In a prospective study that involved over 35,000 patients, a correlation was found between soft drinks and an increased risk of obesity-related cancers. Patients who consumed sugar-sweetened beverages more than once per day experienced an 18 percent increase in cancer diagnosis.
A 2023 comprehensive review found that 48 percent of all cancer cases, including breast, colorectal, endometrial, liver, stomach, and thyroid, are tied directly to obesity. A high sugar diet is one of the main drivers of obesity.
A 2020 prospective cohort study followed 100,000 people over a period of several years and tracked their sugar consumption without interfering with their eating habits. In the study, those who consumed the highest level of sugar were 17 percent more likely to be diagnosed with cancer compared to those with the lowest sugar intake. The finding was significant because the researchers adjusted for factors such as weight gain and body mass index. The study suggests that sugar increases cancer risk independent of obesity and weight gain.
High fructose corn syrup causes inflammation and insulin resistance, creating the condition for cancer
High sugar intake triggers inflammation at the cellular level and alters the metabolic profile, leading to insulin resistance. These dysfunctional metabolic factors are precursors to tumor growth and development. In these instances, it doesn’t matter if the individual is obese or at their target weight. If the sugar is causing systemic inflammation and insulin resistance, then these are the conditions for tumors to develop, regardless of fitness level. When the body is forced to increase insulin to maintain a proper sugar balance, the increase in insulin causes inflammation and mitochondrial damage that is at the root of cancer formation.
This is why sugar (sucrose) is harmful in high doses and why HFCS is the most dangerous form of sugar. Every cell in the body can absorb glucose as an energy source. However, sucrose molecules are one part glucose and one part fructose. While the glucose is absorbed, the fructose does not get absorbed. These fructose molecules enter the liver directly, and a portion of these molecules will be converted to fat, leading to increased insulin resistance in the long run. The issue is made worse with HFCS because this unnatural sugar is comprised of 45 percent glucose and 55 percent fructose. This unnatural balance of glucose and fructose is an assault on the metabolic profile, leading to more rapid weight gain and insulin resistance. In fact, a study published in Science found that high-fructose corn syrup enhanced intestinal tumor growth in mice.
If public health is so important, then there needs to be more emphasis on sugar’s role in causing immunosuppression and various types of cancers. Breast cancer awareness campaigns need a real purpose and would be better served if they focused on the SUGAR OVERLOAD CRISIS that is driving so many cancers today.
Sources include:
Jurors in state court in Jefferson City awarded James Draeger, Valerie Gunther and Dan Anderson a total of $61.1 million in actual damages along with another $500 million each in punitive damages over claims that using Roundup on their lawns and gardens caused them to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
https://www.newstarget.com/2023-11-22-mosanto-forced-pay-billions-roundup-verdict.html
Three former users of Roundup weed killer have won more than $1.5 billion in a judgment against Monsanto, now a unit of Bayer AG, that a Missouri jury says must pay its victims for the glyphosate-based herbicide giving them cancer.
Jurors in state court in Jefferson City awarded James Draeger, Valerie Gunther and Dan Anderson a total of $61.1 million in actual damages along with another $500 million each in punitive damages over claims that using Roundup on their lawns and gardens caused them to develop non-Hodgkin lymphoma.
The suit is one of many in recent days in which juries have ruled against Monsanto over claims concerning the carcinogenic properties of its Roundup formula. This latest suit is one of the largest to be handed down against a U.S.-based corporate defendant this year.
(Related: In 2021, a court ruled that Monsanto showed “willful” disregard for human safety by selling cancer-causing glyphosate.)
Will Monsanto survive the litigatory pressure?
Though Monsanto has won other similar such cases in the past, the fact that it lost this big one along with numerous others recently, has caused speculation that the now-German-owned drug and agriculture chemical company may need to alter its legal strategy.
The jury, based in Cole County, Mo., ruled that Monsanto is liable for claims of negligence, design defects and failure to warn plaintiffs of the potential health damages of using Roundup, the primary active ingredient of which is glyphosate.
Each of the three plaintiffs was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma which is said to have been caused by the simple use of Roundup on their family properties. The weed killer is highly toxic, we now know, and Monsanto is known for hiding and covering up the damning science against its products.
Monsanto is appealing the ruling, which could end up resulting in reduced punitive damages. It all depends on what happens and whether or not the case makes it to the Supreme Court, which reportedly will not allow punitive damages to be this high based on court guidance.
Bayer, which purchased Monsanto a few years back, continues to claim that decades of studies support the safe use of Roundup.
The case marks the fourth straight loss for Bayer in court this year. Union Investment, one of Bayer’s top 10 shareholders, recently called on the company to try to engage more directly with plaintiffs to settle cases rather than see them through to court.
Meanwhile, the plaintiffs are celebrating the victory, as is their lawyer, Bart Rankin, who said in a statement that this is just the first case among many to be won on behalf of thousands of plaintiffs all across the country.
In many ways, Monsanto has turned out to be a toxic asset for Bayer, which everyone cringed at when the company took over the chemical giant. With so much evidence floating around out there about the dangers of glyphosate, it is almost shocking that Bayer made the decision to buy at all.
Nevertheless, suits against Bayer continue to flood the courts, and the company has said in a recent statement that it plans to present stronger arguments in the appeal that it says will overturn the judgment.
“It said in the recent trials that have gone against the company, courts have improperly permitted plaintiffs to misrepresent the European Union’s renewal process for glyphosate and the safety assessment by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency,” Reuters reported about the matter.
Last week, the EU Commission said it would renew approval for glyphosate based on the safety assessments of the European Food Agency and European Chemicals Agency following the failure of EU member states to provide a clear opinion one way or another about the herbicide’s continued use.
More of the latest news about the downfall of the chemical industry can be found at Collapse.news.
Sources for this article include:
Exploring Big Pharma’s Unproven Assertion that Gardasil Will Prevent Cervical Cancer
The age-related peak incidence for a diagnosis of cancer of the cervix is 44 years of age. In the 40 – 44 year age group, the MDH says that in any given year there are only 14 newly diagnosed cervical cancers per 100,000 population, which means that 99,986 out of every 100,000 44-year-old Minnesotan women will not be diagnosed with cervical cancer.
Gardasil Has Not Been Proven to Prevent Cancer of the Cervix!
https://www.globalresearch.ca/gardasil-cervical-cancer-hoax-making/5835449
Global Research, October 10, 2023
[This article was originally published by Transcend Media Service on June 29, 2016.]
***
According to a recent Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) report, cancer of the cervix was the 14th most common malignancy among Minnesota women. Cervical cancer was also listed as the 17th most common cause of cancer death in Minnesota.
In Minnesota, according to the statistical information provided by the MDH (published here), the incidence of cancer of the cervix among Minnesotan females of all races is a miniscule 6.8/100,000 population (ie, 6.8 newly diagnosed cases per 100,000 women per year). (Incidence is the term for the number of new cases of a disease diagnosed during a specified period of time, usually a year.)
The age-related peak incidence for a diagnosis of cancer of the cervix is 44 years of age. In the 40 – 44 year age group, the MDH says that in any given year there are only 14 newly diagnosed cervical cancers per 100,000 population, which means that 99,986 out of every 100,000 44 year-old Minnesotan women will not be diagnosed with cervical cancer.
By the age of 50, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reports that more than 80% of American women will have been infected at one time or another with human papillomavirus (HPV). And yet, amazingly, well over 99,000 out of every 100,000 women will never be diagnosed with cervical cancer. (It is useful to point out that deaths from cervical cancer are an even more miniscule 1.5 cases per 100,000 females per year.) Those statistics should make obvious that girls who don’t go along with the crowd – by refusing the CDC’s recommendations – have a close to zero chance that they will ever get cervical cancer.
The question that should come to everybody’s mind is this: “Why vaccinate millions of young girls when the entirely theoretical chance of any of them ever getting cervical cancer approaches zero?” (See supporting data below.)
Not only that, but skeptical parents will save a ton of money (an outrageous $140 per shot, plus office call charge) as well avoiding the distinct possibility of seeing their children become chronically ill with one or more serious autoimmune disorders that are becoming increasingly common among fully vaccinated children.
Some Statistics That Merck and Glaxo Don’t Want Doctors – or Their Patients – to Understand
The American Cancer Society estimates that 12,000 out of the 170,000,000 females in the US are diagnosed with invasive cervical cancer annually in the United States. That represents only 0.0061% of the female population (12,000 divided by 170,000,000 X 100% = 0.0061%) – an infinitesimally small percentage. But that means that 99.9939% of Minnesotan females will not get cervical cancer next year whether they were vaccinated with Gardasil or not or whether they were among the 80 % that had contracted an HPV infection during their lifetimes. That is a chance many will logically choose to take, especially because the costs (both financial and health-related) can be so high.
Those statistics represent pretty good odds that Gardasil has been way over-hyped, especially considering the fact that 60,000,000 American females are under the age of 30 (an age group within which cancer of the cervix is essentially non-existent) For the over-30 group the number of women who will never get cervical cancer still amounts to 99.989% (12,000 divided by 110,000,000 X 100% = 0.011 % and 100% – 0.011% = 99.989 %), even though 80% of them had already been infected – and then spontaneously cured – with one of the 100+ strains of HPV almost all of them not feared as being cancer-causing.
The Number Needed to Treat (NNT)
To make those statistics more meaningful, it is necessary to understand the concept of Number Needed to Treat (NNT) and Number Needed to Vaccinate (NNV), which is a quick figure that tells physicians how many patients have to be treated (or vaccinated) before one patient can be said to have benefitted from the treatment. Here is an excerpt from a Duluth News-Tribune Commentary article that I recently submitted. It was titled “Gardasil Has Not Been Proven to Prevent Cancer of the Cervix!”. It is scheduled to be published soon.
“So how bogus is the vaccine industry’s claims that Gardasil can prevent cancer? The irrefutable fact is that there have been zero cases of cancer prevention proven. Patients will have to wait another generation or two to find out about cancer prevention, the major reason that parents are pushing their daughters to get the shots. 20 – 50 years is the amount of time for cancer of the cervix to develop.
“One useful statistical measure that some medical investigators use is the Number Needed to Treat (NNT), which is one way to quickly state the effectiveness of a treatment…For instance, the NNT for a course of penicillin for a penicillin-sensitive streptococcal pharyngitis is 1 (meaning that one cure [or effective treatment or vaccination] occurs for every one course of treatment. If a treatment results in only half of patients benefitting, the NNT is 2 (the inverse of the fraction1/2). The smaller the NNT or NNV, the more beneficial the treatment or vaccination is.
Gardasil: Not Proven to Prevent Cancer of the Cervix!
“An article published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal (co-authored by four investigators, three of whom were either employees of one of Merck’s Canadian subsidiaries or had received money, honoraria or grants from vaccine companies) that stated that for Gardasil, the NNV to prevent 4 or 5 cases of cervical cancer for a typical 12-year-old girl would be 9,080, meaning that 9075 girls would be unnecessarily risking the financial costs and/or serious adverse health consequences of Gardasil.
“Physicians are never informed of NNT or NNV statistics but patients deserve to know about it before embarking on any recommended treatment program. What Merck has done to promote Gardasil in the deceptive “Not One More” campaign (that makes parents – and obviously physicians – truly believe the bogus claim that Gardasil will prevent cancer when in actuality the risks and costs come nowhere near outweighing the minuscule, alleged benefit.”
Many of the serious health risks related to aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines like Gardasil are only now coming to light, including the autoimmune diseases mentioned in the recently described new syndrome, ASIA (Autoimmune/inflammatory Syndrome Induced by Adjuvants). See Dr Yehuda Shoenfeld’s ground-breaking article in the Journal of Autoimmunity that describes the syndrome here and insists that your daughter’s pediatrician study it as well.
And then, read the following information from www.mercola.com before trusting the vaccine industry’s claim that Gardasil prevents all so-called pre-cancerous lesions of the cervix (which admittedly it can in a small minority of cases [but usually in cigarette smokers]).
“Cervical cancer usually starts to develop in the late 20s to mid-30s. The peak incidence is 45 years of age. The protection period of Gardasil is estimated to be 5 years. That means, if you receive your first set of shots when you’re 10 years old, you’d need at least 2 to 4 additional booster shots to make it through to your 30s. And THAT means you’ll have to expose yourself to the potential side effects of Gardasil over and over and over again, with aluminum adjuvants accumulating in your body and brain with each injection.
“U.S. statistics show there are 30 to 40 cervical cancer cases per year per one million women between the ages of 9 and 26, which is the age bracket that Gardasil was tested on.
“According to Merck, Gardasil was shown to (very modestly!) reduce (not eliminate) pre-cancers by 12.2% to 16.5% in the general population. So, instead of ending up with 30 to 40 cases of cancer per million, per year in that age bracket, Gardasil can potentially bring it down to 26 to 35 cases of cervical cancer per million women.
“What that means is that you would have to vaccinate one million girls to prevent cervical cancer in 4 to 5 girls. (Ed note: Therefore the NNV for that age group would be an astronomical 1,000,000!)
“Further, about 37 percent of women who develop cervical cancer actually die from the disease, so vaccinating ONE MILLION girls would prevent 1 to 2 DEATHS per year, at the ‘bargain-basement’ price of $360 million per year, plus potentially lifelong suffering for an untold number of women, which has no price tag.”
Correlation Does Not Mean Causation
The CDC, which is usually careful to use the term “associated with” rather than the term “causative” when it comes to HPV-associated cervical cancers, says: “Not all cancers termed ‘HPV-associated’ reflect actual HPV infections, and the numbers judged to be HPV-attributable are only estimates.”
Astonishingly, but not surprisingly, ever since America’s over-vaccination program began in the 1990s (soon after President Ronald Reagan signed the 1986 federal law outlawing lawsuits against vaccine manufacturers when children died or were disabled or otherwise sickened because of vaccine injuries), up to 30% of fully vaccinated American children are now seriously and chronically ill, whereas in 1983 only 1.5% of American children were considered seriously chronically ill. See this.
Cause and effect? The answer is probably yes because the basic neuroscience research that is done by un-conflicted researchers is quietly debunking the claims about the safety and efficacy of aluminum-adjuvanted vaccines. But such research almost never gets published in the popular medical journals that take pharmaceutical industry money (grants or advertising) or whose board members have (often undisclosed) professional or monetary pro-vaccine conflicts of interest.
Most physicians will never read the important research findings from such researchers. Sadly, if any published research that counters the “conventional wisdom from Big Pharma or the CDC” the article is likely to be withdrawn from publication or redacted from past publications. Witness the experiences of Doctors Andrew Wakefield, Chris Shaw, and Lucija Tomljenovic when their well-done, peer-reviewed research articles questioning the alleged safety or efficacy of vaccines were unceremoniously withdrawn from publication after the articles had passed the peer review process – and had already been published.
More Disturbing Information About the HPV Bandwagon
Merck’s Gardasil and GlaxoSmithKline’s Cervarix both contain genetically engineered subunit protein antigens (not actual viral particles) that are capable of generating immune complexes with the essential help of the neurotoxic aluminum adjuvant that attaches to the protein antigen. The aluminum is added to the vaccine so that the antigen persists in the muscle tissue and in the macrophages for a long time. (Macrophagic ingestion of aluminum-coated antigens is how the aluminum passes through the blood-brain barrier and into the vaccinee’s brain.)
The synthesized HPV protein antigens (virus-like particles [aka VLPs] that are in both HPV vaccines) are produced in cultured yeast cells.
Q: What could possibly go wrong (with this extremely complex, nearly incomprehensible manufacturing process)?
A: Only the super-secret pharmaceutical industry factories and their “mad” (or just mercenary) scientists know the answers, but unconflicted, altruistic and very skeptical basic neuroscience researchers have their suspicions, and they are trying to warn vulnerable people.
Health Journalists Tend to Use as Their Primary Source Material Propaganda From Big Pharma and the Medical Establishment
There is another aspect about the widespread disinformation surrounding the promotion of prescription drugs and vaccines, which always starts with cunningly well-designed multi-billion dollar propaganda campaigns from Big Pharma. Medical journalists rely a lot on biased information easily gleaned from popular medical journal articles (that are sometimes ghost-written by someone other than the listed authors) or from corporate press releases. In either case, the information always benefits the for-profit pharmaceutical corporations and the private ”research” companies who perform the studies for large sums of money.
The majority of the medical establishment, including some in the nursing profession, relies on the same corporate-generated information, and they have succumbed to the multi-billion dollar ad campaigns that urge parents and guardians to force their dependent pre-teen and young teenage girls to submit – often against their better instincts – to the series of three intramuscular injections, each of which, as mentioned above, contains an aluminum adjuvant that is known to be neurotoxic and fully capable of producing hyper-immunity and chronic autoimmune disorders.
Contrary to Merck’s Multibillion Ad Campaign, No Proof Exists That Gardasil Prevents Cancer
But the most serious criticism that I have concerning the intense push for adolescent girls to receive the shot is that there is no proof (only theory) that the shots will actually prevent cervical cancer among any of the females who are presumed to be at risk. Proof of Merck’s unfounded claim will have to wait for a generation or two, and by that time nobody will care if the vaccines worked or not. What parents are told is not enough to make an informed decision. All they are given is 1) a plausible theory couched as fact, 2) unrelenting pressure from a previously honorable medical profession, 3) weak lab evidence that temporary immune complexes do form after three shots and 4) a cunning billion-dollar Gardasil ad campaign.
Alarmingly, the Big Pharma-influenced FDA approved both Gardasil and Cervarix without requiring either Merck or Glaxo to prove their claims of cervical cancer prevention! Both corporations say that vaccine recipients must continue getting regular Pap smears for the rest of their lives, a certain sign of no confidence in their immensely profitable products.
That reality should make everybody, especially us physicians, re-think our belief systems.
And perhaps the Department of Justice needs to investigate Merck for fraudulent advertising in this, the most recent in a long string of cases of deceptive corporate pseudoscience.
*
Dr Kohls is a retired family physician from Duluth, MN, USA. Since his retirement from his holistic mental health practice he has been writing his weekly Duty to Warn column for the Duluth Reader, northeast Minnesota’s alternative newsweekly magazine. His columns, which are re-published around the world, deal with the dangers of American fascism, corporatism, conscienceless industrialization, militarization, racism, xenophobia, malnutrition, sea level rise, global warming, geo-engineering, solar radiation management, electromagnetic radiation, Big Copper Mining’s conscienceless exploitation of northeast Minnesota’s water-rich environment, Big Medicine’s over-screening, over-diagnosing, over-treating, Big Pharma’s over-drugging and Big Vaccine’s over-vaccination agendas (particularly of tiny infants), as well as other movements that threaten human health, the environment, democracy, civility and the sustainability of life on earth. Many of his columns have been archived at a number of websites, including these four:
http://duluthreader.com/search?search_term=Duty+to+Warn&p=2;
http://www.globalresearch.ca/author/gary-g-kohls;
http://freepress.org/geographic-scope/national; and
https://www.transcend.org/tms/search/?q=gary+kohls+articles
Featured image is from Children’s Health Defense
The original source of this article is Global Research
Copyright © Dr. Gary G. Kohls, Global Research, 2023
“What clinicians have been seeing,” said Dr. Risch, “is very strange things: For example, 25-year-olds with colon cancer, who don’t have family histories of the disease—that’s basically impossible along the known paradigm for how colon cancer works—and other long-latency cancers that they’re seeing in very young people.”
He said this is not how cancer normally develops.
“There has to be some initiating stimulus to why this happens,” he said.
Dr. Risch said that while the individual risk of an adverse reaction to the vaccine is relatively low, once that risk manifests itself at a greater scale when millions of people have received the vaccine, the result is that hundreds of thousands of people are left with injuries and serious adverse events that are often worse than the virus itself.
FRIDAY, SEP 22, 2023
Authored by Efthymis Oraiopoulos and Jan Jekielek via The Epoch Times (emphasis ours),
There is evidence that cancers are occurring in excess after people receive COVID-19 vaccinations, according to Dr. Harvey Risch.
Dr. Risch is professor emeritus of epidemiology in the Department of Epidemiology and Public Health at the Yale School of Public Health and Yale School of Medicine. His research has focused extensively on the causes of cancer as well as prevention and early diagnosis.
In an interview for EpochTV’s “American Thought Leaders,” Dr. Risch said patients must now wait months, not weeks, to get an appointment at an oncology clinic in New York.
There is difficulty in observing whether a vaccine can cause cancer because cancer usually takes time to develop, Dr. Risch said. It can take anywhere from two years to 30 years, depending on the different types of cancer, from leukemia to colon cancer.
“What clinicians have been seeing,” said Dr. Risch, “is very strange things: For example, 25-year-olds with colon cancer, who don’t have family histories of the disease—that’s basically impossible along the known paradigm for how colon cancer works—and other long-latency cancers that they’re seeing in very young people.”
He said this is not how cancer normally develops.
“There has to be some initiating stimulus to why this happens,” he said.
Fighting Cancer
Dr. Risch said that in his opinion, cancer is something a healthy human body can fight and disable, as the non-normal cancerous cells are gobbled up when detected in a body with a functional immune system. If the immune system is compromised, however, it cannot cope with the task of neutralizing cancerous cells and cancerous cells are left to multiply and grow, leading to symptoms of cancer.
“That’s the mechanism I think is most likely here,” Dr. Risch said. “We know that the COVID vaccines have done various degrees of damage to the immune system in a fraction of people who have taken them.”
That damage could translate to getting COVID more often, getting other infectious diseases, or getting cancer.
Another example Dr. Risch gave was breast cancer, which normally, if there is a remanifestation after surgical removal, the remanifestation occurs after two decades. However, vaccinated women are now seen to remanifest breast cancers in much shorter periods of time.
“Those are the initial signals that we’ve been seeing, and because these cancers have been occurring to people who were too young to get them, basically, compared to the normal way it works, they’ve been designated as turbo cancers,” Dr. Risch said.
“Some of these cancers are so aggressive that between the time that they’re first seen and when they come back for treatment after a few weeks, they’ve grown dramatically compared to what oncologists would have expected for the way cancer normally progresses,” he added.
“Be attuned to your body,” Dr. Risch recommended, for noticing any new signals the body might give.
Adverse Events After Vaccination
Dr. Risch also talked about the aspect of official medical agencies not recognizing someone as being vaccinated inside the first two weeks of vaccination. This happens, he said, because the medical agencies say that the effects of the vaccine need two weeks to start manifesting. Adverse effects occurring a few days after vaccinations were officially counted as health conditions manifesting in unvaccinated people, he said.
However, serious adverse events after receiving the vaccine have occurred within the first four days, Dr. Risch said. He said three-quarters of adverse effects are being recorded as happening to unvaccinated people.
The decision makers who were in charge during the pandemic “threw out the principles of public health six days into the pandemic and did the opposite of everything that we knew should be done for respiratory viruses,” he said.
One example was the denial of effective early treatment and unnecessary vaccinations, which show a “colossal failure of public health through this period,” he said.
Dr. Risch said that a lot of people are now less likely to be “propagandized” regarding COVID and that news reports about a new variant that is going to take over the world in the next month are “propaganda to sell the next batch of vaccines coming out in a few weeks.”
“People are fed up with this and it’s going to be a lot more pushback,” he said.
Risks to Society
Dr. Risch said that while the individual risk of an adverse reaction to the vaccine is relatively low, once that risk manifests itself at a greater scale when millions of people have received the vaccine, the result is that hundreds of thousands of people are left with injuries and serious adverse events that are often worse than the virus itself.
Dr. Risch’s opinion is that nobody should get vaccinated with an mRNA vaccine, as the new variants are mild and not life-threatening. He has heard of a few hospitalizations that lasted for some days, but as most people had COVID in the past, they have some immunity to these new variants as well.
“There is no reason for people to be vaccinated now, to any degree,” he said.
He said COVID has become an illness similar to the flu in its degree of severity, and that propaganda to scare people is being pushed by the government on behalf of pharmaceutical companies to sell more vaccines.
“We live in social contact with each other and therefore spread low-level infections. This is part of human life that we take for granted and we try to treat it the best we can,” he said. “That’s how we should be managing this.”
https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1702730408448676250?s=20
Sept 15, 2023
#10 – Fauci now admits the COVID vaccines cause myocarditis.
#9 – Ivermectin is even safer than you think.
#8 – RFK Jr. identifies “the real shooter” behind his father’s death.
#7 – A German study exposes the dangers of masks and CO2 re-breathing.
#6 – Teachers are being decimated by aggressive metastatic cancers after vaccine mandates.
#5 – Unvaccinated children are healthier, according to studies they don’t want you to see.
#4 – The recent wave of forest fires is not due to climate change but something much more sinister. #3 – Excess mortality just got even worse — but don’t look at the vaccine.
#2 – First-ever published spike detox protocol details how you can get better after the COVID shots.
#1 – Viral RFK Jr. video gets censored by “X” after exposing what Pfizer doesn’t want you to know. Article links are included in the thread below:
Go here, follow the thread: https://x.com/VigilantFox/status/1702730408448676250?s=20