Canine Dewormer May be a Cancer Cure

Help Support House Repair Talk:

Eddie_T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,098
Suspicions confirmed;

So why didn’t the Fenbendazole protocol elicit any interest in the press, the medical community or the government?
While you and I know that implementing low-cost natural therapy seems to be just what thIs country needs. There is greater and more evil forces at work.

The medical industrial complex, the pharmaceutical companies, the medical colleges, and the medical workers are making trillions (not billions but trillions). Big money has vastly exaggerated their confirmation bias. They accept what confirms their beliefs and reject what undermines their beliefs.
Fenbendazole Plus Supplements, A Cancer Cure? - Vitality Science
 
Last edited:

Krich

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2017
Messages
116
Reaction score
13
Having spent years in sales and marketing.... one thing I've learned is the powers that be always seek to spin things in such a way as to created power and wealth for themselves.

So in the end, it's all about them making money and setting things up so you need them... so they can make mo money.

It's always amazing to see how many people don't understand this.
 

Flyover

Trying not to screw things up worse
Joined
Jan 6, 2017
Messages
1,340
Reaction score
1,031
Location
Oh Hah
While weakly true, it doesn't seem true enough to support the claim (that we would have dirt cheap, highly effective medicine including cures for cancer if not for those evil cigar-chomping fatcats in the medical industry). Greed and power might be one of the reasons medicines are expensive and why we don't have cures for every well-known disease, but there are lots of other reasons too, some of which the medical industry has little/no control, some of which nobody has any control.

It makes people feel better to be able to point at a single source of a problem and lay the blame squarely there. Makes you feel smart and in-the-know too. This is what attracts people to conspiracy theories: the feeling of having regained some control and power over a chaotic situation in which they are powerless.

Not saying everything in that article is false, just that if an article ever says "this one reason explains everything" then you can be sure many other things are being left out.
 

Eddie_T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,098
Actually the system that protects us requires years of costly testing so a cheap medication can never make the cut. If we abandoned that system we would enter the snake oil era again. However that doesn't mean that those pursuing the cheap meds that show promise are quacks. In my case I pay attention to off label medications however if they are also prescription then I would be stymied and doctors are afraid to venture outside the box as they might be attacked by the government, the AMA or sued for malpractice. I currently seem to have resolved some sun damaged skin issues using topical fenbendazole paste and diclofenac sodium gel. The fenbendazole is less that prescription strength but I overcame that obstacle that by applying it more frequently.
 
Last edited:

Eddie_T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,098
I cut down a 3 ft high squirrel planted black walnut with about 6 leaf fronds. I am drying the leaves to use for tea. Who knows what I might be able to cure. I may experiment with the spent tea leaves as well.

There is an outspoken expert on repurposing medications in Israel that is a man after my own heart. Here is just one statement from his blog page that fits the FDA, many of my friends and some on these forums;
"It was a revelation; that someone may prefer to continue suffering at the hands of “experts” rather than be cured by a (potential) charlatan. And this is the key here—it would seem that Natalie was happy to be cured by Dr. Goodley only so long as he was part of the established expert inner circle."​
To read more about Moshe visit his blog or the other links at the top of his webpage; In Experts We Trust - Moshe Rogosnitzky
 
Last edited:

Krich

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2017
Messages
116
Reaction score
13
If we abandoned that system we would enter the snake oil era
What we have now IS the snake oil era!

At best, today's medical science is experimental and very similar to rolling the dice in Vegas... sometimes you get well and sometimes you die.
 

BvilleBound

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
95
Reaction score
40
Location
02571
This thread reminds me of the laetrile craze of the 1960's and 70's, where desperate people traveled to Tiajuana, Mexico for a "miracle" cure. Steve McQueen was one of them.

By Barron H. Lerner, NY Times,, Nov. 15, 2005

Steve McQueen's death 25 years ago this month ended a bizarre drama in which he surreptitiously traveled to Mexico for an unorthodox cancer treatment. The medical profession largely derided McQueen as a victim of fraud, but to some people with cancer, his pursuit of an alternative treatment seemed heroic. What lessons does his unconventional journey provide today?

McQueen first developed a cough in 1978. By the next year, when he was 49, he was having difficulty breathing. Finally, in December 1979, doctors made the diagnosis: mesothelioma, an incurable cancer of the lining of the lungs usually related to asbestos exposure. McQueen, an avid car racer, may have been exposed by wearing racing suits.

His doctors gave him a gloomy prognosis, but they treated him with radiotherapy and chemotherapy to try to shrink the cancer. He kept the diagnosis a secret from all but his closest friends.

But on March 11, 1980, The National Enquirer published an article titled "Steve McQueen's Heroic Battle Against Terminal Cancer." McQueen continued to deny the rumors.

When his doctors told him they had run out of options, McQueen secretly met with Dr. William D. Kelley, a dentist and orthodontist who had devised a controversial treatment regimen he claimed had cured his own pancreatic cancer.

Dr. Kelley had been blacklisted by the American Cancer Society and had his license suspended in Texas. But McQueen was interested in the treatment, which was based on the notion that cancers arose and grew from a lack of enough pancreatic enzymes.

In July 1980, McQueen secretly traveled to Rosarita Beach, Mexico, to be treated by Mexican and American doctors using Dr. Kelley's regimen. He received not only pancreatic enzymes but 50 daily vitamins and minerals, massages, prayer sessions, psychotherapy, coffee enemas and injections of a cell preparation made from sheep and cattle fetuses. McQueen was also given laetrile, a controversial alternative treatment made from apricot pits.

In October, after being tracked down by The National Enquirer, McQueen issued a statement saying he had mesothelioma and was in treatment in Mexico. A week later, Mexican television played an audio message from McQueen in which he said he was recovering. "Mexico is showing the world a new way of fighting cancer through nonspecific metabolic therapies," he said, adding, "Thank you for helping to save my life."

Cancer organizations were horrified, warning that McQueen's supposed recovery was a hoax. One doctor called the treatment "rank quackery." But others wanted to hear what McQueen and his new doctors had to say. At a press conference, one Mexican physician claimed that 85 to 90 percent of his patients had improved with Dr. Kelley's treatment. Twelve patients who said they were cured by Dr. Kelley attended as well.

McQueen's resurrection was short-lived. On Nov. 6, 1980, doctors operated to remove cancerous masses from his abdomen and neck. He withstood the surgery, but he died the next day.

In short, don't fall for medical hoaxes and "miracle" cures. Ivermectin is a recent example.
 

Eddie_T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,098
In short, don't fall for medical hoaxes and "miracle" cures.
Ivermectin is a recent example.
That's your viewpoint but let's face the facts. Here's an excerpt from NCBI on the subject of ivermectin and its efficacy

There is also evidence emerging from countries where ivermectin has been implemented. For example, Peru had a very high death toll from COVID-19 early on in the pandemic.128 Based on observational evidence, the Peruvian government approved ivermectin for use against COVID-19 in May 2020.128 After implementation, death rates in 8 states were reduced between 64% and 91% over a two-month period.128 Another analysis of Peruvian data from 24 states with early ivermectin deployment has reported a drop in excess deaths of 59% at 30+ days and of 75% at 45+ days.129 However, factors such as change in behavior, social distancing, and face-mask use could have played a role in this reduction.​
Other considerations related to the use of ivermectin treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic include people's values and preferences, equity implications, acceptability, and feasibility.130 None of the identified reviews specifically discussed these criteria in relation to ivermectin. However, in health care decision making, evidence on effectiveness is seldom taken in isolation without considering these factors. Ultimately, if ivermectin is to be more widespread in its implementation, then some considerations are needed related to these decision-making criteria specified in the GRADE-DECIDE framework.130
There are numerous emerging ongoing clinical trials assessing ivermectin for COVID-19. The trade-off with policy and potential implementation based on evidence synthesis reviews and/or RCTs will vary considerably from country to country. Certain South American countries, Indian states, and, more recently, Slovakia and other countries in Europe have implemented its use for COVID-19.129,131,132,133,134 A recent survey of global trends118 documents usage worldwide. Despite ivermectin being a low-cost medication in many countries globally, the apparent shortage of economic evaluations indicates that economic evidence on ivermectin for treatment and prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 is currently lacking. This may impact more on LMICs that are potentially waiting for guidance from organizations like the WHO.​
Given the evidence of efficacy, safety, low cost, and current death rates, ivermectin is likely to have an impact on health and economic outcomes of the pandemic across many countries. Ivermectin is not a new and experimental drug with an unknown safety profile. It is a WHO “Essential Medicine” already used in several different indications, in colossal cumulative volumes. Corticosteroids have become an accepted standard of care in COVID-19, based on a single RCT of dexamethasone.1 If a single RCT is sufficient for the adoption of dexamethasone, then a fortiori the evidence of 2 dozen RCTs supports the adoption of ivermectin.​
Ivermectin is likely to be an equitable, acceptable, and feasible global intervention against COVID-19. Health professionals should strongly consider its use, in both treatment and prophylaxis.​
 

BvilleBound

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
95
Reaction score
40
Location
02571
This thread reminds me of the laetrile craze of the 1960's and 70's, where desperate people traveled to Tiajuana, Mexico for a "miracle" cure. Steve McQueen was one of them.

By Barron H. Lerner, NY Times,, Nov. 15, 2005

Steve McQueen's death 25 years ago this month ended a bizarre drama in which he surreptitiously traveled to Mexico for an unorthodox cancer treatment. The medical profession largely derided McQueen as a victim of fraud, but to some people with cancer, his pursuit of an alternative treatment seemed heroic. What lessons does his unconventional journey provide today?

McQueen first developed a cough in 1978. By the next year, when he was 49, he was having difficulty breathing. Finally, in December 1979, doctors made the diagnosis: mesothelioma, an incurable cancer of the lining of the lungs usually related to asbestos exposure. McQueen, an avid car racer, may have been exposed by wearing racing suits.

His doctors gave him a gloomy prognosis, but they treated him with radiotherapy and chemotherapy to try to shrink the cancer. He kept the diagnosis a secret from all but his closest friends.

But on March 11, 1980, The National Enquirer published an article titled "Steve McQueen's Heroic Battle Against Terminal Cancer." McQueen continued to deny the rumors.

When his doctors told him they had run out of options, McQueen secretly met with Dr. William D. Kelley, a dentist and orthodontist who had devised a controversial treatment regimen he claimed had cured his own pancreatic cancer.

Dr. Kelley had been blacklisted by the American Cancer Society and had his license suspended in Texas. But McQueen was interested in the treatment, which was based on the notion that cancers arose and grew from a lack of enough pancreatic enzymes.

In July 1980, McQueen secretly traveled to Rosarita Beach, Mexico, to be treated by Mexican and American doctors using Dr. Kelley's regimen. He received not only pancreatic enzymes but 50 daily vitamins and minerals, massages, prayer sessions, psychotherapy, coffee enemas and injections of a cell preparation made from sheep and cattle fetuses. McQueen was also given laetrile, a controversial alternative treatment made from apricot pits.

In October, after being tracked down by The National Enquirer, McQueen issued a statement saying he had mesothelioma and was in treatment in Mexico. A week later, Mexican television played an audio message from McQueen in which he said he was recovering. "Mexico is showing the world a new way of fighting cancer through nonspecific metabolic therapies," he said, adding, "Thank you for helping to save my life."

Cancer organizations were horrified, warning that McQueen's supposed recovery was a hoax. One doctor called the treatment "rank quackery." But others wanted to hear what McQueen and his new doctors had to say. At a press conference, one Mexican physician claimed that 85 to 90 percent of his patients had improved with Dr. Kelley's treatment. Twelve patients who said they were cured by Dr. Kelley attended as well.

McQueen's resurrection was short-lived. On Nov. 6, 1980, doctors operated to remove cancerous masses from his abdomen and neck. He withstood the surgery, but he died the next day.

In short, don't fall for medical hoaxes and "miracle" cures. Ivermectin is a recent example.
That's your viewpoint but let's face the facts. Here's an excerpt from NCBI on the subject of ivermectin and its efficacy

There is also evidence emerging from countries where ivermectin has been implemented. For example, Peru had a very high death toll from COVID-19 early on in the pandemic.128 Based on observational evidence, the Peruvian government approved ivermectin for use against COVID-19 in May 2020.128 After implementation, death rates in 8 states were reduced between 64% and 91% over a two-month period.128 Another analysis of Peruvian data from 24 states with early ivermectin deployment has reported a drop in excess deaths of 59% at 30+ days and of 75% at 45+ days.129 However, factors such as change in behavior, social distancing, and face-mask use could have played a role in this reduction.​
Other considerations related to the use of ivermectin treatment in the COVID-19 pandemic include people's values and preferences, equity implications, acceptability, and feasibility.130 None of the identified reviews specifically discussed these criteria in relation to ivermectin. However, in health care decision making, evidence on effectiveness is seldom taken in isolation without considering these factors. Ultimately, if ivermectin is to be more widespread in its implementation, then some considerations are needed related to these decision-making criteria specified in the GRADE-DECIDE framework.130
There are numerous emerging ongoing clinical trials assessing ivermectin for COVID-19. The trade-off with policy and potential implementation based on evidence synthesis reviews and/or RCTs will vary considerably from country to country. Certain South American countries, Indian states, and, more recently, Slovakia and other countries in Europe have implemented its use for COVID-19.129,131,132,133,134 A recent survey of global trends118 documents usage worldwide. Despite ivermectin being a low-cost medication in many countries globally, the apparent shortage of economic evaluations indicates that economic evidence on ivermectin for treatment and prophylaxis of SARS-CoV-2 is currently lacking. This may impact more on LMICs that are potentially waiting for guidance from organizations like the WHO.​
Given the evidence of efficacy, safety, low cost, and current death rates, ivermectin is likely to have an impact on health and economic outcomes of the pandemic across many countries. Ivermectin is not a new and experimental drug with an unknown safety profile. It is a WHO “Essential Medicine” already used in several different indications, in colossal cumulative volumes. Corticosteroids have become an accepted standard of care in COVID-19, based on a single RCT of dexamethasone.1 If a single RCT is sufficient for the adoption of dexamethasone, then a fortiori the evidence of 2 dozen RCTs supports the adoption of ivermectin.​
Ivermectin is likely to be an equitable, acceptable, and feasible global intervention against COVID-19. Health professionals should strongly consider its use, in both treatment and prophylaxis.​
Unfortunately, you quoted old information on ivermectin and Covid - from an article posted in 2020. Here is the source:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/344469305_Real-World_Evidence_The_Case_of_Peru_Causality_between_Ivermectin_and_COVID-19_Infection_Fatality_Rate

As this 2020 article noted, "There are numerous emerging ongoing clinical trials assessing ivermectin for COVID-19. " The largest study, in Brazil, is now complete. See;

Effect of Early Treatment with Ivermectin among Patients with Covid-19 | NEJM

This highlights the need to check the details on medical information. Thanks to the internet and Google, it is now easy to find a wide range of claims and 'studies' that may appear legitimate.
 

Eddie_T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,098
That does not negate the data. This is also quite interesting;

IVM not only has strong effects on parasites but also has potential antiviral effects. IVM can inhibit the replication of flavivirus by targeting the NS3 helicase [17]; it also blocks the nuclear transport of viral proteins by acting on α/β-mediated nuclear transport and exerts antiviral activity against the HIV-1 and dengue viruses [18]. Recent studies have also pointed out that it has a promising inhibitory effect on the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which has caused a global outbreak in 2020 [19]. In addition, IVM shows potential for clinical application in asthma [20] and neurological diseases [21]. Recently scientists have discovered that IVM has a strong anticancer effect.


Since the first report that IVM could reverse tumor multidrug resistance (MDR) in 1996 [22], a few relevant studies have emphasized the potential use of IVM as a new cancer


treatment [[23], [24], [25], [26], [27]]. Despite the large number of related studies, there are still some key issues that have not been resolved. First of all, the specific mechanism of IVM-mediated cytotoxicity in tumor cells is unclear; it may be related to the effect of IVM on various signaling pathways, but it is not very clear overall. Second, IVM seems to induce mixed cell death in tumor cells, which is also a controversial issue. Therefore, this review summarized the latest findings on the anticancer effect of IVM and discussed the mechanism of the inhibition of tumor proliferation and the way that IVM induces tumor programmed cell death to provide a theoretical basis for the use of IVM as a potential anticancer drug. As the cost of the research and development of new anticancer drugs continues to increase, drug repositioning has become increasingly important. Drug repositioning refers to the development of new drug indications that have been approved for clinical use [28]. For some older drugs that are widely used for their original indications and have clinical data and safety information, drug repositioning allows them to be developed via a cheaper and faster cycle and to be used more effectively in clinical use clinically [29]. Here, we systematically summarized the anticancer effect and mechanism of IVM, which is of great significance for the repositioning of IVM for cancer treatment.
 

BvilleBound

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
95
Reaction score
40
Location
02571
That does not negate the data. This is also quite interesting;

IVM not only has strong effects on parasites but also has potential antiviral effects. IVM can inhibit the replication of flavivirus by targeting the NS3 helicase [17]; it also blocks the nuclear transport of viral proteins by acting on α/β-mediated nuclear transport and exerts antiviral activity against the HIV-1 and dengue viruses [18]. Recent studies have also pointed out that it has a promising inhibitory effect on the SARS-CoV-2 virus, which has caused a global outbreak in 2020 [19]. In addition, IVM shows potential for clinical application in asthma [20] and neurological diseases [21]. Recently scientists have discovered that IVM has a strong anticancer effect.


Since the first report that IVM could reverse tumor multidrug resistance (MDR) in 1996 [22], a few relevant studies have emphasized the potential use of IVM as a new cancer


treatment [[23], [24], [25], [26], [27]]. Despite the large number of related studies, there are still some key issues that have not been resolved. First of all, the specific mechanism of IVM-mediated cytotoxicity in tumor cells is unclear; it may be related to the effect of IVM on various signaling pathways, but it is not very clear overall. Second, IVM seems to induce mixed cell death in tumor cells, which is also a controversial issue. Therefore, this review summarized the latest findings on the anticancer effect of IVM and discussed the mechanism of the inhibition of tumor proliferation and the way that IVM induces tumor programmed cell death to provide a theoretical basis for the use of IVM as a potential anticancer drug. As the cost of the research and development of new anticancer drugs continues to increase, drug repositioning has become increasingly important. Drug repositioning refers to the development of new drug indications that have been approved for clinical use [28]. For some older drugs that are widely used for their original indications and have clinical data and safety information, drug repositioning allows them to be developed via a cheaper and faster cycle and to be used more effectively in clinical use clinically [29]. Here, we systematically summarized the anticancer effect and mechanism of IVM, which is of great significance for the repositioning of IVM for cancer treatment.
Read some more current science re ivermectin and Covid - rather than speculation masquerading as science. Actual double-blind studies are the only way to determine if any drug is effective:. The same is true for cancer:

Flawed ivermectin preprint highlights challenges of COVID drug studies

Efficacy of Ivermectin on Disease Progression in Patients With COVID-19

Unethical studies of ivermectin for covid-19

Ivermectin Doesn’t Help Treat COVID-19, Large Study Finds

Ivermectin futile for mild to moderate COVID-19, study finds
 

Eddie_T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,098
IMV has progressed to clinical trials. Of course that doesn't mean it will be approved. At present people are cautioned not to take it unless they are participating in a trial. People always pop out of the woodwork to proclaim quackery as noted by Moshe Rogosnitzky;

"It was a revelation; that someone may prefer to continue suffering at the hands of “experts” rather than be cured by a (potential) charlatan. And this is the key here—it would seem that Natalie was happy to be cured by Dr. Goodley only so long as he was part of the established expert inner circle."​
The FDA removed its approval of antimalarial drugs for COVID but a doctor friend of mine told me he relieved symptoms symptoms for three people using them. He said if I showed any symptoms to call him. I didn't take the jab because of fetal cell line complicity.

As for me my main interest in cancer cures is to prevent sun damaged skin from becoming cancerous. I theorize that anything that kills or prevents cancer cell growth in a petri dish might also perform well as a topical agent.
 

BvilleBound

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
95
Reaction score
40
Location
02571
Large clinical trials of ivermectin have been COMPLETED for COVID and ivermectin was proven ineffective see the links I previously sent you, above -- in response to your outdated quote from a small 2020 study. Anecdotal healthcare claims, even from a physician, are notoriously inaccurate. That is why large double-blind studies are the only 'gold' standard in healthcare.

Ivermectin is in the process of being studied related to a number of types of cancer. You can see the four current studies at: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/results?cond=cancer&term=ivermectin&cntry=&state=&city=&dist=&Search=Search

The best solution to prevent Covid infection, serious illness and death is widely available, free and tested in hundreds of millions of people with excellent, documented results: mRNA vaccines like Pfizer / BioNTech and Moderna. Few drugs on the planet have been tested so widely in such large and diverse populations and many locations. My wife and I have had 4 shots each.

NO, mRNA vaccines were not developed with nor contain fetal cells. This is disinformation / myth promoted by antivaxxers. See the answer to this question and many other myths about COVID vaccines: https://www.mayoclinichealthsystem.org/hometown-health/featured-topic/covid-19-vaccine-myths-debunked

Your theory about topical drugs for cancer prevention: Your theory, unfortunately, does not hold water. "In vitro" studies (e.g. in a petri dish) often do not produce "in vivo" results with a wide range of drugs. Even studies in other species, e.g. mice, often do not work in humans. The many failed trials of Alzheimers drugs are a perfect example. Again, read some science: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26778084/ This is a key reason that drug testing is so complex and costly.

The best way to prevent skin cancer is to (a) stay out of the sun, (b) always wear sun glasses in the sun (because your eyes can get cancer too), (c) wear sun-proof clothing, and (d) wear sun block with a high SPF rating. This is true at any age, from child to an elder with sun-damaged skin.

In short, it is not a good idea to (1) Try to be an untrained clinical researcher and broadcast unfounded ideas, (2) Do not listen to / read 'pop medicine' advice, so easily available on the internet.

It is a good idea to research medical issues on the internet, because your physician is too busy to keep up with everything. You have to be diligent and careful about the sites you select, however. Most ".com" sites are immediately suspect, because they have a profit motive. ".org" and ".edu" sites are best. Plus you need to learn more about clinical trials, which are definitely "not created equal". Early "trials" with ivermectin and COVID are a great example. Researchers can be swayed by funding from key clients. Today, potential biases must be reported, e.g. funding from a tobacco company. But some researchers fall prey to greed and fail to report bias.

I hope this is helpful.
 

Eddie_T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,098
The success rate of chemo is so low that I suspect if it were not already approved it would be considered quackery. I was striving to help a friend whose husband had been given up to die. Unfortunately he passed before we could gather materials for the fenbendazole protocol.
 

BvilleBound

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
95
Reaction score
40
Location
02571
Again, do some research on legitimate scientific / medical sites before you broadcast you personal opinions and anecdotal stories. Both are misleading, and I am sure that is not your intent. Cancer survivorship has, fortunately, increased significantly over the past 50 years - thanks to advances in real medical science. See:

https://www.cancer.org/content/dam/cancer-org/research/cancer-facts-and-statistics/cancer-treatment-and-survivorship-facts-and-figures/cancer-treatment-and-survivorship-facts-and-figures-2019-2021.pdf

https://cancercontrol.cancer.gov/ocs/statistics#stats

https://progressreport.cancer.gov/after/survival

1654299314183.png
 

Eddie_T

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2015
Messages
1,614
Reaction score
1,098
You apply disingenuous arguments. The rationale for my using lab data for skin cancer or its precursors is that an isolated lesion is closer to a lab situation.

All COVID-19 jabs have a connection to fetal cell lines either being used in vaccine development or testing. I did not say that fetal cells were injected so that argument is also disingenuous. IOW apples and oranges.

Double blind studies may be the gold standard but in clinical trials some people are helped and some or not. If one happens to fall into the category of being helped it matters not to that individual that others were not helped. For example Vitamin-C is said not to prevent the common cold yet it has worked for me for so many decades that I have forgotten the misery of the experience.

If the fenbendazole protocol helps some and hurts none then it's certainly worth a try. I wouldn't hesitate to try it were I diagnosed with cancer. In the case of topical application I am happy to say I am pleased with the results. Did I cure a carcinoma or merely an actinic keratosis that might have developed into a carcinoma. Frankly I don't care. Advice to stay out of the sun may be good but I can't go back to my youth to apply the advice.

People need to know the options and have the freedom to make choices. I use NCBI to find info on anything I read on a .com site and make informed decisions. I do not lurk on forums and attack people who have found alternative paths as some are prone to do. One can google whatever position they want to support but I have been successful in veering from the standard of care especially in the case of wound care.

I hope you are enjoying your rants and google searches but I am not impressed. I am results oriented.
 

Spicoli43

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2020
Messages
833
Reaction score
547
Location
Montana
People that use natural methods for treatments as opposed to chemicals from publicly traded companies fare much better. Chemo kills every single patient. Said patient may go into "remission" because the cancer isn't detectable anymore, but their entire immune system is GONE. The next time their cancer cells get active, since we all have cancer cells as part of life, they are DONE FOR.

You can't Napalm the body with chemicals that destroy everything and hope to survive.
 

BvilleBound

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2021
Messages
95
Reaction score
40
Location
02571
Again, why don't you research medical issues on legitimate sites before you post? NCBI is a good source, by you need to study, evaluate and compare the articles / studies on their website -- and (key point) wait for peer review. Every researcher makes mistakes - some egregious - and peer review is an essential step in the process.
People that use natural methods for treatments as opposed to chemicals from publicly traded companies fare much better. Chemo kills every single patient. Said patient may go into "remission" because the cancer isn't detectable anymore, but their entire immune system is GONE. The next time their cancer cells get active, since we all have cancer cells as part of life, they are DONE FOR.

You can't Napalm the body with chemicals that destroy everything and hope to survive.
You made a broad claim with zero evidence - and there is none. Effective treatments for cancer always require modern medical technology; there are no effective "natural" treatments or miracle cures. This doesn't prevent hucksters from marketing "miracle" cures to desperate people For example, have you read about Harry M. Hoxsey and the Hoxsey Cancer Treatment? You can still buy a copy of his book:

1654354011738.png

See:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoxsey_Therapy#History
 

Spicoli43

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2020
Messages
833
Reaction score
547
Location
Montana
There is hundreds of natural cures for everything. Allopathic QUACKS that use CHEMICALS KILL ALL of their patients.

Every single drug commercial has 14 ways it can KILL OR MAIM you everyday and twice on Sunday, and you sit there and spout off like you know something. YOU DON'T.

If you can't figure out that Turmeric is less toxic than CHEMOTHERAPY that has a BIOHAZARD label on it, then you don't get your recommended dose of smart flakes too often, do you?

Either that or you're a Pharma troll.
 
Top