Thanks for the article. The next Gardasil disaster.
Dawn, we must be connected by a satellite - I was just reading pg. 463 in your wonderful book - typical vaccine package insert.
... "has not been evaluated for carcinogenic, or mutagenic potential, or potential to impair fertility"
So here we have a carcinogen injected to prevent a disease caused by carcinogens that will not work and will require carcinogens to treat but that won't work so....
What is your opinion of the hypothesis that cancer is the body's attempt to "wall off" the poisons in a pouch (like hazardous waste clean up). So when oncologists or radiologists attempt to shrink or kill a tumour the process breaks through the wall and allow the poisons to spread causing metastasis in other parts of the body?
How would this explain aneuploidy (mismatch of chromosomes in cancer cells) that the Book talks about per Rasnick and Duesberg? I would think that a cell in this condition would not be able to divide (?) If it did then it's breaking the rules of cell division. Thus aneuploidic cells might be cells that body has "sacrificed" to create a protective wall (?). I have heard Tom Cowan and the Baileys' talk around this but no complete model described so I embellished to create my question.
What happens if we just let nature take its course with no interventions except a good diet, exercise and sleep? Cancer treatments are never tested against the "natural" control, only against a toxic "Standard of Care".
Thank you. I love synchronicities - satellites aren't needed! 😎
It certainly makes sense that the body would create a tumour to house toxins until it is capable of processing them. I would add that biopsies will also break the tumour and allow the toxins to spread.
As for how that idea fits with aneuploidy, that's a good question. I'm not going to speculate but I'll give it some thought and respond later.
In general though, I agree that it's good for us to live as naturally as we can AND at the same time be aware of what we may be doing, or not doing, and of our thoughts that may adversely affect our health.
“In fact, all carcinogens that have been examined so far do cause aneuploidy.”
It seems likely that, from the article you posted, benzene exposure could be a contributory factor for birth defects as the result of sperm aneuploidy.
For the vaccinated group they were mostly following Dr. Thomas's "Vaccine Friendly Plan" per his book of the same title where the shots are delayed and spread out to lower the impact of aluminium (or aluminium-free substitute used). This seems to reduce the autism count but still imparts many serious acute and chronic conditions. The solution to pollution is dilution - but it’s still pollution.
The original study was criminally retracted by the publisher for no good reason based on a spurious anonymous review, which is explained in first linked paper.
From this paper: "due to a small number of cases and corresponding low power, neurodevelopmental conditions and seizures are not well studied using the data available. Autism, at a study-wide rate of 8 per 1000, is far lower than the national rate (18.5–21 per 1000)." I imagine the cases of ADHD etc would have been higher if they had followed the more intensely toxic CDC schedule.
I've given some thought to aneuploidy and this is where my thinking has taken me.
What if aneuploidy represents damaged cells? In which case, maybe these aneuploid cells are what the body sequesters into ‘tumours’ and that’s why aneuploidy is found in all tumours.
Yes! So putting it together with your other Rasnick response. Carcinogens always cause mismatched chromosomes. Mismatched chromosomes are in all tumours. Ergo carcinogenic agents cause tumours. Now I wonder where the carcinogen ends up per our "sequester and protect" discussion. Perhaps carried by special cells to the kidneys to filter it out? What is the eventual fate of aneuploid cells? I have some reading to do. Thanks
I think that the toxin/carcinogen may be found within the tumour, unless the body hasn't been able to isolate it from the system and send it to the tumour.
The liver is the body's main detoxification organ, so I think it is more likely to be taken to the liver to be filtered out, when the body is ready to do that.
That's a good question about the fate of the aneuploid cells. Are you aware that there are some serious questions about the standard view of 'cells'? Do they actually exist in the way we've been told? I'm not at all sure they do. 🤔
Per "cells" Yes! cell membranes every few nanometers doesn't make sense compared to a more continuous structure for tissue strength and function like fast material movement etc. I have read that the bits and bobs inside cells which cell biologists have assigned various roles to ("the 13 organelles") are mostly artifacts of man's incompetence in preparing tissue for electron microscopy. Embedding, slicing, staining with osmium, lead or uranium, drying, coating, high vacuum, thousands of volts. It's hard to imagine what happens to a living tissue during this process. Organic compounds whether manmade plastics or biological tissues are completely black in an electron microscope image. So they are stained with heavy metals that scatter electrons to create white shapes ("contrast" is the posh word). Then they use "point and declare" to describe a random white ring as a "cell" or a "virus". (A ring of metal stain actually). I always wonder "what about the structures that did not get stained and therefore just black holes in the images?" Electron microscopists are highly skilled and competent at what they do but interpretation by their clients can be the weak link.
It was Harold Hillman who studied cell biology and wrote about cell organelles being artefacts and the problems with electron microscopy. We covered that in WRMYI.
Tom Cowan and Stefan Lanka are 2 of the people I know who have raised questions about whether the body is made of cells in the way we are told.
Cancer is really the poisoning of the cells which are akin to factories producing chemicals and/or new cells. If the 'instruction manuals' are damaged by toxins then incorrect products or faulty cells are made. The same would apply if the cells are full of rubbish stuff.
Factories work in the same way, if not clean and tidy and the instructions clear and legible then crap is produced.
I know that this is not a web site for conspiracy thories, but you may just want to have a look at these 2 short links - 1 from the DailyMail and 1 a very short video...#~~
Daily Mail nonsense ... but this is the critical bit:
"But on Tuesday the King and Queen will visit a cancer treatment centre - a deeply poignant engagement given his own cancer battle as well as that of his daughter-in-law, the Princess of Wales - where they will meet medical specialists and patients. The royal event aims to raise awareness of the importance of early diagnosis and highlight innovative research, supported by Cancer Research UK, taking place at the hospital.
And this is factual; charlie boy is a key member of the WEF / NWO (Gates and his merry men at Gavi and elsewhere).
PS Wish I looked as good as him after a few weeks, never mind months of my cancer treatment.
PPS Nothing will scare people more or entice them to get a jab, than a cancer jab... just look at the MSM today. Daily Mail, cancer mention 26 times on the front page headlines and short summaries alone.
That Daily Mail article doesn't surprise me. This story about his cancer diagnosis is part of the reason I wrote my article, to help spread the word that 'cancer' isn't what they tell us.
I agree, it does all look like pure theatre to promote more fearmongering.
The Mail has had this bit between its teeth for decades. I remember reading an article at least twenty years ago listing "things that cause cancer according to the Daily Mail", and there were hundreds. It was a foreshadowing of the "things that cause heart attacks (because obviously THAT isn't one of them)" articles since the Covid vax rollout. Fear sells papers/gets clicks, and the Mail has long been the Scaremaster General of British media.
They just copy and paste the same rubbish across the globe. I unplugged my TV in 2020 and haven't read a newspaper since 2016. It gives me more time to read Dawn's Writings and the great comments. Peace.
I gave up newspapers the same year, when I realised books of cryptic crosswords were available. Mockingbird TV is in a desperate battle to convince itself of its own relevance. Riddance will be good.
What is cancer? According to Wiki; "Cancers comprise a large family of diseases that involve abnormal cell growth with the potential to invade or spread to other parts of the body" Hmmm?? & lots of talk in that article about "infections" & "viruses". (Rolling of eyes emoji) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer
How is cancer diagnosed?
Physical exam; A doctor may look for abnormalities, such as changes in skin color or enlargement of an organ, that may indicate the presence of cancer.
Laboratory tests; such as urine and blood tests, may help a doctor identify abnormalities that can be caused by cancer.
Imaging tests. Imaging tests allow a doctor to examine your bones and internal organs in a noninvasive way. Imaging tests used in diagnosing cancer may include a computerized tomography (CT) scan, bone scan, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET) scan, ultrasound and X-ray, among others.
Biopsy. During a biopsy, a doctor collects a sample of cells for testing in the laboratory. In most situations, a biopsy is the only way to definitively diagnose cancer.
And now the kicker; The 1939 Cancer Act, in particular section 4; "No person shall take any part in the
publication of any advertisement-
(a) containing an offer to treat any- person for cancer, or to prescribe any remedy therefor,
or to give any advice in connection with the treatment thereof; or
(b) referring to any article, or articles of any description, in terms which are calculated to
lead to the use of that article, or articles of that description, in the treatment of cancer.
In plain English; Nobody can advertise treatments for cancer, or prescribe treatments for cancer or even give advice in connection to cancer treatment.
So here in the UK we have a government funded NHS that is the only place allowed to treat the disease that it (the NHS) diagnoses! Where's the Monopolies Commision?
This is anecdotal, a chap (Ray Co Armagh) who used to comment in the UK Column forum claimed to have cured his cancer by becoming a fruitarian.
Thank you. I agree that investigating 'cancer' is a very deep rabbit hole because there are so many aspects to it. Yes, 'warren' is a great way to describe it all.
Cancer has quite a long section in What Really Makes You Ill - and I've learned more since 2019.
Nothing about the cancer industry is about helping people become healthy again.
Cancer is a process, it is not a 'disease' that needs to be 'cured' - so even the 'alternative' health community are maintaining the fearmongering about it.
I read the cancer section again last night, it obviously hadn't sunk in first time! Sorry.
I also hadn't considered that the word "cure" could be bolstering fear, would "heal" be a better word? For example I didn't "cure" my twisted ankle by resting it, I helped the bodies natural "healing" process.
There's nothing to be sorry about. I'm still learning about how the body works.
I agree that heal is a far better word.
The healing processes also involve correcting imbalances and releasing limiting beliefs, so I'm beginning to think that 'healing' doesn't fully describe what happens. I'm still pondering that one. Maybe that will be something for a future Substack article perhaps? 🤔
Yeah, this idea of cancer "infection" is the dumbest unproven idea ever. It's a result of something, not the cause.
Recently I saw an article on Mercola about how Alzheimer's is possibly transmissible because of the amyloid plaque.
WTF? No, the plaque isn't even the cause, it's a result of cell death.
My latest pet peeve.... People who think that terrain theory and germ theory both apply. Dummies have no understanding of terrain, which states that bacteria etc only feed on dead tissue and are the result, the cleanup crew.... Not the freaking cause which germ theory hypothesizes over and over.
It's hard to break people out of this infection mentality, as if they're actually infected by the "mind virus" of blind belief.
Natives called it the Wetiko virus, which the colonizers were infected with... The way of dominance and control... They are the infection of society, 😂 !
Well done Dawn. I might have referred to it before but I was diagnosed with a rare melanoma in my neck, not on the skin, at start of 2020. I received immuno-therapy treatment, Nivolumab, for 9 sessions until September 2020 when I realised what had actually caused my facial palsy. This was sodium nitrite (E250) which in its derivative when bonded to amino acids is known to be carcinogenic.
This has been known about for at least 40 years yet the ignorant doctors never asked me about my diet.
I consider the whole cancer industry a scam and it seems likely the treatment affected my pituitary gland. I am struggling to detoxify from the various issues but I now despise the NHS as a whole and its largely useless doctors who are beholden to big pharma protocols.
Oh brother. Why do I not believe in ANY vaccines? Because they have never invented one for the simplest of illnesses...the "common" cold which by the way has many of the same symptoms as any flu does. A cancer vaccine? I cannot stop laughing at the idea of this.
If your body cannot protect you from cancer it is because you have harmed it's protection mechanisms. No vaccine will override a body out of kilter.
The British Common Cold Research Unit, 1946 - 1989 tried to develop a stabby for colds but could not even prove transmission. That's a whole chapter on the CCRU in "Can You Catch a Cold?" by Daniel Roytas. This book covers 203 studies. He explains that a cold isn't something you catch via a microorganism.
Yes, its what they do to the meat in processing and how they raise the animals in the first place. They will do anything to blame anything else but pharmceutical/chemical products.
Hi, I looked up this article too. The mRna with the monoclonal seems to separate percentage recurrence free survival from mono alone, but by they end, 4 years, they end up the same. Perhaps because the mRNA suppresses the body's natural healing mechanism ie 'cancer'.
Thanks for the article. The next Gardasil disaster.
Dawn, we must be connected by a satellite - I was just reading pg. 463 in your wonderful book - typical vaccine package insert.
... "has not been evaluated for carcinogenic, or mutagenic potential, or potential to impair fertility"
So here we have a carcinogen injected to prevent a disease caused by carcinogens that will not work and will require carcinogens to treat but that won't work so....
What is your opinion of the hypothesis that cancer is the body's attempt to "wall off" the poisons in a pouch (like hazardous waste clean up). So when oncologists or radiologists attempt to shrink or kill a tumour the process breaks through the wall and allow the poisons to spread causing metastasis in other parts of the body?
How would this explain aneuploidy (mismatch of chromosomes in cancer cells) that the Book talks about per Rasnick and Duesberg? I would think that a cell in this condition would not be able to divide (?) If it did then it's breaking the rules of cell division. Thus aneuploidic cells might be cells that body has "sacrificed" to create a protective wall (?). I have heard Tom Cowan and the Baileys' talk around this but no complete model described so I embellished to create my question.
What happens if we just let nature take its course with no interventions except a good diet, exercise and sleep? Cancer treatments are never tested against the "natural" control, only against a toxic "Standard of Care".
Thank you. I love synchronicities - satellites aren't needed! 😎
It certainly makes sense that the body would create a tumour to house toxins until it is capable of processing them. I would add that biopsies will also break the tumour and allow the toxins to spread.
As for how that idea fits with aneuploidy, that's a good question. I'm not going to speculate but I'll give it some thought and respond later.
In general though, I agree that it's good for us to live as naturally as we can AND at the same time be aware of what we may be doing, or not doing, and of our thoughts that may adversely affect our health.
Good point about the biopsies.
Perhaps the carcinogen itself is causing the aneuploidy. This study of what benzene does to sperm chromosomes supports this.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20418200/
Also, we quote Dr Rasnick on page 464,
“In fact, all carcinogens that have been examined so far do cause aneuploidy.”
It seems likely that, from the article you posted, benzene exposure could be a contributory factor for birth defects as the result of sperm aneuploidy.
https://ijvtpr.com/index.php/IJVTPR/article/view/59
For the vaccinated group they were mostly following Dr. Thomas's "Vaccine Friendly Plan" per his book of the same title where the shots are delayed and spread out to lower the impact of aluminium (or aluminium-free substitute used). This seems to reduce the autism count but still imparts many serious acute and chronic conditions. The solution to pollution is dilution - but it’s still pollution.
The original study was criminally retracted by the publisher for no good reason based on a spurious anonymous review, which is explained in first linked paper.
https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/22/8674
From this paper: "due to a small number of cases and corresponding low power, neurodevelopmental conditions and seizures are not well studied using the data available. Autism, at a study-wide rate of 8 per 1000, is far lower than the national rate (18.5–21 per 1000)." I imagine the cases of ADHD etc would have been higher if they had followed the more intensely toxic CDC schedule.
A similar stabby study, by Hooker and Miller
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2050312120925344
I've given some thought to aneuploidy and this is where my thinking has taken me.
What if aneuploidy represents damaged cells? In which case, maybe these aneuploid cells are what the body sequesters into ‘tumours’ and that’s why aneuploidy is found in all tumours.
Is this what you mean?
Yes! So putting it together with your other Rasnick response. Carcinogens always cause mismatched chromosomes. Mismatched chromosomes are in all tumours. Ergo carcinogenic agents cause tumours. Now I wonder where the carcinogen ends up per our "sequester and protect" discussion. Perhaps carried by special cells to the kidneys to filter it out? What is the eventual fate of aneuploid cells? I have some reading to do. Thanks
I think that the toxin/carcinogen may be found within the tumour, unless the body hasn't been able to isolate it from the system and send it to the tumour.
The liver is the body's main detoxification organ, so I think it is more likely to be taken to the liver to be filtered out, when the body is ready to do that.
That's a good question about the fate of the aneuploid cells. Are you aware that there are some serious questions about the standard view of 'cells'? Do they actually exist in the way we've been told? I'm not at all sure they do. 🤔
Per "cells" Yes! cell membranes every few nanometers doesn't make sense compared to a more continuous structure for tissue strength and function like fast material movement etc. I have read that the bits and bobs inside cells which cell biologists have assigned various roles to ("the 13 organelles") are mostly artifacts of man's incompetence in preparing tissue for electron microscopy. Embedding, slicing, staining with osmium, lead or uranium, drying, coating, high vacuum, thousands of volts. It's hard to imagine what happens to a living tissue during this process. Organic compounds whether manmade plastics or biological tissues are completely black in an electron microscope image. So they are stained with heavy metals that scatter electrons to create white shapes ("contrast" is the posh word). Then they use "point and declare" to describe a random white ring as a "cell" or a "virus". (A ring of metal stain actually). I always wonder "what about the structures that did not get stained and therefore just black holes in the images?" Electron microscopists are highly skilled and competent at what they do but interpretation by their clients can be the weak link.
It was Harold Hillman who studied cell biology and wrote about cell organelles being artefacts and the problems with electron microscopy. We covered that in WRMYI.
Tom Cowan and Stefan Lanka are 2 of the people I know who have raised questions about whether the body is made of cells in the way we are told.
I went through immuno-therapy tretament in 2020 until I realised what was really going on.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/sodium-nitrite-e250-the-poison-in
Cancer is really the poisoning of the cells which are akin to factories producing chemicals and/or new cells. If the 'instruction manuals' are damaged by toxins then incorrect products or faulty cells are made. The same would apply if the cells are full of rubbish stuff.
Factories work in the same way, if not clean and tidy and the instructions clear and legible then crap is produced.
I know that this is not a web site for conspiracy thories, but you may just want to have a look at these 2 short links - 1 from the DailyMail and 1 a very short video...#~~
Daily Mail nonsense ... but this is the critical bit:
"But on Tuesday the King and Queen will visit a cancer treatment centre - a deeply poignant engagement given his own cancer battle as well as that of his daughter-in-law, the Princess of Wales - where they will meet medical specialists and patients. The royal event aims to raise awareness of the importance of early diagnosis and highlight innovative research, supported by Cancer Research UK, taking place at the hospital.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13354325/king-charles-major-boost-cancer-battle.html
....
Cancer jab video and AI - https://www.bitchute.com/video/2CSOmmPD3PQ0/
...
And this is factual; charlie boy is a key member of the WEF / NWO (Gates and his merry men at Gavi and elsewhere).
PS Wish I looked as good as him after a few weeks, never mind months of my cancer treatment.
PPS Nothing will scare people more or entice them to get a jab, than a cancer jab... just look at the MSM today. Daily Mail, cancer mention 26 times on the front page headlines and short summaries alone.
That Daily Mail article doesn't surprise me. This story about his cancer diagnosis is part of the reason I wrote my article, to help spread the word that 'cancer' isn't what they tell us.
I agree, it does all look like pure theatre to promote more fearmongering.
The Mail has had this bit between its teeth for decades. I remember reading an article at least twenty years ago listing "things that cause cancer according to the Daily Mail", and there were hundreds. It was a foreshadowing of the "things that cause heart attacks (because obviously THAT isn't one of them)" articles since the Covid vax rollout. Fear sells papers/gets clicks, and the Mail has long been the Scaremaster General of British media.
Daily Mail is actually pronounced "MI6".
Washington Post is pronounced "CIA".
They just copy and paste the same rubbish across the globe. I unplugged my TV in 2020 and haven't read a newspaper since 2016. It gives me more time to read Dawn's Writings and the great comments. Peace.
I gave up newspapers the same year, when I realised books of cryptic crosswords were available. Mockingbird TV is in a desperate battle to convince itself of its own relevance. Riddance will be good.
Great article Dawn, here's my 2p worth;
Investigating "cancer" is a rabbit warren.
If memory serves 30% of people got a cancer diagnosis 40 years ago, today that figure is 40% https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/understanding/statistics (USA stats, can't find UK)
What is cancer? According to Wiki; "Cancers comprise a large family of diseases that involve abnormal cell growth with the potential to invade or spread to other parts of the body" Hmmm?? & lots of talk in that article about "infections" & "viruses". (Rolling of eyes emoji) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer
How is cancer diagnosed?
Physical exam; A doctor may look for abnormalities, such as changes in skin color or enlargement of an organ, that may indicate the presence of cancer.
Laboratory tests; such as urine and blood tests, may help a doctor identify abnormalities that can be caused by cancer.
Imaging tests. Imaging tests allow a doctor to examine your bones and internal organs in a noninvasive way. Imaging tests used in diagnosing cancer may include a computerized tomography (CT) scan, bone scan, magnetic resonance imaging (MRI), positron emission tomography (PET) scan, ultrasound and X-ray, among others.
Biopsy. During a biopsy, a doctor collects a sample of cells for testing in the laboratory. In most situations, a biopsy is the only way to definitively diagnose cancer.
In the laboratory, doctors look at cell samples under the microscope. Normal cells look uniform, with similar sizes and orderly organization. Cancer cells look less orderly, with varying sizes and without apparent organization. https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/cancer/diagnosis-treatment/drc-20370594
How is cancer treated? In simple terms, cut, burn, poison (AKA drugs) https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/about-cancer/treatment
And now the kicker; The 1939 Cancer Act, in particular section 4; "No person shall take any part in the
publication of any advertisement-
(a) containing an offer to treat any- person for cancer, or to prescribe any remedy therefor,
or to give any advice in connection with the treatment thereof; or
(b) referring to any article, or articles of any description, in terms which are calculated to
lead to the use of that article, or articles of that description, in the treatment of cancer.
In plain English; Nobody can advertise treatments for cancer, or prescribe treatments for cancer or even give advice in connection to cancer treatment.
https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1939/13/pdfs/ukpga_19390013_en.pdf
So here in the UK we have a government funded NHS that is the only place allowed to treat the disease that it (the NHS) diagnoses! Where's the Monopolies Commision?
This is anecdotal, a chap (Ray Co Armagh) who used to comment in the UK Column forum claimed to have cured his cancer by becoming a fruitarian.
Talking of The Column....Hello, Bob Enough!
Thank you. I agree that investigating 'cancer' is a very deep rabbit hole because there are so many aspects to it. Yes, 'warren' is a great way to describe it all.
Cancer has quite a long section in What Really Makes You Ill - and I've learned more since 2019.
Nothing about the cancer industry is about helping people become healthy again.
Cancer is a process, it is not a 'disease' that needs to be 'cured' - so even the 'alternative' health community are maintaining the fearmongering about it.
I read the cancer section again last night, it obviously hadn't sunk in first time! Sorry.
I also hadn't considered that the word "cure" could be bolstering fear, would "heal" be a better word? For example I didn't "cure" my twisted ankle by resting it, I helped the bodies natural "healing" process.
There's nothing to be sorry about. I'm still learning about how the body works.
I agree that heal is a far better word.
The healing processes also involve correcting imbalances and releasing limiting beliefs, so I'm beginning to think that 'healing' doesn't fully describe what happens. I'm still pondering that one. Maybe that will be something for a future Substack article perhaps? 🤔
Well said.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/sodium-nitrite-e250-the-poison-in
Yeah, this idea of cancer "infection" is the dumbest unproven idea ever. It's a result of something, not the cause.
Recently I saw an article on Mercola about how Alzheimer's is possibly transmissible because of the amyloid plaque.
WTF? No, the plaque isn't even the cause, it's a result of cell death.
My latest pet peeve.... People who think that terrain theory and germ theory both apply. Dummies have no understanding of terrain, which states that bacteria etc only feed on dead tissue and are the result, the cleanup crew.... Not the freaking cause which germ theory hypothesizes over and over.
It's hard to break people out of this infection mentality, as if they're actually infected by the "mind virus" of blind belief.
Natives called it the Wetiko virus, which the colonizers were infected with... The way of dominance and control... They are the infection of society, 😂 !
Well done Dawn. I might have referred to it before but I was diagnosed with a rare melanoma in my neck, not on the skin, at start of 2020. I received immuno-therapy treatment, Nivolumab, for 9 sessions until September 2020 when I realised what had actually caused my facial palsy. This was sodium nitrite (E250) which in its derivative when bonded to amino acids is known to be carcinogenic.
This has been known about for at least 40 years yet the ignorant doctors never asked me about my diet.
This explains further.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/sodium-nitrite-e250-the-poison-in
I consider the whole cancer industry a scam and it seems likely the treatment affected my pituitary gland. I am struggling to detoxify from the various issues but I now despise the NHS as a whole and its largely useless doctors who are beholden to big pharma protocols.
I wasn't aware of your diagnosis, thank you for sharing your article.
I agree with you about your view of the cancer industry and the NHS, of course.
Oh brother. Why do I not believe in ANY vaccines? Because they have never invented one for the simplest of illnesses...the "common" cold which by the way has many of the same symptoms as any flu does. A cancer vaccine? I cannot stop laughing at the idea of this.
If your body cannot protect you from cancer it is because you have harmed it's protection mechanisms. No vaccine will override a body out of kilter.
The British Common Cold Research Unit, 1946 - 1989 tried to develop a stabby for colds but could not even prove transmission. That's a whole chapter on the CCRU in "Can You Catch a Cold?" by Daniel Roytas. This book covers 203 studies. He explains that a cold isn't something you catch via a microorganism.
Only just published, so I am still reading it!
David Tyrrell was the last director of the CCRU. He and June Almeida are said to have observed the coronavirus (ha, bloody ha).
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/coronavirus-is-it-really-a-monster
Yes indeed. RN here for 43+ years thru every Fauchi Plandemic in thse 4+ decades.
I have long been suspicious of the slash-and-burn approach to cancer that MDs have to offer.
Don't forget poison too. i was give immuno-therapy for an alleged cancer in 2020. In reality I had poisoned myself due to bacon I ate.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/sodium-nitrite-e250-the-poison-in
Bacon = IARC Group 1 carcinogen "There is sufficient evidence of carcinogenicity in humans"
Yes, its what they do to the meat in processing and how they raise the animals in the first place. They will do anything to blame anything else but pharmceutical/chemical products.
Red Meat - IARC Group 2A carcinogen. "The agent is probably carcinogenic to humans"
I worked in a bacon factory in 1974 as cheap student labor. Vegetarian ever since. No regrets.
The illnesses and cancers have always been IN the variousVaccines + other environmental toxins + EMFs.
My favourite 2 minute vid... YOU MUST PLEASE WATCH UNTIL THE END.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsqhwXfn2IU
Loved this. Thank you.
Thank YOU Dawn! Looking forward to meeting at Music & Sky Extravaganza!
https://musicandsky.com/
That will be great, I look forward to it too!
Hi, I looked up this article too. The mRna with the monoclonal seems to separate percentage recurrence free survival from mono alone, but by they end, 4 years, they end up the same. Perhaps because the mRNA suppresses the body's natural healing mechanism ie 'cancer'.