These Pharma poisoners must be having a laugh at us with these poisons. Check out the names, and sort of say them quickly and see what comes to mind. Here are my thoughts:
Enhertu - 'It hurt you!'
Trastuzumab Deruxtecan - (I need help finishing this one): 'Trash to zoo ___? It rocks the can!'
F these evil psychos. I mean, really--- don't they get tired of being mass-murdering poisoner fiends... at some point??
“The “modern West" is 100% wrong with its ideas about life and its medicine.”
( LankaVision)
For a better understanding I would suggest wissenschaftplus magazine.
Affordable and some of the best available understandings. German but with today’s technology anyone can access it with the translate features or free translate sites.
Cancer, what now? -w-plus 5/2011
Colon cancer! What now? -w-plus 6/2011
Prostate Cancer
... getting to the root. - w-plus 1/2012
The Breast
CANCER - THE SOLUTION part 1,2, 3 W-plus - 2/2012, 3/2012, 4/2012
Thank you. I am aware of the work of Stefan Lanka, he was instrumental in my understanding about 'viruses'.
I am also aware that he is a proponent of Dr Hamer and his work. I do accept that there is useful information within GNM, although I do not accept that it provides all of the answers to all health issues.
Corrections, useless at typing and notice the mistakes later , could not edit.
—
Of course it excludes toxicity, severe nutritional deficiency and trauma.
Thanks for all the previous work but what I took away from the article is a few misconceptions and no mention of the later understandings of biology ie. biological shocks .
Only when one connects it with Peter Augustin findings and what is possible clinically it all falls into place.
My personal opinion and why Hamer had to be a clinician to work out the connections, is that few have the clinical experience to see the contradictions and to see what is possible in clinical practice.
Dr Lanka’s dot connecting has been remarkable. He mentioned that he was fortunate to come across Peter Augustin’s work before he got to meet Dr Hamer.
I appreciate that my articles are not a full explanation of every aspect of a topic - that would make them all so long and probably put most people off reading them.
I have heard Stefan Lanka refer to Peter Augustin, but I have not read any of the latter's work. Have you?
What is still not clear what is measured as “ nucleic acid” .
If “dense water” oscillates between energy and matter , maybe what registers as nuclei acid are signals when life becomes visible .
We need some honest scientists to clarify.
Took me a while to sort of get it and put it into contexts.
With the understanding that the brain is an energy switch centre , the tissues are living and are out of a substance , the heart is a vortex , it fits with the clinical presentations , the epicrisis , the anatomical limitations to self- healing.
From Biology after Hamer:( Dr Lanka with Ilsedora Laker)
That is what you feel when press the muscle and release it , you hear the pulse, That means a vortex bubble going through , dissolving in the end of the artery and putting the water substance inside our tissue , it becomes smaller until it is substance . The veins are using this substance in order to produce heat. The Chinese understood this thousands of years ago.
They use this dense matter taking the energy out eg heat, energy for biochemical reaction and the result is liquid water which has an increase in 50% volume . As vortex bubbles in the arteries get smaller and smaller transferring into our tissue ‘ liquid’ into this substance. The veins are putting it back, taking the energy out and adding a lot of water . The water is driven back passively to the heart because we have valves closing against the pressure in the veins. This is how the blood is going back to the heart , by this process.
Our bodies are 90% water. We retain water when we are in survival stress.
This is our survival mechanism that is holding this primordial substance. This is why the kidneys are holding water if we are in a situation where our existence is challenged , if we are in flight .
Digressing but am aware that initially your research started by looking into the nature of reality! we will never know .
From w-plus site
In issue No. 2/2014 of Wissenschafftplus, we have the “Philosopher Thomas Nagel in his book “Gost and cosmos. Why the materialistic and neo-Darwinist Conception of nature is almost certainly wrong"
Newly asked question of the philosophy of the mind
"How can we understand nature as a system capable of generating spirit?"
Answered by the presentation of a new model of life.
We understand them, nature and have contributed to further recognition.
Thomas Nagel:
"If we want to explain the spirit, we must assume that reality is understandable."
We made it understandable .”
From a post someone put on Next Level forum.
“The circuit board, i.e. the storage medium, is in my opinion the "dense water", see Peter Augustin's website dichtes-wasser.de
Water can reproduce any form, store and pass on all possible frequency patterns (water memory). DNA cannot do that.
But the much more important question is where the information that controls the life processes of organisms comes from, who created it (with what intention?). Life only ever arises from life. No scientist has yet succeeded in creating a living organism from dead matter. So what is "life"?”
Plus those that implemented this murderous plandemic knew this to be true as they knew that the toxins in these vials would travel throughout the body and eventually form cancer (body encapsulating the poison to keep the body alive) unless it was actively cleared. That’s why they increased their marketing campaigns for cancer detection- skin, bowel (lowered the age brackets), breast, blood etc so they could then funnel people towards further toxic treatments that would probably result in death as many had to get up to date with their jabs /childhood schedule in order to undertake their ‘life saving’ cancer poisoning treatment. They knew.
"In Natural Hygiene: Man’s Pristine Way of Life, Herbert Shelton provides an exquisitely simple explanation of cancer in the statement that,
“Cancer does not attack. Cancer evolves.”
The evidence indicates that what is called ‘cancer’ is often, but not exclusively, the result of a buildup of toxins in the body. Solid tumours are reported to be the way that the body aggregates toxins and places them in a ‘safe place’ within the body away from vital organs, until such times as it can process the toxins and remove them from the body. This is the reason that biopsies are not a good idea, because they pierce the tumour and allow the toxins to be released into the body causing further damage. This does not explain other forms of ‘cancer’, but understanding that the word is merely a label for a significant level of toxicity within the body, which may be emotional and not just physical, the main focus of attention is to be directed to the source of the ‘toxin’ and its removal from the body - or the mind.
Herbert Shelton expands on his comment by adding,
“Cancer does not develop in a normal body. This is to say, a genuinely healthy body will not evolve cancer.”
There are reasons that ‘cancer’ evolves, and these reasons, as stated above, will be related to physical, mental, or emotional stressors, of which there are many, especially physical environmental stressors that include a wide variety of chemicals as well as non-native electromagnetic frequencies (nnEMFs).
I would suggest that ‘fear of cancer’ is almost certainly the most significant mental/emotional stressor.
It is also important to make the point that the body can both evolve and clear ‘cancer’ without our ever knowing about it - unless we are subjected to a ‘test’ of some description. This is not to say that we should ignore signs that our body produces of lowered vitality, but that we need to gain a better understanding of the meaning of those signs.
There is still so much to learn about how our bodies work; but it’s important to realise that we need to undertake our own journey of discovery - and part of that learning involves taking responsibility for our health and understanding the messages our bodies are sharing with us and then taking the appropriate action to enhance our health.""
To the tune of 'Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band'...
It was (nearly) 20 years ago today, a doctor told us how we've been betrayed
They've been scaring us with wicked lies, it's our health they're going to compromise
So let me introduce to you, the facts they've hidden all these years...
We've all heard the "1 in 9" ratio that the cancer industry spews when referring to how many women will succumb to breast cancer in their lives. Their strategy of course is to frighten the unsuspecting into submitting to their slash and burn treatments that often result in greater harm than if the patient had no medical care at all. But does this "1 in 9" figure have any validity? Perhaps, but not in the way it's generally portrayed. When you have all the data pertaining to the equation, it paints a much different picture. The following is an excerpt from a 2004 medical report.
"Although the risk of breast cancer increases with age, and the 'one in nine' figure applies to women who are 80 and over, it does not limit itself to elderly women. In Canada there will be about 100 women diagnosed with breast cancer between the ages of 20-29 and 1000 ages 30-39 this year." — Dr. Karen Gelmon, MD, FRCPC , Chair Breast Tumour Group, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, B.C.
Now that we know the truth about the "1 in 9" figure, let's do the math and find the ratio of how many younger women are actually affected by breast cancer, according to Dr. Gelmon's own statistics.
Stats Canada population figures for females age 20-39 in 2004 was approx. 4,000,000. According to the doctor's estimations, about 1100 women (100 women between the ages of 20-29, plus 1000 between ages 30-39) will be diagnosed with breast cancer in the year. Therefore, the actual odds for a woman aged 20-39 being diagnosed would only be about 1 in 3600.
Also left out of this equation are the false positive results that medical statistics indicate affects at least 5-10% of mammograms. Thus, the actual number of genuine cases of breast cancer for women in the 20-39 age bracket could be as little as 1 in 5000 or higher! Not so scary now, yeah?
In a Swedish study of 60,000 women, 70% of the mammographically detected tumors weren't tumors at all. These "false positives" aren't just financial and emotional strains, they may also lead to many unnecessary and invasive biopsies. The figures for false positives are very disturbing when you consider the number of women who have unnecessarily undergone invasive and mutilating treatment, or have consequently died from a disease they never actually had.
Funny how these little beastly discoveries are round with spikes - talk about deja vu! I believe you are right regarding the thought that someone is diagnosed and then they give up, even going through the motions of "treatment" will accept that their life will be shortened. But those who really put their mind to it, go into really healthy eating seem to beat it. My dad had stomach cancer, was upset that he wouldn't see his grandson grow up. But he did, my son was 22 when my dad died - as a result of toxins that built up in his bowel from the scar tissue pressing against it. The doc treated his blood poisoning as if it was arthritis in his neck, so nothing was done. I've long mistrusted docs.
Dawn, do you find it strange as I do that the slogan for breast cancer is always let's find the cure rather than let's find the cause? Poisoned air, water, soil is never mentioned at all. Climate change is a natural feature of this planet, but poisoning is not. The same pushers of allopathic medicine are the same people who are pushing for a green impossibility, a one world government and the enslavement of humanity. If you are familiar with Matt Ehret and Cynthia Chung of the Canadian Patriot website, then you know who the players are and I also suggest Dr. Sam Bailey and her husband Mark, their articles and videos will awaken the conspiracies involved in medicine, government and banking that are against the people, Jack.
Thank you Jack. I don't find it 'strange' that it's about the 'cure' which is about maintaining the idea that we 'need' Big Pharma - we don't of course. Also, the 'cure for cancer' doesn't exist because 'cancer' does not need to be 'cured'. Instead, the body needs to be allowed to heal itself.
Yes, I do know Mark & Sam Bailey, I've connected with them and been interviewed by them.
I don't know Matt Ehret and Cynthia Chung, although I am aware from my research of the players behind it all.
I think it would be to your advantage to get to know Matt and Cynthias work because it will fill in who the players are and have been that has led us to this dystopian reality we now occupy. Thanks for your comment, Jack.
Dawn, the book series by the Canadian Patriot, Matt Ehret is a four-volume collection called the battle of the two Americas and Cynthias latest book is the empire on which the black sun never sets are all historical volumes and they will change the way you view the world. I grew up thinking that everything I was taught to believe was the truth when it was in fact a complete lie. After Vietnam I knew something was wrong and it took me several decades of searching to find the answers. There is another book by Robert Ingraham, The Modern Anglo-Dutch Empire, Its Origins, Evolution, and Antihuman Outlook, I look forward to hearing more from you, Jack.
Thank you Jack. I have read and researched quite a bit over the past 20 years almost about how practically everything we think we know about the world is a lie. I don’t pretend to know it all, nobody does, but I do have a reasonable understanding. And whilst I appreciate that these works you suggest will be really interesting and no doubt add significantly to my knowledge and understanding, that is not currently the focus of my work.
I don't accept that we need any 'drug' to heal from what is called 'cancer'.
Fenbendazole is claimed to be antihelmintic, which suggests that it is designed to kill parasites, so it must be toxic, which will only add the the body's burden of toxins.
Ivermectin is also toxic. What are called 'parasites' are in the body for a reason, which is that there is a buildup of toxins that are causing damage. I don't agree that adding further toxins promotes health.
I think a lot of people poisoned themselves by overdosing on Ivermectin as soon as that became a thing especially among the right wing Christian MAGA alt media antivaxxers. And the more they were mocked for consuming horse paste the more they would double down on their preventative intake of Ivermectin. Many of these people including Alex Jones anecdotally claimed that he became very sick from COVID as did other members of his family and crew. I suspect they were suffering from Ivermectin poisoning or some other factor that was common among them that of course had nothing to do with imaginary viruses.
I don't agree that natural things can be 'toxic' in high amounts, although I do accept that they can cause problems.
I've heard this argument used with respect to water. It's called 'water intoxication', but water is never 'toxic'. If people claim they have health issues from drinking water, then I would question what toxins are in the water. Claiming that water is toxic makes no sense because many people undergo long water fasts, so they are only drinking water.
The problems occur if someone drinks 'too much' water over a short period of time because that probably leads to all kinds of imbalances in the body which is what causes health issues.
But I do wonder if there were other factors involved in those cases where people are claimed to have died from water intoxication, but the medical estabishment failed to investigate them.
Alternative treatments for the non-existent covaids were pushed specifically for those who were anti-vaxx but still believe in invisible boogeymen with a contract to kill. It's a win-win for Big Pharma and Russian Roulette for the patient no matter which 'remedy' they choose. That's why it's so important to dispel the Germ Theory and the p$eudo-$cience that supports it.
How was Ivermectin able to do better? Per whom? Dr Kory did a presentation to the Doctors for COVID Ethics, basing his conclusions upon a study which involved "people with COVID," a status determined by PCR tests, totally invalid determinants. Not just "inaccurate" but invalid, since no actual virus is available to authenticate its usage. And then, the subjects were given Ivermectin, and tested again with PCR, and an increase in the number of cycles required to produce positive results was deemed proof that Ivermectin worked. BS to the extreme. (Dr Tom Cowan covered this in a May 2023 video)
Thanks Dawn. Another cancer scam and big pharma marketing ploy. As for Enhertu/Trastuzumab Deruxtecan, honestly what ridiculous names. Trastuzumab Deruxtecan will anagram to:
a Cruz deux mutant breast
No doubt why they say it is good for breast cancer!
I am sure I mentioned it but I had my own experience with NHS and cancer treatment.
"Janine"'s ordeal sure sounds like a class project for Sales and Marketing 101.
The diagnosis is the trap.
Chronic disease through the lens of the allopathic paradigm is all about profit and control of the masses.
These Pharma poisoners must be having a laugh at us with these poisons. Check out the names, and sort of say them quickly and see what comes to mind. Here are my thoughts:
Enhertu - 'It hurt you!'
Trastuzumab Deruxtecan - (I need help finishing this one): 'Trash to zoo ___? It rocks the can!'
F these evil psychos. I mean, really--- don't they get tired of being mass-murdering poisoner fiends... at some point??
Ah, I can help you there. Just posted a comment. Trastuzumab Deruxtecan will anagram to:
a Cruz deux mutant breast
And evil psychos indeed. Or 'car FDA stinkbugs'. Letters got muddled up there, sorry. :)
“The “modern West" is 100% wrong with its ideas about life and its medicine.”
( LankaVision)
For a better understanding I would suggest wissenschaftplus magazine.
Affordable and some of the best available understandings. German but with today’s technology anyone can access it with the translate features or free translate sites.
Cancer, what now? -w-plus 5/2011
Colon cancer! What now? -w-plus 6/2011
Prostate Cancer
... getting to the root. - w-plus 1/2012
The Breast
CANCER - THE SOLUTION part 1,2, 3 W-plus - 2/2012, 3/2012, 4/2012
Arguments
For the new perspective on cancer w-plus 1/2016
Thank you. I am aware of the work of Stefan Lanka, he was instrumental in my understanding about 'viruses'.
I am also aware that he is a proponent of Dr Hamer and his work. I do accept that there is useful information within GNM, although I do not accept that it provides all of the answers to all health issues.
Corrections, useless at typing and notice the mistakes later , could not edit.
—
Of course it excludes toxicity, severe nutritional deficiency and trauma.
Thanks for all the previous work but what I took away from the article is a few misconceptions and no mention of the later understandings of biology ie. biological shocks .
Only when one connects it with Peter Augustin findings and what is possible clinically it all falls into place.
My personal opinion and why Hamer had to be a clinician to work out the connections, is that few have the clinical experience to see the contradictions and to see what is possible in clinical practice.
Dr Lanka’s dot connecting has been remarkable. He mentioned that he was fortunate to come across Peter Augustin’s work before he got to meet Dr Hamer.
I appreciate that my articles are not a full explanation of every aspect of a topic - that would make them all so long and probably put most people off reading them.
I have heard Stefan Lanka refer to Peter Augustin, but I have not read any of the latter's work. Have you?
The like button does not work for me.
Thanks for the clarification.
That is understandable , one can only cover so much .
It also needs to be accessible as there is so much new knowledge outside the consensus and what we all have been exposed to since birth.
—
Peter Augustin passed away In 2015 but most people are aware of the PI water , free article w-plus, and Dr Cowan did a video on it
W-plus and Next Level have more info.
Another site
http://www.dichtes-wasser.de/ueberdenautor.html
From a recent post , 2015 article
https://daserwachendervalkyrjar.wordpress.com/tag/dr-peter-augustin/
What is still not clear what is measured as “ nucleic acid” .
If “dense water” oscillates between energy and matter , maybe what registers as nuclei acid are signals when life becomes visible .
We need some honest scientists to clarify.
Took me a while to sort of get it and put it into contexts.
With the understanding that the brain is an energy switch centre , the tissues are living and are out of a substance , the heart is a vortex , it fits with the clinical presentations , the epicrisis , the anatomical limitations to self- healing.
From Biology after Hamer:( Dr Lanka with Ilsedora Laker)
That is what you feel when press the muscle and release it , you hear the pulse, That means a vortex bubble going through , dissolving in the end of the artery and putting the water substance inside our tissue , it becomes smaller until it is substance . The veins are using this substance in order to produce heat. The Chinese understood this thousands of years ago.
They use this dense matter taking the energy out eg heat, energy for biochemical reaction and the result is liquid water which has an increase in 50% volume . As vortex bubbles in the arteries get smaller and smaller transferring into our tissue ‘ liquid’ into this substance. The veins are putting it back, taking the energy out and adding a lot of water . The water is driven back passively to the heart because we have valves closing against the pressure in the veins. This is how the blood is going back to the heart , by this process.
Our bodies are 90% water. We retain water when we are in survival stress.
This is our survival mechanism that is holding this primordial substance. This is why the kidneys are holding water if we are in a situation where our existence is challenged , if we are in flight .
Or “ My mother’s soul has abandoned me. “
—
The Primary/ Primordial Substance
https://media2-production.mightynetworks.com/asset/f827313e-41ac-41f3-88d0-eb67582bc69d/The_Primal_Substance.pdf
—
Digressing but am aware that initially your research started by looking into the nature of reality! we will never know .
From w-plus site
In issue No. 2/2014 of Wissenschafftplus, we have the “Philosopher Thomas Nagel in his book “Gost and cosmos. Why the materialistic and neo-Darwinist Conception of nature is almost certainly wrong"
Newly asked question of the philosophy of the mind
"How can we understand nature as a system capable of generating spirit?"
Answered by the presentation of a new model of life.
We understand them, nature and have contributed to further recognition.
Thomas Nagel:
"If we want to explain the spirit, we must assume that reality is understandable."
We made it understandable .”
From a post someone put on Next Level forum.
“The circuit board, i.e. the storage medium, is in my opinion the "dense water", see Peter Augustin's website dichtes-wasser.de
Water can reproduce any form, store and pass on all possible frequency patterns (water memory). DNA cannot do that.
But the much more important question is where the information that controls the life processes of organisms comes from, who created it (with what intention?). Life only ever arises from life. No scientist has yet succeeded in creating a living organism from dead matter. So what is "life"?”
It seems that there was an issue with the 'like' button, but it has obviously been cleared as the button is now visible and working.
Spot on!
Plus those that implemented this murderous plandemic knew this to be true as they knew that the toxins in these vials would travel throughout the body and eventually form cancer (body encapsulating the poison to keep the body alive) unless it was actively cleared. That’s why they increased their marketing campaigns for cancer detection- skin, bowel (lowered the age brackets), breast, blood etc so they could then funnel people towards further toxic treatments that would probably result in death as many had to get up to date with their jabs /childhood schedule in order to undertake their ‘life saving’ cancer poisoning treatment. They knew.
It's EVIL beyond comprehension!
"In Natural Hygiene: Man’s Pristine Way of Life, Herbert Shelton provides an exquisitely simple explanation of cancer in the statement that,
“Cancer does not attack. Cancer evolves.”
The evidence indicates that what is called ‘cancer’ is often, but not exclusively, the result of a buildup of toxins in the body. Solid tumours are reported to be the way that the body aggregates toxins and places them in a ‘safe place’ within the body away from vital organs, until such times as it can process the toxins and remove them from the body. This is the reason that biopsies are not a good idea, because they pierce the tumour and allow the toxins to be released into the body causing further damage. This does not explain other forms of ‘cancer’, but understanding that the word is merely a label for a significant level of toxicity within the body, which may be emotional and not just physical, the main focus of attention is to be directed to the source of the ‘toxin’ and its removal from the body - or the mind.
Herbert Shelton expands on his comment by adding,
“Cancer does not develop in a normal body. This is to say, a genuinely healthy body will not evolve cancer.”
There are reasons that ‘cancer’ evolves, and these reasons, as stated above, will be related to physical, mental, or emotional stressors, of which there are many, especially physical environmental stressors that include a wide variety of chemicals as well as non-native electromagnetic frequencies (nnEMFs).
I would suggest that ‘fear of cancer’ is almost certainly the most significant mental/emotional stressor.
It is also important to make the point that the body can both evolve and clear ‘cancer’ without our ever knowing about it - unless we are subjected to a ‘test’ of some description. This is not to say that we should ignore signs that our body produces of lowered vitality, but that we need to gain a better understanding of the meaning of those signs.
There is still so much to learn about how our bodies work; but it’s important to realise that we need to undertake our own journey of discovery - and part of that learning involves taking responsibility for our health and understanding the messages our bodies are sharing with us and then taking the appropriate action to enhance our health.""
SPOT ON, Dawn! Thank you.
To the tune of 'Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band'...
It was (nearly) 20 years ago today, a doctor told us how we've been betrayed
They've been scaring us with wicked lies, it's our health they're going to compromise
So let me introduce to you, the facts they've hidden all these years...
We've all heard the "1 in 9" ratio that the cancer industry spews when referring to how many women will succumb to breast cancer in their lives. Their strategy of course is to frighten the unsuspecting into submitting to their slash and burn treatments that often result in greater harm than if the patient had no medical care at all. But does this "1 in 9" figure have any validity? Perhaps, but not in the way it's generally portrayed. When you have all the data pertaining to the equation, it paints a much different picture. The following is an excerpt from a 2004 medical report.
"Although the risk of breast cancer increases with age, and the 'one in nine' figure applies to women who are 80 and over, it does not limit itself to elderly women. In Canada there will be about 100 women diagnosed with breast cancer between the ages of 20-29 and 1000 ages 30-39 this year." — Dr. Karen Gelmon, MD, FRCPC , Chair Breast Tumour Group, BC Cancer Agency, Vancouver, B.C.
(link to full report "Young Women and Breast Cancer": https://ibb.co/wNNbKrp
Now that we know the truth about the "1 in 9" figure, let's do the math and find the ratio of how many younger women are actually affected by breast cancer, according to Dr. Gelmon's own statistics.
Stats Canada population figures for females age 20-39 in 2004 was approx. 4,000,000. According to the doctor's estimations, about 1100 women (100 women between the ages of 20-29, plus 1000 between ages 30-39) will be diagnosed with breast cancer in the year. Therefore, the actual odds for a woman aged 20-39 being diagnosed would only be about 1 in 3600.
Also left out of this equation are the false positive results that medical statistics indicate affects at least 5-10% of mammograms. Thus, the actual number of genuine cases of breast cancer for women in the 20-39 age bracket could be as little as 1 in 5000 or higher! Not so scary now, yeah?
In a Swedish study of 60,000 women, 70% of the mammographically detected tumors weren't tumors at all. These "false positives" aren't just financial and emotional strains, they may also lead to many unnecessary and invasive biopsies. The figures for false positives are very disturbing when you consider the number of women who have unnecessarily undergone invasive and mutilating treatment, or have consequently died from a disease they never actually had.
Thanks Dawn. Such an inspiring and ultimately positive article. The body is so much more intelligent than any doctor would give it credit for.
Make that "The body is so much more intelligent than any doctor. " and leave it at that!
Funny how these little beastly discoveries are round with spikes - talk about deja vu! I believe you are right regarding the thought that someone is diagnosed and then they give up, even going through the motions of "treatment" will accept that their life will be shortened. But those who really put their mind to it, go into really healthy eating seem to beat it. My dad had stomach cancer, was upset that he wouldn't see his grandson grow up. But he did, my son was 22 when my dad died - as a result of toxins that built up in his bowel from the scar tissue pressing against it. The doc treated his blood poisoning as if it was arthritis in his neck, so nothing was done. I've long mistrusted docs.
Dawn, do you find it strange as I do that the slogan for breast cancer is always let's find the cure rather than let's find the cause? Poisoned air, water, soil is never mentioned at all. Climate change is a natural feature of this planet, but poisoning is not. The same pushers of allopathic medicine are the same people who are pushing for a green impossibility, a one world government and the enslavement of humanity. If you are familiar with Matt Ehret and Cynthia Chung of the Canadian Patriot website, then you know who the players are and I also suggest Dr. Sam Bailey and her husband Mark, their articles and videos will awaken the conspiracies involved in medicine, government and banking that are against the people, Jack.
Thank you Jack. I don't find it 'strange' that it's about the 'cure' which is about maintaining the idea that we 'need' Big Pharma - we don't of course. Also, the 'cure for cancer' doesn't exist because 'cancer' does not need to be 'cured'. Instead, the body needs to be allowed to heal itself.
Yes, I do know Mark & Sam Bailey, I've connected with them and been interviewed by them.
I don't know Matt Ehret and Cynthia Chung, although I am aware from my research of the players behind it all.
I think it would be to your advantage to get to know Matt and Cynthias work because it will fill in who the players are and have been that has led us to this dystopian reality we now occupy. Thanks for your comment, Jack.
Dawn, the book series by the Canadian Patriot, Matt Ehret is a four-volume collection called the battle of the two Americas and Cynthias latest book is the empire on which the black sun never sets are all historical volumes and they will change the way you view the world. I grew up thinking that everything I was taught to believe was the truth when it was in fact a complete lie. After Vietnam I knew something was wrong and it took me several decades of searching to find the answers. There is another book by Robert Ingraham, The Modern Anglo-Dutch Empire, Its Origins, Evolution, and Antihuman Outlook, I look forward to hearing more from you, Jack.
Thank you Jack. I have read and researched quite a bit over the past 20 years almost about how practically everything we think we know about the world is a lie. I don’t pretend to know it all, nobody does, but I do have a reasonable understanding. And whilst I appreciate that these works you suggest will be really interesting and no doubt add significantly to my knowledge and understanding, that is not currently the focus of my work.
Excellent article! Thank you Dawn.
Thank you. 🙏
Anything that ends in -ab is pretty much a toxin they use to suppress things.
Somehow, people still believe in this snake oil poison.
Meanwhile a cheap drug works wonders with cancer.
https://fenbendazole.substack.com/
I don't accept that we need any 'drug' to heal from what is called 'cancer'.
Fenbendazole is claimed to be antihelmintic, which suggests that it is designed to kill parasites, so it must be toxic, which will only add the the body's burden of toxins.
Yes or perhaps like ivermectin, it enhances elimination of certain toxins which makes the terrain less appetizing for parasites...
Just a feeling ... Otherwise it would be like this stupid drug which actually doesn't help those with cancer.
Ivermectin is also toxic. What are called 'parasites' are in the body for a reason, which is that there is a buildup of toxins that are causing damage. I don't agree that adding further toxins promotes health.
I think a lot of people poisoned themselves by overdosing on Ivermectin as soon as that became a thing especially among the right wing Christian MAGA alt media antivaxxers. And the more they were mocked for consuming horse paste the more they would double down on their preventative intake of Ivermectin. Many of these people including Alex Jones anecdotally claimed that he became very sick from COVID as did other members of his family and crew. I suspect they were suffering from Ivermectin poisoning or some other factor that was common among them that of course had nothing to do with imaginary viruses.
So we really know that these drugs work by killing parasites?
Or
Do they somehow change the terrain by helping to eliminate toxins?
After all, even though COVID was normal death... Somehow ivermectin was able to do better than the allopathic response and the non response.
That's what made me curious about ivermectin. If it didn't have benefits, it would have been shelved as soon as the patent ran out.
Not so.
I'm just not as black or white about ivermectin and fenbenzadole. The toxicity was seen with huge doses not typical of human use.
After all, even natural things can be toxic at high amounts. Does that mean they're bad for us? No. But it does mean that we shouldn't overdo it.
I don't agree that natural things can be 'toxic' in high amounts, although I do accept that they can cause problems.
I've heard this argument used with respect to water. It's called 'water intoxication', but water is never 'toxic'. If people claim they have health issues from drinking water, then I would question what toxins are in the water. Claiming that water is toxic makes no sense because many people undergo long water fasts, so they are only drinking water.
The problems occur if someone drinks 'too much' water over a short period of time because that probably leads to all kinds of imbalances in the body which is what causes health issues.
But I do wonder if there were other factors involved in those cases where people are claimed to have died from water intoxication, but the medical estabishment failed to investigate them.
Alternative treatments for the non-existent covaids were pushed specifically for those who were anti-vaxx but still believe in invisible boogeymen with a contract to kill. It's a win-win for Big Pharma and Russian Roulette for the patient no matter which 'remedy' they choose. That's why it's so important to dispel the Germ Theory and the p$eudo-$cience that supports it.
I totally agree. That's why I keep writing about the importance of the 'no virus' position!
How was Ivermectin able to do better? Per whom? Dr Kory did a presentation to the Doctors for COVID Ethics, basing his conclusions upon a study which involved "people with COVID," a status determined by PCR tests, totally invalid determinants. Not just "inaccurate" but invalid, since no actual virus is available to authenticate its usage. And then, the subjects were given Ivermectin, and tested again with PCR, and an increase in the number of cycles required to produce positive results was deemed proof that Ivermectin worked. BS to the extreme. (Dr Tom Cowan covered this in a May 2023 video)
He was seeing more people recover from "COVID" (whatever made them sick to get treatment during the first waves) that used ivermectin.
But yeah, the ones that didn't get it probably died from the remdesevir protocol. I'm not sure there was a control where nothing was given.
But anyway, the toxicity thing is overblown, they used huge amounts that most would never take.
Even aspirin or the natural version, white willow bark can cause issues in high doses.
Thanks Dawn. Another cancer scam and big pharma marketing ploy. As for Enhertu/Trastuzumab Deruxtecan, honestly what ridiculous names. Trastuzumab Deruxtecan will anagram to:
a Cruz deux mutant breast
No doubt why they say it is good for breast cancer!
I am sure I mentioned it but I had my own experience with NHS and cancer treatment.
https://baldmichael.substack.com/p/sodium-nitrite-e250-the-poison-in
I was given Nivolumab until I realised what was really wrong with me. NHS oncologist doctors are utter ******** (insert your favourite words).
My thyroid levels have been mucked up, one of the side effects I now see. This sort of detail was not made known to me.
Pour comprendre le cancer, voyez les travaux du docteur Hamer
https://learninggnm.com/home.html
https://learninggnm.com/SBS/documents/breast.html