patrick.net

A Better Way with Dr Tess Lawrie cross-posted a post from The Defeat Of COVID

Tess Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD
Oct 24 · A Better Way with Dr Tess Lawrie
Ivermectin's role as an anti-cancer agent post-vaccination is nicely explained in this article.

COVID Shot-Cancer Links – Understand Them To Defeat Them
Let's explore each of the ways that the COVID vaccines cause cancer and strategies for fighting back
DR. COLLEEN HUBER
OCT 24

READ IN APP

PART 1: Statement of the problem

PART 2: Mechanisms by which the COVID vaccines induce cancer and natural therapies that reverse these

PART 3: Ivermectin’s roles against COVID vaccine-induced cancer

---

PART 1: Statement of the problem

By October 2022, mainstream media could no longer ignore the enormous rise in fourteen different types of cancers in 44 countries around the world and most remarkably in young people. [1] [2] [3] The American Cancer Society acknowledged that cancer mortality has doubled in young people from pre-2020 levels. [4] Pfizer’s 2022 safety report on the COVID-vaccines revealed thousands of cancers of hundreds of types following the injections. [5] By June 2022, there were 3,711 cases reported by Pfizer under that heading.

Oncologists note stark difference in cancers from pre-2020 to the present

UK clinical oncologist Angus Dalgleish, one of the leading oncology researchers in the United Kingdom, sees an alarming number of cancer patients, long in remission, who “ . . . subsequently present with very aggressive relapse when they should have stayed in remission. Sadly, I have yet to find a case where the patients have not received a covid booster vaccine from their GP or hospital because they are ‘at risk.’” [6] His comment on cancer mortality developments around the world is that “the COVID vaccines are linked to cancer and death.” [7]

Canadian oncologist William Makis MD, who has diagnosed over 20,000 cancer patients over his career, says, “I’ve never seen anything like this. . . . I’ve never seen stage four breast cancers presenting in women in their twenties. I’ve never seen stage four colon cancers presenting in men and women in their twenties and thirties . . .These cancers would always present at stage four, and they would always kill them in a matter of a few months, and it was always less than a year. . . ‘Turbo cancer’ is a term that people came up with to describe the extremely aggressive nature of these cancers in the COVID vaccinated, and these cancers behave extremely differently, unlike anything I’ve seen before in my career. . . . And the other feature of these cancers is that they are very resistant to conventional treatment; they’re resistant to radiation therapy, they’re resistant to chemotherapy, and patients seem to be doing very poorly with conventional treatments. Oncologists are really baffled, and they don’t know what to do.“ [8]

Pathologist Ryan Cole MD, formerly of Mayo Clinic, specializes in postmortem examination. He has criticized COVID vaccines for, among other dangers, the severe impairment of the immune system and impairment of the ability to fight cancer. He says “People ask, ‘Do these shots cause cancer? Well, they cause immune suppression. They cause a disruption and a dyregulation of your immune system that is normally what would fight cancer. So that’s what we’re up against. . . . As I travel the world and talk to doctors . . . they are seeing cancers in age groups they have never seen before, and it happened after the rollout of the CV19 shots . . . In 2021, there was about a 6% or 7% increase in cancer. In 2022, there was a 35% increase above average in cancer. . . . People who have been clear of their cancer, 2, 3, 5, 10 and even 20 years, where, after the shots, their cancer aggressively came back, and the estimates are of 17 million people who have died of these mRNA injections. . . . This is a silent holocaust, and that’s what’s sad about this. People were coerced into an experiment, and the deaths are being denied by the medical establishment. . .” [9]

Spike protein dosing from Pfizer and Moderna

The amount of mRNA dose in each Pfizer vaccine is 13 trillion mRNA molecules, and in Moderna is 40 trillion molecules, each enveloped in its own cationic lipid nanoparticle. These figures were determined by molecular weight of each of the two vaccines. [10] To put those numbers in perspective, there are about 30 trillion cells in the human body. So one can imagine the impact of a maximally ubiquitous distribution throughout the whole body, in a roughly one-to-one or one-to-three ratio of payload unit to human cell.

Each of those two vaccines encoded whole spike proteins, and each of the trillions of lipid nano-particle (LNP) enveloped mRNA codes for spike protein. [11]

The Pfizer vaccine was not studied for carcinogenicity or genotoxicity (DNA damage potential) by Pfizer prior to rollout, as we can see from Pfizer’s own documentation to the FDA: [12]

Pfizer Worldwide Safety. 5.3.6 Cumulative analysis of post-authorization adverse event reports of P-07302048 (BNT162B2) received through 28 Feb 2021. P. 59. https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf
From very early on in the COVID vaccine heyday, February 2021, there was already evidence that COVID vaccines produced a vastly higher spike protein burden in the vaccinated individual than after natural infection. Even within three weeks post-vaccination, the antibodies to spike proteins measured up to 100 times higher in the COVID-vaccinated than in the unvaccinated and previously COVID-infected. [13] While some may interpret these antibodies as a sign of a more intense immune response to spike protein, it also indicates a larger and / or more impactful presence in the body of this known toxin.

Therefore, it is important to fully appreciate the spike protein burden in the vaccinated, in order to be able to find the best strategies to reverse the risk and the damage of this toxin. Toward this end, this article explores the mechanisms of cancer risk from the spike protein. The better we understand these processes, the better we will be able to defend patients and the public against the imminent coming years of record-breaking cancer rates.

It should be noted that the spike protein rarely appears intact more than 20 days after COVID virus infection, but the recombinant, that is, vaccine-generated, spike protein has been observed in the COVID vaccinated, from 69 to 187 days following vaccination. [14] That particular study stopped at 187 days, rather than being the point at which no more spike protein was observed, which implies that there may be a longer time period of spike presence in the bodies of vaccianted people. This persistence includes both the injected mRNA enveloped in liposomes as well as its derivative spike protein. [15] This is plenty of time for the initiation of cancer promoting pathways, and the inhibition of immune defenses against cancer to begin. And it is certainly enough time for cardiovascular and heart damage to have begun, as well as breach of the blood brain barrier, as I discuss in other papers. Peak uptake throughout the northern hemisphere was in spring of 2021. So that is quite a long time for spike protein to persist in the bodies of vaccinated individuals, whereas the fragile mRNA that initiated such spike protein production degrades in weeks, after the payload has been delivered.

Epidemiology of cancer risk following the COVID vaccines

COVID vaccines are correlated with increased incidence of the following cancers.

Lymphomas are so closely correlated with mRNA injection that 45.7% of the studied lymphoma patients who were COVID-vaccinated developed lymphoma within only 30 days post-injection, rather than later. [16] It is not surprising that this is one of the main cancers seen post-COVID vaccine, because the T and B cells of the lymphatic system are not only quickly reproducing, but as waste-drainers, lymph nodes are among the earliest of the body’s tissues to take up spike proteins.

Glioblastomas are pernicious cancers due to their easy accessibility to surrounding brain tissue, and their shielding from most potential treatments behind the blood brain barrier, among other challenges. Pfizer reported hundreds of brain cancers and pre-cancerous conditions in their June 2022 update. [17] Reduced Cytochrome C levels were found in glioma patients post-COVID vaccine, which seemed to be due to impaired oxidative phosphorylation and consequent lower ATP in the mitochondria. [18]

Ovarian and breast cancers are also seen with increased incidence since COVID vaccine rollout, probably due to their p53 impact, yet the COVID vaccines have damaged this p53 gene, the “guardian of the genome” protector of DNA, which I discuss below.

Colorectal cancers have proliferated, and aggressively and among unprecedented young ages since the COVID vaccines. William Dahut is the chief scientif officer of the American Cancer Society. He says, “Colorectal cancer are also presenting with more aggressive disease and larger tumors at diagnosis; it’s more difficult to treat.” Regarding this steep increase in colorectal cancer in youth, Harvard medical professor Kimmie Ng comments that “the steepest rises are in the very youngest people, those in their 20’s and 30’s.” [19]

Although the above are some of the most prominently increased cancers, there is no type of common cancer that has observed to stay flat in incidence since the rollout of the COVID vaccines. All have been listed in the Pfizer documentation. [20]

The Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), which is overseen by the US Centers for Disease Control (CDC) and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), is a national surveillance system regarding adverse vaccine effects, for all vaccines given in the U.S., including the mRNA COVID vaccines. For all of the entries regarding cancers in the year 2021, the researchers found that 96% of all the entries for any of the search terms related to cancer were specific to the COVID vaccines, and only 4% for all the other kinds of vaccines put together. [21]

Worldwide, cancer diagnoses and total excess deaths began to rise following the rollout of COVID vaccines, and then to accelerate following the boosters. The findings are most remarkable in younger ages than are typically affected by cancer. [22]

CDC data on cancer mortality summarized below by The Ethical Skeptic shows a sharp inflection point in vastly increased cancer mortality (those with cancer listed as cause of death) in the United States beginning right at the time of the COVID vaccines rollout, the last week of December 2020. In the following graph of cancer mortality in 0 to 54 year olds, the inflection point of when cancer began to increase beyond yearly averages is quite clear, beginning the week after December 14, 2020, when the vaccine first became available. [23] Because this graph shows deviation from trend rather than actual numbers, the curve is often below zero through 2018 – 2020, as cancer mortality was somewhat lower than prior rates then. My other observation is that the first spike after the vaccine rollout likely reflects those who already had fulminant cancer, now worsened by the toxicity of the vaccines, in which case, cancer would have been the default cause of death listed on the death certificate. However, the continuing trend upward of the cancer mortality trend from 2021 to the present is a very strong indicator that a nationwide health-impact event in late 2020-early 2021 caused that sharp increase, and for that we know of only one. All of the following data is derived from CDC reported data.

The Ethical Skeptic. The state of things pandemic, we have a cancer emergency. Week 38, 2024. https://theethicalskeptic.com/2024/10/02/the-state-of-things-pandemic-week-38-2024/
An enormous study of the entire Japanese population from national vital statistics showed that excess mortality was seen for all cancers examined, 20 types of cancer, each with over 95 or 99% of PI since the rollout of the COVID vaccines. [24] The paper’s politically incorrect findings, based on uncomfortable data, earned its retraction by the journal Cureus. At least 80% of the Japanese population had had two doses of mRNA vaccines and 68% of the population had received a third dose. In that study of the Japanese population, the main cancers to increase following the COVID vaccine rollout were ovarian cancer, leukemia, prostate, lip / oral / pharynx and pancreatic cancers. Breast cancers dipped lower at first, and then shifted to excess mortality also, though the last without statistical significance.

Skyrocketing cases of cancer in the UK have been attributed to smoking, [25] although smoking has drastically decreased in the UK in recent decades, as in the rest of the world. Thirteen new cancers are now being attributed to smoking by the mainstream media, which is highly improbable.

Cancer’s attacks on the body are multi-faceted. They are so complex that researchers Valdes and Perea write:

“This staggering intricacy [of cancer’s many effects] calls for caution when advising all people with cancer (or a previous history of cancer) to receive the COVID-19 primary vaccine series plus additional booster doses.” [26]

To this I would add: Are you a member of a species, such as humans, in which cancer was already the first or second cause of death every year before the COVID vaccines? In that case, the vulnerability is sufficient for all humans to be sure to avoid the COVID vaccines, as I will show in detail below.

Share

Subscribed

PART 2: Mechanisms by which the COVID vaccines induce cancer and natural therapies that reverse these

IgG4 is an antibody made in abundance by COVID-vaccinated persons, many times higher than in the unvaccinated. [27] Antibodies such as the IgG type immunoglobulins are easy to test for by a blood lab, and they are easy to understand. When some irritant – either a pathogenic microbe or allergen – enters the body, then we make reactive antibodies as newly generated soldier molecules to fight the intruders. This is the role of the B-cell generated immunoglobulin antibodies. So when researchers discovered the huge disparity between the COVID vaccinated and the unvaccinated in IgG4 counts, people got excited, and journalists wrote of the stark discovery.

IgG4 is thought to be associated with tolerance of invading microbes, and it is thought that this distracts or shifts the focus of immune system surveillance away from the more inflammatory, combative, so to speak IgG1 and IgG3, and thereby away from important battles against invading pathogens or even cancer. And IgG4 is specifically more tolerant of the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein among other proteins and microbes that do not belong in the body, and that this complacent immune reaction to the spike protein can promote infection and replication by SARS-CoV-2 without opposition. [28]

But there is a problem with all those assumptions and all that attention. IgG4 is a downstream effect, and a product of a vanishingly small component of immune system cells, that is a small fraction of the molecules made by B cells, which comprise only 0.005% = five of every 100,000 blood cells.

That is, IgG4 is unlikely to have as much effect on COVID risk, other microbial risk or cancer risk. But it may serve as a convenient marker on blood labs that gives clues of underlying immune system battles of more importance.

Rather, the most important discovery on COVID vaccine induced cancer risk is something completely different, which is the loss of Type I interferon, and the loss of interferon signalling, in the COVID-vaccinated, which is a tragic loss of many downstream immune functions against cancer. The difference in the importance of these two phenomena is that IgG4 is very rare and very far downstream, while Type I interferon is centrally coordinating of the entire immune system, ubiquitous in healthy people, and significantly reduced in the COVID vaccinated. And this is the central immunity injury that the COVID-vaccinated are faced with. Both of these phenomena are concerning to UK clinical oncologist Angus Dalgleish, who was co-discoverer of the CD-4 receptor. While speaking with U.S. Senator Ron Johnson, Dr. Dalgleish shares his concerns regarding the COVID vaccines, with regard to cancer, is that the COVID vaccine boosters suppress the immune system’s T-cell response, and immunoglubulins switched to tolerization, as two mechanisms most concerning to him by which the COVID vaccines induce or worsen cancer. [29] The Pfizer COVID vaccine specifically was found to significantly reduce Type I interferon, also known as interferon alpha. [30] This causes a tremendous downstream effect of multiple pathologies, both infectious disease and malignant cancer.

Type I interferon, the body’s most important cytokine, is not to be underestimated for its effect against cancer, and this is due to an enormous array of anti-cancer effects. Some of those effects are arrest of the cell cycle, apoptosis, or natural cell death, as well as stimulation of our greatest warriors against cancer, namely the natural killer cells and the CD8+ cytotoxic (“killer”) T-cells. So when COVID-vaccinated individuals display sharply reduced Type I interferon, compared with the unvaccinated, this is a staggering level of vulnerability with respect to cancer.

One of those very important functions is G-quadruplex influence over Type I interferon, which in turn affects transcript, replication and genomic stability. The Seneff research team gets deep into the details of these mechanisms, [31] beyond the scope of this paper, and well worth studying as theirs is the most important analysis to date of the enormity of the COVID vaccine assault on overall immune function.

Cancer attacks the body in seven major ways

At the turn of the millenium, Hanahan and Weinberg identified six major “capabilities” of cancer to undergo changes to promote its own growth and immortality. [32] John Boik summarized the seven major categories of attack inflicted by cancer against the body. [33] I discuss those peculiar features of cancer here, and the roles of vitamins D, C and A against most of those routes of attack. [34] Those are damage or destabilization of DNA, and resulting abnormality in gene expression, abnormal cell signaling and other cell-to-cell communication; angiogenesis, which is the formation of new blood vessels to feed a tumor; invasion and metastasis; as well as immune evasion / camouflage.

I will show throughout this paper that the spike protein carries out most of these functions, in promotion of cancer, and to the detriment of the person with a cancer risk or a cancer burden.

Let’s look at DNA damage first.

Spike proteins damage DNA, and that is a major cancer risk

When DNA is damaged, cancer is a risk. [35] Perhaps the most important cancer risk from the COVID vaccines is damage to DNA. The spike protein has been found by Jiang et al to localize to the cell nucleus, where they were found in abundance and to significantly damage DNA and to alter pathways for DNA repair. The cells most abundant in spike proteins showed the most DNA damage, including the DNA in T-cells and B-cells, showing impairment from this damage. [36] The tragic effect of this is that when spike protein hangs around cells long enough, such as with the mRNA perpetually regenerated spike proteins, your cells’ protective mechanisms against cancer would come to a stop. Not surprisingly, given the current political climate, and despite Jiang and Mei’s meticulously reported data, the Viruses journal retracted their paper, and those who retracted it had financial ties to both Moderna and Pfizer. [37] What Jiang and Mei had proven was what pundits denied, but what Pfizer documentation had already proven: that the spike proteins do enter human cells, and cell nuclei, and do affect DNA.

The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein has been found to cause cells to fuse together to form syncytia, which are multi-nucleated, like cancer cells. And this process has been known to cause cancer. [38] This leads to aneuploidy in daughter cells, which is carcinogenic. Aneuploidy is a different number of chromosomes than the normal 46, either excess or deficient. So DNA is damaged in this way as well, on exposure to spike proteins. [39]

The problem is that DNA repair is essential for B and T cell immunity; it is the core of that adaptive immune system’s ability to defend the organism from both cancerous and infectious disease, [40] and DNA repair is essential to achieve the versatility needed by that adaptive immune system to be able to protect the individual from the variety of infectious and cancerous assaults that each of us faces over the course of life. Indeed, these processes are so fundamental to capable immune surveillance that they are necessary for that ubiquitous and even omniscient monitoring ability of the immune system. Both developing and mature B and T cells, as all cells, need to break and then to repair DNA in order to diversify and to be able to achieve the versatility to accomplish this difficult task.[41] [42] But the spike proteins interfere with this highly complex, evolution-trained and essential immune function. All of these sub-cellular activities are highly organized. Spike proteins throw a kind of microscopic shrapnel into that exquisite system. The damage is so great that Pfizer scientists found that COVID-vaccine injected individuals showed lymphocytopenia (lack of T and B cells) measured two weeks after injection of their second dose. [43]

Cell signaling shutdown, with auto-stimulation and immortality

That was a general view of the damage to DNA from spike protein. Here are some of the specific genetic downstream effects from that damage.

Vaccine developers placed higher guanine-cytosine content in the COVID vaccine RNA than is present in either the wild SARS-CoV-2 virus or in human RNA. These tend to stack into dense formations of guanine bases, which form G-quadruplexes (four guanines stacked together). In excess, this has been found to have downstream effects of dysregulating the G4-protein binding system, which among other diseases, has been found to lead to malignant cancers, by dysregulating human RNA. [44] [45]

The spike protein was found to suppress a p53 dependent gene, leading to tumorigenesis. P53 has been named the “guardian of the genome,” because its well-appreciated function is to prevent cells that have mutated or damaged DNA from reproducing. Of all the body’s proteins, p53 is the most effective suppressor of tumors. P53 accomplishes this by influencing a large set of genes that carry out a variety of functions against cancer. [46] The three major functions of p53 is to stop growth, to repair DNA, and to make sure that a cell dies a normal cell death at the end of its life, rather than gain immortality as cancer cells do. [47] Loss of p53 removes these protective effects for the individual against rampant cancer growth, and nearly half of tumors contain mutated p53. [48] Cancer cells that had high amounts of spike proteins had reduced p53 signalling and reduced p53 transcriptional activity, and after this damage, no controls on cancer cell multiplication were observed. [49] In this way, spike proteins removed an important protective feature against cancer, and then the brakes were released, so to speak, on the proliferation of cancer cells.

Of concern in breast cancer is that the spike protein interacts with BRCA, which is a long-recognized tumor suppressor protein. That protein regulates genes that have effects against cancer. [50] Cancers of the breast, uterus, ovaries and prostate are associated with altered BRCA1 activity. BRCA2 mutations are primarily correlated with cancers of the prostate, pancreas as well as melanoma.

Nuclear factor-kappa B (NFκB) is the name of a group of proteins that cause cancer cells to grow and multiply, while lending them immortality, which makes them a threat to surrounding organs. Spike proteins were found to stimulate and to grow lung cancer by using this NFκB pathway. [51]

Angiogenesis

The NFκB proteins discussed in the previous paragraph create another problem that strengthens cancer to the detriment of the individual, and that is that NFκB stimulates angiogenesis, [52] which is the formation of new blood vessels in the vicinity of the tumor; this is thought to be due to the tumor’s fast-paced metabolism demanding sugar and other fuels, as well as the blood vessel super-highways to satisfy all that demand for fuel, so to speak.

Copper is an essential micronutrient, but must be limited, because of its role in angiogenesis, which has been known since the 1960’s. [53] My clinic has long incorporated zinc in our treatments for cancer, and we have tried to limit copper as much as possible to not stimulate angiogenesis, or to act as an obstacle to it. Zinc is a natural rival opponent of copper.

Immune system evasion

Two issues arise with immune system effects of the COVID vaccines. That is, there is a weakening of the immune system, and there is camouflage or evasion of the immune system by the cancer. Tumors have several mechanisms of camouflage or evasion of targeting by the immune system. [54] The problem is that our immune system’s exist to seek and destroy that which is “non-self,” and tumors disguise themselves, in their antigen display and antigen-concealment, as “self.”

COVID vaccination led to a loss of Type I interferon, which is the immune system’s most important non-nutrient biochemical, which initiates a necessary cascade of immune responses in the event of a pathogenic or cancerous attack. As a result, there are downstream disturbances and failures in the regulation of cancer surveillance. [55]

This leads to increased PD-L1 protein expression on cells, which gives cancer a refuge from immune system surveillance, [56] and functions as a distraction to the immune system with regard to cancer. The PD-L1 protein makes it so that cancer is not apprehended by cells of the immune system, due in part to the distraction of spike protein assault, as an invading pathogen that itself must be fought. The PD-L1 protein has been found to be significantly increased in COVID-vaccinated individuals. [57]

However, the other half of the immune system evasion resulting from decreased Type I interferon is this: The immune system, under the influence of Type I interferon, and then major histocompatibility complex (MHC) class 1 antigen displayed on cancer cells, earmarks and targets cancer cells for the immune system to destroy them. [58] But alas, with the loss of type I interferon, there is a consequent loss of MHC antigen presentation by cancer cells, and thus cancer cells escape the immune system undetected.

The direct effects of Type I interferon against cancer include the above functions plus the following: arrest of the cell cycle (checking rampant growth), tendency toward differentiation (which is a benign rather than a malignant development), initiation of apoptosis (normal “on-time” cell death rather than cell immortality), stimulation of natural killer (NK) cells and cancer-killing (CD8+) T-cells activity. [59]

Also, inactivated COVID vaccines have also been correlated with loss of the very important CD8+ T-cells. [60] As Ryan Cole MD describes this problem, the COVID vaccines “put your T-cells to sleep, in a manner that they can’t fight . . . because those T-cells have gone to sleep to a degree that they would normally fight off cancer, and now they’re not there to fight off cancer.” [61] This also appears to be due to loss of Type I interferon.

In my work with cancer patients over the years, it has been an essential part of our work to keep the immune system vigilant to the presence of cancer and reactive against it. This is very difficult to achieve pharmaceutically, because unlike an obviously foreign item such as a virus or pathogenic bacteria, cancer cells appear to be “self,” and are then too often tolerated without opposition by the immune system. So there is not likely to be a synthetic substance that can accomplish that enhancement of immune vigilance. Vaccines, despite their three-century history, have never achieved such a feat.

Vitamin A, on the other hand, has been able to unmask, so to speak, previously hidden cancers from the immune system, and allow those cancer cells and tumors to be targeted for destruction. On the other hand, it has been found that when vitamin A is deficient, colorectal cancer remained camouflaged from the immune system. [62] This likely has been due primarily to vitamin A’s suppression of the procancerous interleukin IL-6. [63]

The topic of IL-6 bears examination because there is evidence that CD-147, which is abundant on the spike protein, promotes TNF-alpha, which is highly carcinogenic, and that in turn strongly promotes IL-6. [64]

Vitamin A has been able to fight cancer on a number of molecular and cellular levels, beyond the scope of this discussion, [65] but its usefulness against IL-6 alone has been worthwhile. For this reason, vitamin A has been an ever-present part of the cancer-treatment protocols at our clinic since 2006, and at far higher doses than are discussed by the FDA. I have often discussed anywhere from 50,000 to 300,000 units per day with patients, depending on the individual and the aspects of their particular cancer. The success of our clinic’s results against cancer are likely due not to any one of the treatments that we use, but to the synergy among well-tolerated and compatible nutrients that have complementary anti-cancer effects.

Metastasis: an invasion of tumors at sites near and far from the primary tumor

When matched with an unexposed control group, the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein was found to stimulate the migration of lung cancer cells through the blood, and subsequent invasion of the basement membrane in a new location in the body. [66] That process is known as metastasis. Not only do cancer cells break off from a primary tumor to then travel in the bloodstream, but weak basement membranes of different bodily organs are fertile ground for a new secondary tumor to gain a foothold. Think of this as for example, an old ceramic coffee cup with a scratched surface in one area. That area is where the coffee will seep into and stain more so than the resilient finish of the rest of the cup. Similarly, the basement membranes that protect our cells are most vulnerable to a new metastasizing cancer cell floating by in the blood at that weak area rather than where the basement membrane is intact and thereby more resilient to such penetration.

My clinic, since 2006, has fought against basement membrane weakness and friability; that is, our clinic has worked to strengthen our cancer patients’ basement membrane resilience against metastatic invasion. Vitamin C is a necessity, not a luxury, for building collagen, which I describe to patients as the equivalent of the bricks and mortar that we are made of, because collagen is by far the most abundant of the proteins in the body. This is never recognized as the reason for vitamin C’s good effect against cancer, but I think it is one of the most important of its mechanisms. There are dozens of types of collagen. Pro-collagen requires vitamin C together with the amino acids lysine and proline. Therefore, we prepare IV nutrient treatments for the cancer patients that include these three ingredients.

Other mechanisms of the COVID vaccines that promote cancer

The above mechanisms of the COVID vaccines against cancer are those with the most available evidence, and historically established as known cancer promoting pathways. However, there is also accumulating evidence of additional cancer causing factors that are new and peculiar to these novel injections.

DNA plasmid contamination of the COVID vaccines

Foreign DNA , which derives from amplification in the bacteria E. coli, contaminates both the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines. This is a different but related problem than the problem of damage to human DNA that I describe above.

Dr. Phillip Buckhaults is a cancer genomics expert. He testifed, in a video that is no longer viewable on YouTube, to the South Carolina Senate on this DNA contamination found in COVID vaccines. He testified: “The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with DNA. It’s not just mRNA. I’m kind of alarmed about the possible consequences of this. . . . OIt could be causing some of the rare but serious side effects like death from cardiac arrest. This DNA can and likely will integrate into the genomic DNA of cells that got transfected with the vaccine mix. It’s different from RNA because it can be permanent. It could cause theoretically a sustained autoimmune attack toward that tissue. It’s also a very real theoretical risk of future cancer in some people. There’s probably about 200 billion pieces of this plasmid DNA in each dose of the vaccine . . . This is a bad idea.” [67]

Kevin McKernan was the first to discover and to write about this problem of plasmid DNA contamination of the COVID vaccines. [68] This was confirmed by Speicher and Rose. [69]

“Why does that matter?” asks pathologist Ryan Cole. “That matters because that [E coli derived plasmid] DNA can park itself in the nucleus of your cell next to your own DNA, and piggy-back a ride into the next generation of cell, into the next generation of cell, etc. So can it become part of the next generation that’s born? It could. . . And this did happen in mouse studies up to four litters of mice.” [70]

Methyl-pseudouridine

N1-Methyl-pseudouridine (M1Ψ) was inserted into the manufactured mRNA used in the COVID vaccines, which produced a genetically-modified RNA, in order to stabilize the spike protein long enough to display it to the immune system, for recognition as a foreign antigen, so that the immune system could make antibodies against the spike proteins. However, this create new problems, including for cancer risk. It turned out that the M1Ψ actually stimulated both cancer growth and metastasis in melanoma. [71] Nevertheless, N1-methyl pseudouridine is naturally occurring in human RNA, comprising 1.4% of all bases in our RNA, and is necessary for our protein synthesis. [72] So I doubt that this is a major cause of cancer, except by the indirect route of giving shelter from immune attack to spike protein production.

Other possible mechanisms of the increased rates of cancer being seen are an alleged contamination of the COVID vaccines by the oncogenic SV40 virus, the CD147 presence in the spike protein favoring the carcinogenic TNF-alpha,[73] as well as possible contribution to cancerous processes by microclots induced by the spike proteins.

Share

Subscribed

PART 3: Ivermectin’s roles against COVID vaccine-induced cancers

Ivermectin is one of the safest drugs in existence. Prior to the COVID era, four billion doses had been given around the world in the half century since its discovery, mostly in equatorial Africa, as ivermectin has excellent effects against tropical parasites. However, it has been crucially important in the COVID era, because spike protein is the main toxin in both naturally acquired COVID infection as well as in the COVID vaccines. In the latter case, those full-length spike proteins are produced by the mRNA template. I had cited studies back in 2021, in my book The Defeat of COVID, in which several teams of researchers had each shown that ivermectin effectively blocks the troublesome ends of the spike protein, both S1 moieties as well as S2, and that humanity would be fortunate if ivermectin blocked even one of those, let alone the much better effect of blocking all three.

Since that time, many more effects of ivermectin against spike protein have been found. Clinical oncologist William Makis MD summarizes fifteen of those. [74]

Essentially, ivermectin is able to not only block most of the worst effects of the mRNA vaccines, but it inhibits tumor growth and arrests the cell cycle of cancer, and in the very well tolerated dose of 2 mg / kg body weight, which is roughly 136 mg dosing for a 150-lb person or 182 mg for a 200-lb person, and is compatible with both conventional chemotherapy as well as nutritional cancer therapies.

Remarkably, ivermectin was shown to oppose cancer stem cells. [75] Those stem cells are what enable cancer to grow and later to recur. I say that it is remarkable, because previously, only vitamin C had been known to kill cancer stem cells, [76] [77] while being harmless to normal cells. [78]

Even at lower doses, studies summarized in the Makis paper have shown tumor reductions of 50% to 85% in some of the most devastating cancers caused by the COVID vaccines, namely glioblastomas, cancers of the colon and breast. In vitro studies found ivermectin’s effect against a wider range of cancers, including the aforementioned, as well as pancreatic, ovarian, prostate and melanoma.

Regarding pancreatic cancer, ivermectin was found to be compatible with, and to outperform, the standard pancreatic chemotherapy drug gemcitabine, in its effect against that cancer. [79]

--

I look forward to observing more and writing more as time goes on about the life-saving effects of ivermectin and other harmless interventions against not only COVID, but against the most common cancers of our time, especially those that have proliferated since the rollout of the COVID vaccines.

Share

Subscribed

Endnotes

[1] B Goodman. A global epidemic of cancer among people younger than 50 could be emerging. Oct 17 2022. CNN. https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/14/health/early-onset-cancer-increase/index.html

[2] T Ugai, N Sasamoto, et al. Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic? Current evidence and future implications. Oct 2022. Nature. 19. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41571-022-00672-8.epdf

[3] Agence France Presse. Cancer surging among under 50’s worldwide, study says. Sep 6 2023. Barron’s. https://www.barrons.com/news/cancer-surging-among-under-50s-worldwide-study-says-326d064e

[4] P Kory, M Pfeiffer. Princess Catherine is one of many more young adults with cancer. Washington Times. Mar 26 2024. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/mar/26/princess-catherine-is-one-of-many-more-young-adult/

[5] Pfizer. APPENDIX 2.2: Cumulative and Interval Summary Tabulation of Serious and Non-Serious Adverse Reactions from Post-Marketing Data Sources BNT162B2 Cumulative Reporting Period: Through 18-JUN-2022. https://www.scribd.com/document/695603788/Pfizer-Phase-III-Appendix-2-2-Cumulative-and-Interval-Summary-of-Serious-and-Non-serious-Adverse-Reactions-From-Post-Marketing-Sources-as-at-21-Jun

[6] W Makis. Video – Oncologist Prof. Dalgleish warns about turbo cancer (April 2024). Jul 2 2024. MakisMD.

COVID Intel - by Dr.William Makis

VIDEO - Oncologist Prof.Dalgleish warns about Turbo Cancer (April 2024)
UK's Top Oncologist Prof Angus Dalgleish, Demands Immediate Ban on mRNA Gene Therapy Over Escalating Turbo Cancer Crisis…

Listen now
4 months ago · 277 likes · 49 comments · Dr. William Makis MD
[7] A Dalgleish. Systematic suppression of the truth – COVID vaccines are linked to cancer and death. Jul 11 2024. Conservative Woman. https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/systematic-suppression-of-the-truth-covid-vaccines-are-linked-to-cancer-and-death/

[8] J Ferguson. Video: Dr. William Makis on turbo cancer: I’ve never seen cancers behaving like this. Oct 13 2023. https://rumble.com/v3ssk1q-must-watch-dr.-william-makis-on-turbo-cancer-ive-never-seen-cancers-behavin.html

[9] R Cole. CV19 vax causes turbo cancer – Dr. Ryan Cole. Oct 2023. Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com https://rumble.com/v3og3mw-cv19-vax-causes-turbo-cancer-dr.-ryan-cole.html

[10] K McKernan, A Kyriakopoulos, et al. Differences in vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 replication derived mRNA: Implications for cell biology and future disease. Nov 24 2021. OSF Preprints. https://osf.io/preprints/osf/bcsa6

[11] G Poland, I Ovsyannikova, et al. SARS-CoV-2 immunity: review and applications to phase 3 vaccine candidates. Oct 13 2020. Lancet. 396 (10262). 1595-1606. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7553736/

[12] Pfizer Worldwide Safety. 5.3.6 Cumulative analysis of post-authorization adverse event reports of P-07302048 (BNT162B2) received through 28 Feb 2021. P. 59. https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf

[13] F Gobbi, D Buonfrate, et al. Antibody response to the BNT162b2 mRNA COVID-19 vaccine in subjects with prior SARS-CoV-2 infection. Feb 28 2021. Viruses. 13 (3). 422. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/3/422

[14] C Brogna, S Cristoni, et al. Detection of recombinant spike protein in the blood of individuals vaccinated against SARS-CoV-2: Possible molecular mechanisms. Aug 31 2023. Proteomics Clin Appl. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/prca.202300048

[15] L Boros, A Kyriakopoulos, et al. Long-lasting, biochemically modified mRNA, and its frameshifted recombinant spike proteins in human tissues and circulation after COVID-19 vaccination. Jun 12 2024. Pharmacol Res Perspect. 12 (3). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11169277/

[16] Z Cui, J Cheng. A systematic review of lymphoma secondary to COVID-19 vaccination. Authorea. Sep 4 2024. https://www.authorea.com/users/827829/articles/1222329-a-systematic-review-of-lymphoma-secondary-to-covid-19-vaccination

[17] Pfizer. APPENDIX 2.2: Cumulative and Interval Summary Tabulation of Serious and Non-Serious Adverse Reactions from Post-Marketing Data Sources BNT162B2 Cumulative Reporting Period: Through 18-JUN-2022. https://www.scribd.com/document/695603788/Pfizer-Phase-III-Appendix-2-2-Cumulative-and-Interval-Summary-of-Serious-and-Non-serious-Adverse-Reactions-From-Post-Marketing-Sources-as-at-21-Jun

[18] H Abramczyk, B Brozek-Pluska, et al. Decoding COVID-19 mRNA vaccine immunometabolism in central nervous system: human brain normal glial and glioma cells by Raman imaging. Mar 2 2022. bioRxiV. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.03.02.482639v1

[19] P Kory. We published an op-ed on the unprecedented rise of cancers in young people and questioned the link to mRNA vaccines. Mar 27 2024. Pierre Kory Medical Musings.

Pierre Kory’s Medical Musings
We Published An Op-Ed On The Unprecedented Rise In Cancer Among Young People And Questioned The Link To mRNA Vaccines
We have now published three Op-Ed’s on the excess mortality and disability rate spikes which have occurred subsequent to the Covid mRNA campaign (and particularly its mandates) in USA Today, Newsweek, and The Hill. We also published an Op-Ed on the massive surge in maternal mortality…
Read more
7 months ago · 497 likes · 206 comments · Pierre Kory, MD, MPA
[20] Pfizer Worldwide Safety. 5.3.6 Cumulative analysis of post-authorization adverse event reports of P-07302048 (BNT162B2) received through 28 Feb 2021. P. 59. https://phmpt.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/reissue_5.3.6-postmarketing-experience.pdf

[21] S Seneff, G Nigh, et al. Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes and microRNAs. Jun 2022. Food Chem Toxicol. 164 (113008). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027869152200206X

[22] A Powell. Cancer keeps coming for the young. Why? Feb 6 2024. The Harvard Gazette. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2024/02/cancer-keeps-coming-for-the-young-why/

[23] The Ethical Skeptic. The state of things pandemic, we have a cancer emergency. Week 38, 2024. https://theethicalskeptic.com/2024/10/02/the-state-of-things-pandemic-week-38-2024/

[24] M Gibo, S Kojima, et al. Increased age-adjusted cancer mortality after the third mRNA-lipid nanoparticle vaccine dose during the COVID-19 pandemic in Japan. Apr 8 2024. [Retracted by Cureus]. https://www.cureus.com/articles/196275-increased-age-adjusted-cancer-mortality-after-the-third-mrna-lipid-nanoparticle-vaccine-dose-during-the-covid-19-pandemic-in-japan#!/

[25] M Searles. Rates of cancer caused by smoking hit record highs. Jul 9 2024. The Telegraph. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/09/rates-of-cancer-caused-by-smoking-hit-record-highs/

[26] R Valdes, Y Perea. SARS-CoV-2 vaccination and the vaccination and the multi-hit hypothesis of oncogenesis. Dec 17 2023. Cureus. https://www.cureus.com/articles/209584-sars-cov-2-vaccination-and-the-multi-hit-hypothesis-of-oncogenesis

[27] P Irrgang, J Gerling. Class switch toward non-inflammatory, spike-specific IgG4 antibodies after repeated SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccination. Dec 22 2022. Science. 8 (79). https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798

[28] V Uversky, E Redwan, et al. IgG4 antibodies induced by repeated vaccination may generate immune tolerance to the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein. May 17 2023. Vaccines (Basel). 11 (5). 991. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10222767/

[29] A Dalgleish. This strong evidence of the link between covid vaccines and cancer can no longer be ignored. Apr 24 2024. https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/this-strong-evidence-of-the-link-between-covid-vaccines-and-cancer-can-no-longer-be-ignored/

[30] K Föhse, B Geckin, et al. The impact of BNT162b2 mRNA vaccine on adaptive and innate immune responses. Oct 2023. Clin Immunol. 255 (109762). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1521661623005259

[31] S Seneff, G Nigh, et al. Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes and microRNAs. Jun 2022. Food Chem Toxicol. 164 (113008). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027869152200206X

[32] D Hanahan, R Weinberg. The hallmarks of cancer. Jan 7 2000. Cell. 100 (1). 57-70. https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S0092-8674(00)81683-9

[33] J Boik. Natural Compounds in Cancer Therapy. Book. Oregon Medical Press. 2001. P. 2.

[34] C Huber. Defeating cancer requires more than one treatment method: An 11-year retrospective case series using multiple nutritional and herbal agents, 2017 update. Dec 30 2017. Nature Works Best Clinic. https://natureworksbest.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/2017-Cancer-treatment-paper.2017.12.30.pdf

[35] T Gemoli, G Auer, et al. Genetic instability and disease prognostication. 2015. Recent Results Cancer Res. 200. 81-94. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7737009/

[36] H Jiang, Y Mei. SARS-CoV-2 spike impairs DNA damage repair and inhibits V(D)J recombination in vitro. Oct 13 2021. [Retracted by Viruses]. 13 (10). 2056. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8538446/

[37] A Syed. Welcome to Gilead. Jul 30 2022.

Arkmedic's blog
Welcome to Gilead
TLDR: A paper was published in October showing how the mRNA vaccines could massively impact ovarian and breast cancer risk. Two scientists linked to the NIH and Pharma conspired to remove it from publication - putting a generation of women at risk…
Read more
2 years ago · 658 likes · 271 comments · Dr Ah Kahn Syed
[38] C Merle, P Lagarde, et al. Acquisition of cancer stem cell capacities after spontaneous cell fusion. Mar 7 2021. BMC Cancer. 21. 241. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7938600/

[39] Y Lazebnik. Cell fusion as a link between the SARS-CoV-2 spike protein, COVID-19 complications and vaccine side effects. Dec 7 2021. Oncotarget. 12 (25). 2476-2488. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8664391

[40] J Bednarski, B Sleckman. At the intersection of DNA damage and immune responses. Apr 2019. Nat Rev Immunol. 19 (4). 231-242. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6438741/

[41] A Ciccia, S Elledge. The DNA damage response: Making it safe to play with knives. Oct 22 2010. Mol Cell. 40 (2). 179-204. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2988877/

[42] B Helmink, B Sleckman. The response to and repair of RAG-mediated DNA double-stranded breaks. Jan 3 2012. Annu Rev Immunol. 30. 175-202. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4038028/

[43] E Walsh, R Frenck, et al. Safety and immunogenicity of two RNA-based Covid-19 vaccine candidates. Oct 14 2020. NEJM. 383. 2439-2450. https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJMoa2027906

[44] A Wolfe, K Singh, et al. RNA G-quadruplexes cause eIF4A-dependent oncogene translation in cancer. Sep 4 2014. Nature. 513 (7516). 65-70. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4492470/

[45] K McKernan, A Kyriakopoulos, et al. Differences in vaccine and SARS-CoV-2 replication derived mRNA: Implications for cell biology and future disease. Nov 24 2021. OSF Preprints. https://osf.io/preprints/osf/bcsa6

[46] E Kastenhuber, S Lowe. Putting p53 in context. Sep 7 2017. Cell. 170 (6). 1062-1078. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5743327/

[47] S Read. Human Molecular Genetics 2. Chapter 18. 1999. Cancer Genetics. Quoted in https://www.bioinformatics.org/p53/introduction.html

[48] S Zhang, L Carlsen, et al. Advanced strategies for therapeutic targeting of wild-type and mutant p53 in cancer. Feb 28 2022. Biomolecules. 12 (4). 548. https://www.mdpi.com/2218-273X/12/4/548

[49] S Zhang, W El-Deiry. SARS-CoV-2 spike S2 subunit inhibits p53 activation of p21 (WAFI), TRAIL death receptor DR5 and MDM2 proteins in cancer cells. Apr 15 2024. BioRxiv. https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.04.12.589252v1.full

[50] N Singh, A Singh. S2 subunit of SARS-nCoV-2 interacts with tumor suppressor protein p53 and BRCA: an in silico study. Oct 2020. Transl Oncol. 13 (10). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1936523320303065

[51] M Kim, J Kim, et al. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein induces lung cancer migration and invasion in a TLR2-dependent manner. Sep 13 2023. Cancer Comm (Lond). 44 (2). 273-277. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10876188/

[52] S Huang, C Pettaway, et al. Blockade of NF-kappaB activity in human prostate cancer cells is associated with suppression of angiogenesis, invasion and metastasis. Jul 2001. Oncogene. 20 (31). 4188-4197. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11464285/

[53] M Ziche, J Jones, et al. Role of Prostaglandin E-1 and copper in angiogenesis. Aug 1982. J Natl Cancer Inst. 69 (2). 475-482. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6180207/

[54] D Vinay, E Ryan, et al. Immune evasion in cancer: mechanistic basis and therapeutic strategies. Dec 2015. Seminars in Cancer Biol. 35. S185-S198. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1044579X1500019X

[55] S Seneff, G Nigh, et al. Innate immune suppression by SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccinations: The role of G-quadruplexes, exosomes and microRNAs. Jun 2022. 164. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S027869152200206X

[56] A Dalgleish. This strong evidence of the link between covid vaccines and cancer can no longer be ignored. Apr 24 2024. https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/this-strong-evidence-of-the-link-between-covid-vaccines-and-cancer-can-no-longer-be-ignored/

[57] L Loacker, J Kimpel, et al. Increased PD-L1 surface expression on peripheral blood granulocytes and monocytes after vaccination with SARS-CoV-2 mRNA or vector vaccine. Oct 18 2022. Clin Chem and Lab Med. 61 (1). https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2022-0787/html

[58] R Heise, P Amann, et al. Interferon alpha signalling and its relevance for the upregulatory effect of transporter proteins associated with antigen processing (TAP) in patients with malignant melanoma. Jan 6 2016. PLoS One. 11 (1). https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4703378/

[59] W Schneider, M Chevillotte, et al. Interferon-stimulated genes: A complex web of host defenses. Feb 6 2014. Annu Rev Immunol. 32. 513-545. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4313732/

[60] J Liu, J Wang, et al. Comprehensive investigations revealed consistent pathophysiological alterations after vaccination with COVID-19 vaccines. Oct 26 2021. Nature. 7 (99). https://www.nature.com/articles/s41421-021-00329-3.pdf

[61] R Cole. CV19 vax causes turbo cancer – Dr. Ryan Cole. Oct 2023. Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com https://rumble.com/v3og3mw-cv19-vax-causes-turbo-cancer-dr.-ryan-cole.html

[62] P Huynh, E Beswick, et al. Impaired vitamin A metabolism in colorectal cancer stromal cells: Role in tumor immune evasion. May 2013. Gastroenterology. 338. S-71. https://www.gastrojournal.org/article/S0016-5085(13)60262-0/pdf

[63] R Villéger, M Chulkina, et al. Disruption of retinol-mediated IL-6 expression in colon cancer-associated fibroblasts: new perspectives on the role of vitamin A metabolism. Apr 26 2023. Oncotarget. 14. 377-381. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10132993/

[64] P Chambers. The CD147 epitope on SARS-CoV-2 and the spike in cancer, autoimmunity and organ fibrosis. Nov 3 2023. Qeios. https://www.qeios.com/read/S86J75

[65] C Applegate, M Lane. Role of retinoids in the prevention and treatment of colorectal cancer. Oct 15 2015. World J Gastrointest Oncol. 7 (10). 184-203. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4606174/

[66] M Kim, J Kim, et al. The SARS-CoV-2 spike protein induces lung cancer migration and invasion in a TLR2-dependent manner. Sep 13 2023. Cancer Comm (Lond). 44 (2). 273-277. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10876188/

[67] P Buckhaults. Testimony before the South Carolina Senate. Sep 14 2023.

Alexander MAGA Trump news; fake PCR created non-pandemic
Cancer Genomics Expert Dr. Phillip Buckhaults Testifies to the SC Senate on the DNA Contamination Found in mRNA COVID Vaccines; "The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasmid DNA, it's not just
https://twitter.com/i/status/1703544942004478251…
Read more
a year ago · 85 likes · 48 comments · Dr. Paul Alexander
[68] K McKernan, Y Helbert, et al. Sequencing of bivalent Moderna and Pfizer mRNA vaccines reveals nanogram to microgram quantities of expression vector dsDNA per dose. Open PDF from: https://files.osf.io/v1/resources/b9t7m/providers/osfstorage/64348a3848245638fab48a50?action=download&direct=&version=5

[69] D Speicher, J Rose, et al. DNA fragments detected in monovalent and bivalent Pfizer BioNTeach and Moderna modRNA COVID-19 vaccines from Ontario, Canada: Exploratory dose response relationship with serious adverse events. Oct 19 2023. OSF Preprints. https://osf.io/preprints/osf/mjc97

[70] R Cole. CV19 vax causes turbo cancer – Dr. Ryan Cole. Oct 2023. Greg Hunter’s USAWatchdog.com https://rumble.com/v3og3mw-cv19-vax-causes-turbo-cancer-dr.-ryan-cole.html

[71] A Rubio-Casillas, D Cowley, et al. Review: N1-methyl pseudouridine (M1 Ψ): Friend or foe of cancer. May 2024. Intl J Biol Macromolecules. 267 (1). https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0141813024022323

[72] M Penzo, L Montanaro. Turning uridines around: Role of RNA pseudouridylation in ribosome biogenesis and ribosomal function. Jun 5 2018. Biomolecules. 8 (2). 38. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6023024/

[73] P Chambers. The CD147 epitope on SARS-CoV-2 and the spike in cancer, autoimmunity and organ fibrosis. Nov 3 2023. Qeios. https://www.qeios.com/read/S86J75

[74] W Makis. Ivermectin and cancer: it has at least 15 anti-cancer mechanisms of action. Can ivermectin treat COVID-19 mRNA vaccine-induced turbo cancers? 9 ivermectin papers reviewed. Oct 2 2023.

COVID Intel - by Dr.William Makis
IVERMECTIN and CANCER, it has at least 15 anti-cancer mechanisms of action. Can Ivermectin Treat COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancers? - 9 Ivermectin papers reviewed
Papers reviewed…
Read more
a year ago · 483 likes · 133 comments · Dr. William Makis MD
[75] A Samy, M Hussein, et al. Eprinomectin: a derivative of ivermectin suppresses growth and metastatic phenotypes of prostate cancer cells by targeting the beta-catenin signaling pathway. May 12 2023. J Cancer Res Clin Onc. 149. 9085-9104. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00432-023-04829-5

[76] L Hongwei, C Wang, et al. Vitamin C preferentially kills cancer stem cells in hepatocellular carcinoma via SVCT-2. Jan 8 2018. Nature. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41698-017-0044-8

[77] Y Seyama, K Sudo, et al. Ascorbic acid predominantly kills cancer stem cell-like cells in the hepatocellular carcinoma cell line Li-7 and is more effective at low cell density and in small speroids. May 21 2024. 709. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006291X24003528

[78] Q Chen, M Espey, et al. Pharmacologic ascorbic acid concentrations selectively kill cancer cells; Action as a pro-drug to deliver hydrogen peroxide to tissues. Sep 12 2005. 102 (38). https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1224653/

[79] D Lee, H Kang, et al. Ivermectin and gemcitabine combination treatment induces apoptosis of pancreatic cancer cells via mitochondrial dysfunction. Aug 25 2022 Frontiers Pharmacol. 13-2022. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2022.934746/full

LIKE
COMMENT
RESTACK

Originally posted on
The Defeat Of COVID
The Defeat Of COVID
Dr. Colleen Huber
Subscribe
Humanity is challenged to transcend enslavement to, and traumatic fear of, microbes. COVID is the crucible. As we have learned to defeat SARS-CoV-2, we have learned broadly applicable strategies to defeat other microbes.

© 2024 Dr Tess Lawrie, MBBCh, PhD
EbMCsquared, First Floor, Laura Place, Bath, Somerset, BA2 4BL

与Tess Lawrie博士的更好的方式，从Covid Tess Lawrie，MBBCH，博士博士，博士，博士博士24·一种更好的方法与Tess Lawrie Ivermectin博士作为抗癌剂后疫苗接种的作用很好 Covid射击癌链接 - 了解他们打败他们让我们探索Covid疫苗导致癌症和反击DR战略的各种方式。 Colleen Huber Oct 24在APP第1部分阅读：问题第2部分：Covid疫苗诱发癌症和自然疗法的机制逆转了这些第3部分：Ivermectin对Covid疫苗诱发的癌症的作用---第1部分：第1部分：陈述 [1] [2] [3]美国癌症协会承认，来自2020年前的年轻人的癌症死亡率翻了一番。 [4] PFizer的2022年关于Covid-疫苗的安全报告揭示了注射后数百种类型的癌症。 [5]至6月2022日，辉瑞下的3,711例在该标题下报告。 肿瘤科医生注意到2020年前癌症的癌症差异到现在的英国临床肿瘤学家安格尔士达格利文，其中一个令人震惊的肿瘤科学研究人员，看到了令人惊叹的癌症患者，长期缓解，谁“。 。 。 随后存在在应缓存时非常激进的复发。 可悲的是，我还没有找到患者没有收到GP或医院的Covid加油疫苗的情况，因为它们是“危险的。”[6]他对世界各地的癌症死亡发展的评论是“Covid疫苗与癌症和死亡有关 [7]加拿大肿瘤科医生在职业生涯中诊断出超过20,000名癌症患者的William Makis MD说：“我从未见过这样的东西。 。 。 。 我从未见过阶段的四个乳腺癌在二十几岁的女性中呈现。 我从未见过四阶段的四分之一的冒号癌，他们在二十多岁和三十年代中献出男性和女性。 。 。这些癌症总是在第四阶段出现，他们总会在几个月内杀死它们，而且总是不到一年。 。 。 “涡轮增压癌”是人们提出的术语来描述疫苗的伴随苍白的这些癌症的极具侵略性，而这些癌症的表现得非常不同，与我在职业生涯中见过的任何东西不同。 。 。 。 这些癌症的其他特征是它们对常规治疗非常耐受; 它们耐辐射治疗，它们耐化疗，患者似乎与常规治疗似乎非常差。 肿瘤科医生真的被困惑，他们不知道该怎么办。“[8]瑞安科尔·米德，前者是梅奥诊所，专门从事淘汰后检查。 他批评了Covid疫苗，因为其他危险，免疫系统的严重损害以及对抗癌症的能力的损害。 他说“人们问，”这些镜头会导致癌症吗？ 嗯，它们引起免疫抑制。 它们导致免疫系统的破坏和大约统计，通常是对抗癌症的影响。 所以这就是我们反对的东西。 。 。 。 当我旅行世界并与医生交谈。 。 。 他们在年龄段中看到癌症，他们以前从未见过，并且在CV19射击的推出后发生了。 。 。 在2021年，癌症增加了约6％或7％。 在2022年，癌症中平均水平高出35％。 。 。 。 一直清楚他们的癌症，2,3,5,10甚至20年的人，在镜头后，他们的癌症积极回归，估计数为1700万人，他们已经死于这些mRNA注射。 。 。 。 这是一个沉默的大屠杀，这就是令人难过的事情。 人们被胁迫进行实验，医疗机构否认死亡。 。 。“ [9]从辉瑞和现代发出的尖峰蛋白，每个辉芬疫苗中mRNA剂量的量为13万亿mRNA分子，并且在现代是40万亿分子，每个分子在其自身阳离子脂纳米粒子中包裹。 这些数字由两个疫苗中的每种疫苗的分子量决定。 [10]将这些数字放在角度，人体中有大约30万万亿细胞。 所以人们可以想象在整个身体中最大无处不在的分布的影响，以大致一对一的有效载荷单元与人体细胞的一对一或一对三比率。 这两个疫苗中的每一个编码了整个尖峰蛋白，并且每种脂质纳米颗粒（LNP）包膜mRNA代码用于刺蛋白。 [11]在推出之前，未对致癌物质或遗传毒性（DNA损伤潜力）进行致癌性或遗传毒性（DNA损伤潜力）的辉乳疫苗，因为我们可以从PFizer自己的文件到FDA：[12]全球安全。 5.3.6通过2821年2月28日收到的P-07302048（BNT162B2）的授权后不良事件报告的累积分析.P.59. https://phmpt.org/wp-content/upl 甚至在接种后三周内，刺激蛋白的抗体比在未接受的疫苗和先前的剖腹产中测量的刺激蛋白在Covid接种中测量高达100倍。 虽然有些人可以将这些抗体解释为对穗蛋白的更强烈的免疫应答的符号，但它还表明在该已知的毒素的体内具有更大和/或更大的影响。 因此，重要的是要充分欣赏疫苗接种的尖峰蛋白负担，以便能够找到逆转风险的最佳策略和这种毒素的损害。 迄今为止，本文探讨了穗蛋白癌症风险的机制。 我们了解这些过程越好，我们越好，我们将能够抵御患者和公众，以反对即将到来的未来几年的记录癌症率。 应该注意的是，在Covid病毒感染后，尖峰蛋白很少出现超过20天，但在VICC之后的69至187天中，在苍白的疫苗中已经观察到重组，即疫苗产生的染色蛋白质 [14]特定研究在187天停止，而不是观察到不再观察到尖峰蛋白的点，这意味着在休眠的人的身体中可能存在较长的尖峰存在。 这种持久性包括在脂质体中包膜的注射mRNA以及其衍生物刺蛋白。 [15]这是有足够的时间促进癌症促进途径，并抑制免疫防御对癌症的开始。 正如我在其他论文中讨论的那样，它肯定有足够的心血管和心脏伤害的时间，以及违反血脑屏障。 在北半球的峰值摄取是2021年的春天。因此，穗蛋白在接种疫苗的个体的尸体中是相当长的时间，而发起这样的尖刺蛋白产生的脆弱mRNA在几周后，有效载荷 Covid疫苗疫苗疫苗后癌症风险的流行病学与以下癌症的发病率增加相关。 淋巴瘤与mRNA注射密切相关，即45.7％的学习淋巴瘤患者在注射后30天内在30天内发育淋巴瘤，而不是以后。 [16]这是一种令人惊讶的是，这是尿道后疫苗的主要癌症之一，因为淋巴系统的T和B细胞不仅快速再现，而且作为废弃物，淋巴结是最早的身体组织中的含量 由于它们对周围的脑组织的易于使用，以及他们在血脑屏障背后的大多数潜在治疗中的屏蔽，胶质母细胞瘤是可生成的癌症。 辉瑞先生在6月2022日更新中报道了数百次脑癌症和癌前的条件。 [17]在胶质瘤患者的后Covid疫苗中发现了减少细胞色素C水平，这似乎是由于氧化磷酸化受损并随后线粒体中的下ATP。 [18]卵巢和乳腺癌的发病率增加，由于Covid疫苗卷展栏，可能是由于它们的p53撞击，但Covid疫苗已经破坏了这种P53基因，“基因组的守护者”保护DNA的DNA，我讨论 自Covid疫苗以来，结直肠癌具有增殖，且积极的年轻年龄，并且是前所未有的年轻年龄。 William Dahut是美国癌症协会的首席科学官员。 他说，“结直肠癌也呈现出更具侵略性的疾病和较大的肿瘤诊断; 对待难以理解。“ 关于青年结直肠癌的陡峭增加，哈佛医学教授Kimmie Ng评论“最陡峭的升高在最年轻的人，20岁及30岁的人。” 虽然以上是一些最突出的癌症，但由于Covid疫苗的推出，没有观察到患有常见癌症的常见癌症。 所有已列在辉瑞文档中。 [20]由美国疾病控制（CDC）和食品和药物管理局（FDA）监督的报告系统（VAERS）的疫苗不良事件报告系统（VAERS）是关于疫苗效应不利疫苗效应的国家监测系统，适用于所有疫苗 对于2021年的癌症的所有条目，研究人员发现，对于癌症相关的任何搜索条件的所有条目中的所有条目中的96％是特定于Covid疫苗，而所有其他种类的疫苗只有4％。 [21]全球，癌症诊断和总过量死亡开始在Covid疫苗的推出后开始上升，然后在助推器之后加速。 比较年龄的发现比通常受癌症的影响最大。 [22]

CDC data on cancer mortality summarized below by The Ethical Skeptic shows a sharp inflection point in vastly increased cancer mortality (those with cancer listed as cause of death) in the United States beginning right at the time of the COVID vaccines rollout, the last week of December 2020. In the following graph of cancer mortality in 0 to 54 year olds, the inflection point of when cancer began to increase beyond yearly averages is quite clear, beginning the week after December 14, 2020, when the vaccine first became available. [23]因为该图表显示偏离趋势而不是实际数字，所以曲线通常低于2018 - 2020，因为癌症死亡率略低于之前的速率。 我的其他观察是，疫苗卷展览后的第一穗可能反映那些已经患有过量癌症的人，现在通过疫苗的毒性恶化，在这种情况下，癌症将是死亡证明中列出的违约原因。 然而，从2021年到现在的癌症死亡率趋势的持续趋势是一个非常强大的指标，即2020年代初期的全国健康影响事件发生了2021年初导致急剧增加，为我们只知道一个人。 所有以下数据都来自CDC报告的数据。 道德怀疑论者。 事情的状态大流行，我们有癌症紧急情况。 第38周，2024. https://theeveLicalskeptic.com/2024/10/02/the-state-of-things-pandemy-从国家重要统计数据的整个日本人口研究 [24]根据不舒服的数据，本文的政治上不正确的调查结果赢得了Cureus期刊的撤回。 至少80％的日本人群患有两种剂量的mRNA疫苗，68％的人口已接受第三剂。 在这项研究日本人口的研究中，主要癌症在Covid疫苗卷发布后增加卵巢癌，白血病，前列腺，唇/口腔/咽部和胰腺癌。 乳腺癌起初浸出，然后也转移到过量的死亡率，虽然最后没有统计显着性。 英国癌症的暴涨病例归因于吸烟，[25]虽然近几十年来吸烟在英国急剧下降，如世界其他地方。 目前，十三个新癌症归因于主流媒体吸烟，这是非常不可能的。 癌症对身体的攻击是多方面的。 他们是如此复杂，研究人员valdes和佩雷尔写：“这种惊人的复杂性[癌症的许多效果]在向所有患有癌症（或以前癌症病史）的人提供癌症时致死谨慎，以接受Covid-19初级疫苗系列加上额外的增强剂量。” [26]到此我会补充：你是一个物种的成员，如人类，其中癌症已经是每年在Covid疫苗前的第一个或第二次死亡原因？ 在这种情况下，漏洞足以让所有人类一定要避免Covid疫苗，因为我将在下面详细展示。 股票订阅第2部分：Covid疫苗诱导癌症和自然疗法的机制是逆转这些IgG4的抗体是伴有苍白的疫苗接种的抗体，许多次数高于未接种的疫苗。 [27]诸如IgG型免疫球蛋白的抗体易于通过血液实验室测试，并且它们易于理解。 当一些刺激物 - 致病微生物或过敏原 - 进入体内，然后我们使反应抗体作为新产生的士兵分子来对抗入侵者。 这是B细胞产生的免疫球蛋白抗体的作用。 因此，当研究人员发现Covid接种的巨大差距和IgG4计数中的未接种率逢时，人们兴奋地兴奋，记者写了Stark发现。 IgG4被认为与入侵微生物的耐受性有关，并且认为这会分散或将免疫系统监测的重点分散或转移远离更炎症，良好的炎症性的，所以说IgG1和IgG3，从而远离 在其他蛋白质和微生物中特别耐受不属于体内的SARS-COV-2穗蛋白质的耐受性，并且这种具有与尖刺蛋白的这种自满的免疫反应可以促进SARS-COV-2的感染和复制而没有反对 [28]但是所有这些假设都存在一个问题和所有的关注。 IgG4是下游效果，并且免疫系统细胞的消化不良组分的产物，这是由B细胞制成的小部分，其仅占每100,000个血细胞中的0.005％=五个。 也就是说，IgG4不太可能对Covid风险，其他微生物风险或癌症风险产生多大影响。 但它可以作为血液实验室中的一种方便的标记，其给出了潜在的免疫系统的线索更加重要。 相反，Covid疫苗诱导的癌症风险最重要的发现是完全不同的，这是I型干扰素的丧失，以及干扰素信号传导的丧失，在携带的植物中，这是对癌症的许多下游免疫功能的悲剧性丧失 这两种现象的重要性的差异是IgG4非常罕见，远远下游，而I型干扰素是整个免疫系统中央协调，在健康的人中无处不在，并且在疫苗的苍白疫苗中显着降低。 这是Covid接种疫苗面临的中央豁免伤害。 这两种现象都涉及英国临床肿瘤学家安格斯Dalgleish，他是CD-4受体的共同发现。 虽然与美国参议员罗恩约翰逊发言时，Dalgleish博士在癌症方面分享了他对Covid疫苗的担忧，是Covid疫苗助剂抑制免疫系统的T细胞反应和免疫辊 [29]辉瑞生物疫苗专门发现显着减少I型干扰素，也称为干扰素α。 [30]这导致多种病变的巨大下游效应，传染病和恶性癌症。 I型Interferon，身体最重要的细胞因子，不容低估其对癌症的影响，这是由于阵列巨大的抗癌作用。 其中一些效果是捕获细胞周期，细胞凋亡或天然细胞死亡，以及刺激我们最大的患有癌症的战士，即天然杀伤细胞和CD8 +细胞毒性（“杀手”）T细胞。 因此，当Covid接种疫苗的个体显示器急剧减少I型干扰素时，与未被取消相比，这是关于癌症的脆弱性的惊人水平。 其中一个非常重要的功能是G-Quadreplex对I型干扰素的影响，这反过来影响转录物，复制和基因组稳定性。 SENEFF研究团队深入了解这些机制的细节，超出了本文的范围，符合他们的巨大学习是迄今为止对整体免疫功能的巨大疫苗侵犯巨大的最重要分析。 癌症在千禧年的七种主要方面攻击身体，哈纳山和Weinberg确定了六个主要的“能力”，以促进其自身的增长和不朽的变化。 [32] John Boik总结了癌症对身体造成的七大类攻击。 [33]我讨论了这里癌症的特殊特征，以及维生素D，C和A对抗大多数攻击途径的作用。 [34]这些是DNA的损伤或稳定化，并导致基因表达的异常，细胞信号传导异常和其他细胞到细胞连通; 血管生成，是新血管的形成喂养肿瘤; 入侵和转移; 以及免疫逃避/伪装。 我将在本文中展示穗蛋白在促进癌症中的大部分功能，以及患有癌症风险或癌症负担的人的损害。 让我们先看看DNA伤害。 穗蛋白损伤DNA，这是DNA受损时的主要癌症风险，癌症是一种风险。 [35]也许来自Covid疫苗的最重要的癌症风险是DNA的损害。 江等人发现了穗蛋白，以定位于细胞核，其中它们被发现丰富，并且显着损伤DNA并改变DNA修复的途径。 穗蛋白最丰富的细胞显示出最多的DNA损伤，包括T细胞和B细胞中的DNA，显示出免受这种损伤的损伤。 [36]这的悲剧效果是，当穗蛋白围绕足够长的细胞悬挂时，例如与捕获的mRNA永久再生的尖峰蛋白，你的细胞对癌症的保护机制将停止。 鉴于目前的政治气候，鉴于江和美九的经纪人报告的数据，病毒期刊缩回了他们的论文，撤回其与现代人和辉瑞公司的财务关系有关的病毒期刊。 [37]江和梅已证明是Pundits否认的，但辉瑞文件已经证明是什么：尖峰蛋白确实进入人体细胞和细胞核，并影响DNA。 已发现SARS-COV-2穗蛋白引起细胞融合在一起以形成一个像癌细胞一样的癌细胞。 并已知该过程引起癌症。 [38]这导致子细胞中的一种非倍性，即致癌物质。 非整倍性是不同数量的染色体，而不是正常的46，过量或缺乏。 因此，DNA也在这种方式损坏，在暴露于穗蛋白质上。 问题是DNA修复对于B和T细胞免疫是必不可少的; 它是自适应免疫系统保护癌症和传染病的生物体能力的核心，[40]和DNA修复对于实现自适应免疫系统能够保护个人免受传染病和癌症侵犯的各种所需的功能是必不可少的 实际上，这些过程是能干的免疫监测所必需的，因为它们是免疫系统普遍存在的甚至无所不在的监测能力所必需的。 作为所有细胞的开发和成熟的B和T细胞都需要断裂，然后修复DNA以便多样化并能够实现这一艰难任务的多功能性。[41] [42]但穗蛋白干扰了这种高度复杂的，演化训练的和必需的免疫功能。 所有这些亚细胞活动都是高度组织的。 穗蛋白扔了一种微观的弹片进入该精致的系统。 辉瑞科学家发现，注射第二剂后两周测量淋巴细胞病患者患者淋巴细胞病（缺乏T和B细胞），损坏是如此之大。 [43]细胞信号关断，具有自动刺激和不死，这是对来自尖峰蛋白的DNA损伤的一般视图。 以下是来自该损坏的一些特定遗传下游效应。 疫苗开发人员在Covid疫苗RNA中放置更高的鸟嘌呤 - 胞嘧啶含量，而不是在野生SARS-COV-2病毒或人RNA中存在。 这些倾向于堆叠成致密的鸟嘌呤碱基，其形成g-四翻转（四个岩石堆叠在一起）。 已经发现，已经发现，已经发现，在其他疾病中，已经发现失败的G4蛋白结合系统的下游效果是通过失衡人的RNA导致恶性癌症。 发现穗蛋白被发现抑制p53依赖性基因，导致肿瘤发生。 P53已被命名为“基因组的监护人”，因为其良好的良好功能是防止具有突变或受损DNA再现的细胞。 在所有身体的蛋白质中，P53是最有效的肿瘤抑制剂。 P53通过影响对癌症各种功能进行各种功能的大组基因来实现这一点。 [46] P53的三种主要功能是停止增长，修复DNA，并确保细胞在其生命结束时死于正常的细胞死亡，而不是通过癌细胞进行不朽。 [47] P53的损失除去对猖獗的癌症生长的这些保护作用，近一半的肿瘤含有突变的P53。 [48]具有大量穗蛋白的癌细胞减少了P53信号传导和降低的P53转录活性，并且在这种损伤后，未观察到对癌细胞繁殖的对照。 通过这种方式，尖峰蛋白除去了癌症的重要保护特征，然后释放制动器，以便在癌细胞的增殖上讲话。 乳腺癌的关注是穗蛋白与BRCA相互作用，这是一种长识别的肿瘤抑制蛋白。 该蛋白质调节对癌症产生影响的基因。 [50]乳腺癌，子宫，卵巢和前列腺的癌症与改变的BRCA1活性有关。 BRCA2突变主要与前列腺，胰腺和黑素瘤的癌症相关。 核因子-Kappa（NFκB）是一组蛋白质的名称，导致癌细胞生长和繁殖，同时贷款不死，这使得它们对周围器官的威胁。 发现刺激蛋白刺激并通过使用该NFκB途径来生长肺癌。 [51]血管生成在前段中讨论的NFκB蛋白在损害中造成癌症的另一个问题，即NFκB刺激血管生成，[52]是v中的新血管的形成 这被认为是由于肿瘤的快节奏的新陈代谢要求糖和其他燃料，以及血管超级高速公路，以满足对燃料的所有需求，从而说话。 铜是必需的微量营养素，但必须有限，因为它在血管生成中的作用，这是自1960年代以来已知的。 [53]我的诊所在我们的癌症治疗中长期掺入锌，我们试图尽可能地限制铜，而不是刺激血管生成，或者作为它的障碍。 锌是铜的自然竞争对手。 免疫系统逃避两次出现了Covid疫苗的免疫系统影响。 也就是说，免疫系统存在弱化，并且癌症存在免疫系统的伪装或逃避。 肿瘤具有若干伪装机制或免疫系统靶向的厌恶。 问题是，我们的免疫系统存在寻求和摧毁“非自我”和肿瘤伪装自己的抗原展示和抗原隐藏，如“自我” Covid疫苗接种导致I型干扰素的丧失，这是免疫系统最重要的非营养生化，其在致病或癌症袭击发生时引发了必要的免疫应答。 因此，在调节癌症监测中存在下游障碍和失败。 这导致增加PD-L1蛋白表达对细胞，这使癌症免受免疫系统监测，[56]和对免疫系统的分心作用，关于癌症。 PD-L1蛋白使得免疫系统的细胞不能被免疫系统的细胞造成的癌症，因为穗蛋白攻击的分心，作为本身必须被争夺的入侵病原体。 已发现PD-L1蛋白在Covid接种的个体中显着增加。 然而，Inte Interferon型降低导致的免疫系统逃离的另外一半是：免疫系统，在I型干扰素的影响下，然后在癌细胞上显示的主要组织相容性综合体（MHC）1级抗原（MHC）1级抗原 但是，随着I型干扰素的缺失，随着癌细胞的随之而来的MHC抗原呈现，因此癌细胞逃离免疫系统未被发现。 I型患者对癌症的直接效果包括上述功能加上以下内容：逮捕细胞周期（检查猖獗的生长），分化的趋势（这是一种良性而不是恶性肿瘤），对细胞凋亡（正常“准时”细胞死亡而非细胞IMM 此外，灭活的Covid疫苗也与非常重要的CD8 + T细胞的损失相关。 [60]随着Ryan Cole MD描述了这个问题，Covid疫苗“将您的T细胞放入睡眠状态，以便他们不能打击。 。 。 因为那些T细胞已经睡到了一定程度，他们通常会争夺癌症，现在他们不是在那里争夺癌症。“ [61]这也似乎是由于I型干扰素的损失。 在多年来，在患有癌症患者的工作中，我们一直是我们工作的重要组成部分，以使免疫系统对癌症的存在并反应它的反应。 这是非常困难的药学上，因为与病毒或病原细菌等显然外来物品不同，癌细胞似乎是“自我”，然后经常被免疫系统耐受而不会对抗。 因此，不太可能成为一种合成物质，可以实现这种免疫力的增强。 尽管他们三世纪的历史，但疫苗从来没有实现这样的壮举。 另一方面，维生素A能够揭开，所以向免疫系统发言，先前隐藏的癌症，并允许这些癌细胞和肿瘤靶向破坏。 另一方面，已经发现，当维生素A不足时，结直肠癌仍然伪装于免疫系统。 [62]这可能主要是归因于维生素A的抑制，抑制了对ProCaIngers白细胞介素IL-6。 [63] IL-6的话题是考试，因为有证据表明CD-147丰富的尖峰蛋白质，促进TNF-α，这是高致癌的，并且又强烈促进IL-6。 [64]维生素A能够在许多分子和细胞水平上对抗癌症，超出本讨论的范围，但仅仅对IL-6的用途是值得的。 因此，自2006年以来，维生素A一直是我们诊所的癌症治疗方案的一部分，并且比FDA讨论的剂量远远高。 我经常与患者每天50,000到300,000单位讨论，具体取决于个人癌症的各个方面。 我们诊所对癌症的结果的成果可能是由于我们使用的任何一种治疗，而是在具有互补和抗癌作用的耐受性和相容的营养素中的协同作用。 转移：当与未暴露的对照组相匹配时，侵袭在初级肿瘤附近，远离原发性肿瘤的肿瘤，发现SARS-COV-2刺蛋白刺激肺癌细胞通过血液的迁移，以及随后的地下室侵犯 [66]该过程称为转移。 癌细胞不仅从原发性肿瘤中脱落然后在血液中行进，但不同体内器官的弱基底膜是一种新的继发性肿瘤，以获得立足点。 想到这一点，例如一个旧陶瓷咖啡杯，其中一个区域在一个区域。 该地区是咖啡将在咖啡渗入并染色的地方，而不是杯子其余部分的弹性结束。 类似地，保护我们细胞的基底膜最容易受到在弱区域的血液中漂浮的新转移癌细胞，而不是基底膜完整的血液，从而更具弹性的渗透。 我的诊所自2006年以来，对地下室膜的弱点和脆性进行了斗争; 也就是说，我们的诊所已致力于加强癌症患者的地下膜膜弹性免受转移性侵袭。 维生素C是必需品，而不是建筑胶原蛋白的奢侈品，我向患者描述为我们所做的砖和砂浆，因为胶原蛋白是迄今为止体内最丰富的蛋白质。 这从未被认为是维生素C对癌症良好影响的原因，但我认为这是其机制中最重要的原因。 有几种类型的胶原蛋白。 Pro-Collagen要求维生素C与氨基酸赖氨酸和脯氨酸一起。 因此，我们为包括这三种成分的癌症患者制备IV营养处理。 促进癌症的Covid疫苗的其他机制是Covid疫苗免受癌症的上述机制是具有最可用证据的患者，并且历史地确定为已知的癌症促进途径。 然而，还有累积额外癌症的证据，导致这些新的注射新的和特殊的因素。 DNA质粒污染的Covid疫苗外国DNA，它来自细菌大肠杆菌中的扩增，污染辉瑞和现代疫苗。 这是一个不同但相关的问题，而不是我上面描述的人类DNA的损害问题。 Phillip Buckhaults博士是一种癌症基因组学专家。 他在一个不再在youtube上观看的视频中验证，在Covid疫苗中发现的这种DNA污染的南卡罗来纳州参议员。 他作证：“辉瑞疫苗被DNA污染。 这不仅仅是mRNA。 我有点令人惊慌失措。 。 。 。 oit可能会导致一些罕见但严重的副作用，如心脏骤停。 该DNA可以并且可能将其整合到与疫苗混合物转染的细胞的基因组DNA中。 它与RNA不同，因为它可能是永久性的。 它可能导致理论上持续自身免疫攻击该组织。 在某些人中也是未来癌症的非常真实的理论风险。 每剂疫苗中可能大约200亿件这种质粒DNA。 。 。 这是一个坏主意。“ [67] Kevin McKernan是第一个发现和写下Covid疫苗的质粒DNA污染问题的问题。 [68]这是由Speofer和Rose的证实。 [69]“为什么这么重要？” 问病理学家Ryan Cole。 “这重要的是因为[e coli衍生的质粒] DNA可以在你自己的DNA旁边的细胞核中停放，并乘以乘坐进入下一代细胞，进入下一代细胞等。因此，它可以成为出生的下一代的一部分 它可以。 。 。 这确实发生在鼠标研究中最多四个小鼠。“ 将甲基 - 假尿苷N1-甲基 - 假尿嘧啶（m1ψ）插入到Covid疫苗中使用的制造mRNA中，其产生遗传修饰的RNA，以稳定尖刺蛋白 但是，这会产生新的问题，包括癌症风险。 结果表明，m1ψ实际上刺激了黑色素瘤的癌症生长和转移。 然而，N1-甲基假尿苷天然存在于人RNA中，其包含我们RNA中所有碱的1.4％，并且对于我们的蛋白质合成是必要的。 [72]所以我怀疑这是癌症的主要原因，除了由免疫发作到穗蛋白质生产的间接途径。 所看到的其他可能的癌症率增加的可能机制是致癌的SV40病毒涉嫌染色疫苗的污染，CD147在癫痫发作癌蛋白中的CD147存在也是如此，[73]也是如此 分享认购第3部分：Ivermectin对Covid疫苗诱导的癌症Ivermectin的作用是最安全的药物之一。 在Covid ERA之前，半个世纪以来，在北赤族的发现，半个世纪以来，世界各地都有四十亿剂，因为伊维菌素对热带寄生虫具有出色的影响。 然而，它在Covid时代至关重要，因为尖峰蛋白是天然所获得的Covid感染以及Covid疫苗中的主要毒素。 在后一种情况下，那些全长尖峰蛋白由mRNA模板产生。 我在2021年引用了研究，在我的书中，在我的书中失败了，其中几个研究人员的团队每次表明，伊维菌素有效地阻断了穗蛋白的麻烦末端，均为S1部分以及S2，以及人类将是 从那时起，已经发现了伊维菌素对穗蛋白质的更多效果。 临床肿瘤学家William Makis MD总结了十五个。 基本上，Ivermectin不能阻断mRNA疫苗的大部分最差影响，但它抑制肿瘤生长并捕获癌细胞的细胞周期，并且在非常良好的耐受性2mg / kg体重的剂量，这是粗糙的 值得注意的是，Ivermectin被证明是反对癌症干细胞。 [75]那些干细胞使癌症能够生长，后来会发生重搏。 我说这是显着的，因为之前，只有维生素C杀死癌症干细胞，[76] [77]，同时对正常细胞无害。 [78]即使在较低的剂量下，Makis纸中总结的研究表明，在Covid疫苗，即胶质母细胞瘤，结肠和乳房的癌症中，一些最疣的癌症中的肿瘤减少为50％至85％。 体外研究发现Ivermectin对更广泛的癌症的影响，包括上述和胰腺，卵巢，前列腺和黑色素瘤。 关于胰腺癌，发现Ivermectin与标准胰腺化疗药物吉西他滨相容，伊维菌素与其相对于癌症的影响相容。 [79] - 随着时间的推移，我期待着更多，写得更多，随着时间的推移，伊维菌素和其他无害干预措施不仅对Covid的救生效果，而是对我们的时间最常见的癌症，特别是自C的卷展览以来，尤其是那些已经增殖的癌症 分享订阅尾注[1] B Goodman。 可能会出现比50年龄较小的人的全球癌症流行病。 10月17日2022.CNN。 https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/14/health/early-onset-cancer-increase/index.html [2] t ugai，n sasamoto等。 早盘癌症是一个新兴的全球流行病吗？ 目前的证据和未来的影响。 10月2022年。自然。 19. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41571-022-00672-8.epdf [3] Agence法国按。 研究表明，癌症在全球50岁以下的癌症飙升。 9月6日2023. Barron's。 https://www.barrons.com/news/cancer-surging-among -under-50s-worldwide-study-says-326d064e [4] p kory，m pfeiffer。 凯瑟琳公主是患有癌症的更多年轻人之一。 华盛顿时报。 3月26日2024. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2024/mar/26/princess-catherine-is-one-of-many-more-young-adult/ [5]辉瑞。 附录2.2：营销数据来源的严重和非严重不良反应的累积和间隔概要标题BNT162B2累计报告期：通过18-六月二零零二年二零零二。 https://www.scribd.com/document/695603788/pfizer-phase-iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii appendix-2---culation-anderval-summary-of-serious-and-non 视频 - 肿瘤学家Dalgleish教授警告Turbo Cancer（2024年4月）。 2024年7月2日。 Covid Intel - 作者：Dr.William Makis视频 - 肿瘤科医生教授.Dalgleish关于涡轮病癌症（4月2024年）英国顶级肿瘤科学家的Angus Dalgleish教授，要求立即禁止在升级涡轮癌的mRNA基因治疗 系统抑制真相 - Covid疫苗与癌症和死亡有关。 7月11日2024年。保守的女人。 https://www.conservationwoman.co.uk/systematic-suppression-of-the-truth-covid-vaccines-are-linked-to-cancer-andeateath/ [8] j ferguson。 视频：威廉·威廉博士上涡轮增压癌：我从未见过癌症表现得像这样。 10月13日2023. https://rumble.com/v3ssk1q-must-watch-dr.-cilliam-makis-on-turbo-cancer-ive-never-seen-cancers-behavin.html CV19 Vax导致涡轮癌 - 瑞安科尔博士。 10月2023年10月2023. Greg Hunter's Usawatchdog.com https://rumble.com/v3mw-cv19-vax-causes-turbo-cancer-dr.-ryan-cole.html [10] k mck 疫苗和SARS-COV-2复制衍生mRNA的差异：对细胞生物学和未来疾病的影响。 11月24日2021. OSF预印刷品。 https://osf.io/preprints/osf/bcsa6 [11] g波兰，iovsyannikova，等。 SARS-COV-2免疫力：审查和应用于相3疫苗候选人。 10月13日2020年。柳叶刀。 396（10262）。 1595-1606。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc7553736/ [12] Pfizer全球安全。 5.3.6通过2821年2月28日收到的P-07302048（BNT162B2）的授权后不良事件报告的累积分析.P.59. https://phmpt.org/wp-content/upl 对BNT162B2 mRNA Covid -19疫苗的抗体反应，其受试者的HARS-COV-2感染。 2月28日2021.病毒。 13（3）。 422. https://www.mdpi.com/1999-4915/13/3/422 [14] c brogna，cristoni等。 检测抗SARS-COV-2疫苗的个体血液中的重组刺激蛋白：可能的分子机制。 2023年8月31日。蛋白质组学临床应用。 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/prca.202300048 [15] l博罗斯，kyriakopoulos等。 持续的生物化学改性的mRNA及其在人组织中的框架重组尖峰蛋白和Covid -19疫苗接种后的循环。 2024年6月12日。Pharmacol Res Persept。 12（3）。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc11169277/ [16] z Cui，J Cheng。 次级淋巴瘤的系统综述，Covid-19疫苗接种。 行政区。 SEP 4 2024. https://www.authorea.com/users/827829/articles/1222329-a-ymphoma-review-to-covid-19 附录2.2：营销数据来源的严重和非严重不良反应的累积和间隔概要标题BNT162B2累计报告期：通过18-六月二零零二年二零零二。 https://www.scribd.com/document/695603788/pfizer-phase-iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii appendix-2---culation-anderval-summary-of-serious-and-non 解码Covid-19 mRNA疫苗免疫法在中枢神经系统中的免疫素质：人脑正常胶质和胶质瘤细胞通过拉曼成像。 3月2日2022. Biorxiv。 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.03.02.482639v1 [19] p kory。 我们在年轻人癌症前所未有的癌症上发表了OP-ed，并质疑mRNA疫苗的链接。 3月27日2024。皮埃尔kory医疗博幕。 皮埃尔·kory的医疗介绍我们在年轻人中出版了一个OP-ED，对年轻人的前所未有的癌症崛起，并质疑前往mRNA疫苗的联系我们现在发表了三个OP-ED的过多死亡率和残疾率尖峰，这些股票 我们还在孕产妇死亡率的大规模飙升中发表了一个Op-ed ...阅读更多7个月前·497喜欢·206评论·Pierre Kory，MD，MPA [20] PFizer全球安全。 5.3.6通过2821年2月28日收到的P-07302048（BNT162B2）的授权后不良事件报告的累积分析.P.59. https://phmpt.org/wp-content/upl SARS-COV-2 mRNA疫苗接种的先天免疫抑制：G-Quadruperes，Exosomes和MicroRNA的作用。 2022年6月。食品化学毒素。 164（113008）。 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s027869152200206x [22]鲍威尔。 癌症一直来找年轻人。 为什么？ 2月6日2024.哈佛大学。 https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/20224/02/cancer keeps-coming-for-the-young why/ [23]道德怀疑论者。 事情的状态大流行，我们有癌症紧急情况。 第38周，2024. https://theevemalskeptic.com/2024/10/02/the-state-of-things-pandemy-week-38-2024/ [34] m gibo，s kojima，et 在日本Covid-19大流行期间，在第三mRNA-脂质纳米粒子疫苗剂量后增加年龄调节的癌症死亡率。 4月8日2024. [腐败症缩回]。 https://www.cureus.com/articles/196275-Canceartion--adjusted-Cancer-mortality-After-the-third-mrna-lipid-nanoparticle-vaccine-dose- 吸烟引起的癌症率达到历史新高。 7月9日2024年7月。电报。 https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/07/09/rates-of-cancer-caused-by-smoking-hit-record-highs/ [26] r valdes，y SARS-COV-2疫苗接种和疫苗接种和肿瘤发生的多击假设。 12月17日2023.咕咕座。 https://www.cureus.com/articles/209584-sars-cov---vaccination-and-the-multi-hit-hypothesis-of-oncogenesis [27] p intrang，j gerling。 在重复的SARS-COV-2 mRNA疫苗接种后，阶级切换朝向非炎症，尖峰特异性IgG4抗体。 12月22日2022年。科学。 8（79）。 https://www.science.org/doi/10.1126/sciimmunol.ade2798 [28] v uversky，e Redwan，等。 通过重复疫苗接种诱导的IgG4抗体可以产生对SARS-COV-2穗蛋白的免疫耐受性。 5月17日2023.疫苗（巴塞尔）。 11（5）。 991. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/artlicle/pmc10222767/ [29]一个dalgleish。 Covid疫苗和癌症之间联系的这种有力证据不能再忽视。 4月24日2024. Https://www.consercationwoman.co.uk/this-strong-evidenes-of-the-link-between-covid-vaccines-and-cancer-can-no-longer-be BNT162B2 mRNA疫苗对自适应和先天免疫应答的影响。 10月2023日。临床免疫素。 255（109762）。 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s1521661623005259 [31] S德夫，G nigh，等。 SARS-COV-2 mRNA疫苗接种的先天免疫抑制：G-Quadruperes，Exosomes和MicroRNA的作用。 2022年6月。食品化学毒素。 164（113008）。 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s027869152200206x [32] D Hanahan，R Weinberg。 癌症的标志。 2000年1月7日。 100（1）。 57-70。 https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/s0092-8674(00)81683-9 [33] J Boik。 癌症治疗中的天然化合物。 书。 俄勒冈州医疗机。 2001. P. 2. [34] H Huber。 击败癌症需要多种治疗方法：使用多种营养和草药代理商的11年回顾性案例系列，2017年更新。 2017年12月30日。自然作品最佳诊所。 https：//natureworksbest.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/01/2017-cancer-treatmentspaper.2017.12.30.pdf [35] t gemoli，g奥尔，等。 遗传不稳定与疾病预测。 2015年。最近的结果癌症Res。 200.81-94。 https:///pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/artlicle/pmc7737009/ [36] H江，y mei。 SARS-COV-2尖峰损害DNA损伤修复并抑制体外V（d）J重组。 10月13日2021. [用病毒缩回]。 13（10）。 2056. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc8538446/ [37]一个系统。 欢迎来到Gilead。 7月30日20222年7月30日。ArkMedic的博客欢迎来到Gilead TLDR：一篇论文在10月份出版，显示MRNA疫苗如何影响卵巢和乳腺癌风险。 两个科学家与NIH和Pharma联系起来，将其从出版物中删除 - 将一代妇女置于风险中...阅读更多2年前·658喜欢·271评论·博士Ah Kahn Syed [38] C Merle，P Lagarde，等 自发细胞融合后的癌症干细胞容量的获取。 3月7日2021. BMC癌症。 21. 241. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/artlicle/pmc7938600/ [39] y lazebnik。 细胞融合作为SARS-COV-2穗蛋白，Covid-19并发症和疫苗副作用之间的联系。 12月7日2021.宣红鼠。 12（25）。 2476-2488。 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/artlicle/pmc8664391 [40] J Bednarski，B Sleckman。 在DNA损伤和免疫应答的交叉点。 2019年4月。NAT Rev Immunol。 19（4）。 231-242。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc6438741/ [41] Ciccia，Seledge。 DNA损伤响应：使其安全地与刀具一起玩。 2010年10月22日.Mol细胞。 40（2）。 179-204。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc2988877/ [42] b elmink，b sleckman。 rag介导的DNA双链断裂的响应和修复。 2012年1月3日。annu rev免疫素。 30. 175-202。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc4038028/ [43] e walsh，r frenck等。 两种RNA的Covid-19疫苗候选的安全性和免疫原性。 10月14日2020年。 383. 2439-2450。 https://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/nejmoa2027906 [44] a wolfe，k singh，等。 RNA G-quadruperes导致EIF4A依赖性癌症中的癌症翻译。 2014年9月4日。自然。 513（7516）。 65-70。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc4492470/ [45] K mckernan，kyriakopoulos等。 疫苗和SARS-COV-2复制衍生mRNA的差异：对细胞生物学和未来疾病的影响。 11月24日2021. OSF预印刷品。 https://osf.io/preprints/osf/bcsa6 [46] e Kastenhuber，S低。 将p53放在上下文中。 2017年9月7日。细胞。 170（6）。 1062-1078。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc5743327/ [47] s读。 人类分子遗传学2. 1999年。癌症遗传学。 在https://www.bioinformatics.org/p53/introduction.html [48] s张，l carlsen，等。 癌症野生型和突变体P53治疗靶向的先进策略。 2月28日2022.生物分子。 12（4）。 548. https://www.mdpi.com/2218-273x/12/4/548 [49] s张，w el-deiry。 SARS-COV-2穗S2亚单位抑制P21（WAFI）的P53活化，癌细胞中的P21（WAFI），TRAIL死亡受体DR5和MDM2蛋白的激活。 4月15日2024年。生物XIV。 https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2024.04.12.589252v1.full [50] n singh，singh。 SARS-NCOV-2的S2亚基与肿瘤抑制蛋白P53和BRCA的相互作用：Silico研究中的一个。 10月2020年。翻译oncol。 13（10）。 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s193652320303065 [51] m kim，j金，等。 SARS-COV-2穗蛋白诱导TLR2依赖性方式诱导肺癌迁移和侵袭。 9月13日2023.癌症通讯（伦敦）。 44（2）。 273-277。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc10876188/ [52] s黄，c pettaway，等。 人前列腺癌细胞中的NF-Kappab活性与抑制血管生成，侵袭和转移有关。 2001年7月。托冠。 20（31）。 4188-4197。 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11464285/11464285/ [53] M Ziche，J Jones等。 前列腺素E-1和铜在血管生成中的作用。 1982年8月。J Natl癌症Inst。 69（2）。 475-482。 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/6180207/ [54] D vinay，e Ryan等。 癌症免疫逃避：机械基础和治疗策略。 2015年12月。癌症生物学的研讨会。 35. S185-S198。 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s1044579x1500019x [55] s seneff，g nigh，等。 SARS-COV-2 mRNA疫苗接种的先天免疫抑制：G-Quadruperes，Exosomes和MicroRNA的作用。 2022年6月164日。https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/s027869152200206x [56] Dalgleish。 Covid疫苗和癌症之间联系的这种有力证据不能再忽视。 4月24日2024. Https://www.consercationwoman.co.uk/this-strong-evidenes-of-the-link-between-covid-vaccines-and-cancer-can-no-longer-be 用SARS-COV-2 mRNA或载体疫苗接种后，在外周血粒细胞和单核细胞上增加PD-L1表面表达。 10月18日2022年。Clin Chem和Lab Med。 61（1）。 https://www.degruyter.com/document/doi/10.1515/cclm-2022-0787/html [58] R heise，pamann，等。 干扰素α信号传导及其对抗原加工患者抗原加工（Tap）相关的转运蛋白的上调作用的相关性。 2016年1月6日。 11（1）。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc4703378/ [59] w schneider，m chevillotte等。 干扰素刺激基因：寄主防御的复杂网。 2014年2月6日。安努申请免疫素。 32. 513-545。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc4313732/ [60] J Liu，J Wang等。 综合调查显示使用Covid-19疫苗接种疫苗后的一致病理生理改变。 10月26日2021.自然。 7（99）。 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41421-021-00329-3.pdf [61] r cole。 CV19 Vax导致涡轮癌 - 瑞安科尔博士。 10月2023年10月203日.Greg Hunter's Usawatchdog.com https://rumble.com/v3mw-cv19-vax-causes-turbo-cancer-dr.-can-cole.html [62] p hu 维生素在结肠直肠癌基质细胞中的代谢受损：在肿瘤免疫逃避中的作用。 2013年5月。胃肠病学。 338. S-71。 https://www.gastrojournal.org/article/s0016-5085（图60262-0/pdf [63] rVilléger，m chulkina，等。 转毒醇介导的IL-6在结肠癌相关成纤维细胞中的破坏：对维生素A代谢作用的新观点。 2023年4月26日。托运人。 14. 377-381。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc10132993/ [64] p chopbers。 SARS-COV-2上的CD147表位以及癌症，自身免疫和器官纤维化的尖峰。 11月3日2023. Qeios。 https://www.qeios.com/read/s86j75 [65] c applegate，m lane。 类化醇在预防和治疗结直肠癌中的作用。 2015年10月15日。世界j胃陷in辣味。 7（10）。 184-203。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc4606174/ [66] m kim，j金，等。 SARS-COV-2穗蛋白诱导TLR2依赖性方式诱导肺癌迁移和侵袭。 9月13日2023.癌症通讯（伦敦）。 44（2）。 273-277。 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc10876188/ [67] p buckhaults。 在南卡罗来纳州参议院前的证词。 9月14日2023年。亚历山大马达特朗普新闻; 假PCR创造了非流行性癌症基因组学专家菲利普巴福博士证明了MRNA Covid疫苗中发现的DNA污染的SC参议会; “辉瑞疫苗被质粒DNA污染，它不仅仅是https://twitter.com/i/status/1703544942004478251...阅读更多·85喜欢·48 com 点评：N1-甲基假尿苷（M1ψ）：癌症的朋友或敌人。 5月2024。Intl J Biol MacromoleCole。 267（1）。 https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/s0141813024022323 [72] m penzo，l montanaro。 围绕着尿素：RNA假染蛋白在核糖体生物发生和核糖体功能中的作用。 2018年6月5日。生物分子。 8（2）。 38. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/pmc6023024/ [73] p chopbers。 SARS-COV-2上的CD147表位以及癌症，自身免疫和器官纤维化的尖峰。 11月3日2023. Qeios。 https://www.qeios.com/read/s86j75 [74] w makis。 伊维菌素和癌症：它至少有15个抗癌作用机制。 Ivermectin可以治疗Covid-19 mRNA疫苗诱导的涡轮癌吗？ 9篇综述审查。 10月2日2023年。Covid Intel - 作者：威廉·伊维尔氏素博士和癌症，它至少有15个抗癌行动机制。 Ivermectin可以治疗Covid-19 mRNA疫苗诱导涡轮癌吗？ - 9伊维菌素论文审查了论文审查了...阅读更多一年前·483喜欢·133评论·威廉·马卡斯博士[75]一个Samy，M Hussein等人。 ePrinomectin：伊维菌素的衍生物通过靶向β-连环蛋白信号通路来抑制前列腺癌细胞的生长和转移表型。 5月12日2023. J Cancer Res Clin Onc。 149. 9085-9104。 https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/S00432-023-04829-5 [76] l Hongwei，C Wang，等。 维生素C优先通过SVCT-2杀死肝细胞癌中的癌症干细胞。 2018年1月8日。自然。 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41698-017-0044-8 [77] y seyama，k sudo，等。 抗坏血酸主要杀死肝细胞癌细胞系Li-7中的癌症干细胞样细胞，并且在低细胞密度和小孢子中更有效。 5月21日2024. 709. https://www.sciencearect.com/science/article/pii/s0006291x24003528 [陈晨，m espey等。 药理抗坏血酸浓度选择性杀死癌细胞; 作为一种药物的作用，以将过氧化氢输送到组织中。 2005年9月12日。102（38）。 https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/artlicle/pmc1224653/ [79] d lee，h kang等。 伊维菌素和吉西他滨组合治疗通过线粒体功能障碍诱导胰腺癌细胞的凋亡。 8月25日2022年前方Pharmacol。 13-2022。 https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/Pharmacology/articles/10.3389/fphar.2022.934746/full喜欢评论restack最初发布在击败covid

the的失败 covid是坩埚。 由于我们学会击败SARS-COV-2，我们已经了解了广泛适用的策略，以击败其他微生物。 ©2024 Dr Tess Lawrie，Mbbch，Phd Ebmcsquared，一楼，劳拉广场，浴室，萨默塞特，Ba2 4BL

https://open.substack.com/pub/colleenhuber/p/covid-shot-cancer-links-understand