Thanks for this Doxycyline is used in the Care Oncology Clinic Protocol the most well established repurposed protocol for cancer. This was done long term,. Doxycycline has unique anti-cancer properties. It is a narrow spectrum antibiotic and has minimal effect on the microbiome. This is helped by alternating months. But I will look further. Thanks.
Where is Ivermectin in this? Too (politically) toxic? This bridge approach may be a non-threatening way to get oncologists to accept these as safe "adjuncts" but is this the best medical advice? That "conventional" treatments have to be paused because they're actually toxic and have low success rates would seem to contradict this approach.
While money is part of it,employment is a major part and culling is also,over a hundred million people die of cancer every decade no wars get even close per decade over decade. Tuberculosis killed far more people than cancer prior to the late forties when streptomycin was found to eliminate it in the short term before the mycobacteria became resistant to mono therapy where a couple of other drugs were eventually added and TB is not the feared disease it use to be. Why would they be so eager to eliminate TB and not cancer I can tell you that, the important people in this world could die of it just as a pauper could, whereby calling cancer a genetic disease it could keep millions of people in employment in perpetuity and having just enough success to convince the lemmings to keep walking towards cliffs. Is cancer contagious I believe it is, mildly so just like TB. Since 2019 when Aykut et al found the cause of pancreatic cancer and others have confirmed those findings by looking at other cancers and finding the same I have yet to see anyone mention it and yet it made the news by all the major news organisations at the time. Surely if Paul gave a summary of the study it would be very revealing to many and confirm what the late oncologist Tullio Simoncini told us more than twenty years ago that cancer is a fungus, and thanks to Aykut we now know the type of fungi in malassezia globosa a dimorphic yeast that lives on lipids. Following on from Aykuts findings straussman et al looked at 17400 tumours of 35 different cancers and found malassezia in all 35 types. Although abundant on everyone's skin it was not confirmed as living inside us prior to Akuts work. Ever wondered why all substances that have an effect on cancer are without exception antifungal. For confirmation enter into google antifungal effect of all the substances Paul recommends and you will find they are all antifungal. Of great significance is that fenbendazole,mebendazole, ivermectin and cannabis oil all eliminate fungi the same way as microtubule disruptors as distinct from most other antifungals which attack the ergosterol component of the cell wall, other substances with microtubule disrupting properties are soursop, Curcumin, wormwood, ashwaggandha and lemon grass oil which attacks both the cell wall and microtubules.
The exact cause of cancer still is subject for speculation and everyone with the disease can make a list of "most likely" - in his / her specific case. If antifungals would have been a major preventive, I wouldn't have a BCC, being "heavy" user of those mentioned here: https://botanicalinstitute.org/antifungal-herbs/
Others claim parasites as major cause and sure enough, antiparasitic meds like ivermectin and albendazole helped many but have zero effect on my BCC.
What few (if any) mention is a potential cure described and practiced by George Lakhovsky (Multiple Wave Oscillator), who claimed success for many cases, also re skin cancers but as expected, not in all cases. Full text at
Basal cell carcinoma is the easiest thing in the world to get rid of. Simply order black salve on the internet the BCC will be dead in 24 hours, in a week or two the BCC will fall out leaving a crater that rapidly fills in with new flesh in a week or less. The only warning is don't use it if the BCC in situated anywhere near your eyes.
Black salve is primarily composed of escharotic agents that destroy skin tissue, but it is considered ineffective and unsafe for treating cancer. Its use can lead to serious health risks, including scarring and delayed treatment of actual cancer.
When black salve is used to treat malignancies, patients may experience incomplete tumor eradication, and this may also complicate treatment plans. In this report, we present a case of melanoma in situ (MIS) that a patient attempted to self-treat with black salve.
Black salve, used as an alternative skin cancer therapy, contains both herbal and chemical constituents, including extracts of the rhizomes of Sanguinaria canadensis and zinc chloride. Black salves may be ordered online and have been associated with cases of extensive tissue necrosis and treatment failures
Articles like the ones you posted are designed for the hesitant and timid. There used to be many articles on the internet that were not intended to create fear or hesitancy I've used it at least half a dozen times on myself and a couple of friends with positive results. If you were to put some on sensitive skin it won't touch it other than make it a little pink, should you put it on a skin cancer you'll feel it bite and sting within an hour, leave it on for 24 hours with a band-aid on it.
You don't mention the size of it or the part of body it resides. If you are still hesitant simply have it surgically removed.
It’s good you’re raising the question of bridging when treatments have to be stopped. It is very hard for cancer patients to navigate this area, especially because there are so many different factors: type, stage, response of cancer; and state of patient.
I have been following your articles on using repurposed drugs and nutraceuticals to design a metabolic trap for cancer. My concern is the use of doxycycline for considerable stretches of time (x30 days alternating monthly) given its significant effect of dysbiosis on the gut Microbiome and possibility of bone marrow depression over time. I would appreciate if you could address this in a future Substack article. In a recent article by Justus Hope he has addressed this concern by substituting sulforaphane and aged garlic extract. https://justusrhope.substack.com/p/a-new-ivermectinmebendazole-cocktail?r=no2b4&utm_medium=ios. I’d appreciate your opinion.
These are all supported by the science as helpful in cancer treatment. They do lack in the most important characteristic of conventional treatment. They are inexpensive therefore unprofitable. They go against the primary incentive therefore will never be adopted by mainstream medicine in a standard of care.
The incentive has to be changed for the standard of care to be changed. It is as simple as that.
Thanks..
Thanks for this Doxycyline is used in the Care Oncology Clinic Protocol the most well established repurposed protocol for cancer. This was done long term,. Doxycycline has unique anti-cancer properties. It is a narrow spectrum antibiotic and has minimal effect on the microbiome. This is helped by alternating months. But I will look further. Thanks.
Where is Ivermectin in this? Too (politically) toxic? This bridge approach may be a non-threatening way to get oncologists to accept these as safe "adjuncts" but is this the best medical advice? That "conventional" treatments have to be paused because they're actually toxic and have low success rates would seem to contradict this approach.
I think this article covers the answer and also why the author of this substack needs support and has to exercise caution:
https://www.lesscancer.org/blog/the-cancer-industry-problem-money-over-results
(just compare the cost of hedgehog pathway blocker vismodegib with the price of gold).
I agree. Challenging the moneyed interests whether military, financial, or medical is dangerous. Marik is a hero.
Corporate $$ has bought politicians, celebs, death squads and whatnot. It's why it's very dangerous to supply a complete and verifiable overview.
While money is part of it,employment is a major part and culling is also,over a hundred million people die of cancer every decade no wars get even close per decade over decade. Tuberculosis killed far more people than cancer prior to the late forties when streptomycin was found to eliminate it in the short term before the mycobacteria became resistant to mono therapy where a couple of other drugs were eventually added and TB is not the feared disease it use to be. Why would they be so eager to eliminate TB and not cancer I can tell you that, the important people in this world could die of it just as a pauper could, whereby calling cancer a genetic disease it could keep millions of people in employment in perpetuity and having just enough success to convince the lemmings to keep walking towards cliffs. Is cancer contagious I believe it is, mildly so just like TB. Since 2019 when Aykut et al found the cause of pancreatic cancer and others have confirmed those findings by looking at other cancers and finding the same I have yet to see anyone mention it and yet it made the news by all the major news organisations at the time. Surely if Paul gave a summary of the study it would be very revealing to many and confirm what the late oncologist Tullio Simoncini told us more than twenty years ago that cancer is a fungus, and thanks to Aykut we now know the type of fungi in malassezia globosa a dimorphic yeast that lives on lipids. Following on from Aykuts findings straussman et al looked at 17400 tumours of 35 different cancers and found malassezia in all 35 types. Although abundant on everyone's skin it was not confirmed as living inside us prior to Akuts work. Ever wondered why all substances that have an effect on cancer are without exception antifungal. For confirmation enter into google antifungal effect of all the substances Paul recommends and you will find they are all antifungal. Of great significance is that fenbendazole,mebendazole, ivermectin and cannabis oil all eliminate fungi the same way as microtubule disruptors as distinct from most other antifungals which attack the ergosterol component of the cell wall, other substances with microtubule disrupting properties are soursop, Curcumin, wormwood, ashwaggandha and lemon grass oil which attacks both the cell wall and microtubules.
The exact cause of cancer still is subject for speculation and everyone with the disease can make a list of "most likely" - in his / her specific case. If antifungals would have been a major preventive, I wouldn't have a BCC, being "heavy" user of those mentioned here: https://botanicalinstitute.org/antifungal-herbs/
Others claim parasites as major cause and sure enough, antiparasitic meds like ivermectin and albendazole helped many but have zero effect on my BCC.
What few (if any) mention is a potential cure described and practiced by George Lakhovsky (Multiple Wave Oscillator), who claimed success for many cases, also re skin cancers but as expected, not in all cases. Full text at
https://archive.org/details/the-lakhovsky-mwo-handbook-thomas-j.-brown
It can't be a surprise that this technology was discontinued despite success - few MDs also are electronic engineers.
Basal cell carcinoma is the easiest thing in the world to get rid of. Simply order black salve on the internet the BCC will be dead in 24 hours, in a week or two the BCC will fall out leaving a crater that rapidly fills in with new flesh in a week or less. The only warning is don't use it if the BCC in situated anywhere near your eyes.
Are you kidding?
DuckDuckgo AI:
Black salve is primarily composed of escharotic agents that destroy skin tissue, but it is considered ineffective and unsafe for treating cancer. Its use can lead to serious health risks, including scarring and delayed treatment of actual cancer.
When black salve is used to treat malignancies, patients may experience incomplete tumor eradication, and this may also complicate treatment plans. In this report, we present a case of melanoma in situ (MIS) that a patient attempted to self-treat with black salve.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12614441/
Black salve, used as an alternative skin cancer therapy, contains both herbal and chemical constituents, including extracts of the rhizomes of Sanguinaria canadensis and zinc chloride. Black salves may be ordered online and have been associated with cases of extensive tissue necrosis and treatment failures
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2210803318300575
etc. etc.
Articles like the ones you posted are designed for the hesitant and timid. There used to be many articles on the internet that were not intended to create fear or hesitancy I've used it at least half a dozen times on myself and a couple of friends with positive results. If you were to put some on sensitive skin it won't touch it other than make it a little pink, should you put it on a skin cancer you'll feel it bite and sting within an hour, leave it on for 24 hours with a band-aid on it.
You don't mention the size of it or the part of body it resides. If you are still hesitant simply have it surgically removed.
It’s good you’re raising the question of bridging when treatments have to be stopped. It is very hard for cancer patients to navigate this area, especially because there are so many different factors: type, stage, response of cancer; and state of patient.
Thank you for your heroic work. You are enormously appreciated. 🙏
I have been following your articles on using repurposed drugs and nutraceuticals to design a metabolic trap for cancer. My concern is the use of doxycycline for considerable stretches of time (x30 days alternating monthly) given its significant effect of dysbiosis on the gut Microbiome and possibility of bone marrow depression over time. I would appreciate if you could address this in a future Substack article. In a recent article by Justus Hope he has addressed this concern by substituting sulforaphane and aged garlic extract. https://justusrhope.substack.com/p/a-new-ivermectinmebendazole-cocktail?r=no2b4&utm_medium=ios. I’d appreciate your opinion.
These are all supported by the science as helpful in cancer treatment. They do lack in the most important characteristic of conventional treatment. They are inexpensive therefore unprofitable. They go against the primary incentive therefore will never be adopted by mainstream medicine in a standard of care.
The incentive has to be changed for the standard of care to be changed. It is as simple as that.