The Big C
Stop it by not getting it.
Before going on about cancer in general, I want to address an elephant in the room. Recently, the eminent Dr. Pierre Kory, a fellow warrior on the frontline against mRNA, posted an op-ed on the frightening rise of what are being called “turbo cancers,” and implicating the jabs as a suspect. I thanked him for his serious science on the matter, but I had to include my own statement of the obvious: Looking at the alarming rise in excess deaths in general, and the birth of turbo cancers — something never seen before — and wondering about their origins is rather like standing at the Hoover Dam and wondering about the origins of Lake Mead. In the simplest of terms, the police lineup of suspects has only a single candidate. Any suggestion that turbo cancers are somehow not related to the jabs is quite simply ostrich thinking, even though a dedicated researcher like Dr. Kory is, quite professionaly, objective. The question before us now is, can we do anything about it?
I am 100% convinced that the covid shots will be responsible for a great many cancer deaths. I don’t want to belabor that point, but there is a bit of a different message for those who took the shots. The fundamentals don’t change, but if you’ve had the shots and multiple boosters, there is no doubt in my mind that your risk is significantly greater. I’ll link to a new study showing why this is the case after I speak to the general issue of cancer.
It must be understood that cancer is not natural and only occurs when something has gone wrong.
I put the previous sentence in its own paragraph because it is that important. Healthy, active people, living on a proper diet, do not get cancer. This is substantiated by the complete absence of cancer in indigenous people around the globe. Last year’s death reports for indigenous people included precisely zero deaths from cancer. We know it is difficult to stop cancer once it gets started, so it behooves us to bar the door rather than hire a bouncer to remove it. This is the starting place for today’s message.
The MD Anderson Cancer center says that only about 5% of all cancers are genetically preordained, which does not mean that cancer is a certainty for 5%, only that 5% are born with a significant risk factor. This is an important fact to underscore, because so many people are now having their DNA tested and are started if they findIt is quite possible to have genes that predispose you to cancer without ever getting it. To put that in an even better light, at least 95% (and perhaps 100%) of all cancers are brought about by epigenetic factors, i.e., lifestyle choices: diet, depression smoking, drinking, stress, lack of sleep, exposure to ionizing radiation, etc. And perhaps even by some of the drugs being prescribed for other conditions. What that means is that at least 95% of all cancers should have been prevented. That metric might be altered by the wildcard of the jabs, but perhaps it doesn’t have to be as bad as all that. You see, the jabs slow the response to cancer, but the cancer still has to come from somewhere. It can’t go “turbo,” if it doesn’t get started.
What we know about the jabs is that they suppress our natural immune response by blocking interferon and other natural cancer-inhibiting channels, and by massively upregulating IgG4 antibodies, which are the ones designed to provide “tolerance,” they can facilitate cancer. IgG4 insufficiency is one of the underlying causes of allergies, but IgG4 is only supposed to comprise less than 2% of circulating antibodies. With the jabs, and especially among those who have taken one or more boosters, IgG4 has been seen to increase by more than 45,000%. This is the sentries sleeping at the gate and has been shown to be an underlying cause of many of the autoimmune difficulties shown by jab recipients. Of the more problematic adverse effects of the jabs, Guillain Barré, recurring herpes (including shingles), and VITT, just to name a few, are autoimmune conditions, and two of them carry a high incidence of early mortality. So the jabs can cause a severely delayed response to many conditions, including cancer, but that’s only if something else has gone wrong to open the cancer door. It would seem unnecessary to state this, but let’s nail that door shut so that it can’t open.
There have been few studies delving the depths of how and why cancer gets started, because there’s just no money in finding out. Cancer prevention is an orphan cause, one with no benefactors, that provides no discernable income stream. Otto Warburg gave us a really great clue 100 years ago, and even though he was awarded the Nobel Prize for it, no one has really followed up on his work. This strikes me as weird, possibly even evil. We know that failing to change motor oil will cause an early death for your car, motorcycle, or lawnmower, so we do that at regular intervals. The old commercial from one of the oil companies that you can “pay me now or pay me later,” seems like the kind of advice we’d like to get for preventing a malady with fatality rate well above 50%. So here it comes:
Boston College oncology researcher Dr. Thomas Seyfried says that all cancers stem from the same cause, damage to mitochondria, which cause them to selectively generate energy from glucose only. Ordinarily, most mitochondria can break down fats and ketones as well, and in fact would prefer to do so. I would suggest to Dr. Seyfried that perhaps it isn’t damage, so much as habit. This “damage,” as he terms it is likely the result of a diet dominated by sugars and starches, which become a sort of addiction for the mitochondria.
It is also known, although not publicized, that the imbalance of an excess of omega 6 fats, and specifically the linoleic acid that is an integral part of all of the manufactured seed oils that are used in every restaurant, every fast-food outlet, all processed foods at your grocer, and possibly even in your own kitchen, are highly destructive to mitochondria. There is a component of the inner membrane of mitochondria called cardiolipin, which consists of four fat molecules. Less than 4% of your cardiolipin can function properly if one or more of those molecules is linoleic acid. Our ancestral diet provided the tiny amount we need, while a diet of processed (non)foods and cooking with seed oils gives us as much as 50X what we need and crowds out omega 3. With an overabundance of it in your diet, you end up with linoleic acid in mitochondria that can’t use it, leaving you with dysfunctional mitochondria. And supplementing omega 3 from fish oil, krill, or plant sources does not help very much, unless you eliminate the seed oils from your diet, because most people aren’t so much deficient in omega 3 as suffering from an excess of omega 6. Taking various energy supplements, like NAD, will have no effect on this equation. These supplements are marketed under the premise that they increase mitochondrial production, but those claims are not supported by quality studies.
As Otto Warburg showed us, cancer is a disease that depends on the anaerobic metabolism of sugar. While it is not possible for us to survive without sugar — even if you don’t ingest any of it your liver will make some — using it as a backup to the aerobic metabolism of fatty acids and ketones, rather than as a primary energy source, will unquestionably, slow the progress of cancer, including inhibiting its very origin. There is ample evidence to suggest that humans who get the majority of their energy this way, from fatty acids rather than sugar, will be significantly more resistant, if not immune, to cancer. Regular anaerobic exercise, just a few minutes a day, is one great way to use up excess glucose, but not if you’re using a sports drink to “replenish” it, which will doubtless contain much more sugar than you burn in a brief high-intensity interval session. Twenty 50-meter sprints will burn off about 25 calories worth and a 16 oz. Gatorade will give you 128, Monster 216, Rock Star 202, Cytomax (you mix it yourself from powder) 250-400. If you’re at the gym for 90 minutes, drinking 16 oz. of any of these will “replace” between 4 and 8 times what you used, and frankly, it kind of negates the purpose of going there. Perhaps that’s why so many gym rats can’t seem to get the weight loss and muscle definition they had hoped for. I used to joke that the reason I liked long-distance running was that 10K was the equivalent of a six-pack of beer. Running 10K (at 160 pounds) will burn up close to 1000 calories. The average weight training session, less than 300.
Statistics from WHO show, that over the last 20 years, there has been an increase of more than 25% in death from ischemic heart disease, strokes and cancer, diseases with a massive connection to a diet high in sugar and linoleic acid. 1.5 million Americans will succumb to one of these three in 2024.
A significant body of anecdotal evidence shows a dramatic increase, far too great to ignore, in survival for cancer patients who fast for three days prior to each chemo treatment. This fasting puts the body into a state of ketosis, which reduces the available blood sugar for the cancer. Ketosis is a state where your body converts fatty acids into ketone bodies, which can provide 100% of your energy needs. While our brains can’t burn fatty acids effectively, and greatly prefer glucose, they are perfectly content with ketones. Ketosis doesn’t completely starve the cancer, but it does reduce the available energy for it, giving the chemo treatment a significant boost. A true ketogenic diet would eliminate seed oils, reducing linoleic acid, and improving mitochondrial efficiency. That said, I highly disrecommend a constant state of ketosis, which is almost impossible to maintain anyway without a ketone supplement, but it is a highly unnatural state for prolonged periods.
As stated above, our bodies will make glucose from fatty acids in order to keep us going, so a ketogenic diet is likely not a panacea for cancer patients, but it’s a great place to start. It has been an accepted practice among oncologists to encourage cancer patients to do whatever is necessary to get an adequate caloric intake, which quite often includes candy, because cancer patients often have poor appetites. From my time in hospice clinics, as well as watching my father pass from cancer, my observation is that many patients in end-stage cancer pass rather quickly once their diet becomes mostly candy. I suppose that at that stage, maybe getting it over with isn’t such a bad thing, but a sugar-free diet (no artificial sweeteners either) adopted early, even before a diagnosis, would give patients a far better chance. In my house, we don’t have any sugar. If you need to add sugar to anything, I consider that a sign that you shouldn’t be eating it.
Cancer tends to blunt appetite and that in my never humble opinion, is what we call a clue. Sick animals will often refuse to eat, because their instincts tell them that fasting will help them detox. Fasting stimulates autophagy as well as biogenesis, which probably won’t provide a sure cure for cancer, but it can’t hurt and reducing or eliminating simple sugars, going with a more protein and fat-based diet should unquestionably slow the progress of cancer.
Research has shown that a more ancestral diet — with no seed oils or artificial sweeteners and a significant fasting window (greater than 12 hours) — is beneficial for those showing early signs of dementia or Parkinson’s. There is every reason to expect this to apply to cancer as well. My first recommendation to all my clients, but especially those wanting to trim down, is to eat breakfast (preferably eggs and definitely not oatmeal) no more than twice a week.
Mitochondria are rather like the carburetors on our internal engine, except that they are able to convert multiple fuel types. Since our bodies will be damaged by excesses of alcohol, job one of our digestive system is to convert alcohol to sugar. Since excessive blood sugar (glucose) can be harmful, the next order of business is to convert sugar into fat or glycogen for energy storage to be used later or shuffle it through mitochondria and “burn it up” to produce energy (ATP). But to repeat an earlier point, we burn up far fewer calories exercising than most people think. Hence a sedentary lifestyle that includes significant amounts of alcohol, simple sugars and starches will predispose your mitochondria to become sugar dependent and you to become obese and diabetic, neither of which bode well for a long life free from cancer and other aberrant conditions.
The preferred and most natural energy source for homo sapiens (paleolithically speaking) is fat (fatty acids) primarily from saturated fats with very little PUFA. The modern, junk and convenience food diet of most Americans, consisting of absurd amounts of sugars and starches, accompanied by hideous sugary drinks, as well as an excess of PUFAs, forces our bodies and our mitochondria to predominately burn sugar, busily convert sugar to glycogen, then convert that glycogen back to glucose because our modern mitochondria have almost forgotten how to burn fat, much like modern Americans have forgotten how to find food anywhere other than a store or restaurant. A diet consisting of primarily sugars and starches causes mitochondria to become sugar addicted. I put it to you that it also predisposes us to many maladies, including cancer. Am I saying that too often? Is it possible to say that too often?
In looking at the dramatic rise in cancers, even before the jabs, the pharmaceutical-industrial juggernaut has expended trillions of dollars trying to invent a drug that will kill cancer, and not a penny looking for ways to fortify us to prevent cancer. Big Pharma had to be ecstatic with all these new diseases! And no one asked the question: “Why now?” Why this sudden tidal wave of diseases our ancestors saw so rarely they didn’t even have names for them? They have crept up on us to the point where younger generations of Americans just take for granted that a third of their friends, and perhaps themselves, will be victims. Cancer, along with ischemic heart attacks, strokes, and early dementia are modern problems. What caused this; what changed?
No one is asking that question because the big money is in finding these diseases and then inventing pills for them. Not only is there no money in preventing chronic disease, doing so could put several huge firms out of business. Bayer/Monsanto has known for a generation that glyphosate is immensely toxic and a significant carcinogen and the tobacco industry knew smoking was linked to cancer long before the Surgeon General weighed in. But did any of their executives ever say, “You know, our product is killing people; maybe we should stop producing it.”? Do you think General Mills and Kellogg’s don’t know that their sugar-coated offerings are contributing to mortality? Seriously?
If you were a candy manufacturer, knowing that candy is implicated in obesity, type 2 diabetes and cancer, would you shutter your business. Would you be interested in inventing a pill or even a candy bar that caused people to stop eating candy? If you ran a huge multi-million-dollar pharmaceutical company, would you even be interested in a magic pill that permanently cured and prevented every chronic or infectious disease with just a single dose? You’d have to sell your mansion and your Bentley, because chemo drugs represented over $150 billion in revenue in 2020 and diabetes treatment accounted for 25% of all medical spending. Currently, 35% of the American population over the age of fifty take a (useless) statin drug, up over 300% in the last fifteen years, accounting for $10 billion in pharma revenue. It is impossible to convince Pharma CEOs and the fast food and processed food industries that they should change their business model when their very livelihood depends on maintaining it just as it is. The knowledge that they are profiting from sickness and death isn’t apparently troubling them, because they think of these patients as dollars, not as people.
One place no one seems to be looking is to the forgotten bit of science called terrain theory. What things can we do to make our terrain, our bodies, stronger and impervious to the breakdown of natural processes that leads to cancer or the accumulation of arterial plaque that leads to heart attacks, strokes, ED and dementia. Vegetable oils, dairy free cheeses, tofu, “milk “ from oats and nuts, high-fructose corn syrup, GMOs, artificial sweeteners, chemicals (herbicides and pesticides), iron “enriched” flour, processed food (containing lab created nonfood ingredients), heavy chicken consumption (factory farmed chicken is extremely high in linoleic acid) and a high percentage of raw vegetables — to wit, the modern western diet — is so far removed from the standard diet a mere century ago, and yet there doesn’t seem to be an interest in looking at that as a potential cause for our declining health as a society.
Big Pharma is getting fat right along with the American population (obesity in 1950 ~6%, in 2024 ~50%). And, trust me, the CEOs are ecstatic about it. That’s a thought to keep on the top of your mind every time you see an ad for a drug or get a prescription from your doctor. If all these drugs actually worked, the various pharmaceutical companies wouldn’t own private jets or hold their meetings in exotic locations. You think their job is to keep you well; they know their job is to keep you sick. If that sounds accusatory, it’s just how businesses operate. Even the so-called health industry of doctors and pharmacies are driven by profit and absolutely nothing else.
Finally, for anyone who has taken the mRNA shots, and more so if you’ve stayed current on the boosters, here is a study detailing several of the inescapable metabolic changes caused by the spike proteins that give cancer a huge advantage. While the study focuses on the SARS-CoV-2 virus, the “active ingredient” of that virus, as stipulated in the study, is the spike protein, which is massively more abundant in those who took he shots:
We observed that SARS-CoV-2 spike protein interrupts p53-MDM2 protein… We further observed that SARS-CoV-2 spike suppresses p53 transcriptional activity in cancer cells including after nutlin exposure of wild-type p53-, spike S2-expressing tumor cells and inhibits chemotherapy-induced p53 gene activation of p21(WAF1), TRAIL Death Receptor DR5 and MDM2. The suppressive effect of SARS-CoV-2 spike on p53-dependent gene activation provides a potential molecular mechanism by which SARS-CoV-2 infection may impact tumorigenesis, tumor progression and chemotherapy sensitivity. In fact, cisplatin-treated tumor cells expressing spike S2 were found to have increased cell viability as compared to control cells. Further observations on gamma-H2AX expression in spike S2-expressing cells treated with cisplatin may indicate altered DNA damage sensing in the DNA damage response pathway.
This in addition to the suppression of interferon and the explosion of IgG4 from the jabs.