TruthArchive.ai - Related Video Feed

The speaker discusses the relationship between profits and cancer treatment in the United States. They mention a study that found chemotherapy to be ineffective 97% of the time, but it is still used because doctors profit from it. The speaker explains how doctors receive financial incentives for prescribing chemotherapy drugs. They argue that the pharmaceutical industry has control over cancer treatment and that the medical system prioritizes drugs and surgery over alternative approaches. The speaker suggests that funding for cancer research should also go towards nutritional, homeopathic, acupuncture, and naturopathic research. They criticize the for-profit nature of the medical industry and its impact on patient outcomes.

I was given a grim prognosis of 0% survival chance for my small cell lung cancer. A veterinarian friend shared a story about a scientist at Merck who accidentally discovered that fenbendazole, a common drug for animals, killed cancer in mice. This unexpected finding led to hope for cancer treatment.

I have three friends who had stage 4 cancer, and now they are cancer-free. They used treatments like Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, and methylene blue, which was originally a textile dye but has shown significant benefits for mitochondria. It's surprising to see effective treatments being overlooked, raising questions about the medical industry's priorities. Why are cures that aren't profitable often ignored or demonized? This situation highlights a failure in our medical institutions to promote genuinely effective solutions.

It is nearly impossible to publish data that goes against the national public health narrative, preventing doctors from finding solutions. The speaker has conducted clinical trials for pharmaceutical companies, including vaccine studies, and has brought vaccines and other drugs to market. Some drugs never made it to market because they killed people. Clinical trial guidelines ensure safe drugs, but these guidelines were not followed during the pandemic, affecting everyone. COVID should have been a time for doctors to unite, but interference with research occurred. Science evolves through experiments, skepticism, and an open mind. Challenging current knowledge must be allowed to move science forward, but what the speaker witnessed during the pandemic was not science.

The speaker discusses the challenges of targeting delivery systems to specific tissues. They mention that attempts to target lipid or nano medicine to cancer cells have been unsuccessful for over 40 years. The difficulty lies in raising an immune response and dealing with irrigation. The speaker shares their personal experience of working on this project, stating that they have exhausted five graduate students and the last one refused to continue. They decided to change projects as a result.

In the 1970s, Sloan Kettering Memorial Cancer Center conducted a study on Laetrile (vitamin B17) to determine its effectiveness against cancer. Despite evidence showing its effectiveness, they wanted to prove it was not effective, similar to the current situation with Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine. The study was led by Dr. Kinamitsu Segura, who found that Laetrile improved the health of mice, relieved pain, inhibited tumor growth, stopped tumor spread, and acted as a cancer prevention. However, the board of directors at Sloan Kettering was not interested in publishing the report because Laetrile couldn't be patented. Dr. Segura was removed from the project and discredited. The official statement from Sloan Kettering denied any anticancer properties of Laetrile. The California report, which opposed Laetrile, was later found to have falsified information.

Speaker 1 states they haven't been encouraged to speak about a BioShield, as they are not a political person, but believe it holds a solution for both COVID and cancer. The speaker believes the two are completely connected. They claim the political deep state is powerful, vicious, and egotistical, to the point of stopping good science. The speaker is now speaking out because the drug is approved, but only for bladder cancer. They claim it has the same treatment effect for pancreatic cancer, lung cancer, and triple negative breast cancer. They state it is the only molecule for fifty years that upregulates killer cells.

I have three friends who had stage 4 cancer, and now they are cancer-free. They used treatments like Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, and methylene blue, which was originally a fabric dye but is now known to have significant effects on mitochondria. It's surprising to discover that many effective treatments are overlooked or demonized, raising questions about the motives behind our medical institutions. Why are these cures not promoted when they are not profitable?

I was diagnosed with small cell lung cancer that had spread, and the doctors gave me no chance of survival. However, a friend told me about a scientist at Merck who accidentally discovered that a drug called fenbendazole killed cancer in mice. Fenbendazole is commonly used in veterinary medicine and is safe. The scientist had implanted cancers in mice and gave them fenbendazole to treat intestinal parasites. To her surprise, the drug also killed the cancer. This discovery gave me hope for a potential treatment.

By 2018, the speaker concluded that chemotherapy causes suffering and America has trained the world about it along with big pharma because it's profitable. The first chemotherapy, nitrogen mustard, was invented in 1946 from World War I and II nitrogen gas and became the nucleus of Sloan Kettering. Humans have T-cells and natural killer cells, the latter discovered in the 1970s and around for 450 million years. To design chemicals, the National Cancer Institute invented the nude mouse, lacking T-cells and natural killer cells, to test human tissue. Taxol, developed by Bristol Myers and the International Cancer Institute, is dissolved in castor oil, which can cause fatal anaphylactic shock. Chemotherapy wipes out natural killer cells and T-cells, making one susceptible to infection and cancer. The natural killer cell is essential for survival and prevents cancer.

I have three friends who had stage 4 cancer, and now they’re cancer-free. They took Ivermectin, Fenbendazole, and Methylene Blue, which has surprising benefits for mitochondria. It’s concerning how effective treatments are often ignored for profit. I got COVID and received remdesivir, which caused severe issues, while a friend died. There’s a troubling trend of prioritizing profit over lives in healthcare. Monoclonal antibodies were restricted to promote vaccines, which raises ethical questions. Mel Gibson and others are starting to speak out against these issues, highlighting the dangers of certain treatments and the need for awareness. We must recognize the importance of sharing knowledge and supporting those who fight against these injustices.

I participated in an mRNA-based immunomodulatory medication trial back in 2013. It was meant to alter how T-cells produced antibodies, and it worked phenomenally for lupus, ulcerative colitis, Crohn's, and multiple sclerosis. There were over 200,000 participants in the trial, and every one of us had our hearts stop. Less than five of us are still alive today. The medication was a series of injections over a year, and complications like cancer, heart attack, stroke, and myocarditis took two years to appear. If a medical trial doesn't show what the pharmaceutical company wants and the drug doesn't pass FDA testing because it killed over two percent of participants, the company pays everyone involved to sign an NDA. They bury the data because pharmaceutical companies kill more people than wars. Since 1920, doctors have killed over 200 million Americans. I had open heart surgery, lost my colon, and suffered three strokes.

A veteran physician, Dr. Karen Ruthman, was found dead after allegedly discovering a link between parasites and cancer and a suppressed cure: ivermectin. Dr. Ruthman observed that many patients with chronic illnesses and cancers had parasites. Her research indicated parasites trigger cancer, and ivermectin could treat it. Threatened after planning to reveal her findings, she died in a house fire deemed a "freak accident," though some suspect a cover-up. Experts claim the NIH is aware of the parasite-cancer connection, with studies on ivermectin and cancer. Some researchers claim cancer tumors resemble parasite egg sacs. Big Pharma profits from chronic disease and suppresses cures. Ivermectin, smeared during the COVID-19 pandemic, is a safe, Nobel Prize-winning drug that threatens their profits. Pfizer invested heavily in cancer treatments as mRNA vaccines, potentially linked to "turbo cancers," were rolled out. Experts suggest cancer is linked to parasites, mold, toxic metals, and viruses. The media allegedly altered footage to discredit ivermectin. Federal law prohibits emergency use authorization for vaccines if an existing effective treatment exists, so ivermectin had to be discredited to protect the vaccine enterprise. The World Economic Forum has warned of new injectables for various ailments, including cancers potentially caused by mRNA injections.

There are laws that prevent doctors from trying alternative treatments for cancer, limiting them to only proven unsuccessful methods. The speaker suggests that if this restriction could be lifted, significant progress could be made. They also imply that the pharmaceutical industry profits from this situation, as there is a lot of money to be made from drugs.

A parent shares their experience with their daughter's cancer treatment. The doctors offered two options: let her die or undergo intense chemo and radiation. They chose the latter, but it caused severe burns and other complications. After six months, the standard treatment didn't cure her cancer, and they were told she had only a few months to live. Desperate, they discovered Dr. Brzezinski's treatment, which the FDA deemed nontoxic. They took their daughter off the standard treatment and tried Brzezinski's, and within nine weeks, the tumor disappeared. Sadly, she later died from radiation damage, but the autopsy showed she was cancer-free. The speaker questions why the bureaucratic process for accessing this treatment is so difficult, preventing many patients from receiving a potential cure.

Speaker 0 suggests that the ostriches’ ending was for a far more nefarious reason than a display of dominance, implying ulterior motives beyond a childish rivalry. Speaker 1 states that there are 36-plus worldwide patents and that this is not new research. They began collaborating with an unnamed individual and their herd of ostriches, aiming to develop an alternative to vaccinations by working with natural antibody solutions to create resilience in the body against virus threats and disease. They report significant success, claiming they already had COVID-19 and possessing scientific proof and data that they were able to neutralize the COVID-19 variants, not block them, but cure it, through lozenges or nasal sprays. This progress is described as very exciting. They further recount that the lab they were working with, Frederick Leduc’s lab, Immune BioSolutions in Quebec, was shut down immediately after their robust antibody research results returned. Leduc’s lab was said to have had to sign an NDA and was no longer allowed to talk to them. Speaker 0 then asks for the audience’s thoughts and whether they have been paying attention to the ostrich case in British Columbia, inviting feedback on that topic.

The speaker claims there is active suppression of positive vitamin D news and research because it competes with top-selling drugs. The speaker presented data to top vitamin D researchers and faced vicious attacks, with researchers claiming vitamin D doesn't do what the data suggested. The speaker stated they were only presenting assembled data. The speaker was told they were jeopardizing careers of researchers who had spent their lives studying vitamin D, because they never conceived the presented data could be true.

Speaker 0 shares a story from twenty years ago about a study called Suivimax, which aimed to determine if giving vitamins and supplements to children in schools could reduce cancer rates. They approached pharmaceutical companies for funding but were met with resistance, as the companies were focused on selling drugs rather than preventing cancer. Speaker 0 emphasizes the need to not associate with pharmaceutical companies and suggests finding people who share the mission and are willing to contribute their money and knowledge. They express their inability to provide financial support but offer to help in other ways.

In 2008, I made a breakthrough in chemotherapy with a vitamin A compound. Excited, I shared with colleagues, but realized a pharmaceutical company had patented it broadly. When I called them, they dismissed me. My mentor explained it was a blocking patent for profit, not to benefit patients.

Ivermectin, a Nobel Prize-winning anti-parasitic drug, has been vilified. Merck, who held the patent until 1996, claims it doesn't work for COVID-19. However, Merck has a 50/50 partnership with Moderna on mRNA cancer vaccines. Because Merck will make billions on mRNA cancer vaccines, they have no interest in investigating ivermectin for cancer. There is evidence that high-dose ivermectin is effective in treating many types of cancers.

I have three friends who had stage 4 cancer, and now they are cancer-free. They used treatments like ivermectin, fenbendazole, and methylene blue, which was originally a textile dye but is now found to have significant effects on mitochondria. It's surprising how many effective treatments are overlooked or demonized, often due to profit motives. Many beneficial substances, such as vitamin D, K2, magnesium, zinc, and quercetin, are not promoted because they lack patent protection and cannot be controlled by pharmaceutical companies.

After being given a grim prognosis for small cell lung cancer, a veterinarian friend shared a story about a scientist at Merck who accidentally discovered that a drug called fenbendazole killed cancer in mice. This drug is commonly used in animals and has been around for 40 years. The scientist had been researching cancer in mice when they all got intestinal parasites, leading her to give them fenbendazole, which unexpectedly eradicated their cancer. This accidental discovery brought hope to those facing terminal cancer diagnoses.

Speaker 1 states they haven't been encouraged to speak about their work because they are not a political person, and they are focused on finding solutions for both COVID and cancer. They claim their SpyShield technology works for both. Speaker 1 says they didn't realize the political deep state was so powerful that it would stop good science. They are now speaking out because the drug was approved, but only for bladder cancer. They assert it has the same treatment effect for pancreatic cancer, lung cancer, and triple negative breast cancer. They claim it is the only molecule for fifty years that upregulates killer cells.

Like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin are no are out of patents. So because they're out of patents, you cannot make any money on these drugs. The most you could sell them for is, $300 Pharmaceutical companies are no longer interested in $300 drugs. They're interested in orphan drugs where they can get name your price for a drug. We're going to put it under an orphan and now we can bill whatever we want. From like $300 to $10,000 a month. Then all these companies started copying and doing biologic at $10,000 a month. But there is a movement that is controlling the research and stopping innovations, that is stopping out of patent drugs, drugs that are basically like hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin. So I think that's the number one thing and the attacks on that.

In 2008, I was thrilled about breakthroughs in chemotherapy using a vitamin A compound and rushed to share my findings with colleagues. However, my mentor warned that it could take 25 years for these discoveries to be applied in practice. As I moved into clinical trials, I discovered that a pharmaceutical company had patented vitamin A compounds as chemotherapeutic agents. Excitedly, I reached out to them to discuss my findings, but after answering a few questions, they abruptly hung up on me. When I sought advice from my mentor, she explained that the patent was a blocking patent, designed to prevent my discovery from being developed for profit.