reSee.it - Related Video Feed

" Cancer? Cancer, you know, we're we're seeing certain cases here and there." "for those three cases, you know, there was success. You know, I know two of the patients." "it's not for everybody." "why is it again that some patients are improving with high dosages of mebendazole, ivermectin, etcetera, and some patients are not?" "we did fecal transplant using her grandson, and we extended her life. She improved her appetite." "She improved her hemoglobin, but it wasn't continuous." "we've shown that loss of bifidobacteria is a problem in invasive cancer." "I think there's gonna be in a future where we're gonna have, every cancer is gonna have a microbe attached to it." "Think about HPV cervical cancer, H. Pylori, gastric cancer, Burkitt's lymphoma, Epstein Barr virus." "there's gonna be a link to a cancer and a microbe that's lacking that needs to be repopulated." "in other words, is it over is the tumor growing because of a microbe that's in there that’s allowing it to grow?" "suppression of that microbe would be first to to kill off the tumor." "the methods that we have right now at killing the tumor is we kill off everything. Kind of like what we do with hydroxychloroquine." "We kill off the virus, but then we kill the whole microbiome." "that's not necessarily a solution because the problem is, well, you've killed the virus this time, but then what happens now you've killed your microbiome and your bifidobacteria, and now you're gonna get another virus and another virus." "Knowing what I know today, which is once you kill your microbiome, it takes years to recover."

The speaker developed a protocol, BioStrike, and believes it extended Harry Reid's life. In 2015, the speaker petitioned the FDA to use the treatment at diagnosis, hypothesizing that chemotherapy and radiation wipe out natural killer and T cells. The FDA required testing on end-stage patients who had failed standard care. Despite patients' collapsed immune systems, the speaker reports complete remissions in Merkel cell carcinoma (patient lived six years), bladder cancer (patients alive 10-11 years), triple negative breast cancer, and metastatic pancreatic cancer (patient disease-free after five years, still alive at six). After 700,000 pages of response, the treatment was approved in late 2024. The speaker believes they are on the verge of treating sepsis and cites a recent case of clearing a month-long inflamed lung due to valley fever. The speaker is treating patients with bladder, pancreatic, and lung cancer. The speaker wants to disseminate this information to the scientific, medical, and regulatory communities.

Speaker 0 describes being on the front line in Miami and using vitamin C as a go-to, questioning whether it is taken orally and in what amount. Speaker 1 confirms oral administration and notes taking a lot of vitamin C due to exposure and concern. Speaker 0 explains that a scientist contacted them after testing their sample, asking if they noticed their Bifidobacteria levels had risen fourfold. The speaker reveals they had been taking high dosages of vitamin C, which prompted a shift in approach. While dealing with treating COVID-19 patients and assessing stools in high-risk and severe cases, they decided to consult naturopaths and collect stool samples before and after treatment to evaluate the impact. Speaker 1 recounts that they began making phone calls, offering to pay for stool samples before and after on patients treated with vitamin C. They collected about twenty to twenty-five samples and observed that vitamin C increased Bifidobacteria. This finding led to publishing research showing that vitamin C increases Bifidobacteria in vitro, and they extended this to show an increase in patients as well. Key points: - Vitamin C was used as a primary approach by a frontline clinician in Miami, with emphasis on oral administration. - A scientist noted a fourfold increase in Bifidobacteria, prompting a change in strategy toward investigating vitamin C’s effects. - They initiated a program to collect stool samples before and after vitamin C treatment in COVID-19 patients, collaborating with naturopathic practitioners and funding the stool analyses themselves. - About 20–25 samples were analyzed, revealing that vitamin C increased Bifidobacteria. - They published a paper demonstrating the increase of Bifidobacteria with vitamin C both in vitro and in patient samples.

The speaker shared their journey of battling cancer and how they turned to fenbendazole after traditional treatments failed. They combined the medication with intermittent fasting and other supplements. After following this regimen, they received news that there was no evidence of disease in their body, surprising both them and their medical team.

The speaker discusses an ivermectin study showing ivermectin increased bifidobacteria before and after, noting it rose with ivermectin but didn't last: "Goes up, goes back down." He questions whether this yo-yo effect explains cancer patients' lack of improvement and whether timing matters. When someone reports a patient improved kidney cancer with ivermectin, mebendazole, he asks to see the microbiome before and after, blood work, and markers to understand why some survive while others don't. He praises courageous physicians who push the art of medicine to save lives, citing a seven-year-old with a brain tumor who was headed to hospice; he urges trying everything with informed consent. He concludes: "I don't know. This is research. I don't know, but I'm willing to try. These are the risks. Your kid may die on my protocol." He emphasizes weighing the risk-benefit ratio.

The speaker discusses promising results for high dose vitamin C in cancer treatment. A recent study on high dose vitamin C shows so much promise, and there have already been human trials underway in which patients who received high dose vitamin C did have drastically improved outcomes: they lived longer and they had less symptoms from the chemo. Mechanistically, the vitamin C literally wipes out the cancer cells via, like, four distinct very strong mechanisms. The speaker also notes that it is very safe as well. In addition, the speaker mentions other natural cancer therapies: ivermectin, fenbendazole, and now dandelion root extract, stating that all of these show extreme promise for natural cancer treatments.

A man in his seventies, a smoker and drinker, lost weight and had trouble swallowing. He started taking ivermectin after hearing about its benefits from someone with prostate cancer. Despite being diagnosed with unresectable esophageal tumors, he refused chemo and radiation. After taking ivermectin, his tumors disappeared, but his biggest concern was selling his fishing boat.

The speaker envisions a future in which everything will be linked to microbes, including cancer. They point to current examples such as HPV cervical cancer, Epstein-Barr virus with Burkitt’s lymphoma, and Helicobacter pylori with gastric cancer to illustrate how specific microbes are associated with particular cancers. They suggest it is only a matter of time before doctors begin saying that certain cancers, like colon cancer, are associated with specific bacteria, referring to a hypothetical “colon cancer with X bacteria.” This framing implies that cancer development could be driven or influenced by the presence of particular microbial communities. From there, the speaker raises the question of how to neutralize a particular microbe in order to prevent it from contributing to cancer alongside another microbe. They emphasize that microbes are constantly present and interacting, describing a ongoing “war in our guts” where microbes compete and influence disease outcomes. The idea is that some microbes are beneficial, or “good ones,” and that understanding these relationships is key to prevention and treatment strategies. A central claim the speaker highlights is what has been learned from the COVID experience: it reveals the ability of a microbe to survive inside a virus, but also the ability of a virus to cause death in a person. This observation reinforces the notion of a complex battle between microbes themselves and between microbes and viruses, where outcomes depend on how different organisms interact with one another. The speaker stresses that the crucial insight lies in identifying which microbe neutralizes which other microbe, suggesting that these inter-microbial dynamics could determine disease progression and outcomes. Ultimately, the speaker defines this understanding as “the key to the whole research that I’m doing.” The emphasis is on mapping out the interactions between microbes and viruses, recognizing the dual role of microbes as potential drivers of disease and as possible targets for interception, and using that knowledge to guide the research trajectory aimed at preventing cancer and other illnesses by modulating the microbiome.

The speaker recounts a personal battle with metastatic small cell lung cancer, describing being told there was a zero percent chance of survival and a life expectancy of three to six months. After being told to go home and consider hospice, the speaker received a call from a college friend who is a large animal veterinarian in Western Oklahoma. The friend shared a story about a Merck veterinary cancer researcher who had implanted cancers in hundreds of mice across brain, stomach, liver, pancreas, and more. When the researcher’s mouse population faced intestinal parasites, she saved her research by giving fenbendazole to all the mice. The drug is widely used in zoos for many animals. The speaker notes that fenbendazole is one of the oldest and safest drugs, having been around for forty years. The researcher later learned that she accidentally killed all the cancer in her mice. The researcher herself later developed four-stage glioblastoma wrapped around her brain stem. She was told there was nothing they could do, but she started taking fenbendazole and, she says, saved herself; the cancer disappeared. This account prompted the speaker to try fenbendazole, saying, “What the heck? I got nothing to lose.” They also took other substances they had researched, including CBDs and curcumin. The speaker emphasizes using the most bioavailable curcumin available at the time, which increased absorption from around 2% to 15%. From January through April, the speaker took fenbendazole along with these supplements without initially understanding what was happening inside the body, feeling fine throughout. The only time the speaker did not feel fine was due to radiation affecting the esophagus. In May 2017, the speaker turned up as No Evidence of Disease (NED). NED is defined in the discussion as no evidence of disease. The conversation then shifts to clarifying the period since the diagnosis and the time to eight, with the implication of progression or remission timelines.

"I did a case where I did fecal transplant on a patient with Alzheimer's, and he could remember his daughter's date of birth six months after the procedure. So when I changed his microbiome, his poop in his colon, and gave him his wife's microbiome, who was super with it, started remembering things. So, when we start looking, and we're actually publishing stuff at ACG, because the deadline's today actually to publish for ACG American So, College of we have six abstracts coming up, and so we're showing the data on Alzheimer's, autism, long haulers. So, can't say vaccine injured because then it's not gonna be, you know, it's too controversial. So we have to stay within the but here's the problem. It should not be controversial. In order to advance science, in order to advance medicine, we need to be, better. We need to be better at listening"

Speaker 1 was deemed inoperable, incurable, palliative, and terminally ill, with a couple of months to live without treatment. Speaker 0 was also terminal after cancer spread to the liver and lungs and did not want to undergo chemo again. Metabolic therapy can manage the disorder and correct other problems like diabetes, high blood pressure, and hypertension, so you get healthier as you degrade your tumor. Speaker 0's cancer levels went down to 0.05, which is almost nothing, and was cancer-free by December 2020. Speaker 1 is doing really well fifteen to eighteen months later. Speaker 3's wife had stage four cancer and was cancer-free a year later using metabolic therapies. Fasting and metabolic therapy combined with chemo can lower chemo dosages while maintaining therapeutic efficacy. If you want to live and get healthy, you do metabolic therapy, but "they" will not allow the entire system to change.

A man in his seventies, Eddie, had been losing weight for a year and a half and could no longer swallow or talk well. He knew someone with prostate cancer who had taken ivermectin and cured himself. Eddie began taking ivermectin. After the speaker gave Eddie advice about diet, Eddie sounded stronger within a couple of weeks. He could swallow, had gained six pounds, and his voice was better. Eddie was diagnosed with two unresectable esophageal tumors, but refused chemo and radiation. About six weeks later, a scan revealed Eddie's tumors were gone. The problem was that he had sold his fishing boat.

A colleague of mine, Doctor. Lee, his mother had stage four uterine cancer. He understood from the research that if you have low achromancy, patients don't respond to the immunotherapy, what they call checkpoint inhibitors, is this new form of cancer therapy that helps activate your immune system. So if your gut isn't healthy, you can't actually get the cancer cells to die with immunotherapy. So his mother had stage four uterine cancer and was gonna die and wasn't responding. He gave her pomegranate, cranberry, green tea, all these phytochemicals, got her achromancy levels up and she was cured of her stage four cancer within a month.

Research showed no differences between the groups of responders and non-responders for immunotherapy, except for one thing: one bacteria called Ackermannsia mucinophila. It likes to grow in mucus, in the colon; in this model it grows in the cecum. If the people had that achromancy, they would respond to immunotherapy. The researcher took out the achromanxia and brought it to her lab of the responders from humans and gave it to mice who were not responding to immunotherapy. Boom. She'd resurrect the immune response to kill the cancer. This is one of the first bacteria, and there may be many, many that we haven't yet discovered.

The probiotic industry understands the loss of bifidobacterium in cancer and aging populations, but cannot claim probiotics improve longevity due to FDA regulations requiring clinical trials. Doctors also face scrutiny for promoting products without sufficient data. The speaker conducts clinical trials, involving the FDA when bringing products to market, such as ivermectin, doxycycline, and zinc for COVID. Data showed no deaths during treatment, suggesting its effectiveness. Despite a product's market approval with a 20% success rate, the speaker emphasizes the need to address the remaining 80% of patients. Innovation and discussion among doctors are crucial, but social media is now essential for educating doctors and the public due to the high cost of publishing data.

The speaker describes a medical situation in which cancer had spread extensively: “In my neck, my liver, my bladder, my pancreas, and in my bones from head to toe.” He notes that when small cell lung cancer metastasizes this far, the prognosis is extremely poor, stating that “Life expectancy goes below one percent.” Shortly after, he received a call from a large animal veterinarian who shared a remarkable anecdote involving cancer research at Merck Animal Health on the veterinary medicine side. The veterinarian explained that a scientist working there had been implanting cancer in mice for research, and as a result her entire mouse population developed intestinal parasites. According to the story, the scientist administered fenbendazole, the drug commonly used to treat parasites in animals. Remarkably, not only did the drug save the mice from dying of intestinal parasites, but weeks later it appeared to cure the mice of cancer as well. The speaker recounts this as a concise answer to the question at hand about possible treatments. Motivated by this anecdote, the speaker began taking fenbendazole himself, starting the day after receiving the veterinarian’s account. He reports that “three and a half months later” he was all clear of cancer. In summary, the speaker connects a dire prognosis for widespread metastasized cancer with an anecdotal account from a large animal veterinary context: fenbendazole, used for parasitic infections in animals, purportedly cured cancer in mice in that story, and the speaker credits starting fenbendazole with achieving an all-clear status several months later.

Speaker 0 and Speaker 1 discuss access to treatment protocols and the scope of their metabolic approach to cancer. Speaker 1 notes they recently published a comprehensive, open-access protocol for glioblastoma in Biomedical Central, co-authored with Doctor Thomas Durai and over 20 scientists, physicians, nutritionists, and dietitians. The paper also marks the launch of the new Society for Metabolic Oncology. The protocol targets glioblastoma, a deadly brain cancer; Speaker 1 highlights that the same metabolic issues—cancers’ need for glucose and glutamine and their inability to burn ketones or fatty acids—apply across cancers such as lung, colon, breast, and bladder. He asserts that glioblastoma has seen no major advancement in management for a hundred years and attributes part of the problem to how brain irradiation can increase glucose and glutamine in the tumor microenvironment, potentially hastening decline. Speaker 1 emphasizes that the protocol for glioblastoma could be used for other cancers and centers on “pulling the plug on the fermentable fuels.” The regimen involves a phase of mild exercise, monitoring the glucose ketone index (GKI), and transitioning patients from dangerous metabolic states to more manageable ones to reassess treatment strategies and progressively reduce tumor activity. He stresses they are not claiming a cure; instead, they aim to “manage cancer effectively,” enabling patients to maintain a high quality of life whether or not the tumor regresses. Speaker 1 shares a clinical example: Pablo Kelly, who died last year, lived ten years with glioblastoma; he married and had three children. Although never cured, his tumor was put into an indolent state. Pablo died after a fourth surgical debulking; the tumor had been reduced and became operable after metabolic therapy, though it was never completely eradicated. The discussion notes that initial diagnosis described his tumor as inoperable, with a prognosis of death within twelve months if treated with large doses of chemo and radiation; he avoided radiation and chemotherapy and pursued metabolic therapy. The tumor then shrank enough to allow subsequent surgery over years, illustrating a shift from an aggressive to a more indolent disease course. Speaker 0 clarifies that “debulking” means removal of tissue. Speaker 1 reiterates their stance: cancer can be managed, changing its diagnosis from extremely aggressive to indolent, but they avoid using the word cure. They acknowledge uncertainty about long-term cures and note that standard care does not guarantee cure, while suggesting their approach can achieve substantially better outcomes.

In December 2020, the speaker began collecting stool samples from colleagues before and after their COVID vaccination to study the vaccine's impact on the microbiome. The speaker discovered that mRNA vaccines killed bifidobacteria but believed these findings were unpublishable due to the prevailing narrative. The speaker presented this research as an abstract at the American College of Gastroenterology in October 2022, where it won a research award, beating 6,000 other abstracts. This abstract drew the attention of 18,000 GI doctors, who began to consider that the loss of bifidobacteria may explain why they contracted COVID after vaccination. Further research indicated persistent damage to bifidobacteria from the vaccine. The speaker's presentation also linked the loss of bifidobacteria to Crohn's disease, Lyme disease, and invasive cancer.

The speaker presents a case series of three patients whose cancers went into remission after taking fenbendazole, citing the paper “Fenbendazole enhancing antitumor effects: a case series,” published in *Clinical Oncology Case Reports*. The paper is described as containing significant medical jargon but being “intelligible and readable,” and the speaker encourages reading it directly. The speaker states that mefenamic acid is a “cheap and readily available antiparasitic,” commonly used veterinary medicine, and compares it to ivermectin as an anti-worm medication, noting it is in a different group but still an antiparasitic. The speaker also claims to have used human forms of mefenamic acid and to have provided “thousands and thousands of doses of mebendazole and albendazole” to projects worldwide where worm infections are common, stating this was associated with “devastatingly brilliant effects” and with “never any recorded side effects reported” to the speaker. The speaker emphasizes that they are discussing the veterinary form in the context of fenbendazole. To explain a mechanism, the speaker describes mitosis: chromosomes line up in the middle of the cell, microtubules pull the chromosomes into the correct half, and the cell divides into two. The speaker states that fenbendazole and related drugs “interfere with the formation of these red microtubules,” so that cells cannot divide. The speaker links this to cancer by stating cancer involves uncontrolled cell division. The speaker concludes that fenbendazole “appears to be a potentially safe and effective anti-neoplastic” option and frames cancer as a neoplastic disease that could be repurposed. They call for regulators to look at fenbendazole “with some urgency,” arguing that other preparations can be passed “really pretty quickly” if they are safe and effective. They also reiterate that the paper’s authors state “further research is necessary to define a role of fenbendazole as a chemotherapeutic option,” while saying the three patients “basically” appear “cured” of their cancers.

Speaker 0 explains that in the probiotic market, one out of 17 probiotics on the market has real bacteria in there, meaning 16 out of 17 say Bifidobacteria on the label but don’t actually have it. He adds that three out of 26 yogurts or drinks that say bifidobacteria on the market have bifidobacteria; the rest do not. He then asks about verification and testing. Speaker 1 asks if there is any way to know by looking at the label, and whether testing exists. Speaker 0 says you can call the lab Progena Biome to test, and there are other labs that do spot checks. He notes another problem: whether the microbe is alive or dead. Bifidobacteria in the gut are anaerobic, so exposing capsules to air may kill them, and stomach acid could also kill them before they reach the gut. He reframes the question: what does dead bacteria do to a live microbiome? He compares it to sleeping with corpses and suggests eventual effects on the microbiome and potential diseases, reflecting his viewpoint. Speaker 0 then raises another issue: by taking probiotics, are you suppressing your own gut production, similar to taking pancreatic enzymes which helps digestion but may shut down the pancreas’s own secretion? He questions whether taking oral enzymes could cause damage by reducing the body's own production. He explains that their approach is research-focused: they test patients with a stool test in the research world, then determine what the probiotic is doing, and implement a protocol with the right probiotic, the right prebiotic, the right bovine, and the right vitamins to see if the patient improves. If it works, great; if not, they reassess why the probiotic didn’t work—whether the probiotic was killed in the gut or interacted with certain bowel areas and became inactivated or transformed. Speaker 0 notes that he doesn’t talk about which probiotics upfront because they are still testing. He mentions several probiotics he is testing and acknowledges that not everybody responds similarly. They must understand why a probiotic works in some patients but not in others. Overall, the discussion centers on probiotic quality, viability, and personalized testing to determine effectiveness, along with concerns about dead bacteria, potential suppression of natural gut processes, and the need for ongoing research to explain variable patient responses.

Speaker 1 discusses probiotics and the current state of microbiome science: taking random probiotics may be questionable because the technology of the microbiome is not FDA-approved yet. The reason is that there are many bacteria in the microbiome and we don’t know what they are, what they do, whether they’re good or bad. For example, blotia and Rosaburia are poorly understood; 90% of GI colleagues don’t know blotia is a microbe, and 90% don’t know there’s such a thing as Rosaburia. Historically trained on Klebsiella pneumoniae, E. coli, Salmonella, C. difficile, Clostridium perfringens, but not on nonpathogenic microbes. The question remains: is blotia a good bug or a bad bug, and who has too high or too low levels? This represents the abyss of the microbiome and is still research, not consumer product or standard medical practice. Speaker 1 explains that doctors cannot be told to use a new stool test or to start using microbiome data broadly until researchers reproduce findings and doctors see the data for themselves. The idea is that oncologists may notice correlations, such as loss of bifidobacteria in invasive cancer, and observe improvements in cancer alongside bifidobacteria, which could influence acceptance of the gut-brain or microbiome link. However, such observations need replication to move from incidental findings to established conclusions. An example given is Colleen Kelly at Brown University, who published two cases of alopecia areata with C. difficile where hair grew back after fecal transplant. The question is whether fecal transplant for alopecia areata is valid; however, an academic center trying to reproduce the data could not. The speaker suggests uncertainty about whether a specific microbe caused hair regrowth or if exposure during treatment led to it. Until data are reproduced, no one can claim alopecia areata is improved by fecal transplant or microbiota transplant. Concluding guidance: if you’re healthy, keep doing what you’re doing and do nothing else; if you’re not healthy and have multiple diseases and you’ve tried a probiotic, if it works, continue, but if it doesn’t work, then it’s probably not a great probiotic. The overarching theme is careful interpretation, replication, and recognition that microbiome science is still evolving and not yet ready for universal clinical application.

Bifidobacteria are important for immunity, but they are not the only important microbe. The speaker notes that bifidobacteria are the microbe that is disappearing. Analyzing thousands of stool samples, out of 4,000 stool samples, there are only four that can be said with certainty “these are both microbiomes.” Out of the thousand samples analyzed, less than five percent have bifidobacteria. The speaker highlights that loss of bifidobacteria is not universally linked to all conditions. It is present in Alzheimer's disease, with Alzheimer's patients having lots of bifidobacteria; Lyme disease patients also have lots of bifidobacteria. Crohn’s patients that have never been treated have lots of bifidobacteria. In autistic kids, there is enough data now; they showed data initially, and now more data and more labs reproducing that data show that there are lots of bifidobacteria in autism. The speaker mentions that “Loss of bifidobacteria in autism” can be addressed by replenishing bifidobacteria, and refers to this as proof of concept that the judge at the American College of Gastroenterology acknowledged, noting that this is what is needed to advance science to understand. Loss of bifidobacteria was also noticed in patients with invasive cancer. The speaker says they published that data at the American College of Gastroenterology and presented at Digestive Disease Week, showing that if a patient had a non-aggressive cancer, they had a better level of bifidobacteria than a patient with invasive cancer who has zero. Regarding therapeutic implications, the speaker asks whether modulating the gut to improve bifidobacteria is feasible and notes collaboration with multiple centers, including MD Anderson. The implication is to start modulating the gut and improving bifidobacteria in cancer patients rather than relying solely on chemotherapy and immunotherapy. In summary, the research conducted at Progena Biome—a research lab—focuses on bifidobacteria, its variable presence across diseases, its potential replenishment in autism, and its association with cancer progression, highlighting ongoing work to modulate the gut microbiome as a therapeutic strategy.

The speaker discusses striking clinical observations linking the microbiome, specifically Bifidobacteria, to major improvements in two areas: autism and cancer. They reference two twins with autism who were nonverbal. After improving and manipulating their microbiome, the twins are described as completely fully verbal and reading books, highlighting the potential power of Bifidobacteria in their treatment approach. The speaker then shifts to oncology, noting they recently finished speaking at the Win Consortium in front of academic oncologists. They presented data on a patient with stage four head and neck cancer who “shrunk by increasing the bifidobacteria,” emphasizing that the observed tumor response was attributed to the microbiome rather than surgery, chemotherapy, or radiation. This observation is described as illustrating “the power of the bifidobacteria.” Following this, the speaker describes how these findings are opening new collaborations with major cancer centers, specifically naming Penn State and MD Anderson, as oncologists recognize that while immunotherapy is being given, there is interest in long-term outcomes and better survival. The implication is that there may be an element being missed related to the microbiome. Finally, the speaker mentions ongoing research on neuroblastoma, focusing on Bifidobacteria and the broader microbiome to determine how immunotherapy can help on one side and how boosting the microbiome can help on the other. The overarching message is that “we tend to forget about the microbiome and immunity starts in the gut,” suggesting a central role for the gut microbiome in modulating immune responses and therapeutic outcomes.

The speaker investigated a commercially available microbe, typically given to infants in small doses. To increase the dosage, they created a yogurt-like substance to amplify the bacterial counts a thousandfold. The speaker observed effects in the mice they studied. Surprisingly, the speaker claims that every observation seen in mice has also been observed in humans.

But I think there's you know, what's beautiful now because so many doctors are stepping up and seeing something and talking about something, I'm not saying that's the right thing. 'Is ivermectin improving cancer? Certainly some doctors have seen it.' 'So is that the way we is it improving for everybody? What is it in ivermectin that improves the microbiome of certain people and not in others? What is it in ivermectin that helps certain cancers and not others? Right? So we really need to be better to say, okay, look, I'm courageous enough to add ivermectin to my protocol of the chemo or the bio or the immunotherapy that I'm giving or maybe I don't.' 'And maybe at least I look at the microbiome. I look at the microbiome on what is believed right now, you know, a a good look at it.'