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."

In this video, the speaker discusses two theories: exosome theory and the established theory of viruses. According to the exosome theory, our cells release tiny protein balls called exosomes that contain poisoned genetic material, which can act as messages to alert other cells of toxins. These exosomes are not infectious and do not cause illness, but they spread throughout the body. On the other hand, the established theory of viruses states that viruses are not alive and do not reproduce on their own. They are tiny bits of genetic material packaged in protein balls that can enter and exit cells. Some viruses are believed to be infectious and pathogenic, causing illness and death. The speaker suggests listening to Dr. Andrew Kaufman for more information on this topic.

Parasites are ubiquitous. They're all over the planet. Everybody has parasites. You could assume it. About ten to fifteen years ago, I stopped testing people to find out if they had heavy metal problems because everybody did. I've never met anyone who doesn't have heavy metals. Parasites, the reason they're called parasites, is because they successfully avoid being detected and killed. They're successful, so you're not going to find them. They don't hang out in our stool, they don't hang out in our colons. An adult form might show up there, or you've some pinworms, they might show up there, but for the most part, in order for them to survive in the long term, they have to burrow deep into your tissue, so they'll burrow into the colon, the lining of the colon, the lining of the bladder, ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, spleen, liver, and then lungs, brain, and then here's the thing, if you undertreat them, let's say you only use ivermectin or you only use phenbendazole, you disturb them and then they migrate to another organ like the pancreas and go deep in the pancreas and you wind up with pancreatic cancer.

Dr. Weber has shown that micro parasites, which are not recognized by mainstream medicine as the cause of cancer, belong to two species: A (string-shaped) and B (stick-shaped). These parasites hide inside red blood cells, making them difficult to detect in normal blood tests. They enter the blood cell as a marrow site, grow inside it, and eventually leave to find a partner for DNA exchange. The youth form of both species is round or oval-shaped, while the sexually mature gametes can be seen here. These tiny parasites, known as trophocytes, develop into larger organisms.

Cancer is a widespread problem, including breast cancer, leukemia, and prostate cancer. The speaker claims to have witnessed many people curing themselves of brain tumors. They discuss the work of Otto Warburg, who won two Nobel Prizes for proving that cancer is caused by a lack of oxygen. By increasing oxygen intake and raising red cell blood count, Warburg allegedly cured thousands of people and documented his findings in scientific research journals.

The speaker claims that chemotherapy first wipes out red blood cells, causing anemia, with Epogen; second, neutrophils that prevent infection, with Neupogen; and most importantly, NK and T cells—the lymphocytes. He says, "the only thing that protects your body against cancer is your lymphocytes, meaning the NK cells and T cells," and that, with chemotherapy or radiation, "within a day or two, you wipe out the only cells that matter, i.e. The cells that kill can." He notes, "for thirty five years, we've never had a treatment for that." He links this to long COVID: during viral infection, "the virus is smart, it wipes out the T cells and NK cells." He points out the irony that Epogen and Neupogen are needed because chemotherapy has wiped out the cells that matter. A South African pancreas transplant surgeon says, "everything we've done so far has been wrong. We've actually treated cancer wrongly."

Parasites and cancer have been overlooked, with numerous studies on Ivermectin and cancer conducted by the NIH. Videos from doctors worldwide show that cancer cells resemble parasite egg sacks under a microscope. A chiropractor named Brian Artis discussed this with a parasitologist friend, who revealed that oncologists rarely make the connection between cancer and parasites, despite it being a common topic in parasitology circles. The reason for this silence is likely the fear of losing funding.

Speaker 1 argues that a biopsy can cause cancer to spread because the fibin sheath around a tumor, when breached, acts like a seal that, once broken, allows cancer to disseminate. They recount a personal anecdote of a New York ballerina who experienced tumor biopsies and observed spreading afterward. They explain that histological diagnosis, meaning a pathologist examining slides to determine the tissue origin and type (e.g., breast ductal carcinoma), is used to justify specific drugs. The assertion is made that this diagnostic step is part of a “sales team” and a sales technique because it supports treatment choices that align with FDA approval and insurance coverage. Speaker 1 then claims that research shows that taking certain drugs after a biopsy leads to “almost guaranteeing metastasis.” They further state that performing a biopsy, surgery, high-dose chemotherapy, or radiation will result in metastasis. The overall point is that these interventions produce a short-term reduction of the primary tumor and a perceived remission, but the cancer returns nine months later.

Speaker 0 argues that parasites and cancer have been kept separate topics despite evidence linking them, noting that the NIH has many studies on ivermectin and cancer while doctors worldwide show videos, and referencing a German 1990s project suggesting cancer is caused by intracellular parasites. He cites an example of an adenocarcinoma of the bowel or breast cancer under the light microscope appearing essentially indistinguishable from parasite egg sacs, and relays Brian Artis’s account of a forty-year Egyptian parasitologist who said, “In forty years in parasitology, not one oncologist has told me has made that association, but we talk about it all the time in parasitology circles.” He concludes that “they know that cancer is parasites” but that researchers do not speak about it to avoid losing funding. Speaker 1 shifts to the microbiome and physiology, noting that 40–60 percent of blood volume passes through the mesenteric gut, delivering blood through arteries with melanopsin receptors. He explains that prokaryotes (bacteria) release 5,000 times more light than eukaryotic cells. Physicist Fritz Pott reportedly showed that every cell emits a specific frequency of light called extreme low frequency UV, though the spectrum remains unknown. He conceptualizes the microbiome as a light projector and the enterocyte surface as the screen, with the information buried in the emitted light driving microbiome function. He contends that light is central to quantum biology in the gut and that current biology and gut health research do not fully understand this. Speaker 1 praises Jeff Leach’s work, referencing a paper on HASDA equatorial populations fed highly processed foods; the microbiome did not change with diet, and he views this as pivotal, arguing that exposure to nature and sun alters the microbiome. He explains that migration changes the microbiome due to changes in latitude and diurnal light variation, which suggests that light, water, and magnetism sculpt the gut microbiome in powerful, perhaps paradigm-shifting ways. He mentions a blog post (CPC number 42) and plans to share counterintuitive connections between the gut and brain in Europe (Poland and Germany) after releasing related material on Patreon. Speaker 1 urges microbiome researchers to analyze the spectrum of light emitted by the microbiome, proposing photo multiplier techniques to understand species variation tied to environmental light. He notes UV light is toxic to most prokaryotes, while blue, green, and red light are preferred by many bacteria; mitochondria, derived from a bacterium 650 million years ago, tolerate UV light due to cytochrome components and fluorophore proteins. He describes NAD/NADH as a light-absorbing electron acceptor linked to tryptophan, absorbing 340 nm light, and asserts that carbohydrate electrons enter mitochondria via cytochrome one, with environmental light signals influencing both the skin and gut, and ultimately affecting the brain, blood-brain barrier, and even the cervical spinal cord barrier. He concludes that the gut is a counterintuitive quantum biologic tissue and that many diseases originate outside the gut, with skin and eye signals altering gut processes and biophysical properties of CSF and barriers.

The speaker discusses the possibility of diseases inducing exosomes, but couldn't find evidence linking EMF to exosome production. They mention a second paper from a Chinese group published in the New England Journal of Medicine. The researchers collected lung fluid, separated the cells, and incubated the fluid with lung cancer cells. They then examined the particles under a microscope, but it's unclear if they were viral particles or exosomes. The speaker asks if the audience can differentiate between the two in the provided images.

There is a growing concern about the connection between parasites and cancer, which has been largely ignored. The NIH has conducted numerous studies on Ivermectin and its potential in treating cancer. Doctors worldwide are now sharing videos that show the similarities between cancer cells and parasite egg sacs under a microscope. A chiropractor named Brian Artis discussed this with a 40-year Egyptian endologist, who was surprised that oncologists had never made this association. It seems that cytologists often discuss the link between cancer and parasites, but oncologists remain silent, possibly due to fear of losing funding.

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.

Speaker 0: More evidence. Here's some evidence. Do you guys see that? Let's go ahead and see that again real quick. Yep. That is going to be a tumor. And when oh, oh, there we go. Worms. Those are worms inside the tumor. That's why the body walls the parasites off. It actually becomes a defense mechanism to the parasites and the eggs. So the body is not going to attack it because the immune system isn't gonna attack its own cyst or tumor. So all cysts and tumors are going to be parasites. Speaker 1: So here's the document, which is a confidential document, which is actually nineteen forty eight. So let's read it. There are reasons to believe that specific biological characteristics of malignant tumor tissues and parasite comprise the following elements, and it lists them right there. And then further here. So endoparasites and malignant tumors resemble each other in many respects by reason of similar conditions under which they grow and exist. This suggests long ago the idea in regard to parasitic. Speaker 0: The micro parasites described by doctor Weber that you can see here can be found in the tissue of more evidence. Here's some evidence. Do you guys see that?

Cancer and parasites have been overlooked as a connection, with doctors worldwide sharing videos and research on the topic. A German research project from the 1990s revealed that cancer could be caused by intracellular parasites. Under a microscope, cancer cells resemble parasite egg sacs. Despite this, oncologists have not made the association between cancer and parasites, possibly due to funding concerns.

The speaker critiques the somatic mutation theory of cancer, stating that the average breast cancer has around 50 mutations, while some brain cancers in young people have around 200. They question how 50 different agents could target all these mutations. The speaker contrasts this with bioenergetics, claiming almost all cancer cells share the same difficulty described by Warburg regarding energy generation through fermentation versus respiration. They find it unlikely that every single cancer makes the same "mistake" by chance. The speaker suggests bioenergetics is at the heart of cancer, influenced by mitochondrial health, autophagy, mitophagy, intermittent fasting, insulin, and glucose. They believe the focus is wrongly placed on genes.

The transcript discusses microparasites described by Doctor Weber that are claimed to be found in the tissue of all cancer patients. The stream cancer research denies their existence, though they are called differently: what Doctor Weber calls ergamet is referred to by mainstream cancer researchers as cell intrinsic organelles, and what he calls the youth form is called apoptopic vesicules by the mainstream. The dialogue notes active movement of moving corpuscles inside an immune cell. The mainstream cancer research asserts that these are the cell’s organelles and they move as part of the cell’s life process. If we accept this theory for a moment, that would mean that when the cell dies, the organelles have to die as well. But exactly that does not happen.

Doctor Ryan Cole out of Idaho. Check him out. He's always in trouble with the big machine. They are always trying to discredit him. His most recent antics, he's been working with some doctors out of Germany, and they've been looking at the unusual cancers that are exploding right into stage four. And they're finding in very unusually young ages, as well as those who have been in remission for ten, fifteen plus years because the immune system is being degraded. And can you imagine as they put these cancer cells underneath the microscope, what they're finding? Right in the middle of those cells, they're finding the spike protein.

Dr. Alfons Weber conducted experiments in the 1960s and onwards, discovering that agile corpuscles were responsible for blood infections. He filmed these experiments, providing unique evidence. Dr. Weber identified micro parasites in the tissue of all cancer patients, as shown in the footage. Additionally, a blood sample from a leukemia patient is displayed.

The speaker claims that cancer may not be what we think it is. Red blood cells are shown to contain lively micro parasites. A tumor cell from a bladder carcinoma is shown with vacuoles and string-shaped structures. All recordings have certain reoccurring types of microbes in common. The speaker states there is no tumor tissue without these microbes and no blood of a cancer patient without these micro parasites.

There's been a significant oversight regarding the connection between parasites and cancer. Numerous studies exist on ivermectin and cancer, yet this link remains largely unaddressed. Research from the 1990s indicated that cancer cells, such as those in adenocarcinomas, resemble parasite egg sacs under a microscope. A chiropractor, Brian Ardis, consulted a 40-year Egyptian parasitologist who confirmed that no oncologist had ever made this connection, despite it being a common topic in parasitology. This suggests that the medical community may be aware of the parasite-cancer link but is hesitant to discuss it due to funding concerns.

The discussion centers on the role of parasites in food and their potential link to cancer. It suggests that cancer may be a parasitic infection, a view not widely recognized in mainstream medicine. The conversation critiques mRNA technology and vaccines, proposing that they may weaken the immune system, allowing latent parasites to proliferate, leading to multiple cancers. It also raises concerns about synthetic parasites created through advanced technology, which could be linked to the COVID-19 outbreak. The importance of antiparasitic treatments is emphasized, along with the need for a paradigm shift in understanding diseases as toxic reactions rather than infections. The speakers argue that current health crises may stem from engineered biological agents rather than traditional viruses.

The speaker claims to present scientific evidence of changes in blood cells. The speaker points to a change, followed by white nanoparticles entering the cells. The speaker states the cells are no longer round and normal. The speaker notes an image showing blood cells no longer smooth and symmetrical, but covered in lumps and protrusions. The speaker claims this is an intentional world war on human blood, citing Doctors Sherri Timpenny and Luke Montagner.

The speaker questions the validity of the germ theory, stating that no experiment has proven that a particle can make a person sick. They argue that this particle, which has never been isolated or genetically mapped, is the basis of the germ theory. The speaker claims that the theory rests on the assumption that the particle enters cells, multiplies, and kills them, but this has never been proven. They mention a study from 1954 where researchers demonstrated that the particle could be normal dead cell debris, not the cause of cell death.

A recent study found that the malaria drug Chloroquine does not inhibit SARS CoV 2 in lung cells, although it may work in kidney cells. The speaker, who has experience in ocular oncology, contacted the author of the study and pointed out that the lung cells used in the study were actually cancer cells. This means that Chloroquine allows the virus to attack cancer cells but not normal cells. The speaker believes that this is a misinterpretation of the data and accuses the study of being part of a disinformation campaign. They argue that Chloroquine is actually a very effective drug.

And that is going to be a tumor. When oh, oh, there we go. Worms. Those are worms inside the tumor. That's why the body walls the parasites off. It actually becomes a defense mechanism to the parasites and the eggs. So the body is not going to attack it because the immune system isn't gonna attack its own cyst or tumor. So all cysts and tumors are going to be parasites. There are reasons to believe that specific biological characteristics of malignant tumor tissues and parasite comprise the following elements, and it lists them right there. Endoparasites and malignant tumors resemble each other in many respects by reason of similar conditions under which they grow and exist. This suggests long ago the idea in regard to parasitic.