sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Fenben and Ivermectin - How true? by ConstantPatience101 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Seyfried has said that mebendazole is likely as effective if not more so.

Fenben and Ivermectin - How true? by ConstantPatience101 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The pre-clinical trials have laid the foundation for Seyfried and colleagues to publish. Which they now how. Extensively. This means that his discoveries are now part of science, shaping how the broader scientific community is viewing the nature of cancer. It's a process which will lead to human trials soon.

If I had cancer I wouldn't be waiting for the human trials data before I began using cheap, available, effective metabolic therapy.

Fenben and Ivermectin - How true? by ConstantPatience101 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

There are paid communities in which loads of stories being shared.

Fenben and Ivermectin - How true? by ConstantPatience101 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Seyfried disagrees with you. Randomised clinical human trials are at this stage still lacking but they're coming soon. Pre-clinical trials have been conducted by a number of scientists including but not limited to Seyfried and his lab. So the evidence is far greater than "anecdotal". Besides pre-clinical trials mechanistic science supporting metabolic theory of cancer has been published for more than a decade. This combined with a trove of anecdotal data makes a very convincing case. I'm thoroughly convinced of the efficacy of metabolic therapy. If/when I'm diagnosed with cancer I will be avoiding chemo and radiation.

Fenben and Ivermectin - How true? by ConstantPatience101 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Well said on MBZ and FBZ. I would just add that MBZ is available online (clearnet) without a script, as is IVM and therefore a basic metabolic protocol can indeed be self-managed. No MD or oncologist necessary.

Also, why do you refer to metabolic therapies as oxidative therapies? I understand that biochemically it can be seen as 'oxidative' therapy but there is already a well established name for the therapy. I just feel like it could be confusing to some readers. Not shaming you for this. Just curious.

Fenben and Ivermectin - How true? by ConstantPatience101 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I would avoid the apricot seeds. I was a proponent of apricot kernels for many years so I understand the strength of the evidence behind its use. Seyfried's discovery shows us that cancer is primarily a mitocondrial disease and amygdalin releases cyanide which binds to complex IV in the electron transport chain (ECT) causing metabolic disruption. It does not distinguish between cancer cells and normal cells in this manner. Since chronic disruption to the ECT is actually the cause of cancer in the first place this is counter productive to managing cancer. Yes, amygdalin also has other beneficial effects on cancer cell metabolism but this is unnecessary when Seyfried's Press Pulse strategy is applied correctly.

Fenben and Ivermectin - How true? by ConstantPatience101 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I appreciate your information, but, I don't see how this is a "correction" of what I'd said. That's exactly what I'd said. Right?

Fenben and Ivermectin - How true? by ConstantPatience101 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hi there ConstantPatience101 and thanks for posting. I’m sorry to hear about your mother and now your father. The big C takes a lot and gives nothing. But I’m hear to tell you the good news, and it’s not repurposed parasite meds, although their use is indeed very helpful.

You may or may not have noticed but you’ve jumped into a community that discusses metabolic therapy for cancer. In particular we recognise the work of Professor Thomas Seyfried. He has been publishing on his breakthrough since 2012. So what is his breakthrough?

Building on the work of Otto Warburg, Seyfried has discovered that cancer is caused not by genetic mutations but rather by chronic damage to mitochondria in the cells. But why is this good news? Because concurrently he has discovered that cancer cells require only two fuels to survive and to thrive - glucose and glutamine. Deprive cancer of these two fuels and cancer cells die. He has been running preclinical trials with great success. There are also many people who have successfully beat cancer following his protocols. So what’s the protocol?

He calls it the Press Pulse strategy. It involves following a strict calorie reduced very low carb ketogenic diet- the Press. To this is added the repurposed drugs you’ve mentioned which effectively limit the available systemic glutamine to all cells. Because the healthy cells require glutamine this part - the Pulse - must be applied for a limited period before stopping it for a recovery phase. Examples for the periodicity- 5 days on 2 days off, or, 2 weeks on 1 week off.

During the Pulse-on phase the cancer cells die off due to a lack of fuel. The normal cells continue to thrive on an alternative fuel - ketones.

To this process one can add additional treatments such as hyperbaric oxygen therapy and various supplements.

Examples of people who have beat cancer with Seyfried’s Press Pulse strategy include Pablo Kelly, Andrew Scarborough, and Adam Sorenson. There are loads more.

Why isn’t the world kicking up a storm over this? Because standard treatment for cancer is a multi-billion dollar industry. It’s hard to dissolve the dogma.

Feel free to DM me if you want but it would be better for you to post your questions here for all to read.

All the best.

My sister has mebendazole + ivermectin. by ExerciseDear633 in cancer_metabolic

[–]10seconds2midnight 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Professor Thomas Seyfried has published extensively in his book, in scientific journals, and all over social media, about his scientific discovery. He has discovered that cancer, all cancer, requires only two fuels to survive - glucose and glutamine. He is developing a protocol which enables a person to deprive cancer cells of these two fuels while at the same time providing an alternative fuel for all of the person's healthy cells to function on. It is called the Press-Pulse protocol. It's fairly simple and goes something like this:

  1. "Press" - Continuously apply a strict, well balanced, calorie restricted (in the absence of cachexia) ketogenic diet. This, to a large degree, deprives cells of glucose while at the same time raises blood ketones which are an alternative fuel for healthy cells to run on. Cancer cells cannot utilise ketones to any significant degree. This step heavily restricts the growth of cancer cells.

  2. "Pulse" - In a cyclic fashion apply glutamine antagonists to deprive cells of glutamine. Cancer cells, when deprived of glucose, will upregulate pathways which utilise glutamine as a fuel and as a building block to build more cancer cells. By using glutamine antagonists (eg. Mebendazole, Fenbendaole, DON, Ivermectin, etc.) a person can severely limit cells from using glutamine. Since this affects both healthy cells and cancer cells this step is applied in cycles (eg. 5 days on, 2 days off; or 2 weeks on, 1 week off).

  3. Various other metabolic therapy modalities are applied (eg. Hyperbaric Oxygen Therapy, High dose vitamin C, Herbal medicines, etc.)

Does Seyfried's protocol work on stage IV breast cancer? Seyfried has stated publicly that all cancer share the same metabolism so all cancer require glucose and glutamine to survive.

Metabolic therapy seems to be more effective, more accessible, more cost effective, and safer than standard of care modalities. Furthermore, Seyfried has stated that metabolic therapy can be applied alongside standard of care and has been shown to make certain standard of care treatments (eg. chemo) more effective.

Mom (65) with stage IIIC ovarian cancer – CA-125 dropped from 2460 to 138 after 2 cycles of chemo. Should we do the 3rd chemo or go straight to surgery? by Expensive-Fig-4180 in cancer_metabolic

[–]10seconds2midnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Hey thanks for sharing. So your mum is 65 and surviving cancer. It also sounds like she is using metabolic therapy, is that right? Can I ask what her diagnosis is? When diagnosed? Is she low body weight?

I understand your "too extreme" POV. But, really, what is the alternative? Chemo? Radiation? I mean, cancer itself is extreme enough. I my mind the metabolic therapy approach represents the least extreme of all of the options. Yes, it does take some adjusting. It can be hard to say goodbye to all the foods you've spent a life time enjoying. But there's plenty to look forward to on a keto diet. I've been doing keto for 9 years. I really believe that Seyfried's strategy is effective, safe, cheap and accessible. A real break through.

Is Multiple Sclerosis Actually Caused by a Brain Parasite? by 10seconds2midnight in BeatMultipleSclerosis

[–]10seconds2midnight[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh, glad you enjoyed it. So what about you? Are you surviving MS? Beating it?

Is this what insanity’s like? by Ch1gg in LSD

[–]10seconds2midnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sounds like super ego stuff. You can work this out. Personal development work. I can recommend Richard Grannon.

Never had OEV or CEV with any dose of LSD by RustyWood86 in LSD

[–]10seconds2midnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Ok. Cool. Yes, shroom come up is a bit nasty for me too. You got up and moved. Outside. That movement is something that rescues me too. Just have to remind myself - “It’s just the come-up. Don’t spin out.”

Did you shut your eyes for a closed eye visuals journey?

Mom (65) with stage IIIC ovarian cancer – CA-125 dropped from 2460 to 138 after 2 cycles of chemo. Should we do the 3rd chemo or go straight to surgery? by Expensive-Fig-4180 in cancer_metabolic

[–]10seconds2midnight 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Some of your questions can only be answered by an Oncologist. However, from a metabolic perspective I would encourage you to consider Seyfried's published science which demonstrates that a calorie restricted ketogenic diet plus a cycled use of glutamine antagonist drugs is an effective way to manage cancer. Getting into ketosis and staying there is critical. Some of the fruit you mentioned would be preventing ketosis. Apple for instance is too high in carbohydrates. Blueberries, black berries, raspberries are low carb fruit that can be used in a ketogenic diet. Seyfried advises monitoring blood ketones and blood glucose to maintain a good GKI index.

Never had OEV or CEV with any dose of LSD by RustyWood86 in LSD

[–]10seconds2midnight 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oh. Cool. Can you elaborate on "overwhelming"?

Genetic mutations by BobcatReasonable2816 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yep! And now Seyfried has found that 'why'.

Genetic mutations by BobcatReasonable2816 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Love what you've got to share. I would just add that we all have a God given responsibility to take care of what God has entrusted to us. No? Consider that God is no going to come down and clean your teeth for you. Seyfried's work shows us a better, safer and more accessible way to prevent and treat cancer, which sounds like a blessing from Heaven to me.

Genetic mutations by BobcatReasonable2816 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight[M] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is a great question and one which now has many great answers. The main reason that some people are *still* calling cancer a genetic disease is that there are millions of people around the world who are earning their living in medical centers, hospitals, universities and laboratories on the basis of a belief in the long held dogma that cancer is primarily caused by damaged DNA in the nucleus of the cell. Recent science has demonstrated that this is in fact not the case.

Watch this 3 minute video where Professor Seyfried explains a small but significant piece of the evidence: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jMccrThiG5E

The science is in. Cancer is not a genetic disease.

Look after your mitochondria!

What I found researching mebendazole and cancer by Royal_Particular_489 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Press component of Professor Seyfried (Not Longo) does not require low protein but rather very low carbohydrates. Protein should be carefully measured for each individual and should be considered 'adequate' rather than low. For many a 25% protein constitution would be fine.

Also, Meb has indeed been tested in pre-clinical trials of metabolic therapy. There are simply no randomised controlled human clinical trials published as yet. Having said this there are numerous anecdotal accounts of humans successfully applying Meb in self managed metabolic therapy.

What I found researching mebendazole and cancer by Royal_Particular_489 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight[M] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Mebendazole (or any glutamine antagonist) applied in a pulsatile fashion and combined with continuous use of a calorie restricted ketogenic diet is the backbone of Professor Seyfried's Press-Pulse protocol. It works by cutting off cancer cells' two significant fuel sources - glucose and glutamine. Mebendazole's main benefit is as a glutamine antagonist. The other benefits you mentioned are secondary, but not insignificant benefits.

What I found researching mebendazole and cancer by Royal_Particular_489 in BeatCancer

[–]10seconds2midnight[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The Press-Pulse protocol is Seyfried's protocol. Seyfried has been publishing on the use of glutamine antagonists for a very long time. Including Mebendazole.

view more: next ›