Posted on 04/07/2020 8:41:31 PM PDT by McCabe
I’ve been thinking about Covid-19, the lock-down/quarantine, and the debate over using these drugs like hydroxychloroquine to treat it. Some say don’t use the drugs, some say it’s 100% effective. I started looking up other uses of this particular medication and there have been some trials where hydroxychloroquine is effective in treating cancer cells. Imagine if this drug has been KNOWN to effectively treat cancer, but for decades has been hidden from us so that the entire “cancer” industry can continue to profit?!?! Q has alluded to such a possibility. Perhaps we should be delving in more and questioning. Maybe this virus and this treatment is the road to exposing the biggest con job ever played on humanity.
FWIW they don't. The lung cancer rate for smokers is 7% which is twice the rate of non-smokers which is 3.5%. Two times the rate not five.
7 viruses linked to cancer
https://www.mdanderson.org/publications/focused-on-health/7-viruses-that-cause-cancer.h17-1592202.html
The “quine’s” vs cancer
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31268153
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6206903/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22878749
History of research, metabolic attacks on cancer:
https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/23496164-tripping-over-the-truth
Sherlock Holmes of cancer metabolism on her own cancer
https://www.amazon.com/Starve-Cancer-without-starving-yourself-ebook/dp/B07B2XMLT9/
ALWAYS follow the money trail.
They’ve probably have known about a simple cure for decades and kept it hidden, except to treat the elites, of course. They make tons more money by treating the symptoms than providing a cure. Cancer victims are like cattle to them...to milked till there’s nothing left and let em die.
IF so, these rotten, greedy, evil SOBs should be strung up like Mussolini.
The enemedia wants to downplay it; they don’t want too many people recovering this long before the election.
I remember several years ago when a family member had a cancer scare, I was spending hours upon hours trying to find anything that may help. I read an old research paper (several actually) that showed cancer to be viral based and how at a certain level of zinc in the body, cancer cells can’t spread. So maybe cancer may benefit from the 2 just like this virus.
I have the two book you mentioned.
We already know that this ‘game’ is being played on Diabetics, where they’re told that Diabetes is a life sentence and the ONLY OPTION is to take more and more drugs and insulin, until your body starts rotting out. To put it another way - a HUGE gravy train for the medical/nutritional/drug community.
So one can easily understand the negative reaction of that community to the now-proven alternative to the above, which is the Keto Diet.
“Why smokers get lung cancer 5 times as often as non-smokers? Do viruses only like smokers? Sounds silly.”
Perhaps. Viruses are everywhere (dirty little secret). If smoking interferes with the body’s immune response to the viruses which can cause lung cancer by causing chemical changes in lung cells, then yes, these viruses would mostly like smokers.
Obviously, I have no evidence to support the above, but it does seem to me that we still have a heck of a lot to learn about viruses before we claim to understand them.
Bkmk on cancer resource
Not only are viruses everywhere, but everyone has cancer cells. In healthy people the immune system takes care of cancer cells before they’re a problem.
You MUST include victims of SECOND HAND smoke. My wife never smoked but both her parents, sister and 3 brothers smoked a lot. Dad died of lung cancer, now my wife has lung cancer.
Ditto with my B-in-Law. He never smoked, but everyone in his office smoked (this was back in 1960’s-1970’s). He also died of lung cancer.
Then the ratio is 5:1.
You may have a point that smokers deteriorate their immune system. It is true that rogue cells (cancer cells) are generated constantly in body. The immune system recognizes them and kills them. When immune system is below par, cancer tumors can grow.
To keep you immune system in good condition, I have a list of 3 items I follow.
1. Good nutrition high in vegetables, fruits, lean meats, nuts, legumes. Less low quality carbs.
2. Excercise! This should be #1 item actually.
3. Get enough sleep and consume calories during a 10 hour period, nothing in other 14 hours.
I am trying my best to follow all 3, and so far so good getting ready to light 80 candles. My #1 is definitely aerobic exercise 4 times every week. That lets me get away indulging occasionally in non-healthy decadent foods. 14 hour fasting has helped keep me away from diabetes.
“1. Good nutrition high in vegetables, fruits, lean meats, nuts, legumes. Less low quality carbs.
2. Excercise! This should be #1 item actually.
3. Get enough sleep and consume calories during a 10 hour period, nothing in other 14 hours.”
Nice job! Despite the ‘medical community’ assuring us that Keto (or near-Keto, in your case) is just a fad diet, we now know better! The intermittent fasting is really good too. In our family, we do 36 fasts from Monday evening to Wednesday late mornings (and my stomach is reminding me that it’s nearly time eat again) - and then I always skip breakfast and often have a later lunch - so, usually, I can pound-in my daily food in 6 hours. And so far, so good, no weight gain for me, yet, even with a month of my wife’s cooking (which is really good).
I am sorry for your losses but 3.5% of all non-smokers get lung cancer.
The studies on second-hand smoke were all BS.
Not exactly true. There were good small studies out of Australia using non-smoking volunteers who claimed they were not effected by second hand smoke.
There were measurable decreases in lung function, measurable clamping of blood vessels, and cancer causing metabolites in their urine.
This was back in the 70’s or 80’s when we couldn’t measure as finely as we can now.
Unfortunately they were never followed up with more larger studies because then it was PC to promote non-smoking. PC decided the science was settled. So politics allowed both sides of the argument on how dangerous second hand smoke is to claim to be correct.
You failed to address the subject.
Are there any studies that show second hand smoke increasing the risk of lung cancer?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.