Cancer: causes and cures

[hiker]

More I think about cancer and more I compare different cases around me more I am convinced cancer is first and foremost “spiritual “ disease.
Trying to cure cancer just from without and not venturing within is usually a lost battle. That is why ultimate cure for cancer will remain elusive as long as we don't change the paradigm.

Jay and Hunter interviewed Paul Leendertse and Aria Konrad about how cancer (and other illnesses) is rooted in unresolved stress and other mental ”blockages”:

Of course, physical reasons would have to be taken into account (like carcinogenic chemicals, covid jabs causing turbo cancers, and so on), but I also think that cancer is mainly caused by unsolved mental issues.

I remember reading Dr. Leonard Coldwell’s ”The Only Answer to Cancer” several years ago, and what stood out was the notion that even if cancer can be cured in various ways, it will likely come back if the mental and emotional stress that you have lived under is not resolved.

I agree with this, but I wonder about babies and children with cancer. Have they carried a "spiritual" problem from another/other life?

In the interview, they mention generational trauma as one reason for cancers in babies and children (starting from 1:59:58).

Perhaps vaccinations and other bodily irritants, and even individual life plans (cancer at a young age, planned before an incarnation, could possibly be ”needed” as an experience for that particular soul and/or for the souls that it is in contact with), could be considered as a cause as well.

 

[Huila]

FenBen (Fenbendazole) promising results in Stage 4 cancer Studies
Fenbendazole Studies in stage 4 breast cancer and prostate cancer patients. Perhaps useful in turbo cancer cases. Fenbendazole, inexpensive, widely accessible antiparasitic drug used in veterinary medicine. Patent expired in the early 1990s, making FBZ available as a generic drug.

Fenbendazole as an Anticancer Agent? A Case Series of Self-Administration in Three Patients - Case Report Oncology 2025;18:856–863

Case 1 An 83-year-old female. October 2021. Stage 4 breast cancer. Initially diagnosed in 2009.Treated 2009, bilateral mastectomy.

Recurrence was diagnosed in 2021. Liver biopsy, confirmed metastatic breast. Ascitic fluid confirmed metastatic breast carcinoma. Magnetic resonance imaging of the spine, October 2021 metastatic breast cancer, T10, T12, L1, L2, L3, L4, L5, S1, S2, and the iliac bones. A PET/CT scan on December 29, 2021, showed six hypermetabolic lung lesions. Largest was 2.8 × 1.5 cm. Hypermetabolic liver lesions, 2.9 × 1.7 cm. Hypermetabolic bone lesions, notably a 5.0 × 2.9 cm lytic lesion in L4, extending into the spinal canal, etc. The patient declined further conventional chemotherapy or radiation therapy and was placed under hospice care.

November 22, 2021. Self-administering FBZ daily at a dose of 222 mg. In December 2021, she received fulvestrant injection, (an estrogen receptor blocker) intended to inhibit cancer growth. January 2022- Targeted radiation for two painful spinal metastases. These tumors disappeared rapidly, relieving her pain within a few days. Continued taking 222 mg/day of FBZ for 8 months. During this time, her liver enzymes normalized. CA 27.29 tumor marker dropped from 316 (November 2021) to 36.6 (July 2022). April 20, 2022, PET scan confirmed the absence of any abnormal metabolic activity indicative of cancer. June 2022- Patient was confirmed to have no evidence of active disease. All treatments were discontinued, and she was considered to be in complete remission. Follow-up monitoring was scheduled every 3–6 months. Throughout her FBZ treatment, she continued her regular supplementation of vitamin D (5,000 IU) and a multivitamin. Subsequent PET scans showed no abnormal metabolic activity. The FBZ treatment period revealed no adverse effects at this dosage. The patient remains recurrence-free and continues to take FBZ daily nearly 3 years after being declared to be in remission.

Joe Tipp’s Protocol - Fenbendazole Dosage Guide Calculator


Case 2, Prostate cancer, 75 year old man

Bone scans and CT scans, metastases in the spine, pelvic bones, and right humeral head. Conventional treatments. Complementary treatments. The use of FBZ coincided with continued regression of metastatic lesions and sustained undetectable PSA levels. After 26 months of sustained regression and no new progression, the patient remains in near-complete response and continues FBZ with conventional therapy.

Case 3, 63-year-old man

Hip growth, melanoma. PET-CT showed multiple hypermetabolic foci – peritoneal and retroperitoneal nodules, focal uptake in the stomach and small bowel, lesions in the right gluteus medius, quadratus femoris, and L5 vertebra. Conventional and complementary treatments. The patient remains melanoma recurrence-free over 11 months after being declared to be in remission.


Case Presentations. All three patients, no reported adverse effects. Conclusion- FBZ demonstrates potential as a novel promising therapeutic option for repurposing in oncology. Its ability to contribute to tumor regression and achieve disease remission warrants further clinical research to establish its efficacy and optimize its use.

 

[Ricardo]

This media post on X doesn´t identify the people on it but they speak of a treatment that uses nanotech sized particles in combination with a small laser , something i´ve had yet to learn about.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1988822944294805925

 

[XPan]

This media post on X doesn´t identify the people on it but they speak of a treatment that uses nanotech sized particles in combination with a small laser , something i´ve had yet to learn about.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1988822944294805925

The rabbithole goes a lot deeper

And with far less good intentions.

The other day i listened to Thomas Röper, the german investigative reporter living in St Petersburg. At one point he referred to that yes indeed, they use graphene nanotechnology with apprently Korean scientists who are involved. They demonstrated it with mice by injecting graphene nanoparticles so that they could penetrate the blood-brain barrier.

Then with help of certain wavelengths they could alter and steer the behaviour of the mice !

Since Thomas Röper is very thorough about any sources to be checked carefully before he utters anything at Nuoviso’s german podcast - i would say there is flesh on the bones !

I will later dig into the postcast again in order to refer exactly what he said and where it is coming from (in case i got anything wrong writing out of memory)

Nightmare development
Also highly worrisome was that according to him, DARPA and Fort Detrick openly stated that they are working on artificial bacterias. They asked their own AI how to go best forwards in that goal. After the AI outlined how to go a out - they suceeded in creating artificial bacterias with specific duties. One kind destroys E.coli bacteria in humans. Which means they can eradicate people on a whole continent because if you have no more E.Coli bacteria, you can’t fully digest / take advantage of your food you eat.

I will get back to this, more truthful what exactly Thomas Röper said about this subject.

 

[SasaM]

The rabbithole goes a lot deeper

And with far less good intentions.

The other day i listened to Thomas Röper, the german investigative reporter living in St Petersburg. At one point he referred to that yes indeed, they use graphene nanotechnology with apprently Korean scientists who are involved. They demonstrated it with mice by injecting graphene nanoparticles so that they could penetrate the blood-brain barrier.

Then with help of certain wavelengths they could alter and steer the behaviour of the mice !

Since Thomas Röper is very thorough about any sources to be checked carefully before he utters anything at Nuoviso’s german podcast - i would say there is flesh on the bones !

I will later dig into the postcast again in order to refer exactly what he said and where it is coming from (in case i got anything wrong writing out of memory)

Nightmare development
Also highly worrisome was that according to him, DARPA and Fort Detrick openly stated that they are working on artificial bacterias. They asked their own AI how to go best forwards in that goal. After the AI outlined how to go a out - they suceeded in creating artificial bacterias with specific duties. One kind destroys E.coli bacteria in humans. Which means they can eradicate people on a whole continent because if you have no more E.Coli bacteria, you can’t fully digest / take advantage of your food you eat.

I will get back to this, more truthful what exactly Thomas Röper said about this subject.

Both of these things qualified for the category "stranger than you can imagine" in my case: wouldn't have imagined that humans would develop technologically enabled 'possession' and artificial bacterias that wouldn't wipe their neighbors by a disease, but by starvation regardless of how much they actually eat.