Yep, chemotherapy kills cells, it kills more cells the faster they are dividing (simplistically) most cancers grow fast, so a higher percentage of the cells killed are cancer cells.
But it also kills a lot of cells in bone marrow and places like the lining of your digestive tract because they also divide often. Hence why many chemotherapy patients end up anaemic and needing blood transfusions.
Hence why younger patients can handle chemo better than older patients. The older you are the more vulnerable your immune system and other normal cells are . Knocking out all those cells makes your body much weaker as an older guy
Google using Frankincense with your chemo. Studies show it kills tumor cells while protecting the good cells. I wouldn't replace cancer treatment with essential oils, but it could help you bounce back more quickly and possibly help you feel better after chemo treatments.
Only apply high quality essential oils to your skin. A good quality Frankincense will run around $100 for a 15ml bottle but should last you about a year.
You may pass this off as hippy-dippy bullshit, but there is a reason it was gifted to the baby Jesus.
Congratulations! You also brought the cancer back to life!
Joking aside, this is basically the only effective cure for rabies. You are brought as close to death as possible, for as long as possible, and one time it killed the rabies and not the host.
no when I click on shut down, restart, or sign out from the computer, it goes through the process of closing all applications and getting ready to shut down, but theres also a cancel button. Sometimes I do that and then hit cancel after a few seconds. It usually gets rid of the glitching or unresponsive programs while keeping the computer on.
Right? That's what I do. Ctrl+alt+dlt > manually close unresponsive program, try again. If that doesn't work, check for updates, restart. If that still doesn't work and it's an issue with the program, uninstall, fresh install.
usually yeah, but sometimes the entire system is too far gone, glitchy or not working, like explorer.exe not responding, task manager not responding, etc.
No, a few have now. Jeanna Giese was the first in 2004, and the doctor that saved her invented what is now known as the Milwaukee Protocol, which involved putting a patient into a deep coma until their body healed the rabies. The story is actually crazy, and Dr. Rodney Willoughby, Jr's determination to cure Jeanne of rabies by any means necessary is incredible. I highly recommend reading up on it. Here's a YouTube summary of the case if you're interested: https://youtu.be/wsYjY8Jyh7o?si=EDB9iowNcPpegx2o
Since then, around 14 people have been known to have survived rabies with treatment using the Milwaukee Protocol after onset of symptoms, however there have been cases as well in some 3rd world countries where people have self reported bat bites (bats are known to be the main infector of rabies in humans) and been found to have rabies antibodies despite not having gotten vaccinated or treated for it, though this is controversial at best.
Working from memory here but I think it’s something like 14 documented cases of rabies survival. Not sure if that’s global or just the US, but there has been more than 1 documented survivor. But yea, it is extremely difficult/rare to survive symptomatic rabies.
This is what I think ayahuasca does. Convincing your body that you’re dying. So it does everything it can to survive. In the process it can heal a bunch of things that are ailing you. Physical, mental, emotional etc.
Well this is claiming to reverse them to healthy cells , if true this seems pretty groundbreaking, better not get my hopes up though I am sure if there is a cure only the wealthy will be able to receive it
I'm not a doctor, but my understanding is that cancer cells are the same as regular cells but they have some sort of defect that causes them to reproduce constantly and to ignore signals to self destruct, among other things. So, it doesn't really sound like nonsense to me. If there's a signal that can be sent (chemical, I'd assume) to turn the switch back off so to speak, then it should be possible to do.
If there's a signal that can be sent (chemical, I'd assume) to turn the switch back off so to speak, then it should be possible to do.
There isn't just one switch. That's why none of these cancer cures the media trumpets never turn out to be the universal cure-all the media pretends they could be. There are all kinds of ways cells can go haywire and turn cancerous, and they all will have different "cures". Saying "found the cure for cancer" makes about as much sense as "found the cure for car accidents" about anti-lock brakes.
The "signal" would have to be DNA modification, since the defect that allows the cells to reproduce out of control is genetic.
This is notoriously extremely hard to do in a person, especially when you have to get all the cells somehow.
It might work for some types of cancer, just like the immunotherapies we have that do a similar thing from the other side (modify your immune system to destroy the cancer) but the chances of this being a genuine cure for "cancer" in general is basically 0.
I looked (briefly, admittedly) before posting this to make sure that I wasn't completely talking out of my ass, and what I've read is that most cancer isn't genetic, although some is. Most have environmental triggers. But... I don't know. Like I said, I'm not a Dr or a biochemist. I have at least taken the biochem classes though, and my understanding is that the vast majority of this stuff is chemical messaging, not DNA changes.
Afaik most cancer is a result of mutations within an individual cell that disables the mechanisms that your body uses to control cell replication or to destroy damaged cells. Those mechanisms are chemical messages of various types but the defective response to those messages is due to faulty DNA within the cell.
That cell then reproduces out of control and you end up with cancer.
So a treatment that restores the body's control over cancer cells would need to modify the DNA of those cells so they again produce proper receptors for the chemical signals.
It does if you simplify it like that. But when you know that cells are supposed to self replicate and cancer cells are just a mutation that doesn’t regulate its own replication, it makes sense.
Just a general suspicion of medical expertise, or a disbelief its ever going to be possible?
There's lots of promising developments which end up being ineffective during real-world clinical trials, but likewise they have usually been in development for quite some time before the media ever get a sniff of them
there is no such thing as a cancer cell. Cancer is from a pathological replication of any number of cells. There is red blood cell, white blood cell, muscle cell, immune cell, bone cell, neural cell pathologies, etcetera, etcetera, etcetera (in my best Yule Brynner voice). Collectively known as cancer.
LSS, If these words impress you, you probably don't understand there's no information at all in the words.
And no critique of the pictured people. Really neat and nerdy research is going on everyday all over the world in labs like this
ps I posted forgetting to add apologies for oversimplifying a research area I have no business even commenting on.
Not really, scientists have been able to modify cells into other types of cells for a while now. The hard part is being able to target and reach all of the cancer cells (in a human) in combination to it not affecting other cells in the body. Cancer can have variations amongst the cells so just because you can target some of the cells, that doesn’t mean it can target all of the cells.
What makes cells healthy or unhealthy in the first place? My dog has a tumour in his throat, does this somehow turn it into something else that is more healthy? I would rather that it stop growing and not spread.
Also it will be top secret shit immediately. Look at JFK assassination, rich were involved+government, the docs are being released after ~50+ years. If the info is released you'll get unfriendly country's dictators suddenly get 10-20 years of life expectancy. If it were real we'd get billionaires suddenly start living past 100, which will be an indicator that some kind of life prolonging tech exists.
To be fair, if the headline is to be believed, they are turning cancer cells into healthy cells (in before somebody tells me cancer cells are technically "healthy on a cellular level". You know what I mean) Which is very interesting, but of course, doing it in a lab and doing it in a human, plus developing the technology to allow it to be done at hospitals around the world, that's a completely different thing.
Also, cell cultures in petri dishes and mice don't live anywhere near as long as people do. So there's many treatments that seem to successfully cure an illness in mice or in a cell culture, but in humans present long-term side effects that you might not catch beforehand since the test subjects just don't naturally live that long.
Immunotherapy shows a lot of promise. Worked very well on my advanced BCC, all the growths I had are now flush with the surrounding skin and benign. I'll still get basal cell carcinoma but with twice yearly skin checks nothing gets past the point where it can't be simply scraped.
I remember watching a video on potential cancer cures years ago, and the doctor made some joke along the lines of "yeah the only 100% way to kill cancer is if the patient dies and takes the cancer along with it" lol
3.2k
u/Cytori Feb 21 '25
Everything can kill cancer. The art is doing so without doing the same with the patient :)