Vitamin d cures the flu and many other diseases. Your body uses it to make antimicrobial peptides which kill viruse, bacteria, fungi, cancer. A cure without the side effects of drugs, vaccines, chemo, etc. Check out the science.
@asherasator yes, hustings and methylatiin is about gene expression. Don't you understand that this means it is possible to turn off mutated genes that are causing the cancer? I think you are missing the point of what this means. Also I find it interesting you cite wiki when I assume you dismiss what it says about the cause if cancer being genetic mutation. This is classic cherry picking evidence to try and justify your position
@markgg1 No I was showing u the positives & elements u dismissed or wrote r not true or had no basis. I showed regardless of mutation, inheritance or whatever that there is possibility of changing the situation & influencing DNA. Ur entire thing with me was pH control had no affect bcus it's "purely DNA". I have shown regardless what the initial trigger is it can be dealt with & influence DNA & have proved pH is 1 the most important factors. U have been wrong & 1 sided on so many factors.
@markgg1 The cherry picking has been on ur side bcus u believe ur more scientific & my ideas or others alternatives were "quackery". Which the truth is the current standard attitudes, methods & treatments r the real quackery & psychotic dangerous methods. Simplicity can be even more scientific & build an even stronger foundation when the true & most positive facts r equated that ultimately show positive results. If results don't match theories then those theories must change, not vis-versa.
@markgg1 I wud appreciate it if u stopped approaching me as a person who's hindered progression or thinks backwards, when in reality I'm 1 who's done what seems the impossible in real life & also explained the logic behind it, which is actually 1 of the most advanced yet simple ideas that others understand but may not have explained in detail. This ultimately serves society for a positive outcome. The bottom line is what really works is what shud be modeled from, not what a million ppl think.
@markgg1 Gee lets see? Why wud the body go into cacinogenesis? Why wud the body change DNA to bundle up microorganisms with tumors? Why shud there even be a tumor, polyp, cyst, fibroid process? Carcinogens & germs with intelligence to force the body on DNA to create sacks for microbes or force white blood cells to attack everything? OR IS THE WHOLE PROCESS AN IMMUNE RESPONSE FIRST & FOREMOST TO SOMETHING & DNA smoke trails a side effect? Just like malaria initiated forms of Thalassemia Beta.
@markgg1Manuscript: DNA Methylation Changes In Multiple Myeloma "There is increasing evidence that in addition to genetic aberrations epigenetic processes play a major role in carcinogenesis."..."It could be demonstrated that there are specific methylation patterns in various types of human malignancies.13 Demethylating agents such as 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine are capable of reactivating tumor suppressor genes that are silenced by promoter hypermethylation." THIS WHAT I SAID FROM THE BEGINNING.
@markgg1 U said it cant be reversed once the mutation takes place, I proved it can. Show me also that the Knudson Hypothesis isn't the foundation for ur whole line of thinking. Ur wrong on ur whole position & have very limited knowledge, experience & education or any direct dealings with sick ppl & treatment. Ur not using intelligence to form properly calculated opinions on even the most up to date science. In 1997 Brian Druker cured Brian Romine with Gleevek, a DNA altering drug, look it up.
@markgg1 Not only safer it's more easily accessible for common ppl & can be understood. Yet the the DNA Micro experts r very rare & focus on drugs mostly, which ppl cannot easily get bcus it's not accepted & practiced everywhere & very expensive, also they only see one way of dealing with it bcus of training. The simple way of Natural Medicine or with common items (Baking Soda), diet, herbs etc. anybody can get CHEAP. The outcome can be positive & the whole point is healing & curing
@asherasator oh gawd!!!! don't u understand that changes in epigenetic imprints, such as methylation etc... starts from a genetic mutation in another linked gene.
I accept there is a little bit of evidence showing that cancer caused by epigenetic is inherited from parents, but it is widely accepted that a mutation somewhere triggers a epigenetic abnormally. Some people appear more sensitive to this happening, and maybe less mutations are required to kick start it.
@markgg1 Methylation is a micro DNA pH alkalinizing process. & IT IS NOT ONLY INHERITED FROM PARENTS (EVIDENCE & FOUNDATION IS SMALL but may have dealt with the same microorganisms) BUT THAT DNA PROCESS CAN START IN A PERSONS LIFE & READ AS A BY-PRODUCT. IT'S NOT AS SIMPLE AS U BELIEVE & THE AFFECTS R FROM SEVERAL FACTORS. & ONLY IN THIS LINE OF THOUGHT HARMONIZES WITH THE POSITIVE RESULTS PRODUCED & EXPLAINS THEM IN AN ACCURATE WAY. It's the real-deal & quite simple & thorough.
@asherasator Look... this is boring because you have some grand claims, but back them with nothing but the odd anecdote.
This is simply not evidence
I know I said I wouldn't respond before, but this time I wont unless you bring me proper evidence.. not just some guy who alleged cured himself by pouring bicarb on his toes, or electrifying his nipples or whatever quackery nonsense thats dreamed up but proper evidence done using the scientific method.
@markgg1Ur simply too arrogant & stubborn to get it. U proved u have no real calculating abilities of ur own. I'm done here & the only reason I wrote all this was so maybe someone else may get something & learn to help themselves or further investigate the facts. I've proven u wrong on everything u said or showed it's an incomplete misinterpretation of halfassed facts. I've taken on PhDs & MDs & proven them wrong, ur not even a challenge & completely out of your league. Bye Bye.
@markgg1 All ur DNA rant & basis is limited to ur interpretation. The ultimate effect & reason for any of the mutations forward or backward that u cudnt get is ultimately from the RNA (the CPU & Memory) which can be a doorway & point of interception, RNA communicates to DNA (Hard Drive/storage unit) & affects all sorts of protein catalysts. The body as a whole with all it's complexity, immunity & metabolism works & affects in unison with RNA, it goes both ways, an open system, 2 way street.
@markgg1 if it wasn't wasn't open/holistic a virus cudnt get in there & do what it does, or after the immune response to organisms & after a long process of defense triggers RNA, then proteins & the effect if serious & long term will be left on the genetic blueprint (DNA). So positive effects intercept from the RNA communicate to DNA, & bcus cancers r usually newer system effects they can still be dealt with unlike anemias from malaria & long term DNA imprints several generations deep
@markgg1 & in malarial anemias the mutation provides a level of protection against the disease, that's the whole point & cause of the mutation: to deal with environmental factors, build defense for future generations. In cancer there is no genetic protection bcus its from a variety of things, so the trigger is something else & along the lines of what I wrote & usually triggered by lifestyle & immune-response to current microorganism(s) triggering carcinogenesis. & THAT EXPLAINS CANCER
@markgg1 DOCUMENTA GEIGY, SCIENTIFIC TABLES pg354:MInor Constituents of Nucleic Acids "More than 20 minor purine & pyramidine nucleosides have been found in the hydrolysates of RNA isolated from organisms. There r several classes of these minor components. In the largest class the bases r methylated. The majority of the theoretically possible methylated derivatives of the common bases have been found. Another class has the sugar linked to an unusual portion of the base. Yet another class has..
@markgg1 ..a hydroxyl group of the sugar methylated...The minor constituents are by direct methylation of the RNA molecule, & the enyzymes responsible r reffered to as RNA methylases. @ least 8 separate RNA methylases have been demonstrated. These enzymes r widely distributed in living organisms. The methylated bases r not distributed @ random but r specifically located in the RNA molecule...Several minor components have also been found in addition to the 4 common bases of DNA. The DNA of ...
@markgg1 ..animals & plants contain 5-methylctosine & that of certain bacteria contain 6-methycytosine. The constituents arise by direct methylation of DNA. @ least 2 DNA methylases exist. 1 methylates adenine & the other cytosine of DNA."
So this is the center of action for Methylation & obviously the point of trigger with any DNA associated cancer. In the early days of molecular biology Tomas Cech hit proteins with detergents (alkalines) & destroyed em. Bicarb is a light detergent.
@asherasator Detegetns obviously kill cancer cells, as well as normal cells.
I bet my mortgage that these detergetn experiments were done in a petri dish, and not a human being.
I could get a bunch of cancer cells, set them on fire, or bleach them or they will die. But a drug must be able to be inside a human body and not kill it.... this basic logic seems to escape you,.
@markgg1 No the basic logic escaped u that bicarbonate 8.2 does not kill ALL cells in a dangerous way & HAS BEEN PROVEN DELIVERED TO THE TUMOR & ERADICATED IT! R THEY ALL LIARS? ALL THE PPL IN THE WORLD WHO'VE CURED THEMSELVES, INCLUDING PPL I'VE KNOWN OR BY SIMONCINI R ALL LIARS? IF THEYR NOT LIARS THEN THEY PROVE UR THEORY WRONG.
Ur pH description is of a healthy person, not 1 who's been sick after awhile, that's what ur missing
ALL I'VE DONE IS SHOWN U & EXPLAINED WHAT U DON'T UNDERSTAND
@asherasator Im not claiming any of them are liars, but they are being conned by a fraud. One lady you may have heard of is called Gina Camuti. She went to Simanicci, and is now dead from Cancer.
Seems as if the miracle cure works some of the time, just like proven therapies.
The funny thing is many people have been cured completely by chemo, but a doctor will never say that to a patient because he has the integrity to know there is a small chance it will return. Simonicci should be imprisoned
@markgg1 I just listened to 2 interviews with Gina, she is not dead bcus of Simoncini, the chemo treatment ate away a great portion of her stomach before he did anything with him. She was very sick by the time she went to him, cervical cancer & colon. In the interview she looks very sick. I know so many where chemo didn't help & completely destroyed them. Getting rid tumors isn't enuff. Chemo is totally incorrect as a treatment & most know it, they just don't kno what else to do.
@markgg1 I kno the way flaky ppl sometimes present alternative ideas & bring up yoga & other mind body things (which some may have truth) doesn't look good from a scientific perspective. Especially if 1 doesn't believe in any of that or r atheistic etc. But the only reason it comes thru those channels is bcus that standard institutions don't do anything else, u have some cancer centers that focus on nutrition etc. & may have some positive results but a lot r standard.
@markgg1 The truth is hospitals & oncologist r destroying many cells & tissues with an uncontrollable weapon. & it is killing in some cases faster than the cancer. I know a guy who had tumors surgically removed, changed his diet & they never came back, did nothing else. There has to be a merger of some alternative practices that have a good track record with medical institutions. What's being done now is not enuff, It has to be dietary, supplemental & maybe surgical if tumors r too large.
@markgg1 A drug alone will NEVER cure all forms of cancer bcus they're all different. My opinion is a high animal protein diet is contributing to alot of these problems. Its complicated when everyone I see from medical professional to average schmos pretty much have an incomplete education, don't know how to eat right, bad habits & just plain stupid. They're bringing it on themselves. I tell everybody with a medical problem "U did it to urself" & when I analyse in detail the facts prove it
@markgg1 I know so many MDs that were involved with my family & friends that shud be imprisoned for what they're doing. One of my best friends is dead now from a complete screw up & complications brought on that cudv been prevented. My grandmother is dead from 2 completely stupid MDs with mis-diagnosis & surgery that in the end were proven incorrect & completely unecessary. I cud go on & on most MDs kill hundreds of ppl in their careers with mis-diagnosis, drugs & treatment & that is a fact.
@markgg1 Standard medicine has no choice besides drugs & usually invasive procedures, the side effects from drugs in many cases produce more complications, then those r given more drugs, then more complications & more drugs etc. The logic is "the benefits vs the condition" but in serious illness MDs can't differentiate where the medically induced sickness is from an original condition & it's being swept under the rug. Surgeries that r wrong, the reality is worse than the movie Hostel & horror
@markgg1 I've toyed with idea some bacteria in the body 'Spontaneously Appear' from nowhere (the Apeiron of Anaximander). Theres materials & energy within & around cells to appear. Kinda like the idea ammonia, carbon dioxide & water triggered by a lightning strike created primordial life, or photosynthesis with chlorophyll. But those concepts r even more on the fringe. Bacteria love sodium with a pH of 6.7-7.3 which builds charge on cells & is in physical abundance.
@asherasator Bacteria dont like PH of 6.7-7.3 (seriously, where are you getting this info?). Bacteria are extremelly diverse, and some strand like alkali, some like acids... but al living things generally like neutral because it is stable.
Now you have gone from claims without evidence, to simple madness. How on god's green earth do you propose Bacteria 'appear' in the body. This is absurd! The information for bacteria is vastly complex. Where would the genes and DNA come from?
@markgg1 R u just an argumentive person? I cud say the sky is blue & u wud disagree. The 6.7-7.3 is a GENERALITY, meaning around neutral. Only certain bacteria like the extremes of pH like Thiobillus Ferroxidans @ 1& Vibrio Cholera as high as 9 or H.Pylori in the stomach. Cheesus ur anal & if it ain't in a book or local college u can't imagine anything, u have no creativity or pioneering ability. The body is the source for the 'material & energy', just like theories of primordial life.
@markgg1 & I said "toying" meaning thought about, not completely believe in or can prove. Also the 6.7-7.3 is generality around the pH of sodium which bacteria use in moderate amount for H+ & since the body is water (7) & salt it's the perfect breeding ground for most of the common blood flora. Cheesus is this stuff too hard too understand or imagine? Any extremes of pH kill most bacteria, yes there r a few that can thrive, why is pickling done? Come on man ur being a little too oppositional.
@markgg1 Also Y are animals, bacteria, viruses etc. studied for human comparison & purposes? Bcus there r some parallel observations & comparisons & things to be learned from. Photosynthesis happened & happens it appeared from 'nowhere' but explained in the absorption of EM frequencies in chlorophyll. Anyways it doesn't matter. What is ur theory for primordial life?
@markgg1 YES A HEALTHY PERSONS WHOLE SYSTEM IS IDEAL, SICK PPL R NOT IDEAL CHEMICALLY, THAT'S Y THEYR SICK. TIME IN A SICK STATE TAKES ITS TOLL CREATES IMBALANCES OF A VARIETY OF RATIOS. ALL UR EXPLANATION R FROM A BASIC FOUNDATIONAL POSITION. NOT FROM A EXPONENTIALLY UNDERSTOOD POINT WITH THE SICKNESS WREAKING HAVOC. U KEEP THINKING CANCEROUS SICK PPL FUNCTION LIKE NORMAL HEALTHY PPL. AFTER A CERTAIN POINT THEY DO NOT. WHAT THE FUCK IS SO DIFFICULT UNDERSTANDING THAT?
@markgg1 My theory isn't "made up" it's explaining exactly what ppl r doing, it's like reverse engineering. They're neutralizing acid & killing microorganisms & viruses & RNA & DNA sometimes reflect it, REGARDLESS WHICH WAY IT'S DONE. Some of the cancers r mold, fungi & parasites (or combination of all of em) triggering the response @ times leaving a genetic blueprint which ur so focused on. SOME METHODS INVOLVE DRUGS, SOME ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES & HAVE PARALLEL CONCEPTS. THAT IS THE REALITY
@markgg1 What u failed to understand for alternative therapy which involve diet is how it can affect the cellular level, which in turn affect the RNA & DNA level which loop right back to the cellular etc. >∞. Basic nutrition & food r so important to enzyme activity & metabolism its ridiculous & can have all sorts of anti-bacterial, anti-fungal, ant-parasitical, anti-microbial properties, WHICH MOST BASICALLY TRAINED IN COMMON MEDICINE NO NOTHING ABOUT. Yet this is so simple it's elementary.
@markgg1 None of these ideas go against the laws, rules & what is known of the most basic aspects of biochemistry, microbiology, molecular biology. They just use the full playing field as resources instead of only drugs or invasive treatments, which is the narrow tunnel-vision those that read Skeptical Inquirer believe in, they think theyr some how more scientific denying everything they don't understand. Just bcus someone doesn't believe something doesn't mean it isn't true. History proves it
@markgg1 I've provided an incredible amount of things, uv provided nothing proving those claims (the actual ppl cured etc.) themselves wrong or an alternative explanation for their cure. Uv only denied the ability to cure in that manner yet showed nothing with the actual ppl as liars, or still sick thinking theyr cured yet no symptoms r evident. PROVE SOMETHING AGAINST THE ACTUAL PPL. Show something besides a formula, equation or textbook elementary study. This has been a full week of u & me.
@markgg1 Article: Tumor-Secreted Lactic Acid Promotes IL-23/IL-17 Proinflammatory Pathway: "Many tumor cells produce large amounts of lactic acid by altering their glucose metabolism" YOU SAID "SMALL" UR WRONG..."The effect of lactic acid was strictly regulated by extracellular pH"..."lactic acid is a proinflammatory mediator that is secreted by tumor cells to activate the IL-23/IL-17"...."Targeting the lactic acid-induced proinflammatory response may be a useful approach for treating cancer."
@asherasator IT says 'targetting the lactic acid MAY be useful. This is a pure speculation from a scientist, and requires more work. It could turn out to be helpful in treatment...
But I keep repeating over and over and over and its tearing my hair out YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE PH OF A PERSONS BODY!!!!. there is no way you can 'alkalise' the tumour cell to tagret the lactic acid. You could create drugs to target it, but I don't dispute this. This doesnt not prop up your made up theory.
@markgg1 WIKI: "Interleukin-23 (IL-23) is an important part of the inflammatory response against infection..promotes upregulation of the matrix metalloprotease MMP9, increases angiogenesis and reduces CD8+ T-cell infiltration. Recently, IL-23 has been implicated in the development of cancerous tumors". All the evidence point to a truth much closer in reality to my Hypothesis. Learn to put 2 & 2 together, calculate, that's what the brain is for. Sometimes things r implicated & can be understood
@asherasator GENETICS MANUAL, G.P. Redei, pg646: "Methylation protects DNA from most of the restriction endonucleases".. "Methylation in the promoter region usually prevent the transcription of that gene"..."It is assumed that Methylation of infective (inserted) DNA is part of the eukaryotic defense system". Once again all promoting the idea that this whole process is immunity response @ the RNA & DNA level.
This is all reactionary & attempt to eradicate something in the cell or system.
@markgg1 Errata...I mean the patient was Bud Romine. These ideas have been around for quite sometime, drugs & other things can trigger the curing process. Anything from a pharmaceutical company can be found in nature or & usually where they get things from to create a product, or the process can be initiated by other methods when explored AFTER THE RIGHT IDEA BECOMES THE FOCUS. Everything I wrote has no quackery: putting a banana on ur head & calling a voodoo god in a circle with ppl
@markgg1 Ur line of thinking is 1 sided & obsolete & does nothing for advancement & those u influence with ur bullshit don't know anything. Stop being such a stubborn bonehead bcus u may have done a paper on this for a grade or learned a halfassed idea from a book or online. Grow up & evolve. U don't know everything & stop acting like ur an expert bcus ur not. U need to admit ur wrong not to me BUT TO URSELF. If u want to be a real player in this field & do something about it.
Methylation is caused by proteins. in Cancer, some mutated proteins methylate genes for tumour suppression, therefore causing the cancer indirectly.
Im not trying to be an expert, but I do know three fundamental facts: 1. Cancer is 100% due to genetic mutation.
2. It possible to mutate dna, and by chance maybe mutate it back to the original code - but this cannot be done in a practical way to deal with cancer.
3. Alkali/acid ph of cells has nothing to do with cancer.
@markgg1 Wrong! I've explained it over & over, The whole reason for the ENTIRE PROCESS IS IMMUNE RESPONSE WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT LEAVE IT'S MARK IN THE GENETIC BLUE PRINT. Now ur focus is proteins, which is a link in the chain put not the first link. I cannot believe u don't understand this? Cheesus Christ. The body is a holistic unit, affect one thing & many other things r affected, there is not one singular process that doesn't affect the whole unit. It's a very sensitive machinery.
@markgg1 it doesn't matter if u start from a Macrocosmic point: diet, pH raising chemicals or microorganism destruction, all together. OR start with the DNA Methylation with drugs that trigger Microcosmic DNA . THE TRIGGERS CAN BE DONE FROM UPSTAIRS OR DOWSTAIRS. THE PROCESSES EVENTUALLY BECOME THE SAME. Alternative medicine usually start from a the Macro, common pharmacology from the Micro. Doesn't matter both focus on the body & sometimes produce the same results. YET THE MACRO IS SAFER.
@markgg1 U have to understand all food acts like a drug in one way or another & CAN & DO AFFECT DNA, pharmacology drugs are nothing more than products for sale of condensed things from sometimes common natural items created for a "Magic Bullet" affect but ultimately for business reasons. So it depends on which side of the fence ur on & what playing field u want to be on. THE BOTTOM LINE IS WHAT WORKS! IF PPL R GETTING POSITIVE RESULTS THEN THAT MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED . NOT IGNORED OR DOW N PLAYED
@markgg1 The only real difference in our opinions u put DNA as #1. I'm mutable on DNA as #1 or #2 in the process (DNA HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN FOR EVERY CASE & originally based on the Knudson Hypothesis), but either way CAN BE INFLUENCED, IT IS NOT IRREVERSIBLE. That as a foundation affects the overall attitude whether one can cure or not & other possibilities. So ur position leads to almost nothing & more research. Mine has the potential for a cure & IS THE WAY TO CURE.
I have always been a critic of private medicine simply because I feel if in private hands its about profit and not health. How can a private hospital make money out of a perfectly healthy person who requires no care? Obviously it cannot, so its not in their interest to treat underlining causes of disease, but to give you the most expensive treatment (perhaps unnecesarily).
I think we may agree here on some of the flaws of a private system, but my observation is a public system is much better.
@markgg1 I have not used baking soda as a treatment but endorse it bcus it is bio-chemically correct when one understands that it's buffering the tumor, tissue etc. So if one accepts that there is truth to tumor development as part of an acidic tissue state with microorganisms & immune-response then it makes perfect biological sense. Yes it's one aspect of cancer but the ones in the tissues this is key. Ur main problem is that u see it so complex u raise ur hands up lost in technical jargon.
@markgg1 The real main problem is not the science, It's the lack of simple logic & understanding the place of that science to an even larger body of information, which when calculated like an exact formula produce the correct end results. How many musicians do you know that go to school, get degreed etc. that can't write a good song? They lack talent & are missing something, yet they can tell you all kinds of theoretical things but when it comes down to it they suck. The same thing in medicine
@markgg1 Also what u have to understand there r ppl in this world that can do things others can't, history is full of examples, yet they set down things that get appreciated later when more intelligent generations are seeing from a different position, only when certain things r purged or an attitude changed can they finally start to see, bottom line is talented ppl see things in "unconventional ways" then point them out to others & they're like "wow how come I didn't see that so simple"?
40 Years ago a North Carolina Doctor Started Giving People Baking Soda mixed with Maple Syrup, it Cured Cancer, Just take enough daily to keep PH Level above 8
@deadadelta u cannot physically make your blood PH go above 8. I promise you if you test your blood (testig urine is not blood) than it will NEVER deviate from about 7.4 unless you have a metabolic disorder, meaning you have acidosis.
What a sad and hateful man you are GiacomoVeteran. You poison yourself and your suroundings with all that spite. The doctor giving these treatments is medically trained cancerspecialist,who has worked with cancerpatients for years. In the case of skincancer like the above, he treats it with iodin tincture, not bakingsoda. He uses sodium-bicarbonate (bakingsoda) for internal cancers, and his explanation of how and why it works, is very sensible from biokemistry point of view.
I know of no doctors in the world of oncoplogy and dermatology who would BOTHER writing a reply on youtube to idiots using Baking Soda to CURE CANCER! No way. No how. Again, anyone with Melanoma using any therapy but, SURGERY will certainly DIE! This is a guarantee. Write Ucla oncology, USC oncology. Mayo Clinic and others around the world and they will LAUGH at the idea Melanoma is cured with Baking Soda. I am waisting my time here, I know, but, I am FURIOUS with asshole's who use the ignorant.
@GiacomoVeteran have you ever heard of the Semmelweis effect? Its still as much of an issue today as it ever was. Your idiot friends the doctors are totally irresponsible and incapable of basic reasoning. I expect they claim that Candidiasis is not caused by antibiotics - check the journals for yourself and see just how scientific your doctor friends really are. If you think they are remotely decent or objective people then you are very naive indeed.
@GiacomoVeteran Actually, it's spelled "wasting", not "waisting", so before you start spewing slurs against people and call them idiots, you should check your spelling or take an English grammar class. I am also skeptical of these treatments, but there is no need to be spiteful to those who do believe.
@GiacomoVeteran I agree. Its depressing seeing such unscientific bullshit on u tube. Its dangerous because people will pour baking soda over their cancers instead of seeing a proper doctor.
@GiacomoVeteran Correct about the baking soda but wrong about other ways to cure nodal melanoma. Let me know if you want to see PET scan results and before/after photos of stage 4 patient.
This is BULLSHIT. Very very dangarous telling patients and the public this shit. IF the man before her has Melanoma and he uses 'Baking Soda' *(he'll die believe it) (LOL) I guarantee you after having Basal Cell for 26 years and a Mutation myself (I am very educated and know doctors worldwide. Many are my FRIENDS and they have tried many therapies and it helped but,. I assure you it WAS NOT SODA you idiots) this guy will DIE! IF he has Melanoma and not just a Fungus from Hiking! learn english!
@mario0186 no you of sh.... you are a doctor who wants to make millions ,then tell us you have to die ,sorry ?
so you dont belive the video ,how about you go to the Doctor in the video, and see for yourself, then you can say, he is a asshole' in his face ????? ja you are Chicken !!!!!!!! chicken
@ThePowerofReason You are a fucking idiot. I am wasting my time with an asshole like you who knows nothing of genetics and DNA. However, Power of Reason in my book is: I Pray you get Malanoma and DIE from your stupidity. You are a worthless human being & Dangerous to folks with Cancer. . My Dog has more sense! Bye bye stupid ass. Oh, you must be selling something. Baking Soda re-packahed as a 'Cure for cancer?', Ha! That GIRL probably DIED from her miserable stupidity as well. Good. LOL
@GiacomoVeteran Cancer cannot thrive in an alkaline environment of 7.4 & higher, baking soda is a buffer, at the most basic biochemical level it is theoretically correct. It is biochemically impossible for cancer to grow in an alkalinized state, regardless whether it's a fungus or some other organism. Most cancer patients are in acidosis, especially with the drugs given. That is a fact.
@asherasator Most cancer patients are not in acidosis, this is not a fact. Cancer does not 'thrive' in acidic environments at all. Cancer like any cell in the body thrives in neutral conditions. Its true that sometimes an acidic environment is detected around cancer cells, but this is because cancer has figured out how to respire anaerobically (without oxygen) and lactic acid builds up.
@markgg1 Well I helped 3 ppl get rid of cancer completely by alkalinizing their system & controlling microorganisms. U can have ur opinion, & I can have mine, but some opinions are closer to the truth. What is typically taught about cancer is absolute bullshit & the treatments usually do more harm than good. & cancer does thrive in acidic environments of a pH below 7, not only cancer, microorganisms & fungus thrive in an acidic state but also cold sores which I've taught ppl to control with pH
@asherasator I doubt very much you cured Cancer. If you had, you would win the nobel prize for medicine and overturn 50 years of mounting evidence.
Science by definition is repeatable, meaning scientists in one country should get the same results as a scientists on another. It is well known what causes cancer, and has been verified hundreds of thousands of time of times. Science is not about opinion, but about evidence. The mainstream theories on what causes cancer are mainstream for a reason.
@asherasator U physically cannot influence the PH of blood using diet or ingesting any of these agents you are proposing. Read a little bit on the ph of blood and how it is regulated, and how it controls breathing in a well researched human physiology textbook and you will understand why this PH idea is bogus.
If you believe cancer thrives in acid (which is biologically unfounded) then please point me to a study.
As I said, I dont do opinions, I do fact based on evidence.
@markgg1PH IS ABSOLUTELY AFFECTED BY DIET & OTHER HABITS OR MEDICATIONS. YOU KNOW NOTHING OF PRACTICAL VALUE IN THIS SUBJECT. When the body is more acidic the immune system is weaker, that's the point, & it allows the microorganism to proliferate. If you don't understand that there is no point on discussing this with you. & I said it's a much more complicated process. You simply hone in on small things without understanding the whole picture.
@asherasator I do understand what your suggesting, but it is not true. I study biomedical sciences as a degree and I learn the forefront of human biology based on hundreds of published papers by scientists from across the world, most of which have no agenda except to help people live longer. Your 23 years of personal research may be intensive, and I dont doubt your sincerity, but science disagrees with you...
if science disagrees with you, than your hypothesis has a big problem.
@markgg1 Does not matter how many agree or disagree & most studies become worthless seeds for theories & practices that are not the best way to deal with illnesses. Every individual is different & requires special attention & creating a specific method for them. When studies & statistics become the foundation for mass protocol that is gonna fail overall, & I've seen it over & over again. Everything I've done had various labs from hospitals & one university involved.
@asherasator thats not true. Oncologists plan treatments in a individualistic way. They find out what proteins are involved, and how to target them using the tools at their disposal which tends to be surgery or specific drugs which by the way are proven to work.
Look, do this as an experiment than which will disprove your ph idea. If you litmus test your blood I 100% promise and assure you it will not change from about 7.4%.
I I just want the truth to be known about this quack medicine.
@markgg1 & my opinions are based on over 23 years research, practice & successful outcomes with a 100% success rate of not just cancer but other diseases which are viewed with narrow tunnel vision by basically trained medical "experts". I understand pH & it's functions & is extremely important in maintaining health. There are ppl around the world curing cancer in unconventional ways. Does not matter if you believe me, you can go on being a fool. You think you figured it out? You know nothing.
@asherasator If microorganisms cause cancer than how do you explain the clear correlation between sun light and skin cancer? Its got nothing to do with bacteria or viruses. Its DNA damage caused by UV light. 50% of cancers lack a functional P53 protein (look it up) its known as the 'guardian of the genome' because it stops cells going out of control. If it is mutated due to DNA damage, it can lead to cancer.
go to any scientific journal and tap in 'cancer review' for more information.
@markgg1 You explained only one process from the sun, not for every other form, the lack of proteins can come from a variety of ways not just one. Also just like mutations can happen for the negative, mutations can happen for the positive when proper treatment is established. The body can do many things if you allow it & change things. That's why it's a complicated process & every individual must be studied & take control from the various stages they'r in. Cancer is not the same in everybody
@markgg1 This is not quack medicine. It's just dealing with biochemical processes from a different way. You have too much faith in your education. You can either drink coffee for the caffeine or take a pill, both stimulate. Get the point yet? Until you see a person healthier or get rid of something terminal that didn't require invasive procedures it's a whole new ball game, I understand the skepticism of medical students & professionals
@asherasator It is totally unproven with no evidence base. This idea contradicts well known human biology. There are no published studies AT ALL that support this theory.
We must have some mechanism to figure out truth from fiction, and that is science. it is repeatable, unbiased, and is seeking the truth.... this truth finding mechanism does not support your theory one bit. How can you support and believe something that is not proven by anybody, except vague anecdotes on the internet?
@markgg1 If you're really looking on the internet there are plenty of examples. Pau D'Arco alone has been used to cure cancer & one Japanese pharmaceutical company has a US patent from the an isolated component from the bark proven to get rid of tumors. You're simply seeing what you want to see. Also the majority of academias studies won't delve into these other areas simply because they spent enormous time on current hypothesis, ppl don't want to rock the boat or stray from what is normal
@asherasator I agree science doesnt always explore the alternatives and could do more, but Cancer research is a huge field and there have been some wacky things researched, such as why tea drinkers are less prone to cancer, and cannabis has got a few studies. You will be surprised what is tested. If you go to pub med and google things like 'cancer cannabinoids' there are studies done. Lots of them. I am not seeing what I want to see. I am interested in what helps people, and what does not.
@asherasator Aspirin has been shown to reduce Cancer which may interest you as aspirin is from willow bark, so is a 'natural' remedy. Although there could be other explanations, it is promising if they figure out the processes.
I agree there are problems eg drug companies want profit only so don't research smaller diseases (although government try to get them to do it) but not all of medicine is funded by private
I dont expect to change our mind, but don't be so skeptical of a proven science.
@markgg1 One final thing here's a little pH in living systems info from wiki: "Enzymes and other proteins have an optimum pH range and can become INACTIVATED or DENATURED outside this range". Ur hardcore about not believing in the pH & cancer connection on other videos as well. When it comes to food it doesn't matter what its original pH state is, it's how it metabolizes in the body & affects the blood. pH alone not being optimal can cause cellular mutations & destruction.
@asherasator I know about enzymes and their optimal PH ranges thank you, but the human body does not deviate from 7.4ish.... If it did, it would stop the enzymes from working optimally (as you just showed) and kill the person.
The human body does not change it's ph. You need to understand that this whole idea is bogus science. It is simply untrue.
@markgg1 Go to any drug store & ask for pH strips or look them up on internet & see what they're used for. Ur statement is so foolish I'm amazed. Ppl do vary in their pH & the body tries to keep it "7.4ish". Ur completely wrong in the established theory u emphasize. It's dogmatic no different than a religious fanatic, basically u think u know everything about this subject & u simply don't even know basics. Anyways what about that patent I pasted the link for u have nothing to say about that?
@asherasator yes please get the litmus strips and test your blood. It will never change. Urine and saliva is not your overall PH as it can change depending on what you have eaten.
Yes the dialog is pointless if you wont test your blood PH and find out it wont change. If your so confident of this theory, than test it out for real.
@markgg1 Yes the blood is tightly regulated with buffering & can fall especially over time & illness, BUT THE OTHER AREAS DO GET ACIDIC (by your own admission) & THATS WHERE THE PROBLEMS ARE. Where's a tumor in the blood or the tissues? What do you think happens in sick people. The blood dumps acidity into the cells to maintain it's pH regularity, DOES IT NOT? WHERE DOES IT STEM FROM? THE BLOOD! DO U EVEN REALIZE UR LACK OF COMPLETING THE THOUGHT PROCESS TO IT'S LOGICAL CONCLUSION?
@markgg1 The way u only see 1 aspect of a larger process is the EXACT reason why ppl fail to be able treat or cure something, bcus of an incomplete view, picking & choosing with selective sight (mental filter) & believing their own bullshit which is based on ignorance, ego & a desire to feel right & believing they know it all, when they don't know shit bcus they can't observe, admit & equate details of an entire process, possibly bcus they get lost in jargon, like stuck in mud.
@markgg1 Most ppl in the medical field have no business being in there & are too stupid & lack basic logical abilities that build up into more complex reasoning. Over 90% of "experts" I've dealt with were complete morons, focusing on trivial points that have nothing to do with the overall obvious conclusions when looked at completely with a little (un)common sense. & Their end results speak for themselves, most cannot cure anything bcus they're suffering with a mental disorder called ego.
@markgg1 My initial statement was 'acidosis' which in the tissues & other areas of the body, 'acidemia' is in the blood, I'm not disagreeing that the blood regulates, my overall point has been the build up over time or illness the blood dumps & deals with acid & it goes in the tissues, most of the problems occur in tissue, except leukemia. Sick ppls fluids do go below 7.35, I've seen 6.5-7.0 which is the perfect pH for many bacteria. IS IT NOT? SO STOP FOCUSING ON JUST THAT.
@asherasator But by what method did you test their PH. If saliva or urine, this is not a indicator of the body as a whole or any part of it. Urine is alkali when the body is excreting excess alkali....
@markgg1 The bottom line is I know many trained ppl have a hard time believing there are completely different effective simple ways of treating something with EVEN BETTER RESULTS is hard to digest. For a long time I wanted to have faith in the medical field but with all the ppl I've been involved with & also observed from a distance, the over point that was emphasized is they really didn't know what they were doing & the standard protocols failed with serious illness. Too many mistakes for me.
@markgg1 Simple things like giving ppl insulin to a diabetic in a hospital (standard US protocol now) where the person at home was on a pill occasionally & controlled mostly thru diet, had catastrophic conclusions & complications, that was swept under the rug bcus of sloppiness & routine without very focused observation. I've seen many misdiagnosed & treatments begun that created other problems then those were treated killing a person, then when I forcefully stopped em everything went away
@markgg1 From my point of view most MDs cannot properly diagnose or treat serious illnesses & most of the time push them further in sickness & iatrocide. A family member had pneumonia was in the hospital for 2 weeks given many different strong anti-biotics & eventually Zithromax & still didn't do anything, they eventually let her out bcus they gave up & she wanted to leave, I gave her Pau D'Arco & Grapefruit Seed Extract (pro-biotic) which got rid of it in days. On & on the same thing
@markgg1 The grim reality is pros are treating things that aren't there & misunderstanding what they're witnessing & they're really seeing a stage of something of an entirely different process, yet focus on one minute aspect & build a whole treatment around the wrong idea, when I proved so many wrong & shattered their egos most cud not believe it. I then sometimes go over the whole process & explain what was really going on. The simplicity was too complex for them, all their training was in vain
@markgg1 Just using test results numbers on a clipboard are not enuff to diagnose someone, There is way more information necessary into a persons life needed to get a proper idea, put the same info in front of 2 MDs they'll interpret them different. An uncle in a different state 3 years ago was having serious stomach issues, they were convinced after all kinds of testing it's the gall bladder, it was removed, nothing changed he dad the same problems afterwards. So they chased another delusion
@asherasator I cannot talk off the US system as Im from UK. Here the government pays for healthcare, so are incentivised to cut costs where they can. This is why the NHS focuses on preventative medicine where it can, in terms of free stop smoking services, free contraception, and emphasis on cutting obesity and lowering blood pressure. A GP here makes more money if he cuts his patients blood pressures as this saves money in the long term.
@markgg1 & That's what I'm finding more & more, pros are literally delusional & cannot even learn from their mistakes, what happens when they fuck up is they build a mental wall & compartmentalize, they're so robotic they just keep doing what they kno out of habit & don't want to relearn things & can legally get away with it. They explain away deadly mistakes incorrectly to make themselves feel better, iatrocide is sometimes very clear & shud have their license & privileges stripped.
@asherasator Your pointing out flaws in the medical system, and perhaps medical training, but thsi is not an argument against the science of medicine. You are simply describing flaws in the practical execution of a science.
I could not argue that the theory of splitting the atom was incorrect because the physicists kept on leaking radiation into the water or blowing themselves up.
If the health system is not working, then it needs reform. The actual science is still sound.
@markgg1 What it really comes down to they have all kinds of things they want to use: various tests, equipment, drugs etc. Research activities: studies, statistics, inventions of all sorts giving ppl jobs: a business machine with routines, they want to use all this stuff. Obviously some it is necessary & serves some good. But the flip side is there is a lot of unnecessary things as well. They don't know when to pull back or use very simple methods or step out of the box.
@asherasator My main gripe with you is that you claim scientific principles of human health that are simply incorrect, e.g. the alkali/acid thing, or that curing cancer is as easy as drinking sodium bicarbonate, or pouring it on tumours (bearing in mind most tumours are within the body). You yourself admitted that Cancer is a umbrella term for hundreds of diseases, it makes no sense that such a simple cure will do anything. Cancer is vastly complex, hence good treatment is difficult
@markgg1 I am honestly telling u cancer can absolutely be controlled & cured with (1) Change of diet. (2) pH attention. (3) Pau D'Arco as treatment. Those 3 things alone done right can have incredible repeatable results. Each one has various stages & can evolve into other methods. Also (4) Checking for parasites & eradicating em. (5) Exposure to various radio frequencies as therapy. (6) Utilizing natural radio-active foods as a metabolic form of chemotherapy. These things work.
@asherasator Please point me to a study where this doctor guy has cured Cancers. I would be fascinated to read it. His own website is obviously biased, so I cannot take this as trith, but if he has published results in proper scientific journals such as Nature, or pub med please point me to it as I could not find anything.
@markgg1 I don't know if he's ever cured a common cold, I pasted it for the information & his observations. Shudn't that US patent be on the front page of every newspaper & on every news channel on earth? But it's not, why is that? I mean every Dr on the planet shudv heard of it but most haven't. U see the whole medical community is in a state of 'looking for a cure' as opposed to 'knowing it's here' & BEEN HERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. Think of all the researchers & their funding
@markgg1 There is too big of a 'machine' involved globally with research & all kinds of established theories & millions of $ of funding how many jobs wud be lost if the medical community & the public realized one of the most serious diseases with all kinds of profitable mechanisms attached to it cud be reduced to the level of a cold? Also bcus it's status is so "Mysterious & we're still learning about it" most cannot accept a simple cure, they want some grand glorious thing, not baking soda.
@markgg1 & of course the cure has to be from some big pharmaceutical company or university after 50 years of research with some ingeniously evolved drug & treatment, not a .99 cent box of baking soda from the local store or $4 tea for a S. American tree bark from a health food store! It's like the expected messiah it has to be some major thing with pomp & breakthrough, yet as far as I'm concerned precisely bcus it's so simple it makes it more awesome: The mouse that rawred.
@markgg1 Also the dietary changes necessary wud shock ppl & the public, realizing that almost all commercially accepted things wud have to change, who wants to sacrifice McDonalds, Steakhouses & all kinds of "fun rewarding" food "that tastes so good"? The sacrifice for an almost cancer free society is too much for ALL KINDS OF BUSINESS, FAMILY VALUES, EVEN RELIGIOUS THINKING. EVERYTHING SOCIETY IS USED TO MUST CHANGE & MATURE. & it's available right now & has always been there.
@markgg1 As far as Green Tea having any benefits for cancer, it's really bcus of it's antioxidant & anti-microbial properties, it's like a low dose anti-biotic more or less, but it alone is not enuff. When one understands the germ element of cancer it makes sense & like anything else can have good results under certain conditions usually in conjunction with other beneficial things. But like so many 'isolated' answers then blown up is not correct, no different when it's reduced to just DNA.
@markgg1 1st of all ur entire DNA theory is founded on the Knudson Hypothesis whose statistical work was done on Retinoblastoma & or Li-Fraumeni Syndrome (which is RARE, LESS THAN 400 worldwide) BOTH MINOR COMPARED TO OTHER FORMS OF CANCER. P53 protein flipped on or off is nothing but a byproduct of the greater immune response. In Li-Fraumeni CHEK2 is around 30%. How can u even take this to the greater whole? That is insanity & very weak science to found a universal theory.
@asherasator Simple bullshit. P53 is involved in cancer when the P53 gene is damaged. P53 gene codes for a protein that cannot be turned on, because it cannot be phosphorylated due to amino acid differences... all due to genetic mutation.
Do you even understand the central tenet of biology? that genes code for proteins? Damaged DNA means, a protein with a different chemical shape. It has been established that 50% of Cancers are due to mutated P53 genes. I can point you to evidence if u want?
@markgg1 I've seen plenty on P53. I do not believe P53 is "damaged" UR LOST IN A MISINTERPRETED OPINION & WEAK FOUNDATION ONLY BCUS UR LEARNING ABOUT IN SCHOOL.. PPL HAVE STOPPED TUMORS. I KEEP TELLING U IT IS A BYPRODUCT FROM A DYNAMIC PROCESS INITIATED FROM THE IMMUNE SYSTEM. ALSO IF TUMORS CAN BE ELIMINATED & UR RIGHT P53 CANNOT BE REVERSED, THEN IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. EITHER WAY UR POSITION IS COMPLETELY FALSE. NO BODY SAID RAISE PH TO DANGEROUS LEVELS. UR SILLY
@markgg1 Bicarbonates pH is 8.2 enuff to destroy any negative microorganisms in the human body WHICH IS INSIDE ANY TUMOR, CYST OR FIBROID ALSO STOP THE ENERGY SOURCE. U CANNOT PROVE THAT WRONG. UV BEEN WRONG & WERE WISHY WASHY ABOUT (1) pH affected by diet. Then u admitted it is affected. (2) The entire DNA source evidence is built on a small % of cancers. (3) Lactic Acid as a tumor energy. Ur just completely wrong & really know nothing & worse yet understand nothing.
@asherasator Yes Bicarb could destroy cancer, as well as any cell in the body... this isnt surprising. Fire, poison, hitting with a hamour could also kill cancer. The point is you cannot target cancer without targeting other normal cells. It would be great if we could flood the body with inhibitors of the tumour causing proteins (like chemo) but unfortunately these proteins usually have an essential function, so is impossible except in small doses. This is why chemo is given in small doses.
@markgg1 A least u admit bicarbonate can destroy cancer. Simonici showed when a tumor is delivered bicarbonate cancer goes away (without destroying other tissue). Y? Bcus it neutralizes acid & destroys bacteria proving the theory correct as the patients have said. Bicarbonate is the bodys fist choice for raising pH & drinking some acidic products metabolize alkaline effects so ur wrong about drinking & pissing the same pH with everything. Bicarbonate in low doses is beneficial & not harmful
@asherasator I never said diet could change PH, because that is nonsense. Its biologically impossible for that to happen. Ive already asked you to read about PH homeostasis to see why its a silly idea.
2: the cause of 100% OF ALL CANCERS is due to genetic damage (caused by radiation, viruses, bacteria, errors in replication, or spontaneously)
3: I never said Lactic acid is an energy source for tumours. I said some tumours can live without oxygen and the lactic acid is a byproduct
@markgg1 U SAID: "Urine and saliva is not your overall PH as it can change depending on what you have eaten." Any MD will tell u these readings still give a idea of the system, WHAT THE FUCK DO U THINK THEY'RE READ FOR? Did you read the Duke findings of Lactic Acid or do u have selective sight? & ur pH description is about blood acidemia, NOT TISSUE ACIDOSIS WHICH DOES HAPPEN ESPECIALLY AROUND THE TUMOR & GERM PROLIFERATION WHAT I'VE BEEN MENTIONING. WHAT IS WRONG WITH U? GO REREAD UR BOOKS!
@asherasator your urine will be more alkali when you ingest alkali, because your body is getting rid of excess alkali because as I keep repeating the body stays at a constant 7.4. If you drink a litre of lemon juice, your urine will be acidic, its quite simple to understand.
The tissues are bathed in blood so there is a very limited local effect of blood PH. As I have said more than once, a minority of cancer has a slightly acidic environment because the cells are secreting lactic acid as waste
C6-H12-O6 (sugar) + 202 (oxygen) = 6H20 (water) and 6CO (carbon dioxide) + ATP (the universal energy currency in nature)
The carbon dioxide is absorbed in liquid as carbonic acid, which lowers the PH of blood (as blood is made of mainly water) by a tiny fraction. The brain recognises this is happening and makes you breath faster to expel the carbon dioxide.
Acidosis can be caused by too much exercise, or a breathing problem (and NOT cancer)
@asherasator In the case of a lack of oxygen the equation is different C6 H12 06 = 2C3H6O3 (lactic acid) + 2 ATP (having oxygen creates 18 ATP.. so this method is a lot less efficient, but works in emergencies).
Cancer cells are constantly replicating so need a lot of energy. This is why they evolve mechanisms to get blood vessels to grow towards them, or can use sugar without oxygen present, hence lactic acid secretion, and hence a barely detectable lowering in PH in the immediate area.
@markgg1 Ur describing basic functions. Where is the typical blood flora: Lactococcus, Enterococcus, Streptococcus, Pediococcus etc. within any of those processes especially over time? What are they feeding off of? In 1977 Domingue and Schlegel confirmed "the existence of a novel bacteriologic system in the blood. They cultured staphylococcal-like bacteria and filamentous cocco-bacillary forms from 71% of the blood specimens from ill patients; and from 7% of supposedly healthy people."
@markgg1 Wiki on DNA Epigenetic control: "It has been shown that the epigenetic control of the proto-onco regions and the tumor suppressor sequences by conformational changes in histones directly affects the formation and progression of cancer. Epigenetics also has the factor of reversibility, a characteristic that other cancer treatments do not offer...HDAC specifically has been shown to play an integral role in the progression of oral squamous cancer.
@markgg1 That's DNA Methylation described which is an Alkylating process. Positive effects for cancer whether alternative or clinical HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON: THE ALKALINIZING PROCESS. In 1 way or another from the DNA or blood delivering or direct deliverance to the region/tumor of alkalinity show positive & eradicating effects. Thats a fact. So those 1,700,000 papers unless they go along with this standard are worthless. My position has been completely solid, factual & practical=THE TRUTH
@markgg1 Also HDAC inhibitors suggested for CHK2 are used FOR INFLAMMATORY which is once again IMMUNE SYSTEM. In fact raising tissue pH will trigger DNA methylation & control P53 & CHK2 & control apoptosis, ALL BACKS EVERYTHING I MENTIONED EVEN BASED ON UR WEAK DNA THEORY. Ur entire position is 1 small minor view of a much bigger playing field. I am 100% correct & challenge any Ph.D. or M.D. on this worldwide.
@asherasator My position is backed by any serious cancer researcher and scientist, all based on decades of intense research.
Your 'theory' is made up in your head based on vague anecdotal evidence.
This is getting a little frustrating, because Im getting the impression you think all opinions in science are valid, d (like in politics)This is not the case, as its about facts and evidence.
If you raise someone's PH (which is impossible), they will die. Simple as that
@asherasator I wanted to inbox u a conversation I had with a lady who also believed this alkali thing. She looked into it more and found it that it was nonsense. She admitted she had been wrong, and even removed her comments. I wish you could be less stubborn.
I keep asking you to provide the evidence... the PROPER evidence, not just someons theory with no research to back it up, but you cannot.
On the other hand I can point you to thousands of properly researched journal articles.
@markgg1 The Baking Soda Theory has to be correct from a biological point of view: IF lactic acid is fueling tumors, how does the body buffer? It produces bicarbonate. If administered directly to the tumor THAT'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT THE BODY WUD DO ON IT"S OWN. I view tumors as immune defenses bundling up microorganisms, so the organisms MUST BE ERADICATED TO PREVENT FURTHER TUMORS. If the bicarbonate keeps the tissue pH 7.4+ then that prevents further organisms proliferating, PERFECT LOGIC.
Lactic acid is a waste product of cells burning sugar for energy without oxygen Its a well known process and happens when people exercise vigorously as they are using more oxygen than they can breath in. Its very inefficient (makes 1/18th of the ATP than with oxygen) but useful for emergencies Some cancers have cleverly created means to also utilise this mechanism meaning they dont need a blood supply
@markgg1 It's not that I don't think "the scientific principles work". I think they're just 1small aspect. I know in some cases ppl see what they want to see, the medical world suffers from tunnel-vision. They pretend to be so scientific & try to distance themselves from simple natural things, which also have scientific proof if one looks, as I proved to u. I don't like the selective thinking/filter. Also when ppl r so confident they're becoming stupid & don't relearn or evolve.
@markgg1 & if ur really into science u shud kno almost everything established now was rejected @ some point by somebody, every truth is always rejected by "experts". My true position is that "it's already been figured out" in many subjects. A lot of research & science that's going on is really doing nothing but employing ppl or giving others something to do. Some of the most advanced developments have happened that got side lined simply bcus it didn't fit into a current agenda or system.
@markgg1 It's pretty much like this: A route/path has already been created, certain important details & observations are mentioned. Then others travel the route get out of the car walk away from the path & writing down observations, then more ppl do the same thing over & over traveling further away from the path & forget where the travel plans were going then they're so far from the path giving details that may be true & can be done anywhere but really doesn't mean anything, over describing.
@markgg1 Sepecialized Specialists Specializing Specialties for Specialized Specialists creating more Specialties for more Specialized Specialists creating newer Specialties, a merry go round going nowhere. All they see is one merry go round & forgot there are other rides to over describe, LOST IN JARGON, that's turned into a religion for ppl wanting to feel important & have self worth then pushing aside anything that doesn't fit into the mold held dear. But is almost of no practical value.
@markgg1 I've seen Prednisone create complications in many: bring on diabetes, create physical distortions, induce further pulmonary problems when it's being administered for the lungs or arthritis, then dosage increased, swell the legs & body to freakish levels, when the drug was stopped ALL SYMPTOMS WENT AWAY. The MDs were insisting it was helping yet it clearly wasn't. Many cannot discriminate or tell the difference between further complications from treatment & an actual illness.
@markgg1 I've watched Albuterol creates all kinds of complications: create seizures, induce diabetes, make ppl crazy etc. Xopanex has been clearly proven NOT to do the negatives of Albuterol & work 100% better yet the standard protocol in the US was Albuterol. They don't even know how to use the best the pharmaceuticals have to offer. Routine & other reasons are involved in their choices. Some simply don't want to admit what works best from their own bag of tricks available. It ridiculous.
This has been flagged as spam show
Vitamin d cures the flu and many other diseases. Your body uses it to make antimicrobial peptides which kill viruse, bacteria, fungi, cancer. A cure without the side effects of drugs, vaccines, chemo, etc. Check out the science.
hamptonbay100 3 months ago
@asherasator yes, hustings and methylatiin is about gene expression. Don't you understand that this means it is possible to turn off mutated genes that are causing the cancer? I think you are missing the point of what this means. Also I find it interesting you cite wiki when I assume you dismiss what it says about the cause if cancer being genetic mutation. This is classic cherry picking evidence to try and justify your position
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 No I was showing u the positives & elements u dismissed or wrote r not true or had no basis. I showed regardless of mutation, inheritance or whatever that there is possibility of changing the situation & influencing DNA. Ur entire thing with me was pH control had no affect bcus it's "purely DNA". I have shown regardless what the initial trigger is it can be dealt with & influence DNA & have proved pH is 1 the most important factors. U have been wrong & 1 sided on so many factors.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 The cherry picking has been on ur side bcus u believe ur more scientific & my ideas or others alternatives were "quackery". Which the truth is the current standard attitudes, methods & treatments r the real quackery & psychotic dangerous methods. Simplicity can be even more scientific & build an even stronger foundation when the true & most positive facts r equated that ultimately show positive results. If results don't match theories then those theories must change, not vis-versa.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 I wud appreciate it if u stopped approaching me as a person who's hindered progression or thinks backwards, when in reality I'm 1 who's done what seems the impossible in real life & also explained the logic behind it, which is actually 1 of the most advanced yet simple ideas that others understand but may not have explained in detail. This ultimately serves society for a positive outcome. The bottom line is what really works is what shud be modeled from, not what a million ppl think.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Yes you really are the next Hippocrates.
If you can prove that a single cancer is not due to mutation, please point me to it.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Gee lets see? Why wud the body go into cacinogenesis? Why wud the body change DNA to bundle up microorganisms with tumors? Why shud there even be a tumor, polyp, cyst, fibroid process? Carcinogens & germs with intelligence to force the body on DNA to create sacks for microbes or force white blood cells to attack everything? OR IS THE WHOLE PROCESS AN IMMUNE RESPONSE FIRST & FOREMOST TO SOMETHING & DNA smoke trails a side effect? Just like malaria initiated forms of Thalassemia Beta.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator i said point me to a single cancer not due to mutation, not carry on spouting misinformation.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1Manuscript: DNA Methylation Changes In Multiple Myeloma "There is increasing evidence that in addition to genetic aberrations epigenetic processes play a major role in carcinogenesis."..."It could be demonstrated that there are specific methylation patterns in various types of human malignancies.13 Demethylating agents such as 5-aza-2'-deoxycytidine are capable of reactivating tumor suppressor genes that are silenced by promoter hypermethylation." THIS WHAT I SAID FROM THE BEGINNING.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator And how do you think genes get methylated?
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 U said it cant be reversed once the mutation takes place, I proved it can. Show me also that the Knudson Hypothesis isn't the foundation for ur whole line of thinking. Ur wrong on ur whole position & have very limited knowledge, experience & education or any direct dealings with sick ppl & treatment. Ur not using intelligence to form properly calculated opinions on even the most up to date science. In 1997 Brian Druker cured Brian Romine with Gleevek, a DNA altering drug, look it up.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Its hard to know where to begin on why suggesting you can 'fix;' someones genome is crazy talk.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Not only safer it's more easily accessible for common ppl & can be understood. Yet the the DNA Micro experts r very rare & focus on drugs mostly, which ppl cannot easily get bcus it's not accepted & practiced everywhere & very expensive, also they only see one way of dealing with it bcus of training. The simple way of Natural Medicine or with common items (Baking Soda), diet, herbs etc. anybody can get CHEAP. The outcome can be positive & the whole point is healing & curing
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator oh gawd!!!! don't u understand that changes in epigenetic imprints, such as methylation etc... starts from a genetic mutation in another linked gene.
I accept there is a little bit of evidence showing that cancer caused by epigenetic is inherited from parents, but it is widely accepted that a mutation somewhere triggers a epigenetic abnormally. Some people appear more sensitive to this happening, and maybe less mutations are required to kick start it.
Nothing to do with PH though
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Methylation is a micro DNA pH alkalinizing process. & IT IS NOT ONLY INHERITED FROM PARENTS (EVIDENCE & FOUNDATION IS SMALL but may have dealt with the same microorganisms) BUT THAT DNA PROCESS CAN START IN A PERSONS LIFE & READ AS A BY-PRODUCT. IT'S NOT AS SIMPLE AS U BELIEVE & THE AFFECTS R FROM SEVERAL FACTORS. & ONLY IN THIS LINE OF THOUGHT HARMONIZES WITH THE POSITIVE RESULTS PRODUCED & EXPLAINS THEM IN AN ACCURATE WAY. It's the real-deal & quite simple & thorough.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Look... this is boring because you have some grand claims, but back them with nothing but the odd anecdote.
This is simply not evidence
I know I said I wouldn't respond before, but this time I wont unless you bring me proper evidence.. not just some guy who alleged cured himself by pouring bicarb on his toes, or electrifying his nipples or whatever quackery nonsense thats dreamed up but proper evidence done using the scientific method.
I doubt you can bring it so have a nice life
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1Ur simply too arrogant & stubborn to get it. U proved u have no real calculating abilities of ur own. I'm done here & the only reason I wrote all this was so maybe someone else may get something & learn to help themselves or further investigate the facts. I've proven u wrong on everything u said or showed it's an incomplete misinterpretation of halfassed facts. I've taken on PhDs & MDs & proven them wrong, ur not even a challenge & completely out of your league. Bye Bye.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator You just keep talking. I asked for evidence. CIte me some evidence please.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 All ur DNA rant & basis is limited to ur interpretation. The ultimate effect & reason for any of the mutations forward or backward that u cudnt get is ultimately from the RNA (the CPU & Memory) which can be a doorway & point of interception, RNA communicates to DNA (Hard Drive/storage unit) & affects all sorts of protein catalysts. The body as a whole with all it's complexity, immunity & metabolism works & affects in unison with RNA, it goes both ways, an open system, 2 way street.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 if it wasn't wasn't open/holistic a virus cudnt get in there & do what it does, or after the immune response to organisms & after a long process of defense triggers RNA, then proteins & the effect if serious & long term will be left on the genetic blueprint (DNA). So positive effects intercept from the RNA communicate to DNA, & bcus cancers r usually newer system effects they can still be dealt with unlike anemias from malaria & long term DNA imprints several generations deep
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 & in malarial anemias the mutation provides a level of protection against the disease, that's the whole point & cause of the mutation: to deal with environmental factors, build defense for future generations. In cancer there is no genetic protection bcus its from a variety of things, so the trigger is something else & along the lines of what I wrote & usually triggered by lifestyle & immune-response to current microorganism(s) triggering carcinogenesis. & THAT EXPLAINS CANCER
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 DOCUMENTA GEIGY, SCIENTIFIC TABLES pg354:MInor Constituents of Nucleic Acids "More than 20 minor purine & pyramidine nucleosides have been found in the hydrolysates of RNA isolated from organisms. There r several classes of these minor components. In the largest class the bases r methylated. The majority of the theoretically possible methylated derivatives of the common bases have been found. Another class has the sugar linked to an unusual portion of the base. Yet another class has..
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 ..a hydroxyl group of the sugar methylated...The minor constituents are by direct methylation of the RNA molecule, & the enyzymes responsible r reffered to as RNA methylases. @ least 8 separate RNA methylases have been demonstrated. These enzymes r widely distributed in living organisms. The methylated bases r not distributed @ random but r specifically located in the RNA molecule...Several minor components have also been found in addition to the 4 common bases of DNA. The DNA of ...
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 ..animals & plants contain 5-methylctosine & that of certain bacteria contain 6-methycytosine. The constituents arise by direct methylation of DNA. @ least 2 DNA methylases exist. 1 methylates adenine & the other cytosine of DNA."
So this is the center of action for Methylation & obviously the point of trigger with any DNA associated cancer. In the early days of molecular biology Tomas Cech hit proteins with detergents (alkalines) & destroyed em. Bicarb is a light detergent.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Detegetns obviously kill cancer cells, as well as normal cells.
I bet my mortgage that these detergetn experiments were done in a petri dish, and not a human being.
I could get a bunch of cancer cells, set them on fire, or bleach them or they will die. But a drug must be able to be inside a human body and not kill it.... this basic logic seems to escape you,.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 No the basic logic escaped u that bicarbonate 8.2 does not kill ALL cells in a dangerous way & HAS BEEN PROVEN DELIVERED TO THE TUMOR & ERADICATED IT! R THEY ALL LIARS? ALL THE PPL IN THE WORLD WHO'VE CURED THEMSELVES, INCLUDING PPL I'VE KNOWN OR BY SIMONCINI R ALL LIARS? IF THEYR NOT LIARS THEN THEY PROVE UR THEORY WRONG.
Ur pH description is of a healthy person, not 1 who's been sick after awhile, that's what ur missing
ALL I'VE DONE IS SHOWN U & EXPLAINED WHAT U DON'T UNDERSTAND
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Im not claiming any of them are liars, but they are being conned by a fraud. One lady you may have heard of is called Gina Camuti. She went to Simanicci, and is now dead from Cancer.
Seems as if the miracle cure works some of the time, just like proven therapies.
The funny thing is many people have been cured completely by chemo, but a doctor will never say that to a patient because he has the integrity to know there is a small chance it will return. Simonicci should be imprisoned
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 I just listened to 2 interviews with Gina, she is not dead bcus of Simoncini, the chemo treatment ate away a great portion of her stomach before he did anything with him. She was very sick by the time she went to him, cervical cancer & colon. In the interview she looks very sick. I know so many where chemo didn't help & completely destroyed them. Getting rid tumors isn't enuff. Chemo is totally incorrect as a treatment & most know it, they just don't kno what else to do.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 I kno the way flaky ppl sometimes present alternative ideas & bring up yoga & other mind body things (which some may have truth) doesn't look good from a scientific perspective. Especially if 1 doesn't believe in any of that or r atheistic etc. But the only reason it comes thru those channels is bcus that standard institutions don't do anything else, u have some cancer centers that focus on nutrition etc. & may have some positive results but a lot r standard.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 The truth is hospitals & oncologist r destroying many cells & tissues with an uncontrollable weapon. & it is killing in some cases faster than the cancer. I know a guy who had tumors surgically removed, changed his diet & they never came back, did nothing else. There has to be a merger of some alternative practices that have a good track record with medical institutions. What's being done now is not enuff, It has to be dietary, supplemental & maybe surgical if tumors r too large.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 A drug alone will NEVER cure all forms of cancer bcus they're all different. My opinion is a high animal protein diet is contributing to alot of these problems. Its complicated when everyone I see from medical professional to average schmos pretty much have an incomplete education, don't know how to eat right, bad habits & just plain stupid. They're bringing it on themselves. I tell everybody with a medical problem "U did it to urself" & when I analyse in detail the facts prove it
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 I know so many MDs that were involved with my family & friends that shud be imprisoned for what they're doing. One of my best friends is dead now from a complete screw up & complications brought on that cudv been prevented. My grandmother is dead from 2 completely stupid MDs with mis-diagnosis & surgery that in the end were proven incorrect & completely unecessary. I cud go on & on most MDs kill hundreds of ppl in their careers with mis-diagnosis, drugs & treatment & that is a fact.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Standard medicine has no choice besides drugs & usually invasive procedures, the side effects from drugs in many cases produce more complications, then those r given more drugs, then more complications & more drugs etc. The logic is "the benefits vs the condition" but in serious illness MDs can't differentiate where the medically induced sickness is from an original condition & it's being swept under the rug. Surgeries that r wrong, the reality is worse than the movie Hostel & horror
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator ok
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 I've toyed with idea some bacteria in the body 'Spontaneously Appear' from nowhere (the Apeiron of Anaximander). Theres materials & energy within & around cells to appear. Kinda like the idea ammonia, carbon dioxide & water triggered by a lightning strike created primordial life, or photosynthesis with chlorophyll. But those concepts r even more on the fringe. Bacteria love sodium with a pH of 6.7-7.3 which builds charge on cells & is in physical abundance.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Bacteria dont like PH of 6.7-7.3 (seriously, where are you getting this info?). Bacteria are extremelly diverse, and some strand like alkali, some like acids... but al living things generally like neutral because it is stable.
Now you have gone from claims without evidence, to simple madness. How on god's green earth do you propose Bacteria 'appear' in the body. This is absurd! The information for bacteria is vastly complex. Where would the genes and DNA come from?
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 R u just an argumentive person? I cud say the sky is blue & u wud disagree. The 6.7-7.3 is a GENERALITY, meaning around neutral. Only certain bacteria like the extremes of pH like Thiobillus Ferroxidans @ 1& Vibrio Cholera as high as 9 or H.Pylori in the stomach. Cheesus ur anal & if it ain't in a book or local college u can't imagine anything, u have no creativity or pioneering ability. The body is the source for the 'material & energy', just like theories of primordial life.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator yep sorry, you gave neutral Phs, didnt notice.
I've never doubted that life came from non life billions of years ago, but this cannot happen in bodies. That is impossible.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 & I said "toying" meaning thought about, not completely believe in or can prove. Also the 6.7-7.3 is generality around the pH of sodium which bacteria use in moderate amount for H+ & since the body is water (7) & salt it's the perfect breeding ground for most of the common blood flora. Cheesus is this stuff too hard too understand or imagine? Any extremes of pH kill most bacteria, yes there r a few that can thrive, why is pickling done? Come on man ur being a little too oppositional.
asherasator 1 year ago 2
@markgg1 Also Y are animals, bacteria, viruses etc. studied for human comparison & purposes? Bcus there r some parallel observations & comparisons & things to be learned from. Photosynthesis happened & happens it appeared from 'nowhere' but explained in the absorption of EM frequencies in chlorophyll. Anyways it doesn't matter. What is ur theory for primordial life?
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 YES A HEALTHY PERSONS WHOLE SYSTEM IS IDEAL, SICK PPL R NOT IDEAL CHEMICALLY, THAT'S Y THEYR SICK. TIME IN A SICK STATE TAKES ITS TOLL CREATES IMBALANCES OF A VARIETY OF RATIOS. ALL UR EXPLANATION R FROM A BASIC FOUNDATIONAL POSITION. NOT FROM A EXPONENTIALLY UNDERSTOOD POINT WITH THE SICKNESS WREAKING HAVOC. U KEEP THINKING CANCEROUS SICK PPL FUNCTION LIKE NORMAL HEALTHY PPL. AFTER A CERTAIN POINT THEY DO NOT. WHAT THE FUCK IS SO DIFFICULT UNDERSTANDING THAT?
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 My theory isn't "made up" it's explaining exactly what ppl r doing, it's like reverse engineering. They're neutralizing acid & killing microorganisms & viruses & RNA & DNA sometimes reflect it, REGARDLESS WHICH WAY IT'S DONE. Some of the cancers r mold, fungi & parasites (or combination of all of em) triggering the response @ times leaving a genetic blueprint which ur so focused on. SOME METHODS INVOLVE DRUGS, SOME ALTERNATIVE THERAPIES & HAVE PARALLEL CONCEPTS. THAT IS THE REALITY
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 What u failed to understand for alternative therapy which involve diet is how it can affect the cellular level, which in turn affect the RNA & DNA level which loop right back to the cellular etc. >∞. Basic nutrition & food r so important to enzyme activity & metabolism its ridiculous & can have all sorts of anti-bacterial, anti-fungal, ant-parasitical, anti-microbial properties, WHICH MOST BASICALLY TRAINED IN COMMON MEDICINE NO NOTHING ABOUT. Yet this is so simple it's elementary.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 None of these ideas go against the laws, rules & what is known of the most basic aspects of biochemistry, microbiology, molecular biology. They just use the full playing field as resources instead of only drugs or invasive treatments, which is the narrow tunnel-vision those that read Skeptical Inquirer believe in, they think theyr some how more scientific denying everything they don't understand. Just bcus someone doesn't believe something doesn't mean it isn't true. History proves it
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 I've provided an incredible amount of things, uv provided nothing proving those claims (the actual ppl cured etc.) themselves wrong or an alternative explanation for their cure. Uv only denied the ability to cure in that manner yet showed nothing with the actual ppl as liars, or still sick thinking theyr cured yet no symptoms r evident. PROVE SOMETHING AGAINST THE ACTUAL PPL. Show something besides a formula, equation or textbook elementary study. This has been a full week of u & me.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Article: Tumor-Secreted Lactic Acid Promotes IL-23/IL-17 Proinflammatory Pathway: "Many tumor cells produce large amounts of lactic acid by altering their glucose metabolism" YOU SAID "SMALL" UR WRONG..."The effect of lactic acid was strictly regulated by extracellular pH"..."lactic acid is a proinflammatory mediator that is secreted by tumor cells to activate the IL-23/IL-17"...."Targeting the lactic acid-induced proinflammatory response may be a useful approach for treating cancer."
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator IT says 'targetting the lactic acid MAY be useful. This is a pure speculation from a scientist, and requires more work. It could turn out to be helpful in treatment...
But I keep repeating over and over and over and its tearing my hair out YOU CANNOT CHANGE THE PH OF A PERSONS BODY!!!!. there is no way you can 'alkalise' the tumour cell to tagret the lactic acid. You could create drugs to target it, but I don't dispute this. This doesnt not prop up your made up theory.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 WIKI: "Interleukin-23 (IL-23) is an important part of the inflammatory response against infection..promotes upregulation of the matrix metalloprotease MMP9, increases angiogenesis and reduces CD8+ T-cell infiltration. Recently, IL-23 has been implicated in the development of cancerous tumors". All the evidence point to a truth much closer in reality to my Hypothesis. Learn to put 2 & 2 together, calculate, that's what the brain is for. Sometimes things r implicated & can be understood
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator WHen did I deny that the immune system plays a part in Cancer?
Lets backtrack to the beginning.
You stated that a large proportion of cancers are due to the immune system attacking microorganisms. This is untrue.
Yes, the immune system can be involved in cancer and yes, epigenetics can be also.
BUT IT ALL STEMS FROM A GENETIC MUTATION.
A mutated protein can cause innappropriate epigenetic pringint.
You are citing things I agree with already, yet u interpret it incorrectly
markgg1 1 year ago
@asherasator GENETICS MANUAL, G.P. Redei, pg646: "Methylation protects DNA from most of the restriction endonucleases".. "Methylation in the promoter region usually prevent the transcription of that gene"..."It is assumed that Methylation of infective (inserted) DNA is part of the eukaryotic defense system". Once again all promoting the idea that this whole process is immunity response @ the RNA & DNA level.
This is all reactionary & attempt to eradicate something in the cell or system.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Errata...I mean the patient was Bud Romine. These ideas have been around for quite sometime, drugs & other things can trigger the curing process. Anything from a pharmaceutical company can be found in nature or & usually where they get things from to create a product, or the process can be initiated by other methods when explored AFTER THE RIGHT IDEA BECOMES THE FOCUS. Everything I wrote has no quackery: putting a banana on ur head & calling a voodoo god in a circle with ppl
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Ur line of thinking is 1 sided & obsolete & does nothing for advancement & those u influence with ur bullshit don't know anything. Stop being such a stubborn bonehead bcus u may have done a paper on this for a grade or learned a halfassed idea from a book or online. Grow up & evolve. U don't know everything & stop acting like ur an expert bcus ur not. U need to admit ur wrong not to me BUT TO URSELF. If u want to be a real player in this field & do something about it.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator
Methylation is caused by proteins. in Cancer, some mutated proteins methylate genes for tumour suppression, therefore causing the cancer indirectly.
Im not trying to be an expert, but I do know three fundamental facts: 1. Cancer is 100% due to genetic mutation.
2. It possible to mutate dna, and by chance maybe mutate it back to the original code - but this cannot be done in a practical way to deal with cancer.
3. Alkali/acid ph of cells has nothing to do with cancer.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Wrong! I've explained it over & over, The whole reason for the ENTIRE PROCESS IS IMMUNE RESPONSE WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT LEAVE IT'S MARK IN THE GENETIC BLUE PRINT. Now ur focus is proteins, which is a link in the chain put not the first link. I cannot believe u don't understand this? Cheesus Christ. The body is a holistic unit, affect one thing & many other things r affected, there is not one singular process that doesn't affect the whole unit. It's a very sensitive machinery.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 it doesn't matter if u start from a Macrocosmic point: diet, pH raising chemicals or microorganism destruction, all together. OR start with the DNA Methylation with drugs that trigger Microcosmic DNA . THE TRIGGERS CAN BE DONE FROM UPSTAIRS OR DOWSTAIRS. THE PROCESSES EVENTUALLY BECOME THE SAME. Alternative medicine usually start from a the Macro, common pharmacology from the Micro. Doesn't matter both focus on the body & sometimes produce the same results. YET THE MACRO IS SAFER.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 U have to understand all food acts like a drug in one way or another & CAN & DO AFFECT DNA, pharmacology drugs are nothing more than products for sale of condensed things from sometimes common natural items created for a "Magic Bullet" affect but ultimately for business reasons. So it depends on which side of the fence ur on & what playing field u want to be on. THE BOTTOM LINE IS WHAT WORKS! IF PPL R GETTING POSITIVE RESULTS THEN THAT MUST BE ACKNOWLEDGED . NOT IGNORED OR DOW N PLAYED
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 The only real difference in our opinions u put DNA as #1. I'm mutable on DNA as #1 or #2 in the process (DNA HAS NOT BEEN PROVEN FOR EVERY CASE & originally based on the Knudson Hypothesis), but either way CAN BE INFLUENCED, IT IS NOT IRREVERSIBLE. That as a foundation affects the overall attitude whether one can cure or not & other possibilities. So ur position leads to almost nothing & more research. Mine has the potential for a cure & IS THE WAY TO CURE.
asherasator 1 year ago
Comment removed
asherasator 1 year ago
I have always been a critic of private medicine simply because I feel if in private hands its about profit and not health. How can a private hospital make money out of a perfectly healthy person who requires no care? Obviously it cannot, so its not in their interest to treat underlining causes of disease, but to give you the most expensive treatment (perhaps unnecesarily).
I think we may agree here on some of the flaws of a private system, but my observation is a public system is much better.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 I have not used baking soda as a treatment but endorse it bcus it is bio-chemically correct when one understands that it's buffering the tumor, tissue etc. So if one accepts that there is truth to tumor development as part of an acidic tissue state with microorganisms & immune-response then it makes perfect biological sense. Yes it's one aspect of cancer but the ones in the tissues this is key. Ur main problem is that u see it so complex u raise ur hands up lost in technical jargon.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 The real main problem is not the science, It's the lack of simple logic & understanding the place of that science to an even larger body of information, which when calculated like an exact formula produce the correct end results. How many musicians do you know that go to school, get degreed etc. that can't write a good song? They lack talent & are missing something, yet they can tell you all kinds of theoretical things but when it comes down to it they suck. The same thing in medicine
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Also what u have to understand there r ppl in this world that can do things others can't, history is full of examples, yet they set down things that get appreciated later when more intelligent generations are seeing from a different position, only when certain things r purged or an attitude changed can they finally start to see, bottom line is talented ppl see things in "unconventional ways" then point them out to others & they're like "wow how come I didn't see that so simple"?
asherasator 1 year ago
40 Years ago a North Carolina Doctor Started Giving People Baking Soda mixed with Maple Syrup, it Cured Cancer, Just take enough daily to keep PH Level above 8
deadadelta 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@deadadelta u cannot physically make your blood PH go above 8. I promise you if you test your blood (testig urine is not blood) than it will NEVER deviate from about 7.4 unless you have a metabolic disorder, meaning you have acidosis.
markgg1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
w w w.123hjemmeside.dk/cancer_is_not_a_fungus/
Cancer IS NOT A FUNGUS! Read the info here and learn why this guy is a crook!
c0wootr 1 year ago
What a sad and hateful man you are GiacomoVeteran. You poison yourself and your suroundings with all that spite. The doctor giving these treatments is medically trained cancerspecialist,who has worked with cancerpatients for years. In the case of skincancer like the above, he treats it with iodin tincture, not bakingsoda. He uses sodium-bicarbonate (bakingsoda) for internal cancers, and his explanation of how and why it works, is very sensible from biokemistry point of view.
Konnie11121314 1 year ago
I know of no doctors in the world of oncoplogy and dermatology who would BOTHER writing a reply on youtube to idiots using Baking Soda to CURE CANCER! No way. No how. Again, anyone with Melanoma using any therapy but, SURGERY will certainly DIE! This is a guarantee. Write Ucla oncology, USC oncology. Mayo Clinic and others around the world and they will LAUGH at the idea Melanoma is cured with Baking Soda. I am waisting my time here, I know, but, I am FURIOUS with asshole's who use the ignorant.
GiacomoVeteran 1 year ago
Comment removed
hamilton977 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GiacomoVeteran have you ever heard of the Semmelweis effect? Its still as much of an issue today as it ever was. Your idiot friends the doctors are totally irresponsible and incapable of basic reasoning. I expect they claim that Candidiasis is not caused by antibiotics - check the journals for yourself and see just how scientific your doctor friends really are. If you think they are remotely decent or objective people then you are very naive indeed.
hamilton977 1 year ago
@GiacomoVeteran Actually, it's spelled "wasting", not "waisting", so before you start spewing slurs against people and call them idiots, you should check your spelling or take an English grammar class. I am also skeptical of these treatments, but there is no need to be spiteful to those who do believe.
cjs33139 1 year ago
@GiacomoVeteran I agree. Its depressing seeing such unscientific bullshit on u tube. Its dangerous because people will pour baking soda over their cancers instead of seeing a proper doctor.
markgg1 1 year ago
@GiacomoVeteran Correct about the baking soda but wrong about other ways to cure nodal melanoma. Let me know if you want to see PET scan results and before/after photos of stage 4 patient.
drfittt 1 year ago
This is BULLSHIT. Very very dangarous telling patients and the public this shit. IF the man before her has Melanoma and he uses 'Baking Soda' *(he'll die believe it) (LOL) I guarantee you after having Basal Cell for 26 years and a Mutation myself (I am very educated and know doctors worldwide. Many are my FRIENDS and they have tried many therapies and it helped but,. I assure you it WAS NOT SODA you idiots) this guy will DIE! IF he has Melanoma and not just a Fungus from Hiking! learn english!
GiacomoVeteran 1 year ago
@ GiacomoVeteran
El blog del asma busca es curable. y de Cuando ya estes enfermo
Por El Odio . nep consultas .
mario0186 1 year ago
@mario0186 no you of sh.... you are a doctor who wants to make millions ,then tell us you have to die ,sorry ?
so you dont belive the video ,how about you go to the Doctor in the video, and see for yourself, then you can say, he is a asshole' in his face ????? ja you are Chicken !!!!!!!! chicken
TheHarleyHardRock 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@GiacomoVeteran
no cure for you forever,keep going to docters that dont love you and you will die of cancer
spirit7000 1 year ago
@GiacomoVeteran LOL you know many doctors and you had basal cell for 26 years, and this girl cured it in 1 and a half weeks, how must you feel?
ThePowerofReason 1 year ago
@ThePowerofReason You are a fucking idiot. I am wasting my time with an asshole like you who knows nothing of genetics and DNA. However, Power of Reason in my book is: I Pray you get Malanoma and DIE from your stupidity. You are a worthless human being & Dangerous to folks with Cancer. . My Dog has more sense! Bye bye stupid ass. Oh, you must be selling something. Baking Soda re-packahed as a 'Cure for cancer?', Ha! That GIRL probably DIED from her miserable stupidity as well. Good. LOL
GiacomoVeteran 1 year ago
@GiacomoVeteran Cancer cannot thrive in an alkaline environment of 7.4 & higher, baking soda is a buffer, at the most basic biochemical level it is theoretically correct. It is biochemically impossible for cancer to grow in an alkalinized state, regardless whether it's a fungus or some other organism. Most cancer patients are in acidosis, especially with the drugs given. That is a fact.
asherasator 1 year ago 2
@asherasator Most cancer patients are not in acidosis, this is not a fact. Cancer does not 'thrive' in acidic environments at all. Cancer like any cell in the body thrives in neutral conditions. Its true that sometimes an acidic environment is detected around cancer cells, but this is because cancer has figured out how to respire anaerobically (without oxygen) and lactic acid builds up.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Well I helped 3 ppl get rid of cancer completely by alkalinizing their system & controlling microorganisms. U can have ur opinion, & I can have mine, but some opinions are closer to the truth. What is typically taught about cancer is absolute bullshit & the treatments usually do more harm than good. & cancer does thrive in acidic environments of a pH below 7, not only cancer, microorganisms & fungus thrive in an acidic state but also cold sores which I've taught ppl to control with pH
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator I doubt very much you cured Cancer. If you had, you would win the nobel prize for medicine and overturn 50 years of mounting evidence.
Science by definition is repeatable, meaning scientists in one country should get the same results as a scientists on another. It is well known what causes cancer, and has been verified hundreds of thousands of time of times. Science is not about opinion, but about evidence. The mainstream theories on what causes cancer are mainstream for a reason.
markgg1 1 year ago
@asherasator U physically cannot influence the PH of blood using diet or ingesting any of these agents you are proposing. Read a little bit on the ph of blood and how it is regulated, and how it controls breathing in a well researched human physiology textbook and you will understand why this PH idea is bogus.
If you believe cancer thrives in acid (which is biologically unfounded) then please point me to a study.
As I said, I dont do opinions, I do fact based on evidence.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1PH IS ABSOLUTELY AFFECTED BY DIET & OTHER HABITS OR MEDICATIONS. YOU KNOW NOTHING OF PRACTICAL VALUE IN THIS SUBJECT. When the body is more acidic the immune system is weaker, that's the point, & it allows the microorganism to proliferate. If you don't understand that there is no point on discussing this with you. & I said it's a much more complicated process. You simply hone in on small things without understanding the whole picture.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator I do understand what your suggesting, but it is not true. I study biomedical sciences as a degree and I learn the forefront of human biology based on hundreds of published papers by scientists from across the world, most of which have no agenda except to help people live longer. Your 23 years of personal research may be intensive, and I dont doubt your sincerity, but science disagrees with you...
if science disagrees with you, than your hypothesis has a big problem.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Does not matter how many agree or disagree & most studies become worthless seeds for theories & practices that are not the best way to deal with illnesses. Every individual is different & requires special attention & creating a specific method for them. When studies & statistics become the foundation for mass protocol that is gonna fail overall, & I've seen it over & over again. Everything I've done had various labs from hospitals & one university involved.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator thats not true. Oncologists plan treatments in a individualistic way. They find out what proteins are involved, and how to target them using the tools at their disposal which tends to be surgery or specific drugs which by the way are proven to work.
Look, do this as an experiment than which will disprove your ph idea. If you litmus test your blood I 100% promise and assure you it will not change from about 7.4%.
I I just want the truth to be known about this quack medicine.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 & my opinions are based on over 23 years research, practice & successful outcomes with a 100% success rate of not just cancer but other diseases which are viewed with narrow tunnel vision by basically trained medical "experts". I understand pH & it's functions & is extremely important in maintaining health. There are ppl around the world curing cancer in unconventional ways. Does not matter if you believe me, you can go on being a fool. You think you figured it out? You know nothing.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator If microorganisms cause cancer than how do you explain the clear correlation between sun light and skin cancer? Its got nothing to do with bacteria or viruses. Its DNA damage caused by UV light. 50% of cancers lack a functional P53 protein (look it up) its known as the 'guardian of the genome' because it stops cells going out of control. If it is mutated due to DNA damage, it can lead to cancer.
go to any scientific journal and tap in 'cancer review' for more information.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 You explained only one process from the sun, not for every other form, the lack of proteins can come from a variety of ways not just one. Also just like mutations can happen for the negative, mutations can happen for the positive when proper treatment is established. The body can do many things if you allow it & change things. That's why it's a complicated process & every individual must be studied & take control from the various stages they'r in. Cancer is not the same in everybody
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator of course Cancer is different for most. Cancer is an umbrella term for 200 plus causes. I think we found something we agree on.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 This is not quack medicine. It's just dealing with biochemical processes from a different way. You have too much faith in your education. You can either drink coffee for the caffeine or take a pill, both stimulate. Get the point yet? Until you see a person healthier or get rid of something terminal that didn't require invasive procedures it's a whole new ball game, I understand the skepticism of medical students & professionals
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator It is totally unproven with no evidence base. This idea contradicts well known human biology. There are no published studies AT ALL that support this theory.
We must have some mechanism to figure out truth from fiction, and that is science. it is repeatable, unbiased, and is seeking the truth.... this truth finding mechanism does not support your theory one bit. How can you support and believe something that is not proven by anybody, except vague anecdotes on the internet?
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 If you're really looking on the internet there are plenty of examples. Pau D'Arco alone has been used to cure cancer & one Japanese pharmaceutical company has a US patent from the an isolated component from the bark proven to get rid of tumors. You're simply seeing what you want to see. Also the majority of academias studies won't delve into these other areas simply because they spent enormous time on current hypothesis, ppl don't want to rock the boat or stray from what is normal
asherasator 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@asherasator I agree science doesnt always explore the alternatives and could do more, but Cancer research is a huge field and there have been some wacky things researched, such as why tea drinkers are less prone to cancer, and cannabis has got a few studies. You will be surprised what is tested. If you go to pub med and google things like 'cancer cannabinoids' there are studies done. Lots of them. I am not seeing what I want to see. I am interested in what helps people, and what does not.
markgg1 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@asherasator Aspirin has been shown to reduce Cancer which may interest you as aspirin is from willow bark, so is a 'natural' remedy. Although there could be other explanations, it is promising if they figure out the processes.
I agree there are problems eg drug companies want profit only so don't research smaller diseases (although government try to get them to do it) but not all of medicine is funded by private
I dont expect to change our mind, but don't be so skeptical of a proven science.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 One final thing here's a little pH in living systems info from wiki: "Enzymes and other proteins have an optimum pH range and can become INACTIVATED or DENATURED outside this range". Ur hardcore about not believing in the pH & cancer connection on other videos as well. When it comes to food it doesn't matter what its original pH state is, it's how it metabolizes in the body & affects the blood. pH alone not being optimal can cause cellular mutations & destruction.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator I know about enzymes and their optimal PH ranges thank you, but the human body does not deviate from 7.4ish.... If it did, it would stop the enzymes from working optimally (as you just showed) and kill the person.
The human body does not change it's ph. You need to understand that this whole idea is bogus science. It is simply untrue.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Go to any drug store & ask for pH strips or look them up on internet & see what they're used for. Ur statement is so foolish I'm amazed. Ppl do vary in their pH & the body tries to keep it "7.4ish". Ur completely wrong in the established theory u emphasize. It's dogmatic no different than a religious fanatic, basically u think u know everything about this subject & u simply don't even know basics. Anyways what about that patent I pasted the link for u have nothing to say about that?
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator yes please get the litmus strips and test your blood. It will never change. Urine and saliva is not your overall PH as it can change depending on what you have eaten.
Yes the dialog is pointless if you wont test your blood PH and find out it wont change. If your so confident of this theory, than test it out for real.
get back to me with the results.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Yes the blood is tightly regulated with buffering & can fall especially over time & illness, BUT THE OTHER AREAS DO GET ACIDIC (by your own admission) & THATS WHERE THE PROBLEMS ARE. Where's a tumor in the blood or the tissues? What do you think happens in sick people. The blood dumps acidity into the cells to maintain it's pH regularity, DOES IT NOT? WHERE DOES IT STEM FROM? THE BLOOD! DO U EVEN REALIZE UR LACK OF COMPLETING THE THOUGHT PROCESS TO IT'S LOGICAL CONCLUSION?
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 The way u only see 1 aspect of a larger process is the EXACT reason why ppl fail to be able treat or cure something, bcus of an incomplete view, picking & choosing with selective sight (mental filter) & believing their own bullshit which is based on ignorance, ego & a desire to feel right & believing they know it all, when they don't know shit bcus they can't observe, admit & equate details of an entire process, possibly bcus they get lost in jargon, like stuck in mud.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Most ppl in the medical field have no business being in there & are too stupid & lack basic logical abilities that build up into more complex reasoning. Over 90% of "experts" I've dealt with were complete morons, focusing on trivial points that have nothing to do with the overall obvious conclusions when looked at completely with a little (un)common sense. & Their end results speak for themselves, most cannot cure anything bcus they're suffering with a mental disorder called ego.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator as i said. test your blood ph and it wont deviate from 7.4 ever, unless you have a acidosis (below 7.65) or alkolosis (above 7.45).
Prove me wrong by performing the experiment, which is a simple one.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 i meant 7.35 for acidosis. my bad
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 My initial statement was 'acidosis' which in the tissues & other areas of the body, 'acidemia' is in the blood, I'm not disagreeing that the blood regulates, my overall point has been the build up over time or illness the blood dumps & deals with acid & it goes in the tissues, most of the problems occur in tissue, except leukemia. Sick ppls fluids do go below 7.35, I've seen 6.5-7.0 which is the perfect pH for many bacteria. IS IT NOT? SO STOP FOCUSING ON JUST THAT.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator But by what method did you test their PH. If saliva or urine, this is not a indicator of the body as a whole or any part of it. Urine is alkali when the body is excreting excess alkali....
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 The bottom line is I know many trained ppl have a hard time believing there are completely different effective simple ways of treating something with EVEN BETTER RESULTS is hard to digest. For a long time I wanted to have faith in the medical field but with all the ppl I've been involved with & also observed from a distance, the over point that was emphasized is they really didn't know what they were doing & the standard protocols failed with serious illness. Too many mistakes for me.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Simple things like giving ppl insulin to a diabetic in a hospital (standard US protocol now) where the person at home was on a pill occasionally & controlled mostly thru diet, had catastrophic conclusions & complications, that was swept under the rug bcus of sloppiness & routine without very focused observation. I've seen many misdiagnosed & treatments begun that created other problems then those were treated killing a person, then when I forcefully stopped em everything went away
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 From my point of view most MDs cannot properly diagnose or treat serious illnesses & most of the time push them further in sickness & iatrocide. A family member had pneumonia was in the hospital for 2 weeks given many different strong anti-biotics & eventually Zithromax & still didn't do anything, they eventually let her out bcus they gave up & she wanted to leave, I gave her Pau D'Arco & Grapefruit Seed Extract (pro-biotic) which got rid of it in days. On & on the same thing
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 The grim reality is pros are treating things that aren't there & misunderstanding what they're witnessing & they're really seeing a stage of something of an entirely different process, yet focus on one minute aspect & build a whole treatment around the wrong idea, when I proved so many wrong & shattered their egos most cud not believe it. I then sometimes go over the whole process & explain what was really going on. The simplicity was too complex for them, all their training was in vain
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Just using test results numbers on a clipboard are not enuff to diagnose someone, There is way more information necessary into a persons life needed to get a proper idea, put the same info in front of 2 MDs they'll interpret them different. An uncle in a different state 3 years ago was having serious stomach issues, they were convinced after all kinds of testing it's the gall bladder, it was removed, nothing changed he dad the same problems afterwards. So they chased another delusion
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator I cannot talk off the US system as Im from UK. Here the government pays for healthcare, so are incentivised to cut costs where they can. This is why the NHS focuses on preventative medicine where it can, in terms of free stop smoking services, free contraception, and emphasis on cutting obesity and lowering blood pressure. A GP here makes more money if he cuts his patients blood pressures as this saves money in the long term.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 & That's what I'm finding more & more, pros are literally delusional & cannot even learn from their mistakes, what happens when they fuck up is they build a mental wall & compartmentalize, they're so robotic they just keep doing what they kno out of habit & don't want to relearn things & can legally get away with it. They explain away deadly mistakes incorrectly to make themselves feel better, iatrocide is sometimes very clear & shud have their license & privileges stripped.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Your pointing out flaws in the medical system, and perhaps medical training, but thsi is not an argument against the science of medicine. You are simply describing flaws in the practical execution of a science.
I could not argue that the theory of splitting the atom was incorrect because the physicists kept on leaking radiation into the water or blowing themselves up.
If the health system is not working, then it needs reform. The actual science is still sound.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 What it really comes down to they have all kinds of things they want to use: various tests, equipment, drugs etc. Research activities: studies, statistics, inventions of all sorts giving ppl jobs: a business machine with routines, they want to use all this stuff. Obviously some it is necessary & serves some good. But the flip side is there is a lot of unnecessary things as well. They don't know when to pull back or use very simple methods or step out of the box.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator My main gripe with you is that you claim scientific principles of human health that are simply incorrect, e.g. the alkali/acid thing, or that curing cancer is as easy as drinking sodium bicarbonate, or pouring it on tumours (bearing in mind most tumours are within the body). You yourself admitted that Cancer is a umbrella term for hundreds of diseases, it makes no sense that such a simple cure will do anything. Cancer is vastly complex, hence good treatment is difficult
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 I am honestly telling u cancer can absolutely be controlled & cured with (1) Change of diet. (2) pH attention. (3) Pau D'Arco as treatment. Those 3 things alone done right can have incredible repeatable results. Each one has various stages & can evolve into other methods. Also (4) Checking for parasites & eradicating em. (5) Exposure to various radio frequencies as therapy. (6) Utilizing natural radio-active foods as a metabolic form of chemotherapy. These things work.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Please point me to a study where this doctor guy has cured Cancers. I would be fascinated to read it. His own website is obviously biased, so I cannot take this as trith, but if he has published results in proper scientific journals such as Nature, or pub med please point me to it as I could not find anything.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 I don't know if he's ever cured a common cold, I pasted it for the information & his observations. Shudn't that US patent be on the front page of every newspaper & on every news channel on earth? But it's not, why is that? I mean every Dr on the planet shudv heard of it but most haven't. U see the whole medical community is in a state of 'looking for a cure' as opposed to 'knowing it's here' & BEEN HERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. Think of all the researchers & their funding
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 There is too big of a 'machine' involved globally with research & all kinds of established theories & millions of $ of funding how many jobs wud be lost if the medical community & the public realized one of the most serious diseases with all kinds of profitable mechanisms attached to it cud be reduced to the level of a cold? Also bcus it's status is so "Mysterious & we're still learning about it" most cannot accept a simple cure, they want some grand glorious thing, not baking soda.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 & of course the cure has to be from some big pharmaceutical company or university after 50 years of research with some ingeniously evolved drug & treatment, not a .99 cent box of baking soda from the local store or $4 tea for a S. American tree bark from a health food store! It's like the expected messiah it has to be some major thing with pomp & breakthrough, yet as far as I'm concerned precisely bcus it's so simple it makes it more awesome: The mouse that rawred.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Also the dietary changes necessary wud shock ppl & the public, realizing that almost all commercially accepted things wud have to change, who wants to sacrifice McDonalds, Steakhouses & all kinds of "fun rewarding" food "that tastes so good"? The sacrifice for an almost cancer free society is too much for ALL KINDS OF BUSINESS, FAMILY VALUES, EVEN RELIGIOUS THINKING. EVERYTHING SOCIETY IS USED TO MUST CHANGE & MATURE. & it's available right now & has always been there.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 As far as Green Tea having any benefits for cancer, it's really bcus of it's antioxidant & anti-microbial properties, it's like a low dose anti-biotic more or less, but it alone is not enuff. When one understands the germ element of cancer it makes sense & like anything else can have good results under certain conditions usually in conjunction with other beneficial things. But like so many 'isolated' answers then blown up is not correct, no different when it's reduced to just DNA.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Germs can cause cancer because they can mutate DNA. When are you going to understand that Cancer is purely about DNA damage?
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 1st of all ur entire DNA theory is founded on the Knudson Hypothesis whose statistical work was done on Retinoblastoma & or Li-Fraumeni Syndrome (which is RARE, LESS THAN 400 worldwide) BOTH MINOR COMPARED TO OTHER FORMS OF CANCER. P53 protein flipped on or off is nothing but a byproduct of the greater immune response. In Li-Fraumeni CHEK2 is around 30%. How can u even take this to the greater whole? That is insanity & very weak science to found a universal theory.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Simple bullshit. P53 is involved in cancer when the P53 gene is damaged. P53 gene codes for a protein that cannot be turned on, because it cannot be phosphorylated due to amino acid differences... all due to genetic mutation.
Do you even understand the central tenet of biology? that genes code for proteins? Damaged DNA means, a protein with a different chemical shape. It has been established that 50% of Cancers are due to mutated P53 genes. I can point you to evidence if u want?
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 I've seen plenty on P53. I do not believe P53 is "damaged" UR LOST IN A MISINTERPRETED OPINION & WEAK FOUNDATION ONLY BCUS UR LEARNING ABOUT IN SCHOOL.. PPL HAVE STOPPED TUMORS. I KEEP TELLING U IT IS A BYPRODUCT FROM A DYNAMIC PROCESS INITIATED FROM THE IMMUNE SYSTEM. ALSO IF TUMORS CAN BE ELIMINATED & UR RIGHT P53 CANNOT BE REVERSED, THEN IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH IT IN THE FIRST PLACE. EITHER WAY UR POSITION IS COMPLETELY FALSE. NO BODY SAID RAISE PH TO DANGEROUS LEVELS. UR SILLY
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Please tell me the mechanism that causes P53 to be involved in 50% of cancers, if it is not to do with genetic mutation of the P53 gene?
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Bicarbonates pH is 8.2 enuff to destroy any negative microorganisms in the human body WHICH IS INSIDE ANY TUMOR, CYST OR FIBROID ALSO STOP THE ENERGY SOURCE. U CANNOT PROVE THAT WRONG. UV BEEN WRONG & WERE WISHY WASHY ABOUT (1) pH affected by diet. Then u admitted it is affected. (2) The entire DNA source evidence is built on a small % of cancers. (3) Lactic Acid as a tumor energy. Ur just completely wrong & really know nothing & worse yet understand nothing.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Yes Bicarb could destroy cancer, as well as any cell in the body... this isnt surprising. Fire, poison, hitting with a hamour could also kill cancer. The point is you cannot target cancer without targeting other normal cells. It would be great if we could flood the body with inhibitors of the tumour causing proteins (like chemo) but unfortunately these proteins usually have an essential function, so is impossible except in small doses. This is why chemo is given in small doses.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 A least u admit bicarbonate can destroy cancer. Simonici showed when a tumor is delivered bicarbonate cancer goes away (without destroying other tissue). Y? Bcus it neutralizes acid & destroys bacteria proving the theory correct as the patients have said. Bicarbonate is the bodys fist choice for raising pH & drinking some acidic products metabolize alkaline effects so ur wrong about drinking & pissing the same pH with everything. Bicarbonate in low doses is beneficial & not harmful
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator I never said diet could change PH, because that is nonsense. Its biologically impossible for that to happen. Ive already asked you to read about PH homeostasis to see why its a silly idea.
2: the cause of 100% OF ALL CANCERS is due to genetic damage (caused by radiation, viruses, bacteria, errors in replication, or spontaneously)
3: I never said Lactic acid is an energy source for tumours. I said some tumours can live without oxygen and the lactic acid is a byproduct
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 U SAID: "Urine and saliva is not your overall PH as it can change depending on what you have eaten." Any MD will tell u these readings still give a idea of the system, WHAT THE FUCK DO U THINK THEY'RE READ FOR? Did you read the Duke findings of Lactic Acid or do u have selective sight? & ur pH description is about blood acidemia, NOT TISSUE ACIDOSIS WHICH DOES HAPPEN ESPECIALLY AROUND THE TUMOR & GERM PROLIFERATION WHAT I'VE BEEN MENTIONING. WHAT IS WRONG WITH U? GO REREAD UR BOOKS!
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator your urine will be more alkali when you ingest alkali, because your body is getting rid of excess alkali because as I keep repeating the body stays at a constant 7.4. If you drink a litre of lemon juice, your urine will be acidic, its quite simple to understand.
The tissues are bathed in blood so there is a very limited local effect of blood PH. As I have said more than once, a minority of cancer has a slightly acidic environment because the cells are secreting lactic acid as waste
markgg1 1 year ago
@asherasator How the body creates energy:
C6-H12-O6 (sugar) + 202 (oxygen) = 6H20 (water) and 6CO (carbon dioxide) + ATP (the universal energy currency in nature)
The carbon dioxide is absorbed in liquid as carbonic acid, which lowers the PH of blood (as blood is made of mainly water) by a tiny fraction. The brain recognises this is happening and makes you breath faster to expel the carbon dioxide.
Acidosis can be caused by too much exercise, or a breathing problem (and NOT cancer)
markgg1 1 year ago
@asherasator In the case of a lack of oxygen the equation is different C6 H12 06 = 2C3H6O3 (lactic acid) + 2 ATP (having oxygen creates 18 ATP.. so this method is a lot less efficient, but works in emergencies).
Cancer cells are constantly replicating so need a lot of energy. This is why they evolve mechanisms to get blood vessels to grow towards them, or can use sugar without oxygen present, hence lactic acid secretion, and hence a barely detectable lowering in PH in the immediate area.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Ur describing basic functions. Where is the typical blood flora: Lactococcus, Enterococcus, Streptococcus, Pediococcus etc. within any of those processes especially over time? What are they feeding off of? In 1977 Domingue and Schlegel confirmed "the existence of a novel bacteriologic system in the blood. They cultured staphylococcal-like bacteria and filamentous cocco-bacillary forms from 71% of the blood specimens from ill patients; and from 7% of supposedly healthy people."
asherasator 1 year ago
Im not going to carry on responding as theres no point me supplying facts that are easy to find in a proper textbook
If your serious about knowing about Cancer, go to google scholar and write in your search results.
Interestingly I tapped in 'Cancer genetic mutation' and got 1'700'000 papers.
Than I tapped in 'Cancer alkali acid' and got 117'000 resilts.
'Cancer acidosis' gets 47'000 results.
A pattern is emerging here
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Wiki on DNA Epigenetic control: "It has been shown that the epigenetic control of the proto-onco regions and the tumor suppressor sequences by conformational changes in histones directly affects the formation and progression of cancer. Epigenetics also has the factor of reversibility, a characteristic that other cancer treatments do not offer...HDAC specifically has been shown to play an integral role in the progression of oral squamous cancer.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 That's DNA Methylation described which is an Alkylating process. Positive effects for cancer whether alternative or clinical HAVE ONE THING IN COMMON: THE ALKALINIZING PROCESS. In 1 way or another from the DNA or blood delivering or direct deliverance to the region/tumor of alkalinity show positive & eradicating effects. Thats a fact. So those 1,700,000 papers unless they go along with this standard are worthless. My position has been completely solid, factual & practical=THE TRUTH
asherasator 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Im not going to carry on responding as theres no point me supplying facts that are easy to find in a proper textbook
If your serious about knowing about Cancer, go to google scholar and write in your search results.
Interestingly I tapped in 'Cancer genetic mutation' and got 1'700'000 papers.
Than I tapped in 'Cancer alkali acid' and got 117'000 resilts.
'Cancer acidosis' gets 47'000 results.
A pattern is emerging here
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 Also HDAC inhibitors suggested for CHK2 are used FOR INFLAMMATORY which is once again IMMUNE SYSTEM. In fact raising tissue pH will trigger DNA methylation & control P53 & CHK2 & control apoptosis, ALL BACKS EVERYTHING I MENTIONED EVEN BASED ON UR WEAK DNA THEORY. Ur entire position is 1 small minor view of a much bigger playing field. I am 100% correct & challenge any Ph.D. or M.D. on this worldwide.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator My position is backed by any serious cancer researcher and scientist, all based on decades of intense research.
Your 'theory' is made up in your head based on vague anecdotal evidence.
This is getting a little frustrating, because Im getting the impression you think all opinions in science are valid, d (like in politics)This is not the case, as its about facts and evidence.
If you raise someone's PH (which is impossible), they will die. Simple as that
markgg1 1 year ago
@asherasator I wanted to inbox u a conversation I had with a lady who also believed this alkali thing. She looked into it more and found it that it was nonsense. She admitted she had been wrong, and even removed her comments. I wish you could be less stubborn.
I keep asking you to provide the evidence... the PROPER evidence, not just someons theory with no research to back it up, but you cannot.
On the other hand I can point you to thousands of properly researched journal articles.
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 The Baking Soda Theory has to be correct from a biological point of view: IF lactic acid is fueling tumors, how does the body buffer? It produces bicarbonate. If administered directly to the tumor THAT'S DOING EXACTLY WHAT THE BODY WUD DO ON IT"S OWN. I view tumors as immune defenses bundling up microorganisms, so the organisms MUST BE ERADICATED TO PREVENT FURTHER TUMORS. If the bicarbonate keeps the tissue pH 7.4+ then that prevents further organisms proliferating, PERFECT LOGIC.
asherasator 1 year ago
@asherasator Lactic acid is not fuelling tumours
Lactic acid is a waste product of cells burning sugar for energy without oxygen Its a well known process and happens when people exercise vigorously as they are using more oxygen than they can breath in. Its very inefficient (makes 1/18th of the ATP than with oxygen) but useful for emergencies Some cancers have cleverly created means to also utilise this mechanism meaning they dont need a blood supply
where are you getting this information from?
markgg1 1 year ago
@markgg1 You can look on the internet but I'll post a link on ur page since it wont post here, there's a lot more if you research it.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 It's not that I don't think "the scientific principles work". I think they're just 1small aspect. I know in some cases ppl see what they want to see, the medical world suffers from tunnel-vision. They pretend to be so scientific & try to distance themselves from simple natural things, which also have scientific proof if one looks, as I proved to u. I don't like the selective thinking/filter. Also when ppl r so confident they're becoming stupid & don't relearn or evolve.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 & if ur really into science u shud kno almost everything established now was rejected @ some point by somebody, every truth is always rejected by "experts". My true position is that "it's already been figured out" in many subjects. A lot of research & science that's going on is really doing nothing but employing ppl or giving others something to do. Some of the most advanced developments have happened that got side lined simply bcus it didn't fit into a current agenda or system.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 It's pretty much like this: A route/path has already been created, certain important details & observations are mentioned. Then others travel the route get out of the car walk away from the path & writing down observations, then more ppl do the same thing over & over traveling further away from the path & forget where the travel plans were going then they're so far from the path giving details that may be true & can be done anywhere but really doesn't mean anything, over describing.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 Sepecialized Specialists Specializing Specialties for Specialized Specialists creating more Specialties for more Specialized Specialists creating newer Specialties, a merry go round going nowhere. All they see is one merry go round & forgot there are other rides to over describe, LOST IN JARGON, that's turned into a religion for ppl wanting to feel important & have self worth then pushing aside anything that doesn't fit into the mold held dear. But is almost of no practical value.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 I've seen Prednisone create complications in many: bring on diabetes, create physical distortions, induce further pulmonary problems when it's being administered for the lungs or arthritis, then dosage increased, swell the legs & body to freakish levels, when the drug was stopped ALL SYMPTOMS WENT AWAY. The MDs were insisting it was helping yet it clearly wasn't. Many cannot discriminate or tell the difference between further complications from treatment & an actual illness.
asherasator 1 year ago
@markgg1 I've watched Albuterol creates all kinds of complications: create seizures, induce diabetes, make ppl crazy etc. Xopanex has been clearly proven NOT to do the negatives of Albuterol & work 100% better yet the standard protocol in the US was Albuterol. They don't even know how to use the best the pharmaceuticals have to offer. Routine & other reasons are involved in their choices. Some simply don't want to admit what works best from their own bag of tricks available. It ridiculous.
asherasator 1 year ago