(Mercola)—According to the American Cancer Society, about 1 in 8 men will be diagnosed with prostate cancer during their lifetime. It’s the second-leading cause of cancer death behind lung cancer.¹ But despite its prevalence, a diagnosis is not an automatic death sentence.

Between 1993 and 2013, the death rate of prostate cancer declined by around half, and 3.3 million American men diagnosed with this disease at some point are still alive.² Furthermore, the National Cancer Institute predicts a 97.5% survival rate after diagnosis.³ But, we’re not out of the woods yet — plenty of research is still being done to learn more about treating this disease, and researchers from the University of Michigan have just pushed the frontier.

NSD2 Protein Implicated as an Activator of Prostate Cancer

In a study⁴ published in Nature Genetics, researchers discovered a key factor in the development of prostate cancer. Specifically, they noted that when the NSD2 (nuclear receptor binding SET Domain Protein 2) binds with the androgen receptor (AR), it leads to rapid cell division and growth that results in prostate cancer.

Before diving further into this, let’s define some of the basics. Androgens are essentially hormones that trigger the growth and development of the male reproductive system, and the most prominent example is testosterone. They’re responsible for the changes that males go through during puberty, such as thickening of the vocal cords that leads to a deeper voice.⁵

While androgens are largely associated with males, females produce androgens as well, but in smaller amounts. When androgens are released, they’re converted into estradiol, a type of estrogen. In this converted state, estradiol helps regulate menstruation, as well as conception and pregnancy.⁶

Now, what is the AR? It’s essentially a protein produced by the AR gene, which then binds to the androgens produced in your body. As noted by MedlinePlus:⁷

“The receptors are present in many of the body’s tissues, where they attach (bind) to androgens. The resulting androgen-receptor complex then binds to DNA and regulates the activity of certain genes that play a role in male sexual development. By turning the genes on or off as necessary, the androgen receptor complex helps direct the development of male sex characteristics.”

Going back to the Nature Genetics study,⁸ the researchers were able to crack the code, as it were, between NSD2 and AR using an epigenetics-targeted functional CRISPR (clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats) screening. Interestingly, they noted that NSD2 is also an oncogene in hematologic cancers, and “harbors recurrent activating alterations in over 15% to 20% of multiple myeloma and 10% childhood acute lymphoblastic leukemia.”

Diving Deeper Into the Development of Prostate Cancer

The researchers used different methodologies that comprised human and animal test samples. For human samples, prostate tumor patient tissues were taken from the archives of University of Michigan archives, while mice were provided by the University of Pennsylvania and the University of Michigan, which were kept under humane conditions.⁹ After completing their assays and analysis, the researchers published these findings:¹⁰

“Conventional plasmid-based reporter systems fail to capture intricate epigenetic or chromatin-level regulation of gene expression as they lack the native histone composition or higher-order chromosomal structure. Thus, we engineered an endogenous AR reporter system by using the CRISPR/Cas9 and homologous recombination methodologies.

We edited the KLK3 gene (also known as prostate-specific antigen, PSA) locus in AR-driven LNCaP cells to knock-in the mCherry coding sequence directly downstream of the endogenous promoter and fused in-frame via an endopeptidase sequence to the KLK3 gene …

Using these endogenous AR reporter cell lines, we carried out a functional CRISPR screen, wherein we treated the cells with a custom single guide RNA (sgRNA) library targeting druggable transcriptional cofactors for eight days, stimulated with DHT for 16 h and FACS-sorted into mCherry^HIGH and mCherry^LOW populations.

Genomic sgRNAs were sequenced and the ratio of normalized counts in mCherry^LOW to mCherry^HIGH cell populations was used to rank individual sgRNAs. Here, ranked alongside BRD4 and TRIM24, we identified NSD2 as an AR coactivator.”

The study is packed with dense information largely meant for oncology researchers, but the findings above summarize how the researchers were able to sift through large swaths of information and methodologies. Undoubtedly, this new breakthrough will be beneficial for all people receiving prostate cancer treatments.

The researchers concluded that NSD2 plays an important role in the development of prostate cancer. Furthermore, they proposed targeting this protein in further experiments to fully confirm the effectiveness of their findings. In a press release, co-author Dr. Arul M. Chinnaiyan elucidates further:¹¹

“By degrading NSD1 and NSD2, we can more directly target cancer and avoid the normal tissue. Our study suggests if we’re able to develop NSD1/2-targeting agents, they could potentially be combined with FDA-approved androgen receptor antagonists and have a synergist effect in terms of treatment.”

Choline Does NOT Cause Prostate Cancer

Considering the new information published, I’d like to debunk a medical myth about prostate cancer that’s been circulating for a few years now — choline intake and its association with this disease.

The primary study where this notion came from,¹² published in 2012, suggested there might be a link between increased choline intake and an increased risk of advanced, lethal prostate cancer. As noted by the authors, “Men in the highest quintile of choline intake had a 70% increased risk of lethal prostate cancer.” However, there are several questionable aspects surrounding this conclusion.

To start, the study was observational only, which means it only suggests associations but cannot prove causation. Since there are many factors, both dietary and environmental, that play a big role in predicting prostate cancer outcomes, pinning the disease to a single nutrient is problematic.

Furthermore, the researchers collected dietary information only six times during 22 years of follow-ups, which raises questions about the accuracy of their collated information. Many people can’t even recall what they ate several days ago, let alone the foods they consumed within a span of 22 years. Other shortcomings of this study include the following:

• It does not account for other components of the diet that could influence prostate cancer risk, such as phytonutrients, fiber and other vitamins and minerals.
• No dose-response relationship across quintiles of choline intake was established. Understanding whether the risk of prostate cancer increases linearly with choline intake or if there’s a threshold effect would be crucial for dietary recommendations.
• The study also looked at post-diagnostic intake of choline and its relationship with lethal prostate cancer among men who were initially diagnosed with nonmetastatic disease and here, no statistically significant link could be found.

In truth, choline is beneficial for your health. Several studies have shown that increasing choline intake has important benefits, such as decreased risk for heart disease,¹³ cancer¹⁴ and nonalcoholic fatty liver disease.¹⁵ Based on these findings, you’d be better off increasing your dietary choline intake, and the best sources include grass fed meat and milk, as well as pastured eggs.

Address the Root of Cancer — Poor Mitochondrial Health

I believe that virtually all major diseases like cancer, heart disease and obesity are linked to an inability to produce cellular energy due to impaired mitochondrial function. Without optimal cellular energy, your body cannot properly initiate the repair processes essential to preventing and recovering from disease.

Through the years, I’ve identified three pernicious toxins that damage your mitochondrial function, mainly by affecting intracellular calcium that subsequently impact your cellular health. In essence, exposure to these toxins raise intracellular calcium, which results in increased superoxide and nitric oxide levels. These combine into peroxynitrite, a potent reactive oxygen species that contributes to poor health. These three primary culprits are:

• Excess linoleic acid (LA) intake — An omega-6 polyunsaturated fat (PUFA), LA is abundantly found in seed and vegetable oils as well as ultraprocessed foods, and is one of most harmful ingredients in the Western diet. When consumed in excess, it negatively affects your metabolic rate and gut microbiome, which are the two of the most important factors that impact your health.
• Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDC) — Exposure to EDCs from sources like microplastics is over-activating your estrogen receptors. Microplastics are so pervasive that you’re probably eating a credit card’s worth of plastic every week.¹⁶ These plastics are loaded with phthalates and bisphenol A (BPA), which activate estrogen receptors. Estrogen increases intracellular calcium levels, which results in the generation of peroxynitrite.
• Excessive electromagnetic field (EMF) exposure — People are bombarded with EMFs, such as from cellphones, every day with hidden consequences to public health. EMFs activate voltage-gated calcium channel (VGCC) receptors within the cell, catalyzing the production of peroxynitrite by triggering an influx of calcium.

Addressing these three factors will help repair and return your mitochondrial function back on track to producing optimal cellular energy. Ultimately, this is the crucial first step to warding off all chronic disease that plague Americans today, such as cancer, and the best way to do it is limiting your exposure to them. To start, I recommend minimizing your LA intake below 5 grams from all dietary sources. If you can get it below 2 grams, that’s even better.

Next, minimize your EMF exposure by turning off the Wi-Fi and using hardwired connections instead. I also recommend using an analog alarm clock instead of relying on your phone’s alarm clock, which most people put beside their bed. The next strategy is reducing your exposure to plastics, which is accomplished by opting for products sold in glass containers and using reusable products over single-use ones.

This is just a preview of the strategies available to restore and repair your mitochondrial function. My newest book, “Your Guide to Cellular Health: Unlocking the Science of Longevity and Joy,” goes into great detail about how these three factors affect your mitochondrial function, as well as practical, healthy strategies to address them.

The eBook is now available, while the print edition will be released on December 10, 2024. I encourage you to pick up a copy, as this contains my latest research that corrects many long-held beliefs I’ve had in the previous years.

Another Anticancer Tip — Aspirin

In addition to addressing the main factors of mitochondrial function, there are other strategies available to help you prevent cancer. One approach is taking aspirin, a drug well-known for its pain-relieving and anti-inflammatory uses.

In my interview with bioenergetic medicine expert Georgi Dinkov, he discusses research using a combination of B vitamins and aspirin against a highly lethal form of human mantle cell lymphoma. He discovered that while the vitamins stopped tumor growth, adding aspirin into the equation regressed the tumor in the animal test subjects. Below, he explains the theoretical basis:

“One of Ray [Peat]’s main theories was that … cancer cells … [are] metabolically dysfunctional, we all know that, and typically a cell like that commits apoptosis. But in order to commit apoptosis, that mechanism is controlled almost entirely by the intracellular pH. And in order for apoptosis to occur, it needs to be in the acidic range.

But the cancer cells are alkaline due to exporting lactate and hydrogen ions. So, if anything can drop the intracellular pH, those cancer cells, because they’re deranged, should actually disappear by themselves.

And one of Peat’s suggestions at the time was, ‘Why don’t you use the drug acetazolamide?’ which as a carbonic anhydrase inhibitor, increases carbon dioxide. Carbon dioxide is acidic, and then that should allow cancer cells to commit apoptosis.

There are some studies in vitro and in vivo showing that acetazolamide may work, but it didn’t really cure the tumors. It was a slower growth, partial regression, but it showed that the idea was on the right track.

So, I said, ‘Let’s find something that’s much more acidic than carbon dioxide.’ And that is this 2,6-dihydroxybenzoic acid, which is just one extra hydroxyl group on top of aspirin. Salicylic acid, really, which is 2-hydroxybenzoic acid. And then this thing is about 10 times more potent than aspirin.”

That said, consider adding aspirin into your health routine. But don’t just select any aspirin available — opt for immediate-release formulations instead of the coated extended-release varieties. Pay attention to the ingredients as well. Ideally, corn starch should be the only additive listed.

After doing my own research, I identified a product meeting these criteria. The appropriate dosage ranges from 82 mg to 325 mg daily, taken with your largest meal, depending on your individual needs.

In the context of cancer prevention, the dosage and duration of aspirin are crucial factors. Low doses (75 to 300 mg/day) have been shown to be as effective as higher doses in reducing colorectal cancer-related mortality,¹⁷ which means there’s no need to take large amounts to gain the benefits.

Consistency and long-term use seem to be key, however. Studies indicate that aspirin’s benefits increase with duration, with significant reductions in cancer risk observed after five to 7.5 years of consistent use.¹⁸

I personally take 111 mg daily using Health Natura’s USP grade 60 gram aspirin powder, which costs less than $20. This 99% pure USP aspirin powder appeals to me due to its prometabolic, antilipolytic, anti-inflammatory, anticortisol and anti-estrogen effects. Its safety profile is also well-established.

• ^1, 2 American Cancer Society, “Key Statistics for Prostate Cancer”
• ³ National Cancer Institute, “Cancer Stat Facts: Prostate Cancer”
• ⁴ Nat Genet. 2024 Sep 9. doi: 10.1038/s41588-024-01893-6, Abstract
• ⁵ Britannica, “Androgen”
• ⁶ Cleveland Clinic, “Androgens”
• ⁷ MedlinePlus, “AR Gene”
• ⁸ Nat Genet. 2024 Sep 9. doi: 10.1038/s41588-024-01893-6, Main
• ⁹ Nat Genet. 2024 Sep 9. doi: 10.1038/s41588-024-01893-6, Ethical Statement
• ¹⁰ Nat Genet. 2024 Sep 9. doi: 10.1038/s41588-024-01893-6, Functional CRISPR Screen Reveals NSD2 as an AR Coactivator
• ¹¹ Michigan Medicine, September 9, 2024
• ¹² American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 2012 Oct; 96(4): 855–863, Abstract
• ¹³ Nutrients. 2023 Sep; 15(18): 4036, Abstract
• ¹⁴ Scientific Reports, volume 13, Article number: 22144 (2023), Abstract
• ¹⁵ European Journal of Clinical Nutrition, volume 77, pages 1160–1166 (2023), Abstract
• ¹⁶ World Wildlife Fund, Assessing Plastic Ingestion from Nature to People, page 7
• ^17, 18 Cureus. 2024 Feb; 16(2): e54658, Review

In a Substack newsletter, Dr. William Makis cited a paper from 2020 (by Juarez et al) on the antitumor effects of ivermectin at clinically feasible concentrations where it was found to support its clinical development as a repositioned cancer drug.

According to the study, at a human dose of two mg/kg, ivermectin can achieve anti-cancer effects such as cell cycle arrest (inhibit proliferation), preferential inhibition of cancer stem-like cells, synergize with several chemotherapy drugs and inhibit tumor growth in a breast cancer mouse model.

Ivermectin was tested at two mg/kg/day, translating to roughly 5uM in vitro concentration. They found that the drug goes after cancer stem cells, which tend to be resistant to chemotherapy.

“Ivermectin has a preferential depletion effect on the cancer stem-like cell population,” the authors included in the research. “We observed that among all the evaluated cell lines, a decrease in cell viability and clonogenicity is more evident in the cancer stem-like cells than in their parental population.”

It also found that the most sensitive cancer cell lines were the ovarian, breast, glioblastoma (brain), lung, colon, uterine squamous cell carcinoma (SCC), hepatocellular, triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), pancreatic and endometrial.

Meanwhile, the least sensitive were osteosarcoma, gastric and melanoma.

Moreover, lymphoma and leukemia cell lines appear to be more resistant to Ivermectin but the drug has a significant impact on those cells’ ability to form colonies, according to the study. (Related: Ivermectin can “kill cancer cells” and boost immune response, suggest health experts.)

Makis further highlighted that this was the first study he had ever seen that had tested as many as 28 cancer types with ivermectin.

“No wonder it’s hidden from the public,” he commented.

NEW ARTICLE: IVERMECTIN Tested against 28 types of Cancer – which cancers were most sensitive to Ivermectin? Which were least sensitive?

A research group from Mexico investigated Ivermectin in Cancer

Paper: 2020 (Juarez et al) – Antitumor effects of ivermectin at clinically… pic.twitter.com/xWhgEBa1uv

— William Makis MD (@MakisMD) August 26, 2024

FDA took down social media posts discouraging ivermectin use for COVID-19 but mainstream media seemed to have missed this

Back in March, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) agreed to permanently take down its social media posts urging people to avoid the usage of ivermectin for COVID-19.

One of the pages that the agency has removed was a page that said: “Should I take ivermectin to prevent or treat COVID-19? No.” It also took down posts, including one that reads: “You are not a horse. You are not a cow. Seriously, y’all. Stop it.”

The move was done following a lawsuit with a settlement filed with a federal court in Texas that ordered the agency to delete another page titled “Why you should not use ivermectin to treat or prevent COVID-19 within 21 days.”

The article said that ivermectin was neither authorized nor approved to be used to prevent or treat COVID-19 in humans or animals. It also claims that evidence does not support the efficacy of ivermectin against coronavirus.

On June 2, 2022, Doctors Paul Marik, Mary Talley Bowden and Robert Apter filed a lawsuit against the FDA and its secretary Robert Califf, as well as the Department of Health and Human Services and its secretary Xavier Becerra. They accused the FDA of meddling with their capacity to practice medicine. The lawsuit was first turned down on the basis that the FDA has “sovereign immunity.” However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit overruled the lower court’s ruling, stating that the “FDA is not a physician” and “even tweet-sized doses of personalized medical advice are beyond the FDA’s statutory authority.”

Ivermectin has long been approved for use in both animals and humans. In cases of humans, the drug is recommended to treat parasitic infections such as river blindness disease, threadworm infestation, tropical eosinophilia, roundworm infestation, whipworm infestation, filariasis (also called elephantiasis) and loiasis.

On X, formerly Twitter, Dr. Mary Talley Bowden wrote: “This landmark case sets an important precedent in limiting FDA overreach into the doctor-patient relationship.”

Moreover, independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr in a tweet said: “The FDA is biased against many low-cost, generic, and/or natural therapies with low-profit potential. Could it be because half its funding comes from Big Pharma?”

Ivermectin is not an exceptional case. The FDA is biased against many low-cost, generic, and/or natural therapies with low profit potential. Could it be because half its funding comes from Big Pharma? https://t.co/LxpqLuvb6A

— Robert F. Kennedy Jr (@RobertKennedyJr) March 22, 2024

Australian politician Craig Kelly also called the FDA “corrupt,” stating that they have “blood on their hands.”

Head over to Cancer.news for more stories, similar to this.

Sources for this article include:

• Makismd.substack.com
• HindustanTimes.com

The revelation that DNA contamination can lead to birth defects or cancer surfaced when Dr. Robert Malone, the biochemist who helped invent the mRNA vaccine, made an appearance at House of Representatives hearing led by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA).

According to Malone, Moderna has a patent that acknowledges RNA is preferable to DNA in vaccines due to risks of insertional mutagenesis, which might activate oncogenes or inhibit tumor suppressor genes.

“Moderna has a patent on the use of RNA for vaccines,” Malone stated. “And in that, Moderna explicitly acknowledges that RNA is superior to DNA for vaccine purposes because problems, including the possibility of insertional mutagenesis that could lead to the activation of oncogenes or the inactivation of tumor suppressor genes.”

“FDA [Food and Drug Administration] says they’re not aware of any concerns, but Moderna, in its patent, lays out the same concerns about DNA in insertional mutagenesis and genotoxicity,” Malone continued. He added that Moderna knew DNA was a contaminant but was left in because of how they make it.

“They use DNA to make RNA, and then they degrade the DNA and then they have to purify the degraded DNA away from the RNA and the process they are using is not that good,” he said.

Another Big Pharma company also eventually acknowledged that its jabs, which were meant to “cure” COVID-19, are also contaminated with cancer-causing DNA fragments. In the documentation to regulatory bodies, Pfizer omitted information about the presence of Simian Virus 40 sequences in its vaccine.

The documentation suggests that there are certain DNA sequences present in the vials that are normally not allowed in anything that is going to go into humans, “not the least of which is an antibiotic resistance gene,” Malone explained.

“They include these sequences from SV 40 – not the whole virus, but highly active promoter sequences – which is exactly the thing that the FDA in their older regulations said must be avoided because it confers even more risk for insertional mutagenesis.”

He added that the FDA did not take the raw DNA sequences, reconstruct those plasmid maps and look at them themselves. Instead, they took for granted what Pfizer had given them.

“And now this is all coming out because of what these researchers found,” he further said.

Malone warned that the potential consequences for jab recipients are “anything that is associated with DNA damage, i.e., birth defects and cancer being the most notable ones.” (Related: Moderna’s mRNA COVID jab 30% more deadly than Pfizer’s, VAERS data shows.)

Get ready for the “updated COVID-19 vaccines”

Despite the recent admission, Pfizer-BioNTech and Moderna’s updated vaccine is expected to be available in either August or September.

According to public health officials, they preferred the term “updated vaccines” in line with the need to formulate a new vaccine every year to match circulating variants like what they did for the flu shot.

“Historically, when we’re talking about COVID vaccines, we’re talking about boosters that would happen at some time post your previous vaccine,” said Dr. John Brownstein, the chief innovation officer at Boston Children’s Hospital. “Now we’re targeting annual vaccines for COVID-19 that are similar to flu. It’s a reformulation based on what’s circulating, and this is why we’re talking about an annual campaign rather than a booster.”

The updated 2024-25 COVID-19 vaccines will target the JN.1 lineage of the virus, which is claimed to be an offshoot of the omicron variant. Pfizer and Moderna vaccines will be available for six-month-old babies and adults while the Novavax vaccine will be available for those aged 12 and older.

Last month, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) recommended Americans receive the updated 2024-25 vaccine when it becomes available.

“CDC recommends everyone ages six months and older receive an updated 2024-2025 COVID-19 vaccine to protect against the potentially serious outcomes of COVID-19 this fall and winter whether or not they have ever previously been vaccinated with a COVID-19 vaccine,” the CDC website indicated.

The updated jab is not considered a booster.

“We have to remember that this virus is constantly changing and that your protection from previous infection or previous vaccines declines over time,” Brownstein said. “Making sure that you receive the most updated formulations of vaccine will ensure that you have the most recent protection and we of course assumed that like previous years.”

Read more about the dangerous side effects of mRNA vaccines on VaccineInjuryNews.com. Watch the video below that says the Japanese government launched a task force to investigate the COVID-19 vaccines’ crimes against humanity.

This video is from the Follower of Christ777 channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

• Pfizer, Moderna rolling out new “catch-all” mRNA injections for “pandemic influenza.”
• SCARE TACTICS: U.S. government gives Moderna $176 million to develop mRNA bird flu vaccine for next fake scamdemic.
• mRNA vaccines are extremely toxic, Moderna scientists now warn.

Sources include:

• SHTFPlan.com
• ABCNews.go.com
• CDC.gov
• Brighteon.com

(Mercola)—I strongly recommend getting sensible sun exposure each day, and one of the reasons why is because it helps naturally optimize your vitamin D levels. Low vitamin D levels are linked to an increased risk of cancers,¹ while vitamin D can attach to the vitamin D receptor (VDR) in your cells, setting off a series of signals that may affect how they grow, develop and survive.²

In this way, vitamin D acts like a brake on the process of cell growth in many tissues of the body, helping to control the speed at which cells multiply. This is particularly important when it comes to cancer because one of the key features of this disease is cells growing out of control. Moreover, vitamin D has been observed in animal studies to help delay some age-related changes by activating another important pathway via the vitamin D receptor.

This pathway involves a molecule called Nrf2, which plays a crucial role in protecting your body from oxidative stress and DNA damage — two factors that are commonly linked to the development of cancer.³ Overall, evidence continues to accumulate showing that vitamin D is a strong ally to combat cancer.⁴

Vitamin D Reduces Cancer Mortality

Worldwide, cancer is the No. 2 cause of death, behind only cardiovascular disease.⁵ Meanwhile, the global prevalence of vitamin D deficiency (defined as a level of less than 20 ng/mL) and insufficiency (defined as a level of 20 to less than 30 ng/mL) is 40% to 100%.⁶ Although increasing vitamin D levels may help to reduce cancer deaths, health officials rarely recommend optimizing levels for this purpose.

For example, research has shown that once you reach a minimum serum vitamin D level of 40 ng/mL, your risk for cancer diminishes by 67%, compared to having a level of 20 ng/mL or less.⁷

A 2023 systematic review and meta-analysis published in Ageing Research Reviews also found vitamin D3 supplementation reduced cancer mortality by 6%. This wasn’t considered statistically significant, but when only studies involving daily vitamin D intake were analyzed, cancer mortality dropped by a significant 12%.⁸ According to the researchers:⁹

“From a biological perspective, it is plausible that a sufficient vitamin D status has an impact on cancer prognosis: by binding to the vitamin D receptor (VDR), the active hormone 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25(OH)2D) influences signaling pathways that regulate cell proliferation, differentiation, and cell survival, and thus acts as an anti-proliferative agent in many tissues and can slow the growth of malignant cells.”

Other research also supports vitamin D’s role in protecting against cancer death. In one study of 25,871 patients, vitamin D supplementation was found to reduce the risk for metastatic cancer and death by 17%. The risk was reduced by as much as 38% among those who also maintained a healthy weight.^10,11

What’s particularly noteworthy is this study only gave participants 2,000 IU of vitamin D daily and didn’t measure their blood levels. Despite these research flaws, a significant benefit was still found. However, other research has found even more striking benefits, including a GrassrootsHealth analysis published in PLOS ONE.

It showed women with a vitamin D level at or above 60 ng/mL (150 nmol/L) had an 82% lower risk of breast cancer compared to those with levels below 20 ng/mL (50 nmol/L).¹² Meanwhile, risks of lung cancer, colorectal cancer, breast cancer, bladder cancer and lymphoma are higher in people with low vitamin D levels, while having higher levels is associated with a better prognosis in cases of breast and colorectal cancers.¹³

The Ageing Research Reviews study further revealed that daily vitamin D supplementation was particularly beneficial for people aged 70 and over, as well as those who took vitamin D daily and were later diagnosed with cancer. Study author Ben Schöttker, Ph.D., with the German Cancer Research Center in Heidelberg, further explained:¹⁴

“This does imply that basically everyone aged 50 and older, including people who have never had cancer, might profit from vitamin D supplementation if they are vitamin D insufficient … Doctors cannot know who might develop cancer at a later time.”

Vitamin D Has Anticancer Effects Against Many Types of Cancer

A mini review on the impact of vitamin D on cancer, published in The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, pointed out that while vitamin D is widely recognized for its essential role in regulating the balance of minerals in the body, a deficiency has been linked to the onset and progression of various cancers.¹⁵ Vitamin D targets cancer in multiple ways, including:¹⁶

• Anticancer effects, which means it targets different stages of cancer development and progression, including the initiation, growth and spread of cancer cells.
• Antimetastatic effects, which refers to the ability to stop cancer cells from spreading from the original tumor site to other parts of the body. Since metastasis is often responsible for the fatal outcomes of cancers, preventing the spread can significantly improve survival rates.
• Anti-tumorigenic, meaning vitamin D helps prevent tumor formation or the growth of tumors. This can involve mechanisms like inducing cell death in cancer cells, blocking cell cycle progression, or inhibiting pathways that fuel tumor growth.

The review highlighted vitamin D’s role against the following cancers:¹⁷

• Breast
• Prostate
• Bladder
• Colon
• Glioblastoma
• Melanoma
• Squamous cell carcinoma
• Ovarian
• Multiple myeloma
• Osteosarcoma
• Head and neck

In terms of breast cancer, the leading cause of death for women globally, vitamin D deficiency is common among patients, and those who are deficient are more likely to have more aggressive and harder-to-treat subtypes of breast cancer, such as higher grade and estrogen receptor-negative tumors.

The study also highlighted the role of genetic differences in the VDR that could influence breast cancer risk. In particular, in certain populations like North Indian women from New Delhi, variations in the VDR gene were identified as potential risk factors.¹⁸

In prostate cancer — the most common cancer in men — low levels of vitamin D were linked to high levels of dihydrotestosterone (DHT) in the prostate which is associated with the progression of prostate cancer.¹⁹ In addition, vitamin D may influence the activity of sirtuin 1 (SIRT1), which is known as a longevity protein. Optimizing your vitamin D levels may help boost your body’s natural cancer defenses, in part, via mechanisms involving SIRT1.²⁰

Additional research suggests there may be considerable variation in how different individuals’ genes respond to vitamin D supplementation, which might explain why not everyone benefits equally from extra vitamin D.

For best results, the scientists suggest vitamin D supplementation should be personalized and “advocate for options tailored to individual vitamin D needs, combined with a comprehensive intervention that favors prevention through a healthy environment and responsible health behaviors.”²¹

Why Sun Exposure Is the Best Source of Vitamin D

On a typical sunny day, your body may produce up to 25,000 international units (IU) of vitamin D,²² although many people aren’t in the sun enough to optimize their vitamin D levels. However, I strongly recommend getting your vitamin D from proper sun exposure, if possible, as it provides benefits beyond vitamin D optimization.

Higher levels of vitamin D may even serve as a marker for healthy sun exposure, which in turn may be responsible for many of the health benefits, which include reduced risk of cancer and increased longevity, attributed to vitamin D. Regular sun exposure, for instance, enhances production of melatonin — a potent anticancer agent.²³

Near-infrared rays from the sun penetrate deep into your body and activate cytochrome c oxidase, which in turn stimulates the production of melatonin inside your mitochondria. Your mitochondria produce ATP, the energy currency of your body. A byproduct of this ATP production is reactive oxidative species (ROS), which are responsible for oxidative stress.

Excessive amounts of ROS will damage the mitochondria, contributing to suboptimal health, inflammation and chronic health conditions such as diabetes, obesity and thrombosis (blood clots). But melatonin essentially mops up ROS that damage your mitochondria. So, by getting plenty of sun exposure during the day, your mitochondria will be bathed in melatonin, thereby reducing oxidative stress.^24,25

If you’re unable to get adequate sun exposure each day, vitamin D supplementation may be necessary. Keep in mind that 20 ng/mL, which is often used as the cutoff for vitamin D deficiency, has repeatedly been shown to be grossly insufficient for good health and disease prevention, which means the true prevalence of people without optimal levels of vitamin D is even greater.

The only way to determine how much sun exposure is enough and/or how much vitamin D3 you need to take is to measure your vitamin D level, ideally twice a year. Once you’ve confirmed your vitamin D levels via testing, adjust your sun exposure and/or vitamin D3 supplementation accordingly. Then, remember to retest in three to four months to make sure you’ve reached your target level.

The Optimal Vitamin D Level for Cancer Prevention

The optimal level for health and disease prevention, including cancer prevention, is between 60 ng/mL and 80 ng/mL (150-200 nmol/L), while the cutoff for sufficiency appears to be around 40 ng/mL. In Europe, the measurements you’re looking for are 150 to 200 nmol/L and 100 nmol/L respectively.

It’s important to remember that calcium, vitamin D3, magnesium and vitamin K2 must be properly balanced for optimal overall health. Your best and safest bet is to simply eat more calcium-, magnesium- and vitamin K2-rich foods, along with sensible sun exposure.

However, if you find supplementation is necessary after a serum vitamin D test, also supplement with magnesium and vitamin K2 (MK-7) to ensure proper balance. You’ll also want to ensure you’re following an overall healthy lifestyle to reduce your cancer risk as much as possible. As researchers explained in Nutrients:²⁶

“Vitamin D supplementation is not the magic pill that miraculously solves the cancer burden or that can replace a healthy lifestyle. It is necessary to foster a good environment and invigorate a healthy lifestyle, including a high-quality diet and physical activity. Both have been proven to confer health benefits in many diseases, including cancer, and are the best preventive measures available.”

• ^{1, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19} The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry and Molecular Biology July 2023, Volume 231, 106308
• ^2, 3 Ageing Research Reviews June 2023, Volume 87, 101923, Introduction
• ⁴ Substack, Dr. William Makis, April 18, 2024
• ⁵ J Thorac Dis. 2017 Mar; 9(3): 448–451
• ⁶ Endocr Pract. 2021 May; 27(5): 484–493., Introduction
• ⁷ PLOS ONE 2016; 11 (4): e0152441
• ^8, 9, 13 Ageing Research Reviews June 2023, Volume 87, 101923
• ¹⁰ JAMA Network Open 2020;3(11):e2025850
• ¹¹ The Sentinel November 22, 2020
• ¹² PLOS ONE June 15, 2015 (PDF)
• ¹⁴ Medical News Today May 17, 2023
• ²⁰ Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2023, 24(7), 6154; doi: 10.3390/ijms24076154
• ^21, 26 Nutrients 2022, 14(21), 4512; doi: 10.3390/nu14214512
• ²² J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2019 May;189:228-239. doi: 10.1016/j.jsbmb.2018.12.010. Epub 2019 Jan 4., Abstract
• ²³ Youtube, The Joe Cohen Show, Episode 1, October 25, 2022, 4:00
• ²⁴ Physiology February 5, 2020 DOI: 10.1152/physiol.00034.2019
• ²⁵ YouTube, MedCram, Sunlight: Optimize Health and Immunity January 21, 2022

(Mercola)—The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) released a daunting prediction of the global cancer burden. It estimates more than 35 million new cancer cases in 2050 — a 77% increase from the estimated 20 million cancer cases that occurred in 2022.¹

While WHO named an aging population as a key driver behind the increasing cancer burden, along with tobacco, alcohol, obesity and exposure to air pollution, what they’re ignoring is the concerning trend of turbo cancers that occur shortly after COVID-19 shots.

Cancer Cases Set to Increase Significantly by 2050

The IARC cancer burden estimates are based on the “best sources of data available in [185] countries in 2022.”² That year, there were an estimated 20 million new cancer cases and 9.7 million deaths, with WHO reporting, “About 1 in 5 people develop cancer in their lifetime, approximately 1 in 9 men and 1 in 12 women die from the disease.”³

About two-thirds of the new cancer cases and deaths were caused by 10 types of cancer. Lung cancer was most common, followed by female breast cancer, colorectal cancer, prostate cancer and stomach cancer. When broken down by sex, breast cancer was the most commonly diagnosed — and the leading cause of cancer death — among women. For men, it was lung cancer.

Lung cancer and colorectal cancer accounted for the second and third most diagnosed types and cause of most deaths among women. However, for men, prostate and colorectal cancers were second and third most common, while liver and colorectal cancer caused the second and third most cancer deaths.⁴

There were also disparities revealed based on human development index (HDI), a statistical tool that assesses three dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, access to knowledge (schooling) and a decent standard of living. According to WHO:⁵

“In terms of the absolute burden, high HDI countries are expected to experience the greatest absolute increase in incidence, with an additional 4.8 million new cases predicted in 2050 compared with 2022 estimates. Yet the proportional increase in incidence is most striking in low HDI countries (142% increase) and in medium HDI countries (99%). Likewise, cancer mortality in these countries is projected to almost double in 2050.”

What’s Driving Up Cancer Rates?

WHO blamed the projected cancer burden increase on a combination of age and environmental factors, stating:⁶

“The rapidly growing global cancer burden reflects both population ageing and growth, as well as changes to people’s exposure to risk factors, several of which are associated with socioeconomic development. Tobacco, alcohol and obesity are key factors behind the increasing incidence of cancer, with air pollution still a key driver of environmental risk factors.”

But it did not mention the emergence of rapid-growing cancers of the breast, colon, esophagus, kidney, liver, pancreas, bile duct, brain, lung and blood — including exceedingly rare types of cancer. As noted by Canadian oncologist and cancer researcher Dr. William Makis in the Highwire interview above,⁷ these cancers are showing up in young people, many under age 30, with no family history of cancer.

They’re showing up in pregnant women and young children. Equally odd is the fact that most are Stage 3 or 4 by the time they’re diagnosed, with symptoms arising only days or weeks before. The cancers grow and spread so rapidly, many of these patients die before treatment can even begin. Most of them are also resistant to conventional treatment.

The phenomenon has become common enough that the term “turbo cancers” was coined to describe these rapid-growing cancers in people who have received one or more COVID jabs.

Turbo Cancer Cases Reported Following COVID-19 Shots

In a case report described by board-certified internist and cardiologist Dr. Peter McCullough and colleagues, basaloid carcinoma, a type of aggressive cancer, developed in a 56-year-old man shortly after he received an mRNA COVID-19 shot.

Early symptoms, which began just four days after the jab, were similar to those caused by Bell’s palsy, and involved head pain — but soon a tumor developed on his ear and face. According to the study:⁸

“We place this within the context of multiple immune impairments potentially related to the mRNA injections that would be expected to potentiate more aggressive presentation and progression of cancer. The type of malignancy we describe suggests a population risk for occurrence of a large variety of relatively common basaloid phenotype cancer cells, which may have the potential for metastatic disease.

… Since facial paralysis/pain is one of the more common adverse neurological events following mRNA injection, careful inspection of cutaneous/soft tissue should be conducted to rule out malignancy.”

This is just one example. Another case report, published in Frontiers in Medicine,⁹ also found a “rapid progression” of angioimmunoblastic T-cell lymphoma (AITL) — a rare type of non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) — following an mRNA COVID booster shot. AITL is a cancer that affects the lymph system, primarily involving T-cells, a type of white blood cell that plays a crucial role in the immune system.

“Since nucleoside-modified mRNA vaccines strongly activate T follicular helper cells, it is important to explore the possible impact of approved SARS-CoV-2 mRNA vaccines on neoplasms affecting this cell type,” the study notes.¹⁰

The cancer occurred in a 66-year-old man, mere days after he got his third Pfizer shot. Ironically, he got the shot to protect him during chemotherapy, and in eight days, the cancer just exploded and spread like wildfire.

According to Makis, that kind of progression would normally take a couple of years, or at least a few months. “Such a rapid evolution would be highly unexpected in the natural course in the disease,” according to the study.¹¹

How Might COVID-19 Shots Trigger Cancer?

In May 2021, I interviewed Stephanie Seneff, Ph.D., a senior research scientist at MIT for over five decades, about the likely hazards of replacing the uracil in the RNA used in the COVID shots with synthetic methylpseudouridine.¹² Uracil is one of the four nucleobases in the nucleic acid of RNA that are represented by the letters A, G, C and U.

This process of substituting letters in the genetic code is known as codon optimization, which is known to be problematic.

At the time, Seneff predicted the shots would cause a rise in prion diseases, autoimmune diseases, neurodegenerative diseases at younger ages, blood disorders and heart failure, and one of the primary reasons for this is because they genetically manipulated the RNA in the shots with synthetic methylpseudouridine, which enhances RNA stability by inhibiting its breakdown.

But when substituting parts of the code in this way, the resulting protein can easily get misfolded, and this has been linked to a variety of chronic diseases,¹³ including Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s disease and heart failure.¹⁴ As explained by Makis, the pseudouridine insertion can also suppress your innate immune surveillance by dampening the activity of toll-like receptors, and one downstream effect of that is reduced cancer surveillance.

“The more mRNA shots you take, the greater the immune system damage, the greater your risk of impaired cancer surveillance and hence, the greater your risk of turbo cancer,” Makis says.

DNA Contamination Discovered in COVID Shots

In a preprint study, microbiologist Kevin McKernan — a former researcher and team leader for the MIT Human Genome project¹⁵ — and colleagues assessed the nucleic acid composition of four expired vials of the Moderna and Pfizer mRNA shots. “DNA contamination that exceeds the European Medicines Agency (EMA) 330ng/mg requirement and the FDAs 10ng/dose requirements” was found.¹⁶

So, in addition to the spike protein and mRNA in COVID-19 shots, McKernan’s team discovered simian virus 40 (SV40) promoters that, for decades, have been suspected of causing cancer in humans, including mesotheliomas, lymphomas and cancers of the brain and bone.¹⁷

Florida Surgeon General Dr. Joseph Ladapo, called for an end to the use of COVID-19 mRNA shots, citing concerns about DNA fragments in the products.¹⁸ In a December 6, 2023, letter sent to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration and Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Ladapo outlined findings showing the presence of lipid nanoparticle complexes and the SV40 promoter/enhancer DNA.

While there are limits on how much DNA can be in a vaccine due to concern over DNA integration, the guidelines don’t consider lipid nanoparticles and other factors in COVID-19 shots that could enhance how much DNA can enter a cell.

“Lipid nanoparticles are an efficient vehicle for delivery of the mRNA in the COVID-19 vaccines into human cells and may therefore be an equally efficient vehicle for delivering contaminant DNA into human cells.

The presence of SV40 promoter/enhancer DNA may also pose a unique and heightened risk of DNA integration into human cells,” according to a news release from the Florida Department of Health (DOH).¹⁹ Further, according to the Florida DOH, the FDA’s own 2007 guidance states:²⁰

• “DNA integration could theoretically impact a human’s oncogenes – the genes which can transform a healthy cell into a cancerous cell.
• DNA integration may result in chromosomal instability.
• The Guidance for Industry discusses biodistribution of DNA vaccines and how such integration could affect unintended parts of the body including blood, heart, brain, liver, kidney, bone marrow, ovaries/testes, lung, draining lymph nodes, spleen, the site of administration and subcutis at injection site.”

How to Recover From Post-Jab Injury

If you’ve had a COVID-19 shot, there are steps you can take to repair from the assault on your system. Remember, the more mRNA shots you take, the greater the immune system damage. So, the first step is to avoid getting anymore COVID jabs. Next, if you’ve developed any unusual symptoms, seek out help from an expert.

The Front Line COVID-19 Critical Care Alliance (FLCCC) also has a treatment protocol for post-jab injuries. It’s called I-RECOVER and can be downloaded from covid19criticalcare.com.²¹

Dr. Pierre Kory, who cofounded the FLCCC, has transitioned to treating the vaccine injured more or less exclusively. For more information, visit DrPierreKory.com. McCullough is also investigating post-jab treatments, which you can find on PeterMcCulloughMD.com.

The World Health Council has also published lists of remedies that can help inhibit, neutralize and eliminate spike protein, which most experts agree is a primary culprit. I covered these in my 2021 article, “World Council for Health Reveals Spike Protein Detox.”

• ^{1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6} World Health Organization February 1, 2024
• ⁷ Rumble, The HighWire with Del Bigtree, Is the COVID Vaccine Causing Turbo Cancers? September 22, 2023
• ⁸ EXCLI Journal 2023;22:992-1011
• ^9, 10 Frontiers in Medicine November 25, 2021; 8: 798095
• ¹¹ Frontiers in Medicine November 25, 2021; 8: 798095, Discussion
• ¹² International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research May 10, 2021; 2(1): 402-444
• ¹³ Nature Medicine December 6, 2011; 17: 1536-1538
• ¹⁴ Autophagy August 2008; 4(6): 821-823
• ¹⁵ The Healthcare Channel April 2, 2024
• ¹⁶ OSF Preprints April 10, 2023
• ¹⁷ Expert Rev Respir Med October 2011; 5(5): 683-697
• ^18, 19, 20 Florida Health January 3, 2024
• ²¹ Covid19criticalcare.com

Dr. Phillip Buckhaults, a cancer genomics expert, recently spoke about his findings in front of the South Carolina Senate Medical Affairs Ad-Hoc Committee on the Department of Health and Environmental Control (“DHEC”).

Buckhaults has a PhD in biochemistry and molecular biology; he studies how genes cause cancer. He and his team specialize in detecting foreign pieces of DNA in places where they can incorporate or interfere with healthy genetic expression.

“The Pfizer vaccine is contaminated with plasmid DNA. It’s not just mRNA, it’s got bits of DNA in it.” Prof. Buckhaults said in front of the South Carolina Senate committee. One of his colleagues retrieved vials of the Pfizer covid-19 vaccines from the vaccination program he managed in Columbia, South Carolina. Professor Buckhaults sequenced all the DNA from those vials. He was surprised to see any DNA at all. He said, “You can kind of work out what it is and how it got there and I’m kind of alarmed about the possible consequences of this both in terms of human health and biology.”

“This DNA can and likely will integrate into the genomic DNA of cells that got transfected with the vaccine mix,” he warned. He says the DNA could be the reason why people are having cardiac events and autoimmune attacks after vaccination.

“We do this in the lab all the time; we take pieces of DNA, we mix them up with a lipid complex, like the Pfizer vaccine is in, we pour it onto cells and a lot of it gets into the cells. And a lot of it gets into the DNA of those cells and it becomes a permanent fixture of the cell.”

According to Buckhaults, the long-term risks of DNA integration include cancer. “It’s also a very real theoretical risk of future cancer in some people. Depending on where in the genome this foreign piece of DNA lands it can interrupt a tumor suppressor or activate an oncogene.”

The DNA alterations can also be passed on to future generations. Because DNA lasts for hundreds of thousands of years, “alterations to the DNA can stick around” according to Buckhaults.

Pfizer scientists knew about the DNA contamination and tried to chop it up and hide it

Prof. Buckhaults said most of the DNA in Pfizer’s vaccines contained around 100 base pairs. Some were 500 to 5,000 base pairs long. The size doesn’t make a difference because any of these fragments can incorporate into the human genome. “Your genome risk is just a function of how many particles there are,” he said. “All these little pieces of DNA that are in the vaccine [give] many many thousands of opportunities to modify a cell of a vaccinated person.”

Buckhaults said the pieces are very small because they were chopped up during the manufacturing process. “The pieces are very small because during the process they chopped them up to try to make them go away – but they actually increased the hazard of genome modification in the process,” he said.

When Buckhault’s team pieced all the DNA fragments back together, they were able to determine the source. The chopped-up DNA comes from a plasmid called Agilent, which is manufactured by Agilent Technologies, Inc., a life sciences company in California.

According to Buckhault’s team, Pfizer used this plasmid to clone spike proteins into it. The plasmid is then fed an RNA polymerase so it can replicate mRNA. In the process, this mRNA is then encapsulated in lipid nanoparticles, which are injected into the cells for efficient delivery of the mRNA and the DNA contamination.

Buckhaults said, “They [Pfizer-BioNTech] failed to get the DNA out before they did this.” While “they did make some effort to chop it up … all these little pieces of the plasma got packaged in with the RNA.” Buckhaults said it’s “clear as day what happened just from the forensics of looking at the DNA sequencing.”

Buckhaults said vaccinated people can be tested to see if the foreign plasmid DNA eventually integrated into their genome. While most vaccine adverse events are hard to prove, this integration leaves an imprint that can be detected later. The consequences of this DNA contamination are devastating for humanity and future generations.

Sources include:

• NaturalNews.com
• Expose-News.com
• SCStatehouse.php
• Agilent.com

(Mercola)—According to the latest statistics, global cancer incidence is on the rise, especially among younger people. Between 1990 and 2019, incidence of 29 cancers rose worldwide in those younger than 50, with rates rising faster among women. Cancers on the rise include breast, uterine, prostate, lung, colorectal, pancreatic and stomach cancers.

Between 2016 and 2019, early-onset breast cancer incidence rose by 3.8% annually.¹ As reported by the journal Nature in mid-March 2024,² even teens are now being diagnosed with “improbable” cancers previously only seen in seniors, such as advanced gastrointestinal cancers. And it’s not just happening in the U.S. Oncologists in China and India have also noted this trend.³ According to Nature:⁴

“Statistics from around the world are now clear: the rates of more than a dozen cancers are increasing among adults under the age of 50. This rise varies from country to country and cancer to cancer, but models based on global data predict that the number of early-onset cancer cases will increase by around 30% between 2019 and 2030.⁵

In the United States, colorectal cancer — which typically strikes men in their mid-60s or older — has become the leading cause of cancer death among men under 50.⁶ In young women, it has become the second leading cause of cancer death …

[The] number of deaths from early-onset cancers has risen by nearly 28% between 1990 and 2019 worldwide. Models also suggest that mortality could climb …

As calls mount for better screening, awareness and treatments, investigators are scrambling to explain why rates are increasing. The most likely contributors — such as rising rates of obesity and early-cancer screening — do not fully account for the increase.”

Likely Culprits

The conventional medical model is beyond clueless when they believe the solution for this dilemma is better screening. This is unadulterated nonsense and fails to address the cause, which is a disruption in the microbiome that obliterates the healthy obligate anaerobes in the large intestine.

When your body fails to make enough cellular energy because the mitochondria are dysfunctional as a result of being regularly poisoned by LA and estrogen, they simply are unable to maintain an environment that allows the healthy beneficial bacteria to grow.

When the beneficial bacteria disappear, they are replaced by facultative anaerobes that tolerate oxygen, as a result of the lack of competitive inhibition by the beneficial bacteria. It is these bacteria that are increasing GI cancers, not a lack of screening.

Excessive LA Intake Promotes Cancer

The Nature article⁷ does, however, point to there being a dietary culprit, stating “The prominence of gastrointestinal cancers and the coincidence with dietary changes in many countries point to the rising rates of obesity and diets rich in processed foods as likely culprits in contributing to rising case rates.”

While the Nature article does not go into specifics about what it might be about our modern diets that contribute to cancer, my own research has singled out linoleic acid (LA) — an omega-6 fat found in seed oils (and hence most processed foods) — as a key contributor.

Like other experts in bioenergetic medicine, I’m convinced that chronic diseases such as Type 2 diabetes, Alzheimer’s and cancer are bioenergetic diseases rooted in dysfunctional metabolism resulting in poor energy production, and polyunsaturated fats (PUFAs) appear to be a primary contributing factor in this chain of events. As reported by bioenergetic researcher Georgi Dinkov in an October 2022 blog post:⁸

“The bad news for PUFA (in this case linoleic acid) just keep piling on. At this point, there is hardly a chronic condition out there that has not been linked to elevated PUFA and/or their peroxidation products.

[A December 2022 study in Antioxidants & Redox Signaling⁹] makes the argument that PUFA peroxidation byproducts (created by the increased reactive oxygen species (ROS) itself driven by PUFA) such as 4-hydroxynonenal (4-HNE), are the cause of diabetes and cancer.

In fact, the study makes the argument that the two conditions are basically slightly different points on the same spectrum of systemic disease (i.e. cancer being the more severe one).”

The study¹⁰ published in Antioxidants & Redox Signaling highlights the increased risk diabetic patients face in developing several types of cancer, including hepatocellular carcinoma, pancreatic cancer, colorectal cancer, and breast cancer.

LA intake is linked to several mechanisms promoting cancer, including disruption in energy production in cells, hormonal imbalances, increased oxidative stress, and damage to cellular and mitochondrial membranes.

This elevated risk is attributed to several factors that promote cancer growth in diabetic individuals. These factors include insulin resistance, hyperglycemia, dyslipidemia, chronic inflammation, and elevated levels of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1). These conditions contribute to reductive stress that disrupt the body’s redox balance. As explained by the authors:¹¹

“The consequent oxidative stress associated with lipid peroxidation appears to be a possible pathogenic link between cancer and diabetes” and “the major bioactive product of oxidative degradation of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs), the reactive aldehyde 4-hydroxynonenal (4-HNE) … may be the key pathogenic factor linking diabetes and cancer …

Controlling the production of 4-HNE to avoid its cytotoxicity to normal but not cancer cells while preventing its diabetogenic activities could be an important aspect of modern integrative biomedicine.”

4-HNE Linked to Obesity and Cancer

In her book, “Deep Nutrition: Why Your Genes Need Traditional Food,”¹² Dr. Cate Shanahan details the hazards of 4-HNE, which forms during the processing of most vegetable oils. 4-HNE is highly toxic to gut bacteria, and consumption of 4-HNE has been correlated with having an obesogenic balance of gut flora.

4-HNE is also cytotoxic (toxic to cells), causes DNA damage, and instigates free radical cascades that damage the mitochondrial membrane. As noted by Shanahan in a 2017 interview:

“You can’t design a better delivery vehicle for a toxin that’s going to destroy your health slowly over the course of maybe 10, 20 years, depending on the genetics of your antioxidant system capacity.”

Importantly, 4-HNE occurs even if the oil is obtained from organic crops. It’s an intrinsic byproduct of the refining and processing of the oil, no matter how healthy the oil initially was.

Elevated LA Destroys Mitochondrial Function

Dinkov’s blog also draws attention to another noteworthy study,¹³ albeit its focus is on Alzheimer’s Disease instead of cancer. The study reveals that individuals with Alzheimer’s have cells that are inefficient at producing energy.

This inefficiency stems from a deficiency in glycocholic acid and an excess of LA. Essentially, LA triggers the production of damaging reactive oxygen species (ROS), which then hampers the cells’ ability to generate energy.

Moreover, PUFAs, like LA, disrupt your body’s hormonal equilibrium, imitating the effects of estrogen and cortisol while counteracting androgens and progesterone. Additionally, they alter cellular interactions with water, making cells more water-attracting. Dinkov suggests that these effects, beyond merely generating ROS, play a much more critical role in the harmful effects of PUFAs on a wide variety of chronic diseases, including cancer.

Seed Oils Undermine Your Health in Myriad Ways

In summary, seed oils in general and LA in particular have been shown to harm health by:¹⁴

• Make your fat cells more insulin sensitive, thereby causing insulin resistance.¹⁵
• Creating high amounts of oxidation products when used in cooking (as they are very susceptible to heat), including aldehydes, which are what cause oxidized low-density lipoprotein (LDL) associated with heart disease. Aldehydes also crosslink tau protein and create neurofibrillary tangles, thereby contributing to the development of neurodegenerative diseases.
• Damaging the endothelium (the cells lining your blood vessels) and causing an increase in penetration of LDL and very low-density lipoprotein (VLDL) particles into the subendothelium.¹⁶
• In other words, these oils get integrated in your cell and mitochondrial membranes, and once these membranes are damaged, it sets the stage for all sorts of health problems. With a half-life of 600 to 680 days,¹⁷ it can take years to clear them out of your body. They also get incorporated into tissues such as your heart and brain.
• Damaging your mitochondria and DNA by making your cell membranes more permeable, allowing things to enter that shouldn’t.
• Making the cell membrane less fluid, which impacts hormone transporters in the cell membrane and slows your metabolic rate.
• Inhibiting cardiolipin,¹⁸ an important component of the inner membrane of your mitochondria that needs to be saturated in DHA to perform optimally and facilitate optimal function of the electron transport chain and production of ATP. Cardiolipin can be likened to a cellular alarm system that triggers apoptosis (cell death) by signaling caspase-3 when something goes wrong with the cell.
• If the cardiolipin is not saturated with DHA, it cannot signal caspase-3, and hence apoptosis does not occur. As a result, dysfunctional cells are allowed to continue to grow, which can turn into a cancerous cell.
• Inhibiting the removal of senescent cells, i.e., aged, damaged or crippled cells that have lost the ability to reproduce and produce inflammatory cytokines that rapidly accelerate disease and aging.
• Stripping your liver of glutathione (which produces antioxidant enzymes), thereby lowering your antioxidant defenses.¹⁹
• Inhibiting delta-6 desaturase (delta-6), an enzyme involved in the conversion of short-chained omega-3s to longer chained omega-3s in your liver.²⁰
• Exposing you to toxic 4-HNE, which is highly toxic to gut bacteria, causes DNA damage, and instigates free radical cascades that damage your mitochondrial membranes.²¹
• Exposing you to glyphosate residues, as most vegetable oils are made with genetically engineered crops. Glyphosate has been shown to disrupt the tight junctions in your gut and increase penetration of foreign invaders, especially heated proteins, which can cause allergies.

How to Avoid These Dangerous Fats

Considering the profoundly serious damage they cause, eliminating seed oils from your diet can go a long way toward improving your health. This includes soy, canola, sunflower, grapeseed, corn, safflower, peanut and rice bran oil.

Also, be mindful of olive oil and avocado oil, as both are commonly adulterated with cheaper seed oils. That said, even pure olive and avocado oil are loaded with LA. If, like me, you’re in the habit of eating olive oil, I would strongly encourage you to limit your intake to 1 tablespoon per day or less. In my view, olive oil is not a magic bullet and if you are already consuming 80 grams of LA per day, it will only worsen, not help, your health.

Additionally, as you can see in the video below from Brad Marshall, whose interview with me will post shortly, olive oil is no all it is cracked up to be.

To avoid these oils, don’t cook with them, of course, but also avoid processed foods, condiments, fast foods and restaurant foods. If you eat out, you’re undoubtedly eating unhealthy amounts of seed oils, as most restaurant foods are loaded with it.

Fried foods, dressing and sauces tend to be key culprits. Your best bet is to prepare most of your food at home, so you know what you are eating and, in the case of seed oils, what you’re not. Chicken and pork are also high in LA and are therefore best avoided. Since these animals, even healthy organically grown animals, are typically fed grains, they are loaded with omega-6 fats and may have 10 times the LA content that beef, lamb or buffalo do.

How Much Linoleic Acid Is Too Much?

Ideally, consider cutting LA down to below 5 grams per day, which is close to what our ancestors used to get before all of these chronic health conditions, including obesity, diabetes, heart disease and cancer, became widespread. If olive oil puts you over the limit, consider cooking with tallow or lard instead.

If you’re not sure how much you’re eating, enter your food intake into Cronometer — a free online nutrition tracker — and it will provide you with your total LA intake. The key to accurate entry is to carefully weigh your food with a digital kitchen scale so you can enter the weight of your food to the nearest gram.

Cronometer will tell you how much omega-6 you’re getting from your food down to the 10th of a gram, and you can assume 90% of that is LA. Anything over 10 grams is likely to cause problems. To learn more about the biological impact of LA, be sure to watch the video at the top of this article, and/or read through my in-depth report, “Linoleic Acid — The Most Destructive Ingredient in Your Diet.”

mRNA Injections and Turbo Cancer

Another significant factor in the increase of cancer cases is likely the COVID vaccine. I’m convinced that excessive intake of LA was already a key issue contributing to rising cancer rates before the COVID era. Nonetheless, the introduction of mRNA vaccines has compounded the problem.

Specifically, these vaccines seem to be linked to the emergence of “turbo cancers,” which are rapidly growing cancers that often prove fatal. The sheer speed of their growth leaves little opportunity for effective treatment.

Canadian oncologist and cancer researcher Dr. William Makis in the HighWire interview above,²² replacing the uracil in the RNA used in the COVID shots with synthetic methylpseudouridine (to improve RNA stability) is known to be problematic.²³ When substituting parts of the code in this way, the resulting protein can easily get misfolded, and this has been linked to a variety of chronic diseases.²⁴

Importantly, the insertion of synthetic pseudouridine can suppress your innate immune surveillance by dampening the activity of toll-like receptors, and one downstream effect of that is reduced cancer surveillance.

“The more mRNA shots you take, the greater the immune system damage, the greater your risk of impaired cancer surveillance and hence, the greater your risk of turbo cancer,” Makis says.

The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) predicts more than 35 million new cancer cases in 2050 — a 77% increase from the estimated 20 million cancer cases that occurred in 2022.²⁵ Not surprisingly, the same drug companies that made the mRNA shots are now in a race to be the first to come up with new cancer drugs, including Pfizer and Johnson & Johnson.²⁶

mRNA-Based Cancer Drugs Under Development

Disturbingly, many of the cancer drugs currently under development depend on the same mRNA-based technology responsible for the turbo cancer trend in the first place. Here are a handful of notable examples:

• Personalized cancer vaccines — Companies like BioNTech (which partnered with Pfizer for the COVID-19 vaccine) and Moderna have been working on personalized mRNA vaccines for cancer. These vaccines are designed to stimulate the patient’s immune system to target tumors based on the unique mutations in their cancer cells.²⁷
• mRNA technology for solid tumors — Moderna is also developing an mRNA vaccine targeting solid tumors.²⁸ This approach involves using mRNA to produce tumor-specific antigens inside the body to encourage the immune system recognize and destroy cancer cells.
• Combination therapies — Researchers are exploring the combination of mRNA vaccines with existing cancer treatments, such as checkpoint inhibitors, to enhance the immune system’s ability to fight cancer.
• Neoantigen targeting — Several biotech firms are focusing on neoantigens, which are new antigens that arise due to tumor mutations.²⁹
• mRNA-based CAR-T cell therapy — Efforts are also being made to combine mRNA technology with CAR-T cell therapy, a type of treatment that modifies a patient’s T-cells to attack cancer cells. mRNA is used to allow CAR-T therapy to be rapidly tailored to different types of cancer.³⁰

Considering the mRNA technology itself appears to produce carcinogenic results, I’d be extremely wary about cancer drugs based on it. Time will tell if they can somehow perfect it, but why wait? As mentioned, excess LA in the diet is a major driver of cancer, with or without the mRNA shots, and that is something you have complete control over.

As discussed in previous articles, you also want to avoid excess estrogen, which is a major driver of many cancers, especially breast cancer. For a refresher, see “What You Need to Know about Estrogen and Serotonin.”

• ¹ JAMA Netw. Open 2024; 7: e2353331
• ^{2, 3, 4, 7} Nature March 13, 2024
• ⁵ BMJ Oncol. 2023; 2: e000049 (2023)
• ⁶ CA Cancer J. Clin. 2024; 74: 12–49
• ⁸ Haidut.me October 26, 2022 (Archived)
• ^9, 10, 11 Antioxidants & Redox Signaling December 2022;37(16-18):1222-1233
• ^{12, 19, 20, 21} Deep Nutrition: Why Your Genes Need Traditional Food by Dr. Cate Shanahan
• ¹³ Front Aging Neurosci September 23, 2022; 14
• ¹⁴ Spotify Joe Rogan Podcast #1551 with Paul Saladino
• ¹⁵ YouTube June 23, 2020
• ¹⁶ Open Heart 2018;5:e000898
• ¹⁷ Journal of Lipid Research 1966 Jan;7(1):103-11
• ¹⁸ YouTube, Omega-6 Apocalypse 2, Chris Knobbe August 25, 2021
• ²² Rumble, The HighWire with Del Bigtree, Is the COVID Vaccine Causing Turbo Cancers? September 22, 2023
• ²³ International Journal of Vaccine Theory, Practice and Research May 10, 2021; 2(1): 402-444
• ²⁴ Nature Medicine December 6, 2011; 17: 1536-1538
• ²⁵ World Health Organization February 1, 2024
• ²⁶ MakisMD Substack March 12, 2024
• ²⁷ Cancer.gov January 20, 2022
• ²⁸ Moderna Clinical Trial of Cancer Treatment for Adults with Solid Tumors
• ²⁹ Genome Medicine January 25, 2024;16(1):17
• ³⁰ Penn Medicine News Release January 6, 2022

Illustrating the scale of the problem, the annual cancer incidence rate among British individuals aged between 25 and 49 has reportedly reached 162.4 cases per 100,000 people. This represents a 22 per cent increase over the figure in the 1990s. At the global level, a study published in the BMJ Oncology journal last year revealed that, between 1990 and 2019, there was a 79 percent surge in the incidence of early-onset cancer and a 27 percent higher number of early-onset cancer deaths.

Cancers previously seen as being more common in older age groups are increasingly being diagnosed in younger adults. Examples include breast, colorectal, esophageal, gastric, and pancreatic cancers, among others. With healthcare systems still struggling to recover from the impact of policies imposed during the COVID-19 pandemic, there is growing concern that in the years ahead, the burden on national economies will escalate still further.

The fall in the nutrient content of the global food supply

While diet is being discussed as a contributory cause to the rise in cancer cases, important scientific evidence that could help explain the phenomenon would appear to be being ignored. Of particular relevance are studies conducted in the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Finland, and other countries, which show that the nutrient content of the global food supply has fallen significantly over the past 70 to 80 years. The suspected causes of this include the increasing worldwide shift towards industrial forms of agriculture.

In some cases, the reduction in nutrient levels has been dramatic. Between 1951 and 1999, for example, the calcium content of broccoli in Canada fell by almost 63 percent. Similarly, the vitamin A content of Canadian broccoli fell by almost 56 percent, with the vitamin B2 content falling by almost 43 percent and the vitamin B1 content by 40 percent. Changes in nutrient levels for potatoes were also concerning, with iron and vitamin C content falling by over 57 percent, vitamin B2 by 50 percent, vitamin B3 by 45 percent and, most disturbingly of all, vitamin A by 100 percent. With similar reductions being seen in other countries, it is unthinkable that this would not result in negative health consequences.

Significantly, therefore, Dr. Matthias Rath’s Cellular Medicine research has revealed that long-term deficiencies of vitamins, minerals, and other essential nutrients are the primary cause of chronic diseases such as cancer. Based on this finding, a patented combination of nutrients has now been successfully tested against more than 55 different types of cancer cells. Cutting-edge scientific studies carried out at the Dr. Rath Research Institute have demonstrated that these nutrients are able to inhibit cancer cell invasion and metastasis, cancer cell multiplication and tumor growth, the formation of new blood vessels to feed tumors (angiogenesis), as well as induce the natural death of cancer cells (apoptosis).

Reversing the worldwide rise in cancer cases will necessitate improving global nutrient intakes. Achieving this for people of all ages could lead to a significant reduction in the overall number of cases, including those now being seen in younger people. Towards this goal, as well as encouraging and facilitating the use of science-based nutrient supplementation, governments should also consider promoting organic agriculture. Research shows that food produced organically contains higher levels of nutrients.

COVID-19 vaccines and ‘turbo cancers’

Action also needs to be taken regarding the use of mRNA-based COVID-19 vaccines. Research published in the Viruses journal suggests these experimental injections could significantly inhibit DNA damage repair. The effective repair of DNA – the biological software of each cell – is essential for maintaining a proper immune defense and protecting against a multitude of diseases, including cancer.

In the years ahead, far from successfully reversing the rise in cancer incidence, the continued use of these vaccines could potentially even increase the number of cases. Indeed, some observers are already linking the shots to rapidly developing so-called ‘turbo cancers.’ In this respect, with mRNA vaccine profiteer Pfizer recently making a $43 billion bet that cancer will become more prevalent in future, questions are being asked as to whether it knows something that it hasn’t disclosed. Rather than treating the pharma industry as benevolent saviors of humankind, it is time for governments to realize that reversing the cancer ‘epidemic’ also requires confronting the entities that are benefiting from it.

COVID-19 “vaccines” put immune-compromised individuals in a perpetual state of immune failure

The paper’s lead author and scientist, Alberto Boretti, used the Google Scholar database to conduct the review. He did NOT find adequate evidence to suggest that repeated booster vaccination in immune-compromised individuals is safe or efficacious. The evidence he found showed that mRNA boosters actually impair the activation of CD4+ and CD8+ T cells.

These T cells are two of the most important facets of the immune system when it comes to surveilling, responding to and breaking down pathogens. These T cells also help the body respond to allergens and tumors. CD4+ T cells are responsible for activating other immune cells. They coordinate the immune response against other infections and help B cells create antibodies.

The CD8+ T cells help in the recognition and elimination of infected or abnormal cells. They also prevent excessive inflammation. When the vaccines suppress these T cells, they exacerbate basic infections and allow tumor growth to persist.

Despite an overwhelming body of evidence against COVID-19 vaccination, the current CDC guidance calls on children ages 6 months and older to receive one or two doses of an “updated” vaccine if they are immune-compromised and received an initial two doses before September 12, 2023.

Alberto Boretti advises against this: “While booster doses have been recommended to enhance and extend immunity, especially in the face of emerging variants, this recommendation is not based on proven efficacy, and the side effects have been neglected.”

Compounding vaccination has created a population of immune-compromised individuals

Immune-compromised individuals were one of the first groups of people prioritized for the experimental COVID-19 “vaccines.” According to the medical literature, the COVID-19 “vaccines” actually harm a compromised immune system even further. As more boosters are pumped into their blood, their immune system is impaired further, destroying their ability to face all infections, and forcing these individuals into a perpetual state of immune failure.

On one hand, a high level of IgG4 antibodies after vaccination could equate to protection against the target infection. However, the protective effect of high IgG4 is only realized to a certain level. A growing body of evidence suggests that high levels of IgG4 antibodies from repeat vaccination actually causes multi-organ inflammation, autoimmune diseases, rapid onset cancers and autoimmune myocarditis. In other words, the augmentation of the human immune system should be approached with more caution. Compounding vaccination creates adverse effects in the blood.

IgG4 antibodies are specific proteins made by specialized white blood cells called B cells. When these levels are artificially forced to abnormal levels, there will likely be autoimmune issues. As the activation of white blood cells is suppressed, individuals become victim to turbo cancers and the advancement of severe disease following any infection.

This begs the question: Is this issue specific to mRNA vaccines, or do all vaccines prime the immune system for failure? What role did the over-vaccination of the population before SARS-CoV-2 play in the exacerbation of severe disease and critical outcomes of COVID-19 during 2020 and 2021?

Moreover, how might the aggressive, compounding vaccination of infants set their immune systems up for failure? Is the systematic destruction of the body’s T cells behind the new age cancer epidemic in children and young adults?

Sources include:

• TheEpochTimes.com
• Link.Springer.com
• Academic.oup.com
• CDC.gov
• TheLancet.com
• NCBI.NLM.NIH.gov

The article below from Axios exemplifies this perfectly. New cancer diagnoses are surging with projections showing the highest instances in history. Most troubling is that despite the aging population, it’s people under 50-years-old who are most affected.

Those who have read recent studies about “turbo cancer” or who have heard reports of adverse reactions “mysteriously” surging since 2021 likely realize that this is all part of a huge coverup. There are clearly many doctors who are dense but it can’t be all of them, yet so few ever speak up to state the obvious.

As for corporate media, they’re perpetuating the lies. Here’s that Axios article. Notice how it’s positioned in a way that’s supposed to normalize the notion of diseases getting worse yet nobody has a clue why…

New cancer diagnoses expected to hit record high this year

New cancer diagnoses in the U.S. are expected to top 2 million for the first time in 2024, driven in large part by an alarming increase in cancers among younger Americans, according to new American Cancer Society data.

Why it matters: There have been major improvements in cancer survival, but there’s a worrying rise in some cancers at the same time doctors are trying to figure out why they’re seeing more young patients with cancer.

What they’re saying: This demographic shift comes with psychological, physical and financial burdens that are less common with older patients, experts say.

• Patients under 50 are more likely to be uninsured, juggling career and caregiving responsibilities, and face a higher lifetime risk of treatment-related side effects like second cancers.
• “It’s overwhelming for anybody, but especially for these younger patients who are going on with their daily lives and then suddenly get this life-altering diagnosis and really don’t know where to turn,” Robin Mendelsohn, co-director of the Center for Young Onset Colorectal and Gastrointestinal Cancers at Memorial Sloan Kettering, told Axios.
• “Many feel alone because they’re younger, their friends, many haven’t had to deal with this.”

Zoom in: The proportion of people 65 and older diagnosed with cancer dropped from 61% to 58% in the last 30 years, even as the size of that group increased. The proportion of those diagnosed between ages 50-64 was largely stable.

• “Notably, people aged younger than 50 years were the only one of these three age groups to experience an increase in overall cancer incidence during this time period,” the ACS report said.
• Doctors don’t know exactly what’s behind the uptick in new cases and deaths among younger patients in many cases.

While new cases of colorectal cancer — the leading cause of cancer death in men under 50 and the second-leading cause of cancer death in women under 50 — have been declining among adults 65 and older, they’ve increased 1% to 2% annually in people younger than 55 since the mid-1990s.

• “Colorectal cancers are also presenting with more aggressive disease and larger tumors at diagnosis,” ACS chief scientific officer William Dahut told Axios.
• Researchers are examining whether long-term factors like consumption of red meat or ultra-processed food, medication and vitamin use, and obesity are contributing to this shift.
• “Cancer obviously takes time to grow, especially colon cancer. So we think it’s probably exposures from decades prior,” Mendelsohn said.
• Preliminary MSK research found significant differences in the microbiomes of early-onset colorectal cancer patients compared with older ones. More research is needed but “this might be a signal,” she said.

The big picture: The U.S. cancer death rate has been cut by a third in the last 30 years, partly due to improved screening, a sharp drop in smoking, and more effective treatments against certain cancers.

• But diagnoses have been increasing for some cancers, and there are strong racial and ethnic disparities in cancer deaths.
• New cases of prostate, liver, kidney and HPV‐associated oral cancers and melanoma each rose 2% to 3% annually between 2015 and 2019.
• Cases of breast, pancreas and uterine cancers also increased between .6% and 1% annually during that time.
• Black people were twice as likely to die from prostate, stomach and endometrial cancer compared with white people between 2016 and 2020. Mortality rates were also twice as high for Native American people for liver, stomach and kidney cancers in that same time frame.

The ACS projections exclude data from 2020, when the pandemic’s first year led to a drop-off in cancer screenings.

• The largest delays in diagnoses appeared to be for cancers that tend to be less fatal or asymptomatic, according to ACS. For instance, there was a 16% drop for melanoma diagnosed in men and an 18% drop in thyroid cancer diagnosed in women that year.
• “The question of whether these delays lead to increased diagnosis of advanced‐stage disease and, ultimately, higher cancer mortality at the population level will be answered gradually over many years,” the authors wrote.

Of note: There is some good news in the data. The decline in cancer mortality has resulted in more than 4 million fewer deaths in the U.S. since 1991.

• Still, the study projects cancer will kill nearly 612,000 people this year, up from a projected 609,820 in 2023.

The bottom line: Dahut said the study highlights the importance of timely screening, particularly among people with a strong family history of cancer or who are experiencing symptoms of the disease.

• “Most things, of course, won’t be cancer. But if things seem abnormal, make sure you know you are satisfied by the workup,” Dahut said.

Corporate media has become adept at taking important news that demonstrates the truth and perverting it to reinforce lies.