Overlooked Miracle Drug for Cancer? Why Big Pharma Fears Fenbendazole

[Gunny]

Here's the thing, It really Seems like youre PROMOTING the idea that "the government think for them and molly coddle them cradle to grave".
And If i question the gov't you act as if i'm in the wrong somehow.
If I agree with something the gov't does you ask why I don't let them do everything.
Or say I'm inconsistent.

You wanted everyone to follow the gov't rules with covd gunny. the gov't lied to us, and we all suffered yes.
All I'm asking is why you keep running behind me when I question the gov't for GOOD REASON.

youre not here pointing out "irresponsible people's" actions or votes.
Youre here making comments about my post talking about a treatments for cancer and the gov't's & Big Pharma's Slow to No movement.

Now telling me that mine is a "losing argument"?
What?

I'm just trying to help point us all to some light against a horrible disease, and pointing out LIKELY big biz and gov't corruption AND/OR incompetence.
And the Gov'ts and Big Pharm's long HISTORY OF THE SAME.

Your argument shouldn't be with me.

If folks want to nit-pick the details of the facts fine. OK.
But I'm not sure why you think pointing out "irresponsible people's" actions in gov't and Big Biz is a losing move.
Seems like that's a fight WORTH fighting to me.

I'd really prefer your help. If you had some better strategy to move to a better place I'm open. please show the right WAY to WIN.
In the midst of the "irresponsible people" that have been around since day 6.

Been waiting for this one. I run from nothing. Certainly not you. Definitely not your arguments. Just because you believe them correct doesn not mean everyone else does.

I have to pick and choose my battles based on time. I also choose them based on worthiness. I am remarkably (and boringly) consistent. When I don't have time, I just let it go. Not once, in all these years has any amount of fact, logic, common sense changed your point of view.

Then there's that part where I prefer to walk away at times rather than push the insults too far.

Perhaps you need to adjust your filter a tad? Pointing out what I believe is the reason/reasons doesn't always mean I disagree.

But please tell me where I am incorrect:

Are the People responsible for government?

Are the citizens of the US responsible for those who represent us in government?

Are people who abuse pharmaceuticals responsible for abusing them? And don't blame the companies. I agree they are complicit enablers, but they don't hold anyone down and make them say ahhh. Personal responsibility and personal choice. If we possess those freedoms, there are those who abuse them, those that cry to the government to do something, and a heavy-handed government more than willing to justify its existence by doing something. Regulation imposes on freedom.

That is really as simple as it gets.

[revelarts]

Just because you believe them correct doesn't not mean everyone else does.

I'm not sure you've taken the time to review the evidence of the argument.
If you made evidence based replies rather than generic denails we could talk about wether or not either of us have GOOD REASON to believe what we believe.
no one has to believe ANYTHING you or I do.
But if the evidence presented makes logical sense and aligns with reality.
There's no need to pretend that otherwise.

You could just say. "Hey, you have a point here. But still don't WANT to believe it because..."
Instead of crappy blind denials like "your wrong".

I am remarkably (and boringly) consistent.

On most issues yes. On others youre kinda wishy washy.. like your definition of freedom.
you've been all over the place with that.

Not once, in all these years has any amount of fact, logic, common sense changed your point of view.

I've admitted on more than few occasion that I've been wrong a certain facts.
I try to admitted it quickly.
How many times have you done this Gunny?

As far as my GENERAL POV goes.
what about it should change based on the facts presented here over the years.
I think we'd pretty much agree on most issues.
My main disagreement with you are on foreign policy and war. And I think your view of "America" and 'Big Biz' is more pollyanna than my own.
At least it seems you're far more forgiving of it's flaws... old and new.

But please tell me where I am incorrect:
Are the People responsible for government?

Technically, Yes

Are the citizens of the US responsible for those who represent us in government?

Technically, Yes

Are people who abuse pharmaceuticals responsible for abusing them?

Not if they simply asked their Dr's for pain meds and the Dr mis-prescribe and/or over prescribed them.
No they are not.

tons of folks probably had ZERO intent to get hooked. But just wanted some short term relief and slid into addiction.
AFTER they are addicted they are in fact responsible to try and get out.
But they were not responsible for getting in the position.

And don't blame the companies. I agree they are complicit enablers, but they don't hold anyone down and make them say ahhh. Personal responsibility and personal choice. If we possess those freedoms, there are those who abuse them, those that cry to the government to do something, and a heavy-handed government more than willing to justify its existence by doing something. Regulation imposes on freedom.

That is really as simple as it gets.

So "enablers" have near ZERO legal or moral responsibility?
Really?
Lying about the safety and proper use of the drugs you sell shouldn't be recognized and attacked as a problem?
All the blame should fall on the Users.
Seriously?
Buyer beware huh?

Does that go for Food too?
If you buy some ... um... Pune Juice and drink it down, but find out that the seller KNEW it had life threatening bacteria in it.
Is that seller NOT responsible?
YOU Drank it. They didn't Hold you down. right?

Is he SIMPLY an "enabler" with ZERO responsibility?
Should the gov't have any authority to curtail that activity?
What I'm hearing from you now is kind of a Hard Libertarian view.
No gov't controls on drugs at all? Everyone should take "personal responsibility" 100% for their choices BECAUSE Gov't WILL go to far if they are given any authority.
I think you know I'm not unsympathetic to that POV.
I don't think you really hold it though.
Or have you started to change your mind on that?
Small to ZERO gov't is the best?
(except on foreign policy of course, the US military needs to be HUGE, bigger than it is now. To keep the world in check.)

[Gunny]

I'm not sure you've taken the time to review the evidence of the argument.
If you made evidence based replies rather than generic denails we could talk about wether or not either of us have GOOD REASON to believe what we believe.
no one has to believe ANYTHING you or I do.
But if the evidence presented makes logical sense and aligns with reality.
There's no need to pretend that otherwise.

You could just say. "Hey, you have a point here. But still don't WANT to believe it because..."
Instead of crappy blind denials like "your wrong".



On most issues yes. On others youre kinda wishy washy.. like your definition of freedom.
you've been all over the place with that.


I've admitted on more than few occasion that I've been wrong a certain facts.
I try to admitted it quickly.
How many times have you done this Gunny?

As far as my GENERAL POV goes.
what about it should change based on the facts presented here over the years.
I think we'd pretty much agree on most issues.
My main disagreement with you are on foreign policy and war. And I think your view of "America" and 'Big Biz' is more pollyanna than my own.
At least it seems you're far more forgiving of it's flaws... old and new.



Technically, Yes

Technically, Yes


Not if they simply asked their Dr's for pain meds and the Dr mis-prescribe and/or over prescribed them.
No they are not.

tons of folks probably had ZERO intent to get hooked. But just wanted some short term relief and slid into addiction.
AFTER they are addicted they are in fact responsible to try and get out.
But they were not responsible for getting in the position.


So "enablers" have near ZERO legal or moral responsibility?
Really?
Lying about the safety and proper use of the drugs you sell shouldn't be recognized and attacked as a problem?
All the blame should fall on the Users.
Seriously?
Buyer beware huh?

Does that go for Food too?
If you buy some ... um... Pune Juice and drink it down, but find out that the seller KNEW it had life threatening bacteria in it.
Is that seller NOT responsible?
YOU Drank it. They didn't Hold you down. right?

Is he SIMPLY an "enabler" with ZERO responsibility?
Should the gov't have any authority to curtail that activity?
What I'm hearing from you now is kind of a Hard Libertarian view.
No gov't controls on drugs at all? Everyone should take "personal responsibility" 100% for their choices BECAUSE Gov't WILL go to far if they are given any authority.
I think you know I'm not unsympathetic to that POV.
I don't think you really hold it though.
Or have you started to change your mind on that?
Small to ZERO gov't is the best?
(except on foreign policy of course, the US military needs to be HUGE, bigger than it is now. To keep the world in check.)

Again, presumption, and contradiction.

You want the government to control the shit or not? Make up your mind. Can't have both and it isn't going to be your way. Nothing I hated worse in the Marine Corps and/or civilian job World was getting stuck with all the responsibility but given no authority to make it work. That's what you want.

The government's responsible but should hold only providers accountable for the actions of the individuals, but don't dare let the government tell you, the individual what to do That's horse shit.

[revelarts]

Again, presumption, and contradiction.


You want the government to control the shit or not? Make up your mind. Can't have both and it isn't going to be your way. Nothing I hated worse in the Marine Corps and/or civilian job World was getting stuck with all the responsibility but given no authority to make it work. That's what you want.


The government's responsible but should hold only providers accountable for the actions of the individuals, but don't dare let the government tell you, the individual what to do That's horse shit.

Why are you pretending that you think the gov't has to have Dictatorial Control or Nothing? Or that I should think that?

Seems like youre just dancing around the questions again.
Or you're pretending to try oversimplify what you know is the complexity of govt.

The question of what role the gov't plays vs individual freedom is what the founders were working out.
the constitution is the base line for the role of the federal gov't.
Local limited gov't is the next line of gov't and it's based on fundamental moral principals that translate into laws.
A framework that sets broad boundaries for freedom.

In this case the moral and legal line of the framework that the pharma companies crossed is,
number 1, they have LIED to their customers, the Drs and the patients. In law that's called Fraud.
So yes they are responsible for that.
The next legal line they've crossed is bribery. Bribery used to facilitate the fraud.
Bribery to doctors and to gov't officials.

Fraud and Bribery that lead to mass deaths.
Which, at the least, is manslaughter.

They are responsible and should be (have been in some cases) held legally accountable.

[Gunny]

Why are you pretending that you think the gov't has to have Dictatorial Control or Nothing? Or that I should think that?

Seems like youre just dancing around the questions again.
Or you're pretending to try oversimplify what you know is the complexity of govt.

The question of what role the gov't plays vs individual freedom is what the founders were working out.
the constitution is the base line for the role of the federal gov't.
Local limited gov't is the next line of gov't and it's based on fundamental moral principals that translate into laws.
A framework that sets broad boundaries for freedom.

In this case the moral and legal line of the framework that the pharma companies crossed is,
number 1, they have LIED to their customers, the Drs and the patients. In law that's called Fraud.
So yes they are responsible for that.
The next legal line they've crossed is bribery. Bribery used to facilitate the fraud.
Bribery to doctors and to gov't officials.

Fraud and Bribery that lead to mass deaths.
Which, at the least, is manslaughter.

They are responsible and should be (have been in some cases) held legally accountable.

The entire premise of this argument is speculation, not fact. Again, there is no need to dance around your arguments as one has to dance enough to keep up with their wil-o-wisp nature.

If there was provable bribery and fraud it would be in court. When and where it is or has been in court, it is being accounted for. There's a difference between a lie and what you do or do not believe.

Fact is, you want to have your cake and eat it too.

[SassyLady]

The entire premise of this argument is speculation, not fact. Again, there is no need to dance around your arguments as one has to dance enough to keep up with their wil-o-wisp nature.

If there was provable bribery and fraud it would be in court. When and where it is or has been in court, it is being accounted for. There's a difference between a lie and what you do or do not believe.

Fact is, you want to have your cake and eat it too.

The court system moves slowly. It is making its way. Give it time.

[revelarts]

The court system moves slowly. It is making its way. Give it time.

The thing is we have to remember,
how many cigarette executives ever went to prison or even got fined for knowingly lying about the dangers of the products. Or for intentionally making them MORE addictive. Even after literally having company documents and whistle blowers proving in court that they had done the studies decades earlier that showed the dangers, had paid to have fake studies done, created propaganda calling others studies "junk science", had intentionally made the products MORE addictive and that multiple companies had agreed (colluded, conspired) to keep the real info away from the public for as long as possible.
None? I'm talking about the executives, paid propagandist or the bought off gov't officials or bureaucrats.
the companies got fined and sued, yes, but people in jail or personal bank accounts touched?
(BTW bank collapse of 2007–8. No bank or brokerage executive ever went to jail ethier)



And cigarettes are just a recreational drug/product.
But the drugs Big Pharma sells are supposedly "for medicinal purposes".
They have a natural aura of defense, in that, at times we really need them.

No one (mostly) wants to think that their doctors are ignorant (or knowing) tools of money hungry drug companies.

[revelarts]

William Makis MD
@MakisMD
NEW ARTICLE: TURBO CANCER - MELANOMA - ages 22 to 35 - COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Turbo Cancer Melanomas are resistant to all new treatments - 20 shocking cases

Melanoma is skyrocketing.

UK Government Disability data shows a 72% rise in disability due to skin cancer in 2022

COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Induced Turbo Cancer Melanoma is DIFFERENT.

It is extremely aggressive.

It doesn't respond to Radiotherapy.

It doesn't respond to cutting edge Immunotherapy (which is designed to improve long term outcomes)

It's killing MEN and WOMEN in their 20s and 30s

Nov.10, 2023 - Coal City, IL - 35 year old Chris Hardin was diagnosed with Stage 3 Melanoma in June 2023 that rapidly progressed to Stage 4, didn’t respond to radiation or immunotherapy and became Stage 4 with tumor “growing on his spine, pressing on the vertebrae and crushing it while also wrapping around nerves”

Nov.1, 2023 - 33 year old Etai David Gamliel was diagnosed with Metastatic Melanoma in late June 2023. It did not respond to radiation or immunotherapy. Cancer spread to spinal cord, taking away his ability to walk, then further up his spine until it took away his ability to breathe.

Oct.25, 2023 - Brazil, IN - 28 year old Wesley Miller was going to have some cysts removed from his arm and abdomen. Instead, he was diagnosed with Stage 4 Melanoma with lesions in the brain, lungs, liver and bones.

Oct.8, 2023 - Long Beach, CA - 32 year old Randi Young was diagnosed with Stage 4 melanoma Sep.21, 2023. She died 2 weeks later on Oct.8, 2023. Diagnosis to death: 2 weeks.

July 6, 2023 - Germany - 23 year old German handball world champion Liv Suchting was diagnosed with brain tumors which turned out to be Stage 4 Melanoma.

I present 20 such cases.

First research papers are now starting to mention “Turbo Cancer” (more on that in future articles)

The 5 most common COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine Turbo Cancers are: lymphoma, brain (glioblastoma), breast (usually triple negative), colon and lung.

Rounding out the top 10 Turbo Cancers would include: leukemias, melanomas, sarcomas, testicular and renal cell.

Special mention to hepatobiliary cancers (liver, gallbladder, pancreas), ovarian and cervical.

We need urgent research in this area as patients are not offered anything by their Oncologists.

End stage Turbo Cancer Melanoma patients should be offered:

High Dose Ivermectin protocols

High Dose Fenbendazole or Mebendazole protocols

High Dose Melatonin protocols

Supported by peer-reviewed research.

[revelarts]

Professor of Oncology at St George's Hospital Medical School, London:

"At the end of last year I reported that I was seeing melanoma patients who had been stable for years relapse after their first booster (their third injection). I was told it was merely a coincidence and to keep quiet about it, but it became impossible to do so. The number of my patients affected has been rising ever since. I saw two more cases of cancer relapse post booster vaccination in my patients just this last week.

Other oncologists have contacted me from all over the world including from Australia and the US. The consensus is that it is no longer confined to melanoma but that increased incidence of lymphomas, leukaemias and kidney cancers is being seen after booster injections. Additionally my colorectal cancer colleagues report an epidemic of explosive cancers (those presenting with multiple metastatic spread in the liver and elsewhere). All these cancers are occurring (with very few exceptions) in patients who have been forced to have a Covid booster whether they were keen or not, for many so they could travel.

So why are these cancers occurring?
T cell suppression was my first likely explanation given that immunotherapy is so effective in these cancers. However we must also now consider DNA plasmid and SV40 integration in promoting cancer development, a feature made even more concerning by reports that mRNA spike protein binds p53 and other cancer suppressor genes. It is very clear and very frightening that these vaccines have several elements to cause a perfect storm in cancer development in those patients lucky enough to have avoided heart attacks, clots, strokes, autoimmune diseases and other common adverse reactions to the Covid vaccines.

To advise booster vaccines, as is the current case, is no more and no less than medical incompetence; to continue to do so with the above information is medical negligence which can carry a custodial sentence.
No ifs or buts any longer. All mRNA vaccines must be halted and banned now."

Angus Dalgleish
FRCP FRCPath FMedSci is a professor of oncology at St George's, University of London,
best known for his contributions to HIV/AIDS research.