There are several issues with Ear routes. Absorbtion and dosing. Do you really know what what blood levels are achieved, how long they are achieved?
As I said earlier the route of administration will depend a lot on what kind of cancer is being treated and where. I would recommend ear insufflation for brain cancer, but not for prostate cancer. With prostate cancer rectal insufflation in a better choice. For certain tumors such as some cases of breast cancer or superficial tumors the ozone can be injected (but not IV) directly in to the tumor.
As for blood levels in the case of brain cancer we are not worried about blood levels, but rather saturating the brain tissue with the ozone. This CANNOT be achieved with IV or IA injection. Also keep in mind that ozone has to be injected VERY slow. But the half life for ozone is only about 15 minutes. In addition there is very little ozone administered when doing ozone therapy to prevent hemolysis among other problems. Over 99% of what is being administered is oxygen, not ozone. So we start with a miniscule amount of ozone to begin with. So let's say that you are injecting 80cc of ozone it will take longer to inject the gas that its half life. See the problem? This is not to say that IV injections do not work. They do have there place and can be very effective. But it is not the best application method in all cases. Again this depends on the type of cancer and where it is located.
As for blood levels you will saturate the tissues more effectively and safer than injection. With IV or IA injections you are VERY limited as to how much ozone can be administered. With insufflation the tissues can be saturated safely. It has been shown that the body will only saturate with ozone, and the excess will not benefit nor harm the body. By the way, before you try coming back with some argument like too much ozone causes hemolysis I will address this. It is not the volume of ozone that causes hemolysis, it is the concentration. If the concentration is kept within therapeutic levels you are not going to overdose or be harmed from the ozone.
As for cesium chloride I am not going to get in to a long drawn out discussion on this. I already presented my evidence so I will leave it up to people to make their own decisions. What I will say about it though is I do agree that with cancer people should not fool around with it. But this is another reason I would not even consider using cesium. As the research I presented shows there is only about a 50% success rate if things are stretched. Too many other therapies for cancer exist with much higher success rates. Hoxey was getting an 80% success rate, but ozone is still my first choice followed by Rife technology if the proper frequency is being used. These two therapies have the highest success rates I have found yet and with the best safety records.