Autolysis and 'C' Research

Ive had hard long term, large and small, sebacious cysts disappear, never to reappear, while on longer(week plus) fasts, and Ive had skin tags completly removed with 30 day programs of topical castor oil or fig sap, come back in the exact same place. Over the century the idea has been that many simple non threatening skin outbreaks are origined at the liver rather than at the manifestation site. Also Ive found that using an oxidizer therapy(MMS, mega dosing Vit C, H2O2) for a thirty day regimin, produces overall health positive effects and one noticed is the receding or elimination of semi permanant skin and or eye (sclera) signs.

I agree with 90% of what Jaguar posts, but in his recent helpful post on avoiding cancer stimulants, there is a small point I contend with(besides his "disagreeing" with the well publicised fact that fasting stimulates the immune system). After having found a study some time ago I posted it recently, and it relates to Jag's post on 'C' and your's on autolysis. (Its from a 2012 study and its no wonder that its conclusions have been ignored since it disproves the value of all currently practiced AMA approved standard of care cancer treatments). 
 
(previous post) http://www.curezone.info/forums/fm.asp?i=2299276

T Seyfried, Cancer as a Metabolic Disease: On the Origin, Management, and Prevention of Cancer (Wiley, 1st ed., 2012).

on.Autolysis:                                                                                                                                                                He (Seyfried) proceeded with cancerous lab animal studies, where he put them on a water only diet, and in a matter of days the animals cancerous cells recovered their normal functioning.
 He then used the protocol on humans and had the same positive results with the caveat that the glucose levels had to be lower than 65 and the blood ketones level had to be at least 2."

on 'C's origin:
----- after removing the nucleus of a healthy cell and replacing it with the nucleus of a cancerous cell, the cell did not become cancerous. He then replaced the cancerous cell nucleus with one from a healthy cell and that cell did not become healthy."  (implicating a causation other than gene related. And Tennant finds it to be Voltage/Oxygen related.)
  And of course he (Seyfried) did it numerous times and six different research institutions replicated his experiments findings. All succesfully.
  So genes were determined not to be the causative factor. The damaged genes appear to be the results of the cellular environment in cancer, and thus any gene related protocol would be "tecnically" ineffective.

(Further research into this topic also reveal that it is likely that the tumor cell's DNA processing is not as damaged as previous researchers would have us think, due to the actual work being done by the tumors cells in that unusual environment(unusual until we study what happens in the creation of a placenta being prepared------). And that the tumor is created due to specific intra and extra cellular environmental factors and that in changing/reversing those inter and extracellular environmental factors , the tumor is autolyzed by the cells own machinations, quickly).

(The mitochondrial damage percieved by previous researchers (and their assumption of the gene's missworkings), as well as the presence of pathogens in tumors seems to be of secondary outcome and significance, and not as causation for tumor growth).