Date:   2/5/2010 9:25:49 PM ( 14 y ago)
Hits:   13,088
URL:   https://www.curezone.org/forums/fm.asp?i=1567754

0 of 2 (0%) readers agree with this message.  Hide votes     What is this?

 I would say that cancer could be looked at as a survival mechanism in that it usually develops as a cellular response to inflammation (as well as certain fast acting carcinogens such as some highly carcinogenic viruses and toxins and very high doses of radiation).  Where I differ from Moritiz is that I do not consider cancer to be a response by the overall body, but rather by individual cells.

Inflammation in not necessarily a bad thing. It is actually a major part of the healing process. And here we have a chicken and egg question. Which came first? Did the inflammation cause the cancer or is a result of the cancer, which causes tissue damage? And is it the damage to the cells that allows the cancer pathogens to take hold?

Cancer can be considered a disease as well, but not in the sense that it is an illness which can be caught from someone else. Someone may catch a disease or virus from someone else that utlimately creates conditions that lead to cancer, but they don't directly catch cancer. If such were the case, the friends, family members and health care workers would be coming down with cancer left and right.

Been over this before. We are exposed to microbes, including viruses all the time, yet we do not all get sick from these microbes. In fact about 80% of the population is infected with pneumocystic carinii pneumonia bacteria and cytomegalovirus, but we do not show symptoms to these pathogens unless severely immunosuppressed such as in AIDS cases.

So can cancer be "caught"? The answer is YES!!! The Rous sarcoma virus that infects chickens was shown to be an airborne cancer virus. In humans the best evidence of this was seen with David the "Bubble Boy". David died from B cell lymphoma from the Epstein Barre' Virus (EBV) he contracted from a bone marrow transplant he got from his sister who was infected, asymptomatically, with EBV. Other  known contagious cancer viruses include hepatitis viruses and human papilloma viruses. So are you really saying that these viruses are not contagious? If so then how do they end up in our body?

But again exposure to a virus DOES NOT mean guaranteed active infection. If the immune system is sufficiently strong it can fight off the pathogen successfully. If this were not the case then our medical personnel would be ill.

Whatever it is that comes out as "stones" from a liver flush, the value of cleansing, protecting and helping regenerate the liver, and keeping the bile ducts open and flowing, is of paramount importance in beating and avoiding cancer - and doubly so when there is cancer in the liver itself.  The late great cancer pioneer Max Gerson observed that he never found a single cancer patient who did not also have an impaired liver.

First of all the term "liver flush" is misleading. The olive oil stimulates gallbladder contractions. It does not affect or detox the liver. And the bile does not play a role in preventing cancer. In fact it has been shown that due to the caustic nature of bile that when people have their gallbladders removed that their risk of intestinal cancer rises significantly.

So what was Gerson basing his "impaired liver" hypothesis on? In other words what basis did he use to consider the patient's liver impaired and what is he considering impaired? The reason I ask is because people FREQUENTLY mistake liver enzyme tests as an indicator of liver function.

I would suppose that the Hulda Clark parasite protocol might be successful for the same reason that treating for viral infections might help some people beat cancer.  Though such treatments may be intended for parasites and viruses, they also may be beneficial against cancer, which is neither a parasite or a virus.

Actually if you think about it many cancers can be considered parasitic in nature. Malignant tumors tap in to our own blood supply and feed off that nutrition source.

Regardless, Hulda Clark's protocol does have anti-tumor properties, but not for the reason she claimed. Cloves contain eugenol, which is one of the strongest antivirals known. It can also kill other cancer pathogens. Black walnut hull is rich iodine, which also kills cancer pathogens. In addition black walnut hull also contains juglone, which is a mitosis inhibitor. Therefore it can inhibit cancer cell division. Wormwood is also antimicrobial, and I believe is also a mitosis inhibitor.

<< Return to the standard message view

fetched in 0.00 sec, referred by http://www.curezone.org/forums/fmp.asp?i=1567754