TOPIC:

DavidB wrote:

I repeat - I have seen laetrile cure liver, breast and prostate cancers in 5 people. This wasn't hearsay - they were all related to me, or close friends. They were all medically confirmed with cancer - stages 2-4 and their cancers disappeared. I do not bullshit.
For what it's worth, another friend of mine was confirmed with lung cancer last year. I did suggest that he use MMS (as laetrile imports have been banned by the medical mafia in this country. He used MMS diligently but died on 2 January this year.
If I had cancer I would definitely choose laetrile (apricot seeds) over MMS.
Perhaps you could substantiate your claim that "Laetrile has pretty much been proved to not work for most people".
 

What dosage of MMS1 was he using?

Perhaps CDS would be a better option for cancer as it is fully activated, whereas MMS1 is only 10% activated and then relies on the stomach acid to fully activate. That is how I understand it anyway.

MM1 protocol 1000 - 3 drops per hour 8 times per day. He was getting Herx reactions at a time when he was dreadfully ill.
His cancer was very aggressive, from diagnosis to passing was only 4 months, so I really don't think anything would have saved him.
I haven't had any experience with CDS, so can't say whether it would have been better.
IMHO - MMS is effective against diseases caused by external biological agents such as bacteria, viruses, fungi - but is not effective for metabolic conditions of which cancer is one.

in order to be able to talk about COVID19, the SARS-COV2 virus must be proven. However, no one has done this to date. Anyone who hasn't figured out and come to the realization that COVID19 is one big bull shit, really has no help.

I love the claim that someone is fact based but then makes an uninformed statement such as "Similar to the way Ivermectin helps SOME ((very) small group?) of people with COVID-19, but for the greater majority, it does not."  

Let's check the science...
All studies (pooled effects, all stages)
Ivermectin has an efficacy rate of 62% based on 95 studies

For comparison
Quercetin has an efficacy rate of 50% based on 10 studies
Fluvoxamine --> 40% / 15 studies
Paxlovid --> 34% / 28 studies - Recommended for CV19 treatment
Budesonide --> 31% / 11 studies
Hydroxychloroquine --> 25% / 387 Studies
Remdesivir --> 11% / 52 studies - Approved for hospital CV19 treatment

Ivermectin
Early Treatment 62% from 37 studies (Hydroxychloroquine also has a 62% effectiveness as an early treatment)
Prophylaxis 82% from 17 studies

Only three interventions rank higher than Ivermectin (pooled effects, all stages) but all three have limited data (1, 4, and 4 studies respectively). Basic math dictates that 62% would provide a real world efficacy much greater than a very small group as incorrectly stated. Trust the science...or maybe start by reading it.
 

Well - he was an Italian Farmer, so I would rule out the vegan diet. I did advise a vegan diet but doubt whether he did it.
When I last saw him he was in the final stages of cancer and extremely ill, so - as I wrote before - nothing was going to work at that stage.
I didn't mention before that he had been double vaxxed with Pfizer just weeks before the cancer was diagnosed. Aggressive cancers are being increasingly diagnosed in the recently vaxxed. His cancer was in the lung - I was advised by an oncologist that lung cancers are usually quite slow to gestate - not rapid like this.
I really don't know whether he was herxing '- it may have been symptomatic of the final stages of cancer.
The viral theory of cancer is just that - an unproven theory - although I don't dismiss it.

I am very surprised that someone with your contempt for what you regard as bullshit would serious entertain Wikipedia. Wikipedia has been abused by "fact-checkers" to the extent that it is now corrupted through and through with BS. Example - the article claims Laetrile (AKA Amygdalin) is capable of causing cyanide poisoning - GASP GASP. This is utter bullshit. What they won't say is that vitamin B12 also contains cyanide - hence its name cyano-cobalamin and it is absolutely necessary for human health. The idiots who wrote this scare-mongering trash have no understanding of basic chemistry where otherwise poisonous substances change their characteristics completely when combined with other elements in molecular structures. Sodium and chlorine - both poisonous in their elemental forms, combine in ionic form as salt - another essential substance for biological health.
After Dr Sugiura at Sloan Kettering concluded that Laetrile is effective against cancer, there was a powerful campaign to discredit it - after all - the cancer industry based as it is on poisonous chemotherapy cannot afford to lose their billions in revenues to a simple common substance available to everyone.
And that is why Bill, that MMS and its proponents are now under the same vicious attacks as Laetrile suffered in the 1980's and 1990's. They were so successful that Laetrile is hardly heard of anymore.
MMS will probably suffer that same fate.

Again, something that is becoming always, you are the one that is wrong. You and I have had this dance before and you have failed each and every time. You make generalized statements with zero factual information. So enlighten me, which of the 95 Ivermectin studies that were collated are "faulty, misleading, or fraudulent, and/or have been disavowed as in error or mistake". I only ask because all of the ones utilized are published and have been defended. Disavowing a study without being able to scientifically prove an error is as useless as your blanket claims. It's why people think the Cochrane Mask Review somehow is inconclusive or not accurate in it's finding that masks are not effective. Sure, an editor made a claim against it but no scientific challenge has been made because...THERE ISN'T ONE. Their finding stands, and was no surprise considering the decades of research that already existed, but I'm sure the devout Covidians are still wearing them while alone in their vehicle or outside. 

FYI, the 387 studies used to collate the effectiveness of Hydroxychloroquine, including those that were inherently flawed by extreme overdosing which is not enough to disregard the scientific process, were used in the calculations. 

Maybe instead of being presumptuous, you should spend time in the scientific repositories. I have made this suggestion several times.

Why are you getting into these childish arguments over irrelevant details?
 The person who initiated this topic is obviously in dire need of help.
Surely it is our role as contributors to this post to help him/her instead of attacking each other. 

I know I'm just one person but I used Ivermectin when I got sick with Covid and I was 100% better after 2 days.  I still had a stuffed nose for a couple more days but not like my normal 10 days of sickness.  I was very energetic and felt great.  Couldn't believe it!   Whenever I start feeling sick now I immediately take Ivermectin and I'm better.  This is the first winter I haven't gotten sick.   

this is so discouraging. I have same thing as original poster and have pretty much taken same path. Now using MMS for 3 months. No progress so far.  So deflating.