A single intravenous dose of Ewingella americana achieved complete tumor elimination in 100% of treated animals, with no detectable toxicity—outperforming chemotherapy and immunotherapy.
Fascinating and well written analysis of this research Nicholas!
You have a unique ability to summarize and present complex scientific data in a manner understandable to those untrained or minimally trained in scientific disciplines, all the while highlighting and and addressing the most salient and useful as well as practical aspects; while also positioning the research in an overall context of current knowledge and practice.
You are perhaps the main reason I stay with my support of Courageous Discourse after several years now.
Business model does not benefit from cures, it benefits from extended treatments. The average cancer fatality generates I think about $325000 revenue, much of that is chemo.
If that's all it were about, why do they want to sell one-time vaccines that prevent diseases that require treatment with, at the least, 7 to 10 days courses of IV antibiotics? And that result in hospitalizations, and in some cases ICU stays, permanent impairment - There's big bucks in treating all of that.
The antiviral course to treat chronic Hepatitis B costs several hundred thousand dollars. Hepatitis B vaccine series costs a few hundred.
Just looked at your profile, Clot Boy. You know it all. Bye ...
Who are you kidding. Vaccines are one of the highest profit centers of the medico-pharma industrial complex. And a most cherished business model for multiple reasons. Research why that is, if you don't already know.
Because the vaccine group includes everyone - AND Pharma is EXEMPT from liability - sweet deal - anyone else have that business model? - vs the much smaller infected group.
Wow! Interesting. Spread the word before "they" make it go away and disappear into the fog. Is there any timeline on when this might be available for human use? Thanks Nick
This is a fabulous discovery! I'll include this in my next blog post and forwarded it to Paul Marik MD, who has a lot of interest in alternative cancer treatments now.
There's NOTHING that would be "alternative" about this? How would it be produced? On artisanal frog farms? Where frog gut cells are tenderly extracted from free-range frogs, by sweet grandmas. Then they manually centrifuge ...
This would stand to put a lot of businesses out of business. It would be an-alternative, at any rate.
It should be explored further. It reminds me of the discovery of ivermectin in a soil microbe from a Japanese golf course in the early 1970s.
Dr. Marik has a lot of interests in alternatives in cancer treatment lately, which is a very broad statement. Much of what he proposes can be used together with standard chemotherapy to improve outcomes, and/or reduce toxic effects.
The experiment is in a rodent model used to study human colon cancer. It worked very well.
The next step would be to try the treatment in other animal models of human colon cancer, and perhaps animal models of other huiman cancers.
These animal studies take time, and are done by researchers who do animal studies, typically in universities and med schools. Some entity must fund studies, either a public health entity like NIH, or more often a for-profit entity, looking to make a profit down the road.
The more animal studies give favorable results, the more pharmacologic companies will be interested in funding studies .
Since this is cancer, the first human studies might be "compassionate use" in people with terminal cancer who want to try one more thing that might help.
If you read this study, as presented here, and understand the metabolic workings of cancer, you will see how this works in a completely novel way from all other cancer treatments.
Label it as you wish. It's an early stage proof-of-concept model sitting at the intersection of microbiology, immunotherapy and synthetic biology. You can call it "microbiome-based cancer therapy," or "bacterial oncology," or "immunotherapy-adjacent," or whatever.
If you want to call it "natural," because the bacterium discussed (Eeingella aneticana) was isolated from animal microbiota, as opposed to synthesized from scratch in a lab, have fun. But developing this into a therapy would require molecular biology techniques for isolation, purification, conversion from a wild bacterium into a controlled therapeutic strain (e.g., CRISPR-Cas9 for precise gene knockout/knock-on, plasmid engineering, stable chromosomal integration, promoter engineering, codon optimization). Genes might be inserted to encode anti-tumor or immune modulators ... And on and on. All beyond what I know about. But I'm glad that you're enthusiastic about such a HIGH TECH, MOLECULAR and likely GENETICALLY ENGINEERED potential therapy.
In order to facilitate such studies where Low volume sales benefit tiny demographic numbers, it is my opinion that such development work MUST be handled by a public health group with no connections to any Pharmaceutical Company or Academia.
100% taxpayer funded, Congressional budget approved every year.
Proof of concept, trials, etc however must be on a timeline and not allowed to go overboard. 3rd party agency must approve for efficacy and safety before allowing trials at some level. . .
He isn't. He started pushing that lie in early February with an announcement post. His fans just ran with it, but it's simply not true. It's easy to check at the state website.
I remember an old book titled "Sharks Don't Get Cancer" and I think it had something to do with squalene, found in shark liver oil (and also found in olive oil). Because this bacteria comes from amphibians and reptiles, I wonder if salamanders and turtles and lizards get cancer.
There is a rumor that some sharks live for 400 years, providing indirect evidence that they are not cancer-prone (cancer would have set in by then, shortening their lifespan). Some turtles and tortoises can outlive humans also, indicating that they are not cancer-prone, either.
While very interesting, why not focus on what has already been done in previous decades that heals cancer. One is Royal Rife's work. As I recall it is based on Homeopathy which is an energy form of healing, cheap, accessible, and very safe and effective for over 200 years of evidence. Rife took the idea of it being a way to capture energy and created a machine that could create energy frequencies to apply to the person. His labs were trashed by the US pharma controlled power structure. That is why people don't know about it. Despite the destruction of his lab, equipment and research, as well as Rife himself!, people who worked with him reconstructed much of that information and there are machines that are no expensive that do this work. The process is not bio-chemical but quantum physics. Every single thing on earth has its own energy frequency. Every illness has its own energy frequency. Matching energy patterns is the basis of prescribing homeopathy but it does not use machinery. There are manuals with 1000's of frequencies listed that can be programmed in the Rife equipment. Homeopathy uses equipment to energize the little sugar pills that carry the energy for distribution.
Around the world there are many other protocols that have success in healing cancer and need to be looked at and the information shared with Americans who are, not only clueless as a rock, but so conditioned by fear of leaving the medical industry's control they have such difficulty in dealing with their cognitive dissonance. And chancing angering some people, I find those with advanced education degrees, especially in medicine, are some of the worst.
Wonderful news and great reporting. Nicholas, please see Dr. Ardis' interview on Rumble last week on Man in America. Ardis goes through an old medical book showing all the maladies tobacco was used to cure for 100s of years, including cancer. Maybe you could either write an article or interview Dr. Ardis about this topic. The interview on MIA was FASCiNATING.
There are several approaches to treating and curing cancer. Antiparasitics like Ivermectin, fenbendazole and mebendazole appear to be curative in many cancers. These are very inexpensive drugs and they work.
Fascinating and well written analysis of this research Nicholas!
You have a unique ability to summarize and present complex scientific data in a manner understandable to those untrained or minimally trained in scientific disciplines, all the while highlighting and and addressing the most salient and useful as well as practical aspects; while also positioning the research in an overall context of current knowledge and practice.
You are perhaps the main reason I stay with my support of Courageous Discourse after several years now.
Thank you again for all you do.
You are in my prayers Nic.
Jacob
Ditto.
Double Ditto
I’m afraid that this will never see the light of day. At least, if big Pharma has anything to say.
The only people who will receive this treatment for cancer are the same people that say the rest of us can't have it.
Why is that? Why would "big Pharma" withold this?
Business model does not benefit from cures, it benefits from extended treatments. The average cancer fatality generates I think about $325000 revenue, much of that is chemo.
If that's all it were about, why do they want to sell one-time vaccines that prevent diseases that require treatment with, at the least, 7 to 10 days courses of IV antibiotics? And that result in hospitalizations, and in some cases ICU stays, permanent impairment - There's big bucks in treating all of that.
The antiviral course to treat chronic Hepatitis B costs several hundred thousand dollars. Hepatitis B vaccine series costs a few hundred.
Just looked at your profile, Clot Boy. You know it all. Bye ...
Who are you kidding. Vaccines are one of the highest profit centers of the medico-pharma industrial complex. And a most cherished business model for multiple reasons. Research why that is, if you don't already know.
You cannot back your contention. Their annual and quarterly SEC financial reports are all made public.
You missed the point, but ... Bullsh-t, sweetie. Prove otherwise.
maybe you're a bot.
Find me one company's Annual Report showing that "vaccines are one of the(ir) highest profit centers .."
I coukd point you to two companies for which that was the case in a single year, within the last 5 years.
Because the vaccine group includes everyone - AND Pharma is EXEMPT from liability - sweet deal - anyone else have that business model? - vs the much smaller infected group.
This is a plant.
"Is not!" 😢 😭
What Planet Are You On. Money 💰. Money 💰. Money 💰. No Money 💰. In Curing. DAW. JAWZUS
You're misinformed, ignorant, and stupid. You're a waste of time. Sell your wares somewhere else.
isn't that the truth.
Why? Why is that "the truth?"
Sadly. They Control the Media and Goyim Herd.
Very sadly true.
Wow! Interesting. Spread the word before "they" make it go away and disappear into the fog. Is there any timeline on when this might be available for human use? Thanks Nick
5 or 10 yrs. . . longer if RFK Jr does not get word of it. . .
Probably Never. 💰.
This is a fabulous discovery! I'll include this in my next blog post and forwarded it to Paul Marik MD, who has a lot of interest in alternative cancer treatments now.
There's NOTHING that would be "alternative" about this? How would it be produced? On artisanal frog farms? Where frog gut cells are tenderly extracted from free-range frogs, by sweet grandmas. Then they manually centrifuge ...
This would stand to put a lot of businesses out of business. It would be an-alternative, at any rate.
It should be explored further. It reminds me of the discovery of ivermectin in a soil microbe from a Japanese golf course in the early 1970s.
Dr. Marik has a lot of interests in alternatives in cancer treatment lately, which is a very broad statement. Much of what he proposes can be used together with standard chemotherapy to improve outcomes, and/or reduce toxic effects.
Who would do the exploring? And how and why would it "put a lot of companies out of business?"
One drug, to cure them all ...
Are you a parody? Or 90 years old?
Did you read the study?
The experiment is in a rodent model used to study human colon cancer. It worked very well.
The next step would be to try the treatment in other animal models of human colon cancer, and perhaps animal models of other huiman cancers.
These animal studies take time, and are done by researchers who do animal studies, typically in universities and med schools. Some entity must fund studies, either a public health entity like NIH, or more often a for-profit entity, looking to make a profit down the road.
The more animal studies give favorable results, the more pharmacologic companies will be interested in funding studies .
Since this is cancer, the first human studies might be "compassionate use" in people with terminal cancer who want to try one more thing that might help.
If you read this study, as presented here, and understand the metabolic workings of cancer, you will see how this works in a completely novel way from all other cancer treatments.
It is a new paradigm, completely new.
Label it as you wish. It's an early stage proof-of-concept model sitting at the intersection of microbiology, immunotherapy and synthetic biology. You can call it "microbiome-based cancer therapy," or "bacterial oncology," or "immunotherapy-adjacent," or whatever.
If you want to call it "natural," because the bacterium discussed (Eeingella aneticana) was isolated from animal microbiota, as opposed to synthesized from scratch in a lab, have fun. But developing this into a therapy would require molecular biology techniques for isolation, purification, conversion from a wild bacterium into a controlled therapeutic strain (e.g., CRISPR-Cas9 for precise gene knockout/knock-on, plasmid engineering, stable chromosomal integration, promoter engineering, codon optimization). Genes might be inserted to encode anti-tumor or immune modulators ... And on and on. All beyond what I know about. But I'm glad that you're enthusiastic about such a HIGH TECH, MOLECULAR and likely GENETICALLY ENGINEERED potential therapy.
thanks for the detail John.
In order to facilitate such studies where Low volume sales benefit tiny demographic numbers, it is my opinion that such development work MUST be handled by a public health group with no connections to any Pharmaceutical Company or Academia.
100% taxpayer funded, Congressional budget approved every year.
Proof of concept, trials, etc however must be on a timeline and not allowed to go overboard. 3rd party agency must approve for efficacy and safety before allowing trials at some level. . .
. . . if I were king. ha!
How is your comment relevant
Dr Makis needs to see this as well. He is now living and licensed in Florida.
He is most definitely NOT LICENSED In Florida. No license, no practice profile.
https://mqa-internet.doh.state.fl.us/MQASearchServices/Home
Over two months after his big announcement.
Unlikely he's in Florida at all. There's no way he has any kind of work visa either.
He doesn't have a Florida license - in anything. That's all public knowledge. There no super secret Florida medical licenses.
Wrong. He is now a licensed MD in Florida.
He is not, per Florida Board of Medicine;
https://mqa-internet.doh.state.fl.us/MQASearchServices/Home
Is that what Makis pays you to say?
https://www.thefocalpoints.com/p/new-study-frog-derived-gut-bacterium/comment/243826381
He is not. Easily verifiable at their state medical board website.
He is not. Stop lying.
He isn't. He started pushing that lie in early February with an announcement post. His fans just ran with it, but it's simply not true. It's easy to check at the state website.
I am not in communication with Dr. Makis, but yes.
Now . . . THIS, right here, is the very sort of article I expect to see from ALL you Focal Points authors.
and a bit less content riven with TDS.
thanks Nic.
Very exciting! Please keep us updated about further investigations in to the efficacy, safety and availibility of this treatment option.
Move along, nothing to see here.
Sincerely,
Big Pharma
Exciting find, Nic.
I remember an old book titled "Sharks Don't Get Cancer" and I think it had something to do with squalene, found in shark liver oil (and also found in olive oil). Because this bacteria comes from amphibians and reptiles, I wonder if salamanders and turtles and lizards get cancer.
There is a rumor that some sharks live for 400 years, providing indirect evidence that they are not cancer-prone (cancer would have set in by then, shortening their lifespan). Some turtles and tortoises can outlive humans also, indicating that they are not cancer-prone, either.
While very interesting, why not focus on what has already been done in previous decades that heals cancer. One is Royal Rife's work. As I recall it is based on Homeopathy which is an energy form of healing, cheap, accessible, and very safe and effective for over 200 years of evidence. Rife took the idea of it being a way to capture energy and created a machine that could create energy frequencies to apply to the person. His labs were trashed by the US pharma controlled power structure. That is why people don't know about it. Despite the destruction of his lab, equipment and research, as well as Rife himself!, people who worked with him reconstructed much of that information and there are machines that are no expensive that do this work. The process is not bio-chemical but quantum physics. Every single thing on earth has its own energy frequency. Every illness has its own energy frequency. Matching energy patterns is the basis of prescribing homeopathy but it does not use machinery. There are manuals with 1000's of frequencies listed that can be programmed in the Rife equipment. Homeopathy uses equipment to energize the little sugar pills that carry the energy for distribution.
Around the world there are many other protocols that have success in healing cancer and need to be looked at and the information shared with Americans who are, not only clueless as a rock, but so conditioned by fear of leaving the medical industry's control they have such difficulty in dealing with their cognitive dissonance. And chancing angering some people, I find those with advanced education degrees, especially in medicine, are some of the worst.
Just saw a thread on Rife on X today.
https://x.com/trueonx/status/2043841358608380142
And "cancer" is a fungus.
https://countmetalmind.substack.com/p/they-know-cancer-is-a-fungus
Wonderful news and great reporting. Nicholas, please see Dr. Ardis' interview on Rumble last week on Man in America. Ardis goes through an old medical book showing all the maladies tobacco was used to cure for 100s of years, including cancer. Maybe you could either write an article or interview Dr. Ardis about this topic. The interview on MIA was FASCiNATING.
Now what was that story about kissin' frogs!?
Pharma lives in a cave!
"For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God! For it is written, “He catches the wise (experts) in their own craftiness”! 1 Corinthians 3:19
Is this a trap for big pharma? Are you making this up? I double like it. We want more!more!more!!!
Wow. Who wudda thought.
There are several approaches to treating and curing cancer. Antiparasitics like Ivermectin, fenbendazole and mebendazole appear to be curative in many cancers. These are very inexpensive drugs and they work.
Now there's an educated reply if there ever was one. Is that what Pfizer pays you to say, or is it Moderna?
Kermit is going to get very woried.
This is an amazing discovery. It could revolutionize cancer treatment. Let’s hope there is clinical testing. Thank you, Nicholas.