Official oncological medicine and alternative cancer treatments, existing outside the confines of conventional medicine, engage in a mutual exchange of accusations, both lacking substantial scientific rationale regarding the nature of malignancy within the framework of natural laws. Ironically, both sides are bound by a singular utopian belief: that since cancer thrives in an acidic environment, the remedy lies in alkalizing your body. This notion is fervently embraced by doctors, alternative healers, and the majority of individuals seeking self-healing solutions online.
For those seeking cancer prevention or exploring self-healing options on the internet, the journey may lead to a dead end. Mainstream medicine views tumors primarily as surgical targets, with well-established post-operative therapies. However, the vast expanse of the internet offers millions of patients an array of eccentric remedies, often without a comprehensive understanding of cancer. Today, instead of the outdated approaches involving hydrogen peroxide and baking soda, there’s a burgeoning trend towards chlorophyll. Yet, few comprehend or communicate that chlorophyll directly stimulates the oncological process in any organism.
I’m prepared to present a rather contentious viewpoint. Regrettably, mainstream medicine has yet to propose a scientifically sound alternative for the treatment of oncology. However, beyond its confines, where the pursuit of non-medical oncological alternatives flourishes, there exists a profound misunderstanding regarding the nature of cancer, its underlying mechanisms, and the efficacy of various methodologies.
I firmly believe that this overarching issue can only be addressed through the lens of science, drawing upon current knowledge and future advancements. Though the prospect may seem as distant as apple trees blossoming on Mars, it’s increasingly evident that within the realm of cancer research, such achievements are indeed feasible.
Alternative cancer treatment methods
When discussing alternative treatments beyond official medical practices, it’s worth noting that in many East Asian countries, traditional folk medicine is officially recognized:
- In China, traditions like Nei Jing (Su Wen and Ling Shu), Ming Tang Tu are upheld.
- India embraces Ashtanga Veda and Chud-shih (Tsa-Shed-Manag-Chi).
- Korea follows Donge and Sasang Euihak.
- Thailand practices Mor (Suang-Yua-Pao-Nuad-Yuayo Tam-Tsao Baan).
- Indonesia has its own tradition called Jamu.
- Japan follows practices like Kojiki, Yakkei taisho, Daido ruiju ho.
These nations provide training for doctors in both mainstream and traditional medicine. While individuals have the right to choose their treatment method, it’s essential to recognize that ancient medical schools worldwide, despite using various substances in treatment, lack effective methods for treating oncological diseases. WHO statistics reflect this, with India and China among the top ten countries in cancer incidence, yet official medicine retains oncological priority. In contrast, countries like Japan, Thailand, Indonesia, and Malaysia have significantly lower cancer rates for various reasons.
Moreover, in many East Asian and Central American countries, energy techniques exist that can potentially halt the malignant process, especially in its early stages. Often, after such interventions, complete recovery may occur within days or weeks. This phenomenon is attributed to the ability of a person’s psychoenergetic properties to influence the spin properties of molecules. While not classified as alternative treatment, this practice, prevalent in regions like East Asia and Central America, persists to this day, even beyond Buddhist monasteries.
Despite the interest of intelligence services worldwide in harnessing such abilities, official medicine in post-Soviet territories does not take these practices seriously. Scientific research in this field is primarily driven by enthusiasts. However, it’s important to recognize that well-known alternative treatments like homeopathy, fungotherapy, apitherapy, aromatherapy, hirudotherapy, hydrotherapy, thalassotherapy, herbal medicine, and others lack theoretical formulation on their efficacy against cancer. Therefore, they can only serve as supplementary, symptomatic therapies.
From the information presented, it’s evident that there’s currently no globally effective medical approach, whether official or alternative, capable of completely eradicating cancer.
However, there have been some promising alternative tests conducted by doctors within official medicine, demonstrating effective results in seriously ill patients, showcasing instances where malignant tumors and metastases were successfully managed without resorting to surgery.
American physicians Emmanuel Revici and Max Wolf were pioneers in this regard. Revici experimented with implanting Koch’s bacillus (tuberculosis bacillus) onto the membrane of cancer cells, despite facing six criminal cases, all of which he was acquitted. He documented 560 cases of complete recovery in individuals diagnosed with stage 3-4 cancer. Although Revici’s technique later found applications in immunology with less risky infections and substances, his work spurred further research into substances capable of inhibiting mechanisms protecting cancer cells. Notably, this line of inquiry led to the awarding of the Nobel Prize in Medicine in 2019 to William Kaelin, Gregg Semenza, and Peter Ratcliffe.
In Russia, physicist Kirill Lanskoy, under the pseudonym Raul Sanchez, experimented with Revici’s method in 2008-2009.
Max Wolf, more scientist than doctor, focused on enzymology in his oncology project, yielding remarkable results. His work included saving numerous royals in Europe and many sick children from cancer.
While these individual instances from official medicine have contributed to research, they haven’t yet formed the basis of a fundamentally new alternative treatment method. However, it’s worth noting that breakthroughs in science often stem from unconventional approaches and indirect medical communication. The fundamental perspectives of scientists like Gilbert Ling, Stanley Prusiner, S.P. Sitko, and B.V. Bolotov have introduced scientific and methodological doubts that challenge the confidence of oncologists.
Alternative cancer treatments
Alternative cancer treatments and conventional cancer treatments are not synonymous. Typically, the latter are based on systematicity and scientific rationale, while the former often rely on single components in hopes of radical, decisive action.
Today, individuals grappling with illness often seek a miraculous, clandestine remedy outside of conventional medicine, hoping to obliterate cancer cells and secure recovery. However, this hope is misplaced. There are no singular substances capable of eradicating cancer as a process; instead, various substances may destroy tumor cells, but none can eliminate the underlying cancer process itself. This is a common misconception.
Cancer involves the overall oncological process of the body, encompassing the daily construction of cells, tumors, and metastases. Both conventional and alternative treatments target the biological structures formed by this process. As David Agus, who treated Steve Jobs, remarked, “The body doesn’t get cancer, it produces it.”
While numerous poisons and active substances can destroy tumor cells, the cancer process persists and regenerates daily. Many individuals turn to poisonous medicinal plants, such as Spotted hemlock, Aconite, and Belladonna, often in the form of alcohol tinctures. However, this approach is fundamentally flawed, as alcohol, a strong alkali, fuels the oncological process and stimulates tumor growth.
Some herbalists recommend complex herbal teas containing dozens or even hundreds of plants, but this approach may lead to antagonistic interactions among the herbs. Effective herbal preparations typically contain only 5-7 components, and their efficacy depends on timing—plants are most effective at different times of the day.
Self-medicating individuals often turn to substances like baking soda or hydrogen peroxide, following the recommendations of figures like Simoncini or Professor I.P. Neumyvakin. However, while these substances may have some effects on the acidic or alkaline environments of the body, they cannot defeat cancer on their own. Moreover, extreme therapies like hydrogen peroxide can disrupt vital physiological processes, increasing the burden on the brain and lymphatic system.
In summary, while alternative cancer treatments may offer hope, they should be approached with caution, and individuals should prioritize evidence-based approaches supported by scientific reasoning.
Another misguided trend is the overprescription of high doses of vitamin C. Synthetic forms of vitamin C are only active within the body at a rate of absorption of up to 2-3% in covalent bonds. Consequently, higher dosages are often recommended to enhance efficacy. However, pharmaceutically synthesized vitamin C modifications can only be absorbed by the body up to 20%, which is insufficient for general health and especially for cancer patients. Naturally occurring vitamin C, found in foods like Rosehip, Red sweet pepper, Currant, and Sea buckthorn, is much more effective than synthetic alternatives. It can be used as a supplement in any treatment regimen, whether prescribed by conventional medicine, alternative healers, herbalists, or self-prescribed.
There is also a plethora of misguided recommendations that mislead many patients, including fasting (endorsed by Paul Breg and Herbert Shelton), cocaine (suggested by Norman Walker), oil with vodka (promoted by Nikolai Shevchenko), and treatments involving kerosene, turpentine, or tar (advocated by Maria Polevaya and Olga Belyakova). Additionally, treatments involving urine, as proposed by Malakhov, or the use of ASD2 (by A.V. Dorogova), are equally ineffective and harmful. These approaches activate anabolic activity in the body, leading to the formation of D-isomeric material, while inhibiting catabolic processes that could counteract the oncological process and contribute to the formation of metastases.
While medical science endeavors to develop auxiliary drugs and substances to complement standard treatment protocols, some products, like Blastofag, are hailed for their supposed miraculous effects in tumor destruction and complete recovery during remission. However, while such developments may offer some benefits, they are insufficient to eradicate or significantly slow down the malignant process. Cancer cannot be defeated so easily with a mere tip of the sword.
Particularly concerning is the widespread enthusiasm for chlorophyll dietary supplements among nutritionists and trendy therapists, despite its inherent dangers. Chlorophyll consistently stimulates cancer growth and contributes to the onset of oncological diseases in healthy bodies. It poses a greater risk than medications like omeprazole, antibiotics, and glucocorticoids because the oncological process mirrors photosynthesis in the body, involving the formation of plant cells. Chlorophyll, as the epitome of photosynthesis and plant cell formation, influences the production of red blood cells and promotes the formation of cellulose, which serves as a building material for metastases.
Alternative treatment for RVB-1S cancer
The method is employed and refined by Yury Ivanovich Shulga.
The method of cancer treatment and care for pre-oncological patients developed and refined by Yury Ivanovich Shulga is grounded in the theoretical framework proposed by Boris Vasilyevich Bolotov regarding the nature of cancer. Bolotov’s theory draws upon insights and arguments from astrophysics, physics, chemistry, biology, biochemistry, and medical practice. At its core, Bolotov’s theory posits that the oncological process is akin to photosynthesis occurring within a living system. Consequently, the body undergoes a shift towards an alkaline environment with an acidic pH reaction, leading to the degeneration of molecules with a right-handed spin (D-isomerism).
This assertion is grounded in the principles of a novel branch of chemistry developed by B.V. Bolotov, which redefines the concepts of acidity and alkalinity beyond pH values.
In Bolotov’s framework, both acids and alkalis can exhibit varying pH levels, high or low. However, since natural processes within living organisms are not solely determined by static conditions, daily fluctuations occur in the body’s charge, environmental pH, and molecular isomerism. These fluctuations create a physiological pendulum effect, constantly favoring the left-handed spin of all body molecules.
When these mechanisms are disrupted, it can lead to shifts in balance, increasing the risk of malignant processes.
The views of B.V. Bolotov on the nature of cancer have been confirmed BGS-15 screening technology, this innovative technology can identify the peripheral blood phenomenon associated with the process of photosynthesis. It has been patented in both Ukraine and the European Union.
The medical objective of this approach is to create an internal environment within the cancer patient’s body where photosynthesis becomes unfeasible. Once this objective is achieved, the oncological process shifts into reverse, undergoing a regressive transformation. Malignant cells cease their division, undergo apoptosis, and are expelled from the body through the excretory systems within the same timeframes as normal healthy cells.
The practical foundation of this method integrates fundamental principles from enzymology, drawing from successful methodologies pioneered by Jean Senebier, Emmanuel Revici, Max Wolf, A.R. Vinnitsky, and B.V. Bolotov.
RVB-1S Cancer Alternative Therapy stands out as one of the most empirically supported alternatives. Its nearly 30 years of application have demonstrated its efficacy in eradicating malignant cells and tumors. Most significantly, this therapy targets not only the symptoms but also the underlying causes of the disease. Moreover, it does not induce significant burdens or harmful side effects on the body.
It seems like you haven’t provided the link or specified where I can find more information about the nature of cancer here
