Discussion about this post

User's avatar
John OLoughlin's avatar

Thank you, George. I am sure if this can be solved, you will do it. I noticed yesterday in my research that the problem with this "aggressive" form of prostate cancer which I have, is that once it enters the lymph nodes, it can survive and grow without any further connection to the prostate, so they actually call it "castration free." In other words, it is capable of reproducing itself outside the original source, just as we are told HeLa cells do. Surgery, even castration, will not stop it. My urologist has re-started hormone therapy which will stop the testosterone in the prostate from growing more cells, However he said that won't help me because the cancer that will kill me is not dependent on the prostate. The tumors will grow and in 2-4 years I will most likely die. This from a top urologist. (Who is clueless about SV 40.) Many thanks, George.

Expand full comment
Jeffrey Pitts's avatar

I looked it up. Aneuploidy is an abnormal # of chromosomes. Chromosome shattering (chromothripsis?) is a rearrangement with chromosomes possible, lost or gained, chromosomes.

I wonder if we should stop saying “viruses cause cancer” and say...

Genetic material transforming/transfecting our cells has the potential to cause cancer. There is evidence to suggest the CIA has developed synthetic genetic material that can cause cancer and other states of disease. It is thought by many these nucleic acids can be widely dispersed via a number of designed vectors.

I think using the word Virus throws us down the rabbit hole of virology and infectious diseases, when we are talking strictly about biological weapons development.

Just curious what everyone’s thoughts are on this. I even see the no-virus folks get wrapped around the nomenclature axle by slipping in the word virus by accident in an argument.

Expand full comment
6 more comments...

No posts