Ted's Cancer Remedies: Summary and Protocols

Thank you Bill (and Ted)! I took a lot of notes regarding the various remedies but it's great to have everything in one easy-to-read place. I appreciate the time you've taken to do so. Cheers!

Thank you Bill. God's blessings be on you and your family. Merryanne In Florida

Herewith is something that will complement and extend some thoughts on understanding what cancer is in terms of its behaviour. My take is very similar to Ted's opinion of cancer and is given here:

Understanding Cancer Behaviour
Cancer is another big subject that seems so ill-understood by the medical research profession. Since the 1960s their only answer to cancer has been to cut, poison and burn with no other useful therapies or progress since this time. Although the medical profession insist that cancer is caused by carcinogens because of host cell mutation without identifying what microbial species, order or genus the cancer organism actually belongs to, this is as far as they will go in their interpretation of this disease simply because they adhere so rigidly to Pasteur's Germ Theory which makes no accommodation and has no acceptance of the concept of pleomorphism in bacteria, viruses, fungi or even cancer. What is not accommodated in their version of science is whether pleomorphism -- taken and accepted from Antoine Bechamp's Terrain or Cellular Theory -- actually exists in bacteria, fungus, viruses etc. This concept was first put forward by Gunter Enderlein. Here is one definition of pleomorphism:

"Pleomorphism is the occurrence of two or more structural forms during a life cycle, especially of certain plants."

Pleomorphism has already been proved to exist in all microbial forms throughout the last hundred years or so by various distinguished research from Prof. Antoine Bechamp, Gunther Enderlein, Royal Rife, Gaston Naessens, Virginia Livingston and Tullio Simonsini. As far back as 1914, a microbiologist named Ms Marie Henri proved that pleomorphism existed in her Anthrax bacterium studies and her evidence was even presented at the Pasteur Institute in Paris. She even admitted that through this discovery, Pasteur's Germ Theory must be wrong. Furthermore, my own belief is that under different body-state conditions, these microrganisms can even be pleomorphic between species. In other words, as an example, change from:

bacteria->mycoplasma->fungus->fungal spore->virus

Lastly, I must also add and admit that I've never had cancer, but I have used alot of the protocols below and others for other ailments such as candida, flu, tachycardia, colds, arthritis, gout, diabetes etc. -- and most of them have worked and done the job -- and a much better job than standard drugs with fewer side-effects. I have also experienced family members dying of cancer in the past, so my only task and motive here is just to give as different a view as possible towards more helpful cancer protocols (I avoid saying cure here for fairly obvious legal reasons).

All the chemicals/herbs recommended on EC against cancer are relatively easy to purchase over the internet or at health stores and you wont have to sell an arm and a leg to buy them.

Many independent and free-thinking researchers have already accepted that cancer is indeed pleomorphic in nature, since the drug-established cancer research has been completely unable to pin down or agree as to exactly what cancer is or what species it belongs to. And they still haven't got a clue.

Some maintain that it is a bacteria, others maintain that it behaves like a virus, yet others insist that it is like a fungus. Because I believe in the pleomorphic nature of cancer -- its ability to change or even arise from bacteria or viruses or fungus -- I think they are all right. But one fact remains true here, that these microorganisms, including cancer, can indeed change form or species and therefore their behaviour must change -- and not just randomly -- but according to the changes which occur within the host body terrain state, since there can be no other sufficient reason or explanation for this pleomorphic inter-species behaviour. And there is much evidence out there for this. From Cancer is an Infection caused by a Tuberculosis Bacteria by Alan Cantwell, MD:

"In retrospect, it was premature and irrational a century ago to discard bacteria in cancer because the science of bacteriology was in its infancy. Nothing was known about CWD forms and filterable virus-like forms of bacteria. The recent acceptance (after a century) of bacteria (Helicobacter pylori) as the cause of most stomach ulcers is a case in point. For several decades after his 1940 discovery of peculiar S-shaped bacteria in stomach ulcers, A. Stone Freedberg MD stood alone. His research was totally ignored because doctors believed that bacteria could not exist in the acid environment of the stomach. A half century later, these same bacteria were finally accepted and are now a major factor in the development of stomach cancer. Two Australian scientists (Barry Marshall and Robin Warren) received a Nobel Prize in Medicine in 2005 for proving this. Interestingly, in 1998, a new tumor-like stomach lesion was discovered called "Russell body gastritis."

Here is what Dr Tullio Simoncini, an oncologist, has to say about tumor cancer behaving as a fungus :

"Many thinkers ? especially biologists ? believe that by applying the Darwinian theory to the evolution of living beings, it may be possible to progress down a new path when it comes to the so-called degenerative diseases such as cancer, cardiopathies, and mental illness. According to this line of thought, these diseases are not attributable to environmental or genetic factors as is presently believed, but to infections.

Therefore, the answer to the question of what causes a degenerative disease can be found in the discipline that more than anything else has given luster to medicine, and which has promoted medicine from a mere practice to a science, that is microbiology.

It is in fact clear that, with the exception of bacteriology, the state of knowledge in this field of research is still quite limited, especially when it comes to viruses, sub-viruses and fungi, whose pathogenic valence, unfortunately, is little known. It is true that scholars have given more attention to these biological entities recently, and in fact, the concept of "innocuous co-existence" attributed to many parasites of the body has begun to be questioned with much greater conviction. More determination is needed, however, in this process of the revision of microbiology so that the close connection between micro-organisms and degenerative diseases can be clarified.

I believe that it is by focusing on just one of these shadowy areas -- on mycology, the realm of fungi -- that it will become possible to discover the correct answers to questions concerning the problem of tumors.

Much evidence indicates that this is the road to take. The analogy between psoriasis -- an incurable disease of the skin that many treat as fungus -- and tumors, which are also an incurable disease of the organism, the symptomatological overlapping of systemic candidosis and cancer, and the strict genetic relationship between mycetes and neoplastic masses make this clear. These are all elements that support and confirm the point of view that all types of cancer, as happens in the vegetal world, are caused by a fungus.

A fungus infection -- that of the Candida species -- could supply the explanation for why a tumor occurs, and it is in this direction that research should move in the attempt to solve the problem of cancer once and for all."

Simply put, I believe -- much as Ted believes -- that there are at the least three pleomorphic states or physical expressions that cancer exhibits and these are:

* The Tumor or Fungal form of Cancer.

* The Metastatic or Viral spore forms that causes rapid spread, infection and deployment of the cancer so quickly throughout the body.

* The tumor itsef continuously exudes harmful carcinogenic and poisonous aflotoxins and mycotoxins throughout the body and particularly in metastased Stage lV cancers which causes heavy immune depression and damage, blood clots, obstruction problems, cachexia or wasting, appetite loss(bulemia/anorexia issues), starvation and eventual death.

So the way to kill and eradicate the cancer would seem to be to attack each one of these known cancer behaviours or forms logically and all at the same time. Therefore we should attack the tumor as we would attack a fungus, we should somehow find some way to neutralize the cancer-producing aflotoxins and mycotoxins that quickly weaken and kill the host body, and we should also devise a strategy to prevent/destroy the rapidly spreading metastatic or viral form of cancer. At the same time we should boost our immune system and protect all major organs of the body. All of these strategies are incorporated in Ted's cancer remedies as far as I can see, which is what makes them so powerful and effective.

Bill, Wow! That is an awesomely amazing job you did of compiling all this info in one very comprehensive post. Thank you so much for your time and effort. The best to you, Lisa

Thanks for the GREAT work Bill......

It would be helpful if "EC" could create a link or tab that would allow for easy access and searching of Teds postings as he seems to be in the know. Hey EC are you listening, how bout a quick access tab and search for your number one poster ?

Regards

Herewith is a good description, with much evidence throughout the last hundred years or so, that fairly accurately defines the alternative view - and not the current standard medical view - of what a cancer actually is and how it is caused. I took this extract from the Independent Cancer Research website. The article, by R. Webster Kehr, is a long one, and is an honest eye-opener because it further defines the various general ways to defeat cancer. Well worth a read.

What Causes Cancer

Finally, the evidence started to mount, and I started looking deeper and deeper into the issue. While reading the book Sick and Tired?, by Robert O. Young, PhD, and by looking at several other books, all of the pieces of the puzzle were finally put in place.

It was perfectly clear that "cancer microbes" were getting into normal cells and their presence was turning the normal cells into anaerobic cells (an anaerobic cell does not burn oxygen like a normal cell, rather it ferments glucose to get energy). The definition of an anaerobic cell is a "cancer cell." A Nobel Prize was given in 1931 (Otto Heinrich Warburg) for the discovery that a cancer cell is anaerobic.

I have seen several different descriptions of this cancer microbe in the cancer cell. Some people called it a virus, some a fungus, one called it a mould, others called it an acid-fast bacteria (which mutated into a fungus) and one called it an amoeba (e.g. trichomonad). Which of these is correct?

The answer turns out to be that this microbe is highly pleomorphic, meaning it changes shapes and sizes frequently, depending mainly on the environment it is in!! Thus, all of the researchers were correct, but they were all talking about the same microbe!!

I should note that this variety is an indication of independent research and that everyone was not just copying one original source. In fact, there were numerous independent sources of this information, some dating back more than several decades (e.g. Dr. Royal Rife in the 1930s)!!

Here are a few quotes from the book: Four Women Against Cancer by Dr. Alan Cantwell. Pay close attention to the comments about the microbe being found INSIDE the cancer cell. This turns out to be critical in some treatments of cancer, especially the treatments the Independent Cancer Research Foundation, Inc. is working on.

• In, "The microscopy of micro-organisms associated with neoplasms (cancer) published in the August 1948 issue of The New York Microscopical Bullentin, Roy Allen presents illustrations of the cancer microbe ... The microbes live inside the cancer cells (intra-cellular) and outside the cancer cells (extra-cellular)."Four Women Against Cancer, Page 34

• According to Livingston and Addeo's 1984 book, "Dr. Rhoads [of Memorial Sloan-Kittering Cancer Center] was committed to chemotherapy, and well he might have been since he was head of chemical warfare during World War II. [Rhodes] tried to turn chemical warfare against the cancer cell within the human body. His big mistake was that he believed the cancer cell to be the causative agent of the disease and not the parasite within the cell. To unleash the horrors of chemical warfare and the atomic bomb in the form of chemotherapy and cobalt radiation against the hopeless victims of a microbial disease is illogical.
  Four Women Against Cancer, Page 43

• More importantly, the Dillers showed that cancer germs were able to gain entrance not only into the [non-cancerous] cell (intra-cellular) [which turns the cell cancerous], but also into the nucleus of the cell. This intra-nuclear invasion meant that cancer microbes could gain access to the genes contained within the nucleus itself. This is similar to what [gene therapy does].
  Four Women Against Cancer, Page 47

• Like the other women, Seibert observed the virus-like forms of the cancer microbe within the nucleus of the cancer cells. She theorized this infection could disrupt and transform nuclear genetic material that could lead to malignant change. Even though cancer microbes might appear to be simple and common microbes, their ability to infiltrate the nucleus of cells meant they were far from harmless.
  Four Women Against Cancer, Page 49

• In 1890 The distinguished pathologist William Russell (1852-1940) first reported "cancer parasites" in cancer tissue that was specially stained with carbol fuchsin, a red dye. The "parasite" was found inside and outside the cells. The smallest forms were barely visible microscopically; and the largest parasites were as large as red blood cells. Russell also found "parasites" in tuberculosis, syphilis and skin ulcers.
  Four Women Against Cancer, Page 53-54

The cancer microbe is highly pleomorphic which is how it can get inside the cell and even inside the nucleus of the cell. Dr. Robert O. Young, PhD has observed a cancer microbe literally drill through the cell wall of a healthy cell in order to try and escape a highly acidic environment outside the cell.

In fact, in the past 100 years many cancer researchers, from before Dr. Royal Rife to Dr. Robert O Young and Dr. Gaston Naessens, have known cancer was caused by a microbe which was inside of the cancer cell. In other words, a microbe was able to penetrate a normal cell and turn the normal cell into a cancer cell.

by R. Webster Kehr
Extract from The Independent Cancer Research Foundation

Thanks Bill! That is fantastic, what you have compiled.

With gratitude, Lisa