Baking Soda Cures Cancer???

reply to post by NavyDoc


We both know if you put live cells of a petri dish you can kill them any number of ways but the complex structure of the body makes it more problematic but what if you were able to cut off some of the blood flow to a tumour and prevent the rapid evacuation of bodily fluids from that area slowing fluid exchange in that locality and then you were to saturate the tumour with your chosen chemical treatement, weather that be sodium bicarbonate or traditional chemotherapy thereby not totaly isolating that area but increasing the localised effect on that area while minimising the affect on the rest of the system, surely you can see how this sort of targeted partial strangulation of the tumour along with the localised treatment would be efficacious.

Sorry I may be confusing you with your avatar, I am or was a Labtech some time ago and switched to electronic engineering.

LABTECH767
reply to post by NavyDoc

 

We both know if you put live cells of a petri dish you can kill them any number of ways but the complex structure of the body makes it more problematic but what if you were able to cut off some of the blood flow to a tumour and prevent the rapid evacuation of bodily fluids from that area slowing fluid exchange in that locality and then you were to saturate the tumour with your chosen chemical treatement, weather that be sodium bicarbonate or traditional chemotherapy thereby not totaly isolating that area but increasing the localised effect on that area while minimising the affect on the rest of the system, surely you can see how this sort of targeted partial strangulation of the tumour along with the localised treatment would be efficacious.

Sorry I may be confusing you with your avatar, I am or was a Labtech some time ago and switched to electronic engineering.

edit on 14-10-2013 by LABTECH767 because: (no reason given)

They actually use that technique with some forms of solid tumors: tumor embolization. Obviously, if one cuts off the blood supply to many tumor types, given the way such tumors inculcate themselves within the normal tissue, you kill off large amounts of normal tissues as well.

I always said that if I got cancer I would go the alternative route. When I was actually diagnosed with cancer, I changed my mind in a hurry. All I know is that when I had two kinds of cancer and one was an agressive cancer, I chose chemo and radiation and the cancer is gone.

reply to post by NavyDoc


Indeed but as microsurgical techniques become more advanced it will become more practical to manage this but as you point our many of the corposals are so small it is nearly impossible and IS to all intents and purposes practically so for any human surgeon to perform this task but as precision computer enhanced robotic surgery techniques evolve we may see the incising of even complex brain tumours become a routine surgery with Cauterization of the affected blood supply, though until that day this disease is our greated enemy.
I personally believe there is more to be said about the recent reverse engineering of the cancer virus as it has been called but I find myself worried now the cat is out of the bag about possible weaponisation of this, still an innoculation of sort's could strengthen the body's own defence, though I do not see this curing cancer.

(sorry about my spelling never was an english (literary) fan.)

MysterX
reply to post by sandman441

 

If it works for you but you find the taste unpleasant, here's a way around that; Search for empty 'gel caps'.

These are the empty gel capsules that vitamins and suppliments as well as prescriptions drugs come in, and you can just mix up a batch of ACV and Honey and fill the gel caps with it...swallow the gel caps and voila..no taste.

Great idea. I can somewhat deal woth the taste but I hhad my dad try iy once and he threw up. He said he would never drink that again. Its kind of funny cause I cant stsnd the taste of coffee or alcohol but this stuff while nasty I can deal with it.

Im just glad it works gout sucks. I onlyget it if I eat oranges or anything with oranges in it.

spartacus699

Hi could you pm me the info on this. Or anyone for that matter. My father is dying, they say he has three cancers, one supposed to be the worse you can get. He has tumor on his neck that is awful, he also has bad heart, he won't take chemo or radiation. He doesn't trust doctor's. They almost killed him once in hospital and he well never trusted any after that lol.

Anyway, he will try other things and I would love to offer him hope. He is the most honest, caring, loving, godly person I have ever known. He treats everyone with love and honesty. Makes you wonder why he is made to suffer so.

Anyway, any help appreciated.

Thanks

The Bot

reply to post by coolcatt

I hear what you're saying man but when it comes to threads like this people shot this # down so quick.When i wrote that comment i know there's gonna be so backlash from ATS'er.

I guess people shot this # down so quick because its total nonsense. There is no cure for any and all types of cancer for every person. So please, stop spreading this BS about baking soda curing cancer, you really have no idea what you're talking about.

reply to post by NavyDoc


Thanks NavyDoc!

Though I understand exactly what my buddy, who is a scientist working to cure cancer, was talking about I couldn't have described it as well as he did. For those who want a better explanation of why you can't change the body's PH with food, please go back to page three of this thread and view my post. I know it's a complicated read for most but it's well worth reading.

Also, if anybody reading this isn't familiar with Le Chatelier's principle then Google it and learn. That's just really good knowledge to have. Second to learning what the heck an electron actually is, Le Chatelier's principle is probably the next thing everyone should know about chemistry for just a day to day real world impact. Its involved in everything from your blood, to voltaic reactions.

Baking soda is in many baked goods like chocolate chip cookies and no cookies do not cure cancer.

reply to post by spartacus699


As much disinformation, rumor, and bunk circulates about cancer, this one has some truth to it. There is a clincal study at the Lee Moffitt Cancer Center underway by Dr.Robert Gillies and Dr Robert Gatenby. The problem with baking soda is that the effective dose is enormous. So much so that many have been unable to consume the quantities required. However, there are many other chemical buffers that exist, and they are now pursuing a more powerful buffer with very low toxicity. This said, it's more of a growth slowing than a "cure" in trials thus far.

www.reliablecancertherapies.com...

reply to post by dlbott


Look up the "Thunder God Vine".

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tripterygium_wilfordii
en.wikipedia.org...

www.naturalnews.com/040314_thunder_god_vine_cancer_tumors.html#
www.naturalnews.com...#

Its gonna be hard to find and I read the medicine is extracted from the roots. Poison if not done by trained chemist or medicine man. From east asia, Korea and China.

Along with the ideas of this thread, check out some healing methods we wrote about in this thread.

The Power of Water - A Technique For World Healing
www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread972472/pg1
www.abovetopsecret.com...

An Isreali University Hospital has had great results with alkaloids and cannibinoids!!

Depends on what form of government you have to allow you use of natural medicines..

Look into the Iodine thing also.

Godspeed!!

Here's something that shows real promise in the very near future. Within 5 to 10 years we may have this cancer riddle solved.

www.sciencedaily.com...

reply to post by GoldenBrain71


Only for the Rich.

The lower class will get the Molecular Degeneration Models.

They will be able to branch Humanity into something like you seen in Elysium.

The 3 classes will be:

Upper Class
Robot Class
Lower Class

Upper class will be visually distinguishable from lower class.

ELYSIUM - Official Full Trailer - In Theaters 8/9
www.youtube.com/watch?v=QILNSgou5BY
www.youtube.com...


One mans dream, is another mans nightmare...

reply to post by AbleEndangered


Possibly, but that's why I gave it up to 10 years. Talk is that the nano treatments will be available in 5 years which means it will filter down to the poor in another 5 or so...hopefully.

From the more natural side of things, I do like the research you alluded to regarding cannabinoids. I'm not sure how much this forum will allow on this topic, but in 20 of the 50 states in the U.S. it is being tested legally in real life by real people getting real results. Look up phoenix tears. As you pointed out the Israelis are making great strides with this science.

CyberGarp
reply to post by spartacus699

 

As much disinformation, rumor, and bunk circulates about cancer, this one has some truth to it. There is a clincal study at the Lee Moffitt Cancer Center underway by Dr.Robert Gillies and Dr Robert Gatenby. The problem with baking soda is that the effective dose is enormous. So much so that many have been unable to consume the quantities required. However, there are many other chemical buffers that exist, and they are now pursuing a more powerful buffer with very low toxicity. This said, it's more of a growth slowing than a "cure" in trials thus far.

www.reliablecancertherapies.com...

Fingers crossed for that but although there's some promise there it's probably going to be more beneficial for pain management than cancer therapy per se.

Just a quick biology lesson for those who still think ingesting baking soda will cure cancer.

First of all, as has been explained a few times in this thread, the alkaline body hypothesis (it's really not a theory) is nonsense, sorry. Look up homeostasis.
One of the reasons this came about was that it was discovered last century that the envorinment immediately surrounding tumour cells is more acidic than it should be.
However, this is down to the cancer cells' metabolism, i.e. they produce the acidic environment as a by-product or their growth. They don't grow because of the acidic environment. If that acidic environment is neutralised, the cells would still grow and still produce acid.

Back to ingesting baking soda;
The soda passes into the stomach where it dissolves in the gastric fluid there.
A large portion of this fluid is reasonably concentrated hydrochloric acid, around about pH 2.0
Now simple chemistry tells use when you mix an acid with a base they will react with each other to form a salt in this case
sodium hydrogen carbonate NaHCO3 + hydrochloric acid HCl = common salt NaCl + water H2O +carbon dioxide CO2.
So what will happen is that the baking soda will turn into slightly salty water and it will make you burp.

Absolutely none of the baking soda will get "into your bloodstream" and even if it did it cannot selectively target cells. It would affect ALL of your cells in exactly the same way. Negatively.

As for creating some sort of trojan horse with molasses, I really can't get my head around this at all.
Nope, still trying but no matter how hard I try to find some sort of secret pathway opened by the molasses all I find is the molasses being digested and the soda being neutralised.

coolcatt

Cancerwarrior
reply to post by coolcatt

 

I believe that sort of thinking just doesn't help, cancer or no cancer TRY it and then come back and tell us how things went for you.

I'm sorry if the truth is negative thinking in your eyes. In mine it is far worse to spread total nonsense such as this to people that have terminal cancer like me.

I was first diagnosed in June 2011 with stage IV metastatic melanoma. Its a very aggressive very deadly form of skin cancer.

I did baking soda, I did liposomal vitamin c, I did an fresh fruits/veggies diet, I quit smoking cigarrettes (even though the kind of cancer I had was not even from that) I started taking things like Turmeric and more herbs, laid off processed foods totally. And this was after I initially did 5.5 months of chemo at MD Anderson and gamma knife, and a whole host of surgeries and treatments that cured me the first time around.

And still the Melanoma keeps coming back. Of everything the chemo was the only thing that was effective in killing my tumors. Nothing else can really prevent it.

Right now I just had back surgury to remove two tumors from my spinal cord. I just finished three weeks of radiation treatments and feel like hell so forgive me if my post comes off as sounding short, but really, please do a little research before you go around telling everyone not to do chemo and try baking soda instead or some other nonsense.

I hear what you're saying man but when it comes to threads like this people shot this # down so quick.When i wrote that comment i know there's gonna be so backlash from ATS'er. you did not say in you're post about trying this. YOU should have....Cancer has to be explained some how and for this thread was close....

They interviewed 127 actual cancer doctors to find out if they would use Kemo if they got cancer. Over 80% of them said they would NOT because the risks outweighed the benefits. That was posted at: canceractive.com

Here's my theory.... The number 1 cure for cancer (or anything for that matter) is just never to get diagnosed. I know that sounds strange. But think about this...if we were to get the very best dr's do all the testing possible on your body (like at the namao clinic) we'd likely find TONS OF PROBLEMS with you. You'd have several deceases going on. You'd have several conditions. You'd certainly have several cancers, several other problems. No joke they'd find ALL KINDS OF THINGS!!! Why? because people are like cars, we have a lot of things that are not 100% perfect. It doesn't mean we'll die from them. not at all. Just like your car won't stop running if it has a few issues. Most of the issues could resolve themselves using homeopothy, nutrition, excersice, breathing, water, rest. And we don't even need to know what the issues are. Just by changing your lifestyle you likely could resolve many of the issues. But instead we're brainwashed into believing that we need to get "diagnosed" and we need to then subject ourselves to either poison or risky operations. Instead of just letting our immune system do it's job, and or aiding the immune system so it can do it's job even better. instead we do kemo and make it worse. That's so dumb.

That's where those dr's know what they're talking about. They know you have a better chance of surviving by never getting Kemo. I'd add to that by saying you're likely even better off not getting diagnosed. What's teh differene between a voodoo curse by a witchdoctor and a diagnosis by a dr? There's absolutely no difference. They both work on the same premise in a lot of ways. Why is you internalizing someone else's opinion. And that's all it is, someones opinion. Naaa, after all the studies I've done I'm staying far clear of the medical industry. Again I'm not saying that's for everyone, and I'm not saying it's all bad. It's just the choice I plan to make based on all the evidence I've seen. And I could be wrong. But that's just me.

The flip side is this. Lets say there's nothing but medical science. No other factors apply but what the Dr says. No other cures are real. Lets say that's true. I'd still rather take my chances and not opt for kemo which has a 95% mortality rate. Climbing mt everest only has a 10% mortality rate. Like seriously!!! Think about those odds. Plus if It was me and I was in that situation I'd likely just go find a beach somewhere, pitch a tent or rent a cottage, and just take a sabbatical, and try and spent time getting closer to God. Just praying, reading the bible, walking on the beach, eating healthy, getting lots of fresh air, destressing, and maybe even making some plans for the future. And if I still die, then I die.... Guess what??? You got to die of something. At least you'd have done it on your terms in your way knowing God. You'd have no fear. The alternative being you essencially kill yourself on kemo. (you basically poison yourself to death). All the while locked up in a hospital, living in fear, trying to beat something that's going to take us all eventually. Using a method that will likely kill you before it helps you. Trusting advice from people who only have an opinion but no guaranteed cure.... It's totally ludicrous when you boil it down!

The bible says "as a man thinketh in his heart SO IS HE". Don't let anyone tell you "you have this or that". That's risky business. Ya again, you might have something, again, if we tested you for everything you right now have probably several dozen things that are going to kill you eventually. But you shouldn't go looking for them. Again all this is just my opinion and my philosophy. And if my bet is wrong then too bad for me. But we take our chances either way, whether we get treatment or do our own form of treatment. That's my theory. But I just want to check out on my terms, not someone elses, because I've been brainwashed into believing the medical industry is the only way. If the establishment made money off curing people the hospitals would be empty.

reply to post by spartacus699

They interviewed 127 actual cancer doctors to find out if they would use Kemo if they got cancer. Over 80% of them said they would NOT because the risks outweighed the benefits. That was posted at: canceractive.com

Got any more information about that poll? You know, things like the type of cancer, the stage of the disease at diagnosis? Those things are kind of important when it comes to deciding on treatment. In some cases, with some cancers, it's unlikely that treatment would be of any help. In some cases, chemotherapy is seldom used at all. If you ask a doctor, "If you had cancer...", the first thing you will hear is, "What type? What stage?"



I couldn't find any source for that alleged study but I did find this which provides a bit of perspective.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

BTW, I was diagnosed with stage III Hodgkins 30 years ago. I had chemo and radiation therapy. Still cancer free.

Phage
reply to post by spartacus699

 

Got any more information about that poll? You know, things like the type of cancer, the stage of the disease at diagnosis? Those things are kind of important when it comes to deciding on treatment. In some cases, with some cancers, it's unlikely that treatment would be of any help. In some cases, chemotherapy is seldom used at all. If you ask a doctor, "If you had cancer...", the first thing you will hear is, "What type? What stage?"



I couldn't find any source for that alleged study but I did find this which provides a bit of perspective.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

BTW, I was diagnosed with stage III Hodgkins 30 years ago. I had chemo and radiation therapy. Cancer free.

edit on 10/15/2013 by Phage because: (no reason given)

Those statisics can't be trusted AT ALL. For many reasons. The main one being that being a .gov website.

Also just curious, beyond the diagnosis, how exactly did you know you "had it"??? I'd like to know.

reply to post by spartacus699

Those statisics can't be trusted AT ALL. For many reasons. The main one being that being a .gov website.

The website is a clearinghouse for scientific articles. Neither the paper nor the poll was conducted by the government.

Can you provide the source of the poll you were referring to and who conducted it? Do you understand that just asking a doctor, "If you had cancer..." makes no sense whatsoever?

Also just curious, beyond the diagnosis, how exactly did you know you "had it"??? I'd like to know.

A range of symptoms. The first of which was a swollen lymph node the size of an egg in my neck. Prior to that, an ongoing sensation of itching on my skin with no rash or any other visible signs. Also, severe night sweats. I did not know that the itching and night sweats were symptoms until I did further research after I was diagnosed.

My external symptoms were classic. A biopsy of the lump on my neck verified Hodgkin's and follow up abominable surgery found that it had progressed to my internal organs.

spartacus699

They interviewed 127 actual cancer doctors to find out if they would use Kemo if they got cancer. Over 80% of them said they would NOT because the risks outweighed the benefits. That was posted at: canceractive.com

When I read something like that I have to look into it in a bit more detail.
I tend not to take any claims like that at face value.
When I looked into it more (it took me about 2 minutes) I found quite a bit more information than was originally posted.
It's well summed up on this page;
anaximperator.wordpress.com...