Hardly any other disease has such a profound impact on our society as cancer.
Surely everyone knows someone in their immediate environment who has been diagnosed with or even died from cancer.
In 2018 alone, i.e. before coronavirus, there were 18 million new cases of cancer worldwide.
In Germany, cancer was the second most common cause of death in 2022.
The statistics for the last 10 years show an increase of 1.5 percent in the cancer mortality rate.
In 2019, the Südkurier ran the headline: "120 billion euros for research: why the EU is now declaring war on cancer."
Accordingly, research expenditure is to be increased by a further 120 billion between 2021 and 2027.
Huge amounts of money have always flowed into cancer research.
But why is there still no significant progress in the fight against cancer?
Let's start with a brief look at the history of cancer research over 100 years ago.
History of cancer research
Around 1900, more and more pathogens were found that were responsible for various infectious diseases.
The researchers also initially looked for a pathogen in the cancer.
The research findings of Professors Robert Koch and M. Nevyadomsky were very informative.
Both determined independently of each other that the cancer tumor cells differ from normal tissue.
They exhibit behaviors that are not known from body cells in their normal state.
For example, they exhibit seemingly unlimited growth, move "like amoebas" and form
metastases in completely different parts of the body.
Koch and Nevyadomsky therefore concluded that cancer is caused by microparasites, i.e. tiny pathogens.
Other researchers, however, have described the development of cancer from an "inanimate" cause, e.g.
through the effects of stimuli on the body's cells.
According to this, the tumor cell is a mutated, i.e. degenerated, endogenous cell.
After fierce debates, the theory of the degenerate cell prevailed.
Today's oncology is based on this "degeneration"
The search for a pathogen was officially discontinued. Other research results were no longer in demand.
To date, official cancer research has succeeded in ignoring "alternative" research results
or fighting against inconvenient researchers.
So here is a brief overview of research results that you have probably never heard of.
2.
Alternative research results
Dr. Alfons Weber
In 1967, the German cancer doctor and cell researcher, Dr. Alfons Weber, published the results of his research.
According to this, he could detect microparasites in any tumor tissue.
Dr. Alfons Weber was convinced that none of the officially approved treatments for cancer would help.
The tissue cell is attacked instead of the cancer-causing microparasites.
His research evidence was largely ignored.
They are "artifacts, water bubbles or artificial creations" and even "hallucinations of a madman".
His successful cancer treatment method with malaria drugs earned him years of court
cases and the revocation of his medical license.
In 1972, he was admitted to a psychiatric hospital, although there was no evidence of any psychiatric illness.
Dr. Helmut Keller, Germany
From 1972, Keller treated certain tumors very successfully with an extract of the Venus flytrap.
His drug "Carnivora" received provisional approval in Germany and was very popular with patients.
A thorn in the side of the pharmaceutical industry.
As a result, the Federal Health Office was forced to ban the new drug again in 1986.
Because Dr. Keller continued to treat his patients with Carnivora, he was sentenced to pay a fine of DM 10,000.
Tamara Lebedeva
In 1989, the Russian chemist and microbiologist was able to identify the ancient parasite Trichomonas as a cause of cancer.
In her experience, the untrained oncologist's eye would see the flagellates as cancer cells.
The Trichomonas are "masters of deception".
For example, they could change from their elongated shape with filaments and flagella into a round
amoeba shape that would closely resemble a human cell.
In the amoeba form, they form colonies and encapsulate themselves as necessary.
Lebedeva recognized the disease trichomoniasis as the first stage of cancer.
Their efforts to draw public attention to these research findings failed.
Lebedeva: "Every letter, every request to the Ministry of Health or other healthcare bodies is sent
again to the National Oncology Center in Moscow,
and from there comes the devastating answer every time that the discovery is not worth the effort of testing."
Dear viewers: The research results presented here are representative of many others.
Why are they withheld from the public?
Who has an interest in suppressing, slandering and even criminalizing alternative cancer research?
Below we show how certain circles of high finance have hijacked the healthcare system for their own purposes.
3.
Transformation of the healthcare system
Let us turn to a family that went down in the annals of history as "great benefactors", also known as philanthropists:
the American Rockefeller family.
Rockefeller Sr. controlled 90% of the entire US oil market around 1880.
Around 1900, scientists discovered "petrochemistry", i.e. the production of chemicals from crude oil.
They began to produce plant-based active ingredients synthetically.
These could be patented and marketed at a high profit.
Rockefeller's plan was to create a sales market for the chemical medical products.
However, the Americans' preference for natural and herbal medicines stood in his way.
Also, almost half of the doctors and medical schools in the US practiced holistic medicine.
How did Rockefeller Sr. manage to conquer the medical field?
The Flexner Report
Rockefeller's "compagnon for lucrative business" has always been Andrew Carnegie.
Both were convinced eugenicists.
Eugenicists invest themselves in population control and the containment of so-called "inferior parts of the
population", for example through forced sterilizations
Andrew Carnegie achieved great wealth through the steel industry and made a name for himself early on "as a great philanthropist"
through generous donations and the founding of institutions.
For example, Carnegie established the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching in 1905
In order to implement Rockefeller's plan, the Carnegie Foundation commissioned the educational theorist Abraham
Flexner to conduct a study on American medical studies.
Flexner published his findings in 1910, in the so-called "Flexner Report.
This report set the medical field on the path Rockefeller wanted - with far-reaching consequences for the training of doctors.
These were in short:
All schools that did not teach "pharmachemical", i.e. "scientific medicine", lost their accreditation and all financial support.
Of the former 155 medical schools in the USA and Canada, only 66 remained in 1935.
The remaining medical schools lost their independence.
The holistic approach to health and preventive healthcare largely disappeared from teaching and training
Chemically based drugs were elevated to the standard of science.
The US Americans coined the slogan "a pill for every disease".
Medicines of natural origin were defamed.
Just two years later, the whole thing was repeated for Europe
- with the same consequences.
Enforcement of the Flexner Report
The Flexner Report was implemented via John D. Rockefeller's Seniors General Education Board
The GEB is a foundation he established in 1902.
These were used to raise funds for colleges, universities and medical schools.
They were intended to facilitate their "restructuring" in the spirit of the Rockefeller family.
Also in the game: Abraham Flexner.
He moved to the GEB as deputy secretary in 1912.
Flexner:
"...Between 1919 and 1928, the General Education Board...directly and indirectly contributed half a billion dollars or more
to the resources and endowments of American medical education."
This corresponds to a current value of 9.1 billion dollars, which is not entirely altruistic!
Two decades after the founding of the General Education Board, John D. Rockefeller Jr.
founded the International Education Board.
In addition to institutions, the IEB also supported individual scientists at international level.
It has awarded hundreds of scholarships and grants to organizations in 39 different countries.
In total, Rockefeller Jr. contributed more than 21 million dollars to the IEB.
Today, this corresponds to a value of 376 million dollars.
The Rockefeller Foundation took over the tasks of the International Education Board in 1938 and continued them.
Further foundations of the Rockefellers
As you can see, John D. Rockefeller Sr. was a strategic thinker who did not "lead medical
education into the modern age" out of sheer do-gooderism.
After all, he had become an oil magnate and the richest man in the world at the time through dishonest business practices.
He always used his money specifically to maximize profits.
By restructuring medical education and healthcare, he created a gigantic sales market for chemical medical products.
At the same time, he had a significant influence on scientific research.
To this end, the Rockefellers founded influential universities, a highly important research
hospital and an elite medical school, among other things:
1901, foundation of the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, today's Rockefeller University,
a private biomedical research institute.
1910, foundation of Rockefeller University Hospital, the first research hospital in the USA.
Privately financed studies are conducted there.
The problem is that these often lead to a "sponsor-friendly" result.
1910, foundation of the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
You can find out more about the influence and relationships of the entire Rockefeller family in the program
"Rockefeller dynasty: One step ahead of world events?"
We also take a closer look at Rockefeller Jr. and his influence on the health organization "American Cancer Society."
4.
Rockefeller finances the Amarican Cancer Society
In 1913, the "American Society for the Control of Cancer", now known simply as the "American
Cancer Society", or ACS for short, was founded.
The website linkedin.com even lists Rockefeller Jr. as the founder of ACS.
According to its own description, it is a "national, community-based voluntary health organization
dedicated to eliminating cancer as a major health problem".
But what is the reality, despite the billion-euro budget?
Let's take a look at the figures:
In 1913, 75,000 of the approximately 96 million people in the USA died of cancer.
This results in a mortality rate of 78 per 100,000 inhabitants.
Today, around 606,000 Americans die of cancer every year out of a population of 338 million (as of 2022).
The mortality rate is 179 per 100,000.
After 110 years of work by the ACS, we have more than double the cancer mortality rate in the United States.
The detailed book "Murder by injection" by E. Mullins from 1988 documents which bank directors were behind the
Cancer Society and into whose pockets the money for cancer flowed:
"Critics noted in 1976 that at least eighteen members of the American Cancer
Society's board of directors were bank executives.
(...) An ACS spokesman admitted that 70% of its research budget in 1976 went to "individuals or
institutions" with which its board members were affiliated."
5.
Chemotherapy
With the founding of the Rockefeller Institute and Hospital, the Rockefeller family was able to
exert a direct influence on biomedical research.
The interpretation of the research results alone can steer the research in a certain, desired direction.
Today, the most common form of treatment for cancer is chemotherapy.
This had its beginnings during the Second World War.
In 1942, research was carried out in the laboratory of the Yale School of Medicine on the effect of the
chemical warfare agent mustard gas against lymphomas.
Mustard gas was first used as a poison gas in the First World War.
The world's largest producer of toxic gases was the German-American Frederick Zinsser -
father-in-law of World Bank CEO John J. McCloy.
Frederick Zinsser learned how to produce poison gas in Heidelberg and became rich in the USA.
McCloy began bringing German Nazi chemical and biological weapons scientists over to the U.S. as U.S. Deputy Secretary of War.
Japanese bioweapons experts from UNIT 731 were also involved.
McCloy came to Germany in 1949 with dictatorial powers and made his brother-in-law Konrad Adenauer the first Federal Chancellor.
Heidelberg remained a center of German chemical and biological weapons research under the Nazis and under Adenauer.
The German Cancer Research Institute (DKFZ) is in Heidelberg.
But back to the USA:
In 1957, the first cancer was treated with chemotherapy at the National Cancer Institute (NCI).
As everyone knows, the chemotherapy administered today is subject to severe side effects.
This is how the Deutsche Wirtschaftsnachrichten publishes, quote:
"Chemotherapy is paid for by the health insurance companies and the pharmaceutical industry
sponsors the studies so that the chemotherapy sells.
(...) Chemotherapy is often not about the patient, but rather about the huge amounts of money that can be made."
Each chemotherapy treatment costs an average of €10,000 to €20, 000, which the health insurance companies
reimburse to the pharmaceutical manufacturers from the ever-increasing contributions paid by the payers.
Chemotherapy therefore generates gigantic profits for the pharmaceutical industry.
At this point, it should not be denied that chemotherapy can achieve certain successes in cancer treatment and save lives.
But at what cost?
Why are alternative research findings and alternative therapies still being vehemently suppressed?
What right does official cancer research have to massively block alternatives to chemotherapy?
And why don't we hear that there is virtually no cancer in Malaysia because the people there eat a so-called crab fruit?
Or an example of Russian medicine:
The closely networked therapist and singer Sara Bennet reports that for many doctors in
Russia, cancer carries no more weight than a cold.
Why don't we hear anything about Russian medicine, which is currently making such progress in cancer treatment?
Why do those circles that achieve such poor results with their treatment methods that
the cancer mortality rate has more than doubled after 110 years, all alternatives are under lock and key?
6.
Big Pharma: The masks are falling
Did you know that in November 2023, France will introduce a bill "to strengthen the fight against
dangerous sectarian developments" and is now on the verge of being cemented as law?
At first glance, this reveals how relentlessly Big Pharma wants to retain control of the medical market.
The legal text reads:
"The request to give up or refrain from therapeutic or prophylactic medical treatment is punishable
by one year in prison and a fine of 15,000 euros,
(...) The same penalties apply to provocation to practices that are presented as
therapeutic or prophylactic for the persons concerned,
even though, according to the current state of medical knowledge, it is obvious that these practices
expose them to an immediate risk of death or injury,
which can lead to permanent mutilation or disability.
If the provocation provided for in the first two subparagraphs was followed, the penalties are increased to
three years' imprisonment and a fine of 45,000 euros."
The new law is justified with the following words:
"Given the public's enthusiasm for therapeutic practices that are not scientifically validated,
the search for well-being and personal development and due to the increase in training courses,
that award non-state-recognized diplomas,
patients can be abused or subjected to therapeutic abuse, particularly of a sectarian nature.
The French newspaper L'Express also makes this point:
This is sufficient to respond to the numerous cases in which people,
who refer to conspiracies and various alternative therapies, such as not using cancer treatments."
The explanatory memorandum clarifies the actual motives of the French legislator:
The law is intended to ensure that the pharmaceutical complex can further expand its control.
Anyone who proposes a different therapy that is not "scientifically validated" or does not correspond to
the "state of medical knowledge" is to be silenced.
We are already familiar with this approach from the Flexner Report.
Question: Why does Big Pharma want to take care of people's "well-being" in a dictatorial
manner and, if necessary, against their free will?
Is it perhaps the exact opposite of "charity and health" for everyone?
7.
Bioweapons research under a false flag
The doctor and officer Heiko Schöning reveals a highly interesting aspect in an interview:
He directly links cancer research with bioweapons research.
You can now watch short excerpts from the program.
"But we are now in the age of bioweapons.
This technical progress is possible.
And if we go back, we see that yes, there was an official ban on bioweapons in 1972.
They were not allowed to be used, produced or stored, not at all.
And interestingly enough, this was said by US President Richard Nixon.
The only thing that is well documented is that Richard Nixon was the best trickster of the mafia of global organized crime.
His official nickname was also Tricky Dick.
Yes, and Nixon actually just hid and renamed bioweapons research in the US.
Because one of the main places was Fort Detrick in the USA.
And what happened to all those bioweapons researchers and the facilities, the buildings?
They've just been renamed. There was a new sign.
And the sign then read NCI - National Cancer Research Institute.
You really have to understand that.
The same researchers, the same buildings stayed there, and it was now officially cancer research."
Short stopover:
"Purely coincidentally" at the same time as the ban on bioweapons research, the National
Cancer Act was passed by the US government.
President Nixon promised seven billion dollars by 1976 to "fight cancer".
At a stroke, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) became the largest and most influential of all US health
institutes - or should we say "bioweapons institute".
Schöning continues:
"What are bioweapons?
These are cytotoxins.
What are cancer therapeutics?
Cell toxins.
And what is the difference between a bioweapon test and a cancer study?
The different spelling.
And that is exactly what Nixon did.
They just put the sign around Fort Detrick, no longer Biological Weapons Research - National Cancer Institute."
Dear viewers, one thing must be clear to us:
Bioweapons usually have the purpose of killing inconspicuously!
What can we expect from the bioweapons institutes - sorry, cancer research institutes - in the near future?
Schöning continues:
"And it was a cover, for example, that these bioweapons researchers were suddenly
researching a vaccination against cancer for decades.
That has now been forgotten again.
And to pick up where we left off, today we are hearing that mRNA vaccines, yes, actually experimental gene
therapies against cancer, are now being sold to us."
Voilà, after the disaster with the so-called mRNA Covid vaccines, mRNA cancer vaccines are now to be marketed to men and women.
The Covid vaccination crimes with devastating effects, such as the development of turbo cancer, have not yet been dealt with.
In the program "Explosion of turbo cancer after corona vaccination", Kla.TV explained the connection
between mRNA vaccination and extremely fast-growing tumors.
And now new mRNA vaccines are available.
So it is hardly surprising that people's trust in pharma-driven medicine is rapidly declining!
Conclusion:
Unscrupulous men of money and power like Rockefeller & Co. laid the foundations of the modern
pharmaceutical industry and our healthcare system.
2.
From the outset, they aimed for absolute control of medical education and science.
3.
Independent research is also radically opposed from the outset, even if it is promising.
4.
The "charitable image" of foundations and institutions of the super-rich serves to conceal their true
intentions: Namely, the expansion of power and control.
5.
Despite huge investments, cancer death rates are rising steadily.
6.
There is evidence that behind cancer research, bioweapons are also being researched with a big budget.
The purpose of bioweapons is usually to kill inconspicuously and en masse!
7.
Today we are at a point where there is a threat of health dictatorship and highly dangerous coercive medical measures.
The pharmaceutical industry, controlled by the Rockefellers of this world, turns out to be the real cancer.
We ask ourselves: Can the official statements about cancer research be true?
When huge sums of money have been flowing in for around 100 years and so little success has been achieved?
The healing successes seem so small in proportion that they are just enough to keep hope alive.
The eternal hope of victory over cancer never lets the gigantic flow of money for dubious research dry up.
An increasingly radical-dictatorial pharmaceutical complex is proving to be the real cancer.
Now is the time to discover the true
to uncover the causes and perpetrators of constantly rising cancer rates.
The profiteers from toxins in food, air, soil, water and pharmaceutical products need to be investigated.
Because any paternalism by the pharmaceutical-controlled WHO and its vassals must be stopped!