Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

This rather lengthy article by dr Ah Kahn Syed (a pseudonym) on his ArkMedic substack explores the issue from different angles.

As he wrote > This article is hopefully going to answer the question about whether "Turbo Cancer” (a) exists and (b) is a consequence, or possible consequence of the imposition of a genetic vaccine platform on the global population.

Source: https://www.arkmedic.info/p/would-you-like-a-turbo-cancer-with

 

Here his conclusion:

Are Turbo Cancers Real Then?

...

What is certain is :

  1. that the regulators did not monitor the population for cancers after the rollout of a novel vaccine technology

  2. that multiple mechanisms are proven to exist that can cause new cancers or enhance existing cancers and that relate to these technologies

  3. that the regulators were unaware of the complexity of these mechanisms when they approved the vaccines

  4. that there is a huge network of propaganda underpinned by pharma whose job is to silence any discussion of this issue

But I think the most effective image of the last 3 years to resolve this debate is that of Professor Michel Goldman, who published his own case report [ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34901098/ ] following his COVID mRNA vaccines. After his first set of vaccines he developed lymphoma. And not believing that “Turbo Cancer” could be a thing he dutifully got his booster.

The rest, as they say, is history.

 
 
ce270236-22a7-4be9-871b-3f6a0da6c0db_510x513.webp.7fc21661722d30528efcbcd5b0c2dce1.webp

 

= = =

 
  • Sad 3
  • Haha 1
Posted

Whether the mRNA covid-vaccines trigger very fast developing cancers is a more than legitimate question and deserves serious debate. But it seems that even posing that question, let alone looking at the data, invokes an immediate dismissal of even considering that possibility by those that were coerced/manipulated in getting these jabs.

But consider the following > In Europe currently over 100 individual substances are either fully prohibited or restricted in food and beverages due to carcinogenicity or potential carcinogenicity. 

However, injecting an experimental substance straight in your blood that will force your body to produce a toxic substance to prevent reduce the effects of a catching a mild respiratory illness, is deemed to be '100% safe and effective'.  And note that these experimental jabs were NOT tested for carcinogenic effects, as that was deemed unnecessary for 'vaccines'.  

Posted

I developed lymphoma after a fairly long history of chronic lymphocytic leukemia at the end of 2021. I am now in full remission.

 

Unfortunately for the OP's hypothesis, my lymphoma came after two rounds of conventional COVID vaccines, and before I had any mRNA boosters.

 

I am a statistical sample of one, just as the OP is citing Professor Goldman. Absolutely meaningless without a cohort of cases.

 

Cancers metastasize, that is their nature. Linking that to a vaccine booster is one hell of a logical leap.

 

Post hoc, ergo propter hoc does not apply to one-offs, either for or against.

 

 

 

Posted
25 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

Whether the mRNA covid-vaccines trigger very fast developing cancers is a more than legitimate question and deserves serious debate. But it seems that even posing that question, let alone looking at the data, invokes an immediate dismissal of even considering that possibility by those that were coerced/manipulated in getting these jabs.

But consider the following > In Europe currently over 100 individual substances are either fully prohibited or restricted in food and beverages due to carcinogenicity or potential carcinogenicity. 

However, injecting an experimental substance straight in your blood that will force your body to produce a toxic substance to prevent reduce the effects of a catching a mild respiratory illness, is deemed to be '100% safe and effective'.  And note that these experimental jabs were NOT tested for carcinogenic effects, as that was deemed unnecessary for 'vaccines'.  

You are obviously unaware of Paracelsus's maxim, "the dose makes the poison".

 

The 100 individual substances are restricted or limited because they can be imbibed or ingested daily. A vaccine jab is far less frequent.

 

What is your evidence? A single person with an existing lymphoma, where the cancer equally may have metastasized as a matter of course. Not all cancers respond to treatment.

Posted

U.S. NIH - National Cancer Institute:

COVID-19 Vaccines and People with Cancer

...

Can COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer? Can the vaccines cause cancer to recur or make it more aggressive?

There is no evidence that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer, lead to recurrence, or lead to disease progression. Furthermore, COVID-19 vaccines do not change your DNA (i.e., your genetic code). [emphasis added]

 

https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/coronavirus/covid-19-vaccines-people-with-cancer#:~:text=Can COVID-19,your genetic code).

 

  • Updated: October 10, 2023

 

 

 

Posted

American Cancer Society:

 

Can COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer or make cancer grow?

There is no information that suggests that COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer. There is also no information that suggests these vaccines can make cancer grow or recur (come back). [emphasis added]

 

https://www.cancer.org/cancer/managing-cancer/coronavirus-covid-19-and-cancer/covid-19-vaccines-in-people-with-cancer.html#:~:text=Can COVID-19 vaccines cause cancer or make cancer grow%3F

 

Last Revised: September 9, 2024

 

 

 

Posted

Turbo cancer is not a thing

 
Mar 28, 2024
...

Bottom line

"The pandemic caused a significant disruption in cancer screenings, and tragically, that meant many people’s cancer diagnoses were delayed, only to be found when they were late-stage. This started well before Covid-19 vaccines were rolled out, and there is no evidence to suggest Covid-19 vaccines are causing a surge in cancer. Even among younger people like Kate Middleton, who unfortunately, are increasingly being diagnosed with cancer."

 

Kristen Panthagani, MD, PhD, is a resident physician and Yale Emergency Scholar, completing a combined Emergency Medicine residency and research fellowship focusing on health literacy and communication.

 

“Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE)” is written by Dr. Katelyn Jetelina, M.P.H. Ph.D.—an epidemiologist, wife, and mom of two little girls. During the day, she is a senior scientific consultant to several organizations, including CDC.

 

https://yourlocalepidemiologist.substack.com/p/turbo-cancer-is-not-a-thing

 

 
Posted
39 minutes ago, Red Phoenix said:

But it seems that even posing that question, let alone looking at the data,

 

The thing is, you are not looking at the data or for the data. You are scouring the internet for conspiracy theories and you ignore the sites that offer scientific data. An example of how crazy your results are can be found in the subheading of the article you started linking to, it says "Big Pharma and their pseudoscience cronies". No serious scientific site or paper would ever sport a subheading like that.

By the way, I believe I do have a serious side effect from the vaccines: I am less patient and tolerant against idiocy since I got them.

Posted
2 hours ago, Red Phoenix said:

that the regulators did not monitor the population for cancers after the rollout of a novel vaccine technology

It is not true that regulators failed to monitor cancer risks after the rollout of COVID-19 mRNA vaccines. Regulatory agencies, such as the FDA (U.S.), MHRA (UK), EMA (EU), and TGA (Australia), have continuously monitored vaccine safety, including potential links to cancer.

 

How Cancer Risks Were Monitored:

1. Clinical Trials:

• Before approval, mRNA vaccines underwent large clinical trials with tens of thousands of participants. No cancer risk was identified.

2. Post-Marketing Surveillance:

• Governments and independent researchers used real-world data from millions of vaccinated people.

• VAERS (U.S.), Yellow Card (UK), EudraVigilance (EU), and other databases track adverse events, including cancers.

3. Cancer Registries & Epidemiological Studies:

• Cancer rates continue to be tracked by national cancer registries worldwide.

• No increase in aggressive cancers linked to vaccines has been found in peer-reviewed studies.

4. Independent Studies:

• Multiple studies have examined whether mRNA vaccines affect cancer rates.

• No causal link between vaccination and increased cancer incidence has been found.

 

Key Takeaway:

 

Regulatory agencies did monitor cancer risks and continue to do so. Claims that they ignored potential cancer concerns are not supported by evidence.

 

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...