Category: Health Tips

Posted on

Hyperthermia and the Power of Heat

Hyperthermia and the Power of Heat

You already know what happens when your body fights illness: it turns up the heat. Fever = natural immune defense. And no, you shouldn’t always suppress it with ibuprofen.

Here’s what’s less common knowledge: intentional heat (hyperthermia) kills cancer cells. Back in 1893, Dr. William Coley injected bacterial toxins into tumors. The resulting fevers destroyed the cancer. A later German study showed his approach led to a 93% remission rate for non-Hodgkin lymphoma — versus just 29% for chemo.

In 1927, a Nobel Prize was awarded for hyperthermic therapy. Because cancer cells die at just 108°F. Healthy cells? They need much higher heat. That means induced hyperthermia is safe, selective, and effective — improving healthy cell function while wiping out malignant ones.

https://thetruthaboutcancer.com/ttac-book-hyperthermia-treatment/

Posted on

The Fraud That Launched the mRNA Era

A forensic audit of Pfizer’s trial data, newly released Argentine regulatory documents, and what they reveal about the “safe and effective” claim the entire mRNA platform rests upon.

Before COVID, mRNA had failed for decades and both companies developing it were in financial trouble. However, an emergency framework built years in advance made it possible to rush their vaccines to market. Now there is a major push to replace much of the vaccine schedule with lucrative mRNA vaccines, despite the platform being immensely problematic and still poorly understood.

Finish reading:  https://open.substack.com/pub/amidwesterndoctor/p/the-fraud-that-launched-the-mrna

Posted on

The Pink Ribbon Illusion: How Breast Cancer Awareness Month Became Big Pharma’s Favorite Cash Cow

The Pink Ribbon Illusion

It’s October again. Break out the pink ribbons, the pink cleats, the pink yogurt lids, and the pink buckets of fried chicken. America’s favorite corporate virtue-signaling ritual is upon us.

For 40 years now, we’ve been told that “awareness” is the answer. Wear pink, run a 5K, buy a pink-ribboned product, and pat yourself on the back for joining the “fight.”

But here’s the uncomfortable question nobody in the mainstream media wants to ask: What has all this pink actually accomplished?

Breast cancer rates haven’t gone down. They’ve gone up. Fifty years ago, a woman faced a 1-in-20 lifetime risk. Today, that number has skyrocketed to 1 in 7. If “awareness” and “early detection” were the answer, we should be winning by now. Instead, the pink banners fly higher while the incidence rates climb right alongside them.

This isn’t a coincidence.

It’s a business model.

Finish reading: https://thetruthaboutcancerofficial.substack.com/p/the-pink-ribbon-illusion-how-breast

Posted on

Peer-Reviewed Misinformation: The Journals That Lent Science’s Authority to a Blacklist by Sayer Ji

Letter With Edits

How the “Disinformation Dozen” narrative moved into academic literature—and why major publishers must answer for the claims they published.
An open letter to Springer Nature, ACM, Sage, and The BMJ, exposing discrepancies between their published claims and editorial correction policies—with highlighted policy-versus-passage exhibits and a demand for stronger scientific accountability and the issuance of formal corrections.
This investigation is part of a broader effort to establish accountability for the use of misinformation designations against identifiable Americans.
In September 2026, we launched Restore the First, a national citizens’ coalition bringing together 20 organizations and eight independent media outlets to address censorship, government accountability, and enforceable protections for First Amendment rights.
The coalition was convened by six Americans named in the original “Disinformation Dozen” report. Our work now extends beyond the conduct of government agencies and technology platforms to a question of scientific accountability: What happens when published research perpetuates inaccurate or unsupported allegations against the very people targeted for censorship?
We are calling on scientific publishers to examine the documented discrepancies, correct consequential errors, and strengthen their correction policies so that no individual is denied an impartial review because of their views or reputation.
The institutions that claim authority to identify misinformation must themselves be accountable for the accuracy of their claims.