Posts

Posted on

Millions of your mother’s cells persist inside you, and now we know how

Every human born on this planet is not entirely themselves.

A tiny fraction of our cells – around one in a million – is actually not our own, but comes from our mothers. That means each of us has millions of cells that our immune systems would normally recognize as foreign; yet somehow, in most of us, they hang around peacefully without causing any immune problems.

Now, immunologists have figured out why. A small number of maternal immune cells that cross the placenta during pregnancy actively train the fetus’s immune system to tolerate the mother’s cells for their entire life.

The exchange of cells between a mother and a fetus is a well-documented phenomenon that scientists have known about for more than 50 years. It’s called microchimerism, and it goes both ways: every human who has ever been pregnant retains cells from their fetus, and every human retains cells from their mother.

These lingering cells pose a puzzle for immunology, which is built around the idea that the immune system should mount an attack against foreign cells.

A team led by pediatric infectious disease specialist Sing Sing Way of Cincinnati Children’s Hospital Medical Center wanted to understand more about how these foreign maternal cells keep the immune system in check, and what role they play in shaping the fetus’ immune system.

To find out, the researchers studied maternal microchimerism in mice. Building on their previous studies, the researchers bred mice with immune cells engineered to express specific cell surface markers. This allowed researchers to selectively deplete those cells and see whether or not immune tolerance was maintained.

Here’s where it got fascinating. A small subset of the maternal immune cells, with properties similar to bone marrow myeloid cells and dendritic cells, persisted long after birth. They were also strongly associated with both immune activity and the expansion of regulatory T cells – the cells that tell the immune system that everything is copacetic.

To confirm, the researchers next selectively edited out those specific maternal cells in offspring mice.

The results were dramatic. The regulatory T cells disappeared, and the immune tolerance of maternal cells disappeared.

The implication is that lifelong tolerance to maternal microchimeric cells is probably dependent on just a tiny subset of maternal cells. Take those away, and immune chaos likely ensues. That also means that immune tolerance needs to be continuously and actively maintained; it’s not a one-and-done process during pregnancy.

That’s interesting and exciting in its own right, but the research also offers a way to gain a greater understanding of the broad swath of diseases and conditions to which microchimerism may contribute.

“The new tools we developed to study these cells will help scientists pinpoint exactly what these cells do and how they work in a variety of contexts including autoimmune disease, cancer and neurological disorders,” Way says.

“Microchimerism is increasingly linked with so many health disorders. This study provides an adaptable platform for scientists to investigate whether these rare cells are the cause of disease, or alternatively, found in diseased tissue at increased levels as part of the natural healing process.”

The research has been published in Immunity.

https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/science-futures/millions-of-your-mother-s-cells-persist-inside-you-and-now-we-know-how/

Posted on

Biopsies Spread Cancer

Biopsies Spread Cancer

Doctors are finally admitting that biopsies Spread Cancer…

“Biopsies are the kiss of death. The needle punches a hole in the tumor, dragging cancer cells & spreading them.”
-– **Dr. Ben Johnson**

“Biopsies introduce cancer cells into the bloodstream.”
-– **Dr. Leonard Gomella**

The body brilliantly self-contains tumors in a protective fibrin sheath, like a hornet’s nest sealed shut.

But a needle biopsy? It shatters that barrier, unleashing cells, toxins & even parasites into the bloodstream & lymph.

What was contained becomes chaos: inflammation surges, immune response distracts & metastasis explodes.

Think of it: Poke the nest, and the hornets scatter everywhere. Cells hitch a ride along the needle tract, seeding new tumors. Local trauma kickstarts growth. The immune system, overwhelmed, lets invaders run wild.

**The Science Proves It – Biopsies Trigger Spread, Inflammation & Seeding:**

– “Biopsy of primary tumors resulted in significantly increased incidence & number of lung metastasis.” (PMID: 25061543)

– “Biopsies promote intraperitoneal tumor dissemination & progression.” (PMID: 23258276)

– “Core needle biopsy of breast tumors increases distant metastases.” (PMID: 25425969)

– “Biopsies lead to tumor cell dissemination & seeding of malignant tumors.” (PMID: 22686607)

– “Human breast cancer biopsies enhance adjacent cancer cell proliferation.” (PMID: 27249999)

**Top Doctors & Experts Sound the Alarm – “Standard Care” Is Harming Patients:**

– “Manipulation of an intact tumor… is associated with an increase in the incidence of sentinel node metastasis.”
– **John Wayne Cancer Institute (2022)**

– “Cutting out a section… endangered the person’s life by aggravating the malignant growth.”
– **Dr. Perry Nichols**

– “Biopsies spread early cancers.”
– **Dr. Jonathan Wright**

– “Biopsies introduce cancer cells into the bloodstream.”
– **Dr. Leonard Gomella**

– “Biopsies cause cancer cells to spread & the risk is higher in certain types of cancers like prostate & kidney cancers.”
– **Dr. Hal Schofield**

– “Biopsies cause cancer to disseminate further into the body & this has serious implications to patient outcomes.”
– **Dr. Robert Nagourney**

These aren’t fringe opinions – they’re from leading voices in oncology. Yet patients walk in blind, without full informed consent on these risks.

**Safer Alternatives: Diagnose WITHOUT Disturbing the Tumor’s Encapsulation**

Skip the needle. Opt for non-invasive tools that map, detect & monitor without the danger:

1. Multiparametric MRI (mpMRI): High-res imaging of structure & function. Zero radiation, fully non-invasive.

2. Color Doppler Ultrasound: Real-time blood flow mapping in tumors. No radiation, no tissue damage.

3. Liquid Biopsy (ctDNA/CTC Testing): Simple blood draw detects cancer DNA/cells circulating. No poking required.

4. Thermography: Infrared heat detection spots abnormal patterns early. Painless, radiation-free.

Information crushes fear. It empowers choices. If diagnosed, PAUSE. Research deeply. Question everything. Your intuition knows – rushing is the real risk.

The “cancer industrial complex” thrives on fear & procedures, but it’s overdue for a reckoning. Some “tumors” are actually parasitic egg sacs misdiagnosed as cancer. You CAN shrink & eliminate them holistically.

“Targeting the Mitochondrial-Stem Cell Connection in Cancer Treatment: A Hybrid Orthomolecular Protocol”
Pioneered by Dr. William Makis, Dr. Paul Marik & many other experts: Combine Ivermectin, Fenbendazole with fasting, keto diet & targeted therapies to hit cancer & parasites head-on. Thousands report success.

Link to protocol in replies.

Cited research is also in replies…

Don’t let profit-driven “care” endanger you. Choose wisely. Share to protect a life.

https://x.com/ValerieAnne1970/status/2008843877990519175?s=20

Posted on

Failure? A Destination or a Progress Marker?

The dictionary has multiple definitions of failure:

  • 1. lack of success.
  • 2. an unsuccessful person or thing.
  • 3. the neglect or omission of expected or required action.
  • 4. a lack or deficiency of a desirable quality.
  • 5. the action or state of not functioning.
  • 6. a sudden cessation of power.
  • 7. the collapse of a business.

The definitions all deliver the impression of a finite conclusion rather than a step in a process. Failure equals being wrong. Being wrong equals death. As a result, failure has an obvious and deeply negative stigma associated with it. Hence most people fear failing.

In fact many people do not even attempt worthwhile projects for fear of failure. This has been commented upon by various motivational speakers as sad and lamentable but is a natural outcome of the way we are taught to think about failure – it is bad and to be avoided.

And it is a lot easier and very simple to say don’t fear failure than it is to spend the time necessary to change our thinking about it. So what is a better way to think of failure and how do we change our thinking about it?

I don’t know how true it is but I have heard that Edison failed 10,000 times to invent the light bulb before his success. Imagine if he took his first failure as an end point rather than a new starting point. In fact each failure could otherwise be described as a successful experiment to find out that a particular hypothesis did not work.

I was struck by this when I was doing some pullups in the park with 13 kg of weights on my back. I was doing my third set of 5 repetitions and on the last repetition I could not pull myself up more than 85% of my top range of motion. That was my point of failure. Despite my best effort, I could not pull my body up to get my nose over the bar. I “failed“.

Now, when you are exercising, this is something to aim for. Exercising with good form till you are close to failure (with some capacity left in reserve) builds strength and muscle mass.

At this point I realised every person doing resistance training “fails”. We all hit a point where we are at or close to where we can do no more. We are all “failures”, at different points. Some of us fail after 4 repetitions at 13 kg, as did I. Some of fail after 44 repetitions or with 50 kg. None of us stop training “because we failed”. We recognise it as a benchmark or a measure of progress rather than a destination. A “That’s where I am up to.” viewpoint rather than a “That is my end result.” viewpoint.

In many situations, such as in exercise, it is not about failure versus success, it is about WHEN you fail.

Some fail before they start, thinking it is too much effort.

Some fail at the first day that is either too hot or too cold for comfort.

Some fail when their results do not match their expectation.

A rare few fail after they win their marathon, receive their trophy, party on and go to bed at 2:00 am.

It’s all about WHEN you fail! This is why persistence is vital for success. The ultra persistent refuse to fail ’till after the victory party.

Which reminded me of a quote I heard about people who are successful marketers, “They fail fast and they fail often.” They try a lot of things, knowing that many ideas they try will fail and need to be abandoned quickly before wasting too much money on them. By doing that many times and quickly, they sooner or later and without too much wasted money, find that which works and can then do lots of that to huge success.

These top marketers know full well that a fear of failure will not lead to success.

They know that in marketing, as in exercising, it is very easy and natural to view failure as a marker, a peg in the board. A “This is where I am up to”. It is not the end of the road, it is the current position of my progress marker.

What if we started doing that in other spheres of activity? What if every time we thought of something and got the negative thought come in about failing, we just looked at it and thought, “That’s only to be expected. Nothing unusual here. Any time I fail it is merely the current position of my progress marker, just another step toward the ultimate success.”

This I wish for you!

Posted on

Elizabeth Peratrovich

Elizabeth Peratrovich

She sat quietly knitting while they called her people savages. Then she stood up and used their own words to destroy them.
Juneau, Alaska. February 8, 1945.
The Alaska Territorial Legislature chamber was crowded and tense. In the gallery sat dozens of Native Alaskans—Tlingit, Haida, Tsimshian—who had traveled to the capital for this moment. They came for a single law. The Anti-Discrimination Act. A bill that would make it illegal to post signs reading “No Natives Allowed.” That would let them enter any restaurant, any hotel, any theater without being turned away.
A law that would recognize them as equal citizens in their own ancestral homeland.
But first, they had to endure a hearing where white senators explained why Native people didn’t deserve equal rights.
This was 1945. Ten years before Rosa Parks. Nineteen years before the federal Civil Rights Act. Most Americans don’t know that the first anti-discrimination law in United States history was won in Alaska by a Tlingit woman facing down a room of hostile legislators.
Her name was Elizabeth Peratrovich.
And she was about to deliver one of the most devastating responses in American political history.
One senator after another rose to oppose the bill. They argued that the races should remain separate. That integration would cause problems. That Native people weren’t ready for full equality.
Then the insults became personal.
One senator complained openly that he didn’t want to sit next to Native people in theaters because of how they smelled. Another suggested that Native peoples lacked the sophistication to deserve equal treatment.
The Native people in the gallery sat in dignified silence. They’d heard these attitudes their entire lives—but never so brazenly, never in an official government chamber, never while forced to listen without recourse.
Then Senator Allen Shattuck stood. He was among the most vocal opponents of the bill. He looked directly at the Native people in the gallery, his voice dripping with contempt.
“Who are these people, barely out of savagery, who want to associate with us whites with five thousand years of recorded civilization behind us?”
The room went silent.
He had just called them savages. Primitives. People barely evolved enough to desire equality with civilized whites.
In the back of the chamber, Elizabeth Peratrovich was knitting. She was thirty-three years old, mother of three, and president of the Alaska Native Sisterhood. She was known for her composure, her quiet dignity even in the face of injustice.
She set her knitting needles down.
She stood.
Elizabeth hadn’t come prepared to testify. She was simply a Native woman who had spent her life seeing signs in windows telling her she wasn’t welcome. Who had been turned away from hotels. Who watched her children learn they were considered less than human in their own homeland.
She walked to the front of the chamber. Every eye followed her. The legislators who had been sneering moments before now watched in heavy silence.
She looked directly at Senator Shattuck. She didn’t raise her voice. She didn’t show anger. Her tone was measured, controlled, devastatingly clear.
“I would not have expected that I, who am barely out of savagery, would have to remind gentlemen with five thousand years of recorded civilization behind them of our Bill of Rights.”
The impact was immediate.
She had taken Shattuck’s insult—”barely out of savagery”—and turned it into a weapon. She used his claim of superior civilization to expose his complete lack of it.
A defensive murmur went through the opposition. They knew they’d been caught. Exposed. Shamed.
But Elizabeth wasn’t finished.
She described what it meant to see signs comparing her people to dogs. To have her children ask why they weren’t allowed in certain stores. To be treated as unwelcome in lands their ancestors had inhabited for thousands of years before any white settler arrived.
Then came what opponents thought would trap her. A senator asked skeptically whether a law could truly change people’s hearts and stop discrimination.
Elizabeth’s response became legendary.
“Do your laws against larceny and murder prevent those crimes?” she asked calmly. “No law will eliminate crimes, but at least you as legislators can assert to the world that you recognize the evil of the present situation and speak your intent to help us overcome discrimination.”
Silence.
She had dismantled every argument. She had proven she understood law, morality, and civilization better than the senators who claimed millennia of it.
The Native people didn’t need education from white legislators. The white legislators needed education from Elizabeth Peratrovich.
When the vote was called, the Anti-Discrimination Act of 1945 passed eleven to five.
The first anti-discrimination law in United States history.
Not in New York. Not in California. In Alaska. Because a Tlingit woman refused to remain silent when called a savage.
The law prohibited discrimination in public accommodations. It made “No Natives” signs illegal. It declared that Alaska would not tolerate racial discrimination.
Nineteen years before the federal Civil Rights Act. Ten years before Rosa Parks became a household name.
Yet most Americans have never heard of Elizabeth Peratrovich.
We learn about Rosa Parks, as we should. We study Martin Luther King Jr., the March on Washington, the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. These stories deserve to be taught and remembered.
But the woman who won the first anti-discrimination law in American history? The woman who faced down racist senators and won? She remains virtually unknown outside Alaska.
Why? Because Alaska wasn’t the South where national media focused. Because Native American civil rights struggles didn’t capture headlines the way other movements did. Because Elizabeth didn’t have a national platform or massive organization—just her dignity and her refusal to accept injustice.
But Alaska remembers.
February 16th is Elizabeth Peratrovich Day, an official state holiday. Schools and government offices close. In 2020, plans were announced to feature her on the dollar coin. In Juneau stands a bronze statue of Elizabeth, captured in quiet dignity—just as she stood in that chamber in 1945.
Yet beyond Alaska, her story remains obscure. That’s tragic, because what Elizabeth proved was fundamental.
Civilization isn’t measured by how many years your history spans. It’s not measured by monuments or recorded achievements or military conquests.
It’s measured by how you treat the vulnerable. By whether you uphold dignity or destroy it. By whether you use law to protect people or to oppress them.
Senator Shattuck claimed five thousand years of civilization. Elizabeth Peratrovich proved he had none.
Because what’s civilized about “No Dogs, No Natives” signs? What’s civilized about denying people access to public spaces in their own ancestral homeland? What’s civilized about a government official calling people savages?
Nothing.
Elizabeth didn’t need five thousand years of history. She needed moral clarity and courage.
She weaponized their own claims against them. She demonstrated that the supposed “savage” in the room understood America’s founding principles better than the “civilized” senators did.
And she won.
Elizabeth Peratrovich died in 1958 at age forty-seven. She didn’t live to see the federal Civil Rights Act. She didn’t see her image on coins or statues erected in her honor.
But she lived long enough to see “No Natives” signs removed throughout Alaska. She lived to know her children could enter any business in Juneau without being turned away. She lived to see the law of an entire territory changed because she refused to be silent.
That’s not just one woman’s victory. That’s proof that dignity is powerful. That moral clarity can defeat bigotry. That sometimes changing history requires one person willing to stand, set down their work, and speak truth to power.
The senators thought they had civilization on their side. They thought their recorded history gave them authority.
Elizabeth Peratrovich taught them that civilization isn’t inherited. It’s earned every single day by how you treat people.
She was knitting quietly while senators called her people savages.
Then she reminded them what civilization actually means.
And she won the first anti-discrimination law in United States history.
Elizabeth Peratrovich deserves to be as famous as any civil rights leader in American history.
Now you know her name.
Posted on

Time might not exist – and we’re starting to understand why

The closer we look at time, the stranger it gets

The nature of time is one of the most profound and longstanding problems in physics – one that no one can agree on. From our perspective, time seems to steadily progress forward with each tick of the clock.

But the closer we look, the more bizarre time becomes – from equations that state time should flow as freely backwards as it does forwards, to the strange quantum realm where cause and effect can flip on their heads.

Could it even be that time itself is an illusion?

What makes time so confounding is that we have three very different ways of defining it, which don’t easily fit together.

Finish reading: https://nexusnewsfeed.com/article/science-futures/time-might-not-exist-and-we-re-starting-to-understand-why/