Baking soda cures demonic possession by cancer

J: what are your thoughts about adding baking soda to water to ingest or alkaline water machines?
JR: below, here’s yet another Doctor who does not seem to get that tumors are effects, not causes. He talks about tumors as causing acidity. That the old correlation-causation presumption. Because the indoctrination of the demon worship model is so heavy, I can’t blame him personally of course.
” Drinking baking soda has been proven to reduce or eliminate the spread of breast cancer to the lungs, brain and bone, but too much baking soda can also damage normal organs. “In other words, this test is designed to lead to personalized medicine for cancer patients, by optimizing the therapy to each individual,” said Mark “Marty” Pagel, PhD, University of Arizona associate professor of biomedical engineering and lead researcher on the project. Just as people feel the burn from lactic acid produced in their muscles during rigorous exercise, tumors also produce lactic acid when they are actively growing, Pagel says. This acid destroys surrounding tissue, which allows the tumor to grow, invade surrounding areas, and metastasize to other organs in the body. “The acid also provides resistance to common chemotherapies,” Pagel said.

http://www.newswise.com/articles/new-test-found-for-effectiveness-of-baking-soda-as-breast-cancer-therapy

It is demonstrated that drinking it in strong concentration is too much alkalinity for certain tissues. If people understand the simplicity of the issue, then OBVIOUSLY it is better to put small amounts of baking soda across several square feet of tissue (skin) that has evolved over millions of years to assimilate moderate alkalinity… than to dump high alkalinity in to the stomach.
The MDs who do things like that are panicking idiots. I am being dramatic not to be personally insulting, but to point to the total stupidity of their logic (lack of logic) … or lack of well-thought out logic- why: because they are operating in a panic and paranoia of demon worship!
They are terrified about effects. They are ignorant of physics (electromagnetics) as the cause. It is all over Dr. Pagel’s comments.
“The acidity can impair the effectiveness of our holy medications.” F$*king DUH! The acidity is THE issue.
Pagel said “acid destroys tissue and ALLOWS the tumor to grow.” DUMBASS! The tumor is the residual material left after the acid destroys tissue!


In other places, I just read this stupidity:

“Jennifer Barton, professor and head of UA biomedical engineering. “Patients can actually change their body’s pH to make their cancer drugs more effective – it can be as simple as drinking baking soda”
Changing the pH does not make the drugs effective. Changing the pH ends the effect of cancer.
J:

You could design an experiment to determine if that was the case.
JR: yup. wouldn’t cost much.
J:

exactly
JR: The science is already established…. just give the medical profession a century or two and it will be common knowledge. (maybe even faster.)
J: it does seem rather symptom focused. doctors aren’t scientists.
JR:  it is demon worship. that’s not an insult. that’s a precise categorization.
J: they don’t even have to take physics with calculus.
J:

I mean that they (medical students) don’t even have the requirement today. whereas all science students are taking physics with calc.

its lame.

JR: the model of having a physician guide you may be collapsing. with the internet, science is no long easy to supress.
Acidity (too many protons relative to not enough electrons) is the cause of virtually all modern degenerative diseases: ” Viruses and diseases such as colds, flu, cancer and even heart disease thrive in an acidic body, but cannot survive when your body is alkaline. The 2009 Journal of the American Society of Nephrology revealed a study of 134 patients with advanced kidney disease. Taking baking soda daily dramatically slowed down the progression of kidney disease, resulting in no need for dialysis.”
Again, the demonic model: “heart disease cannot survive when your body is alkaline.”
There is no demon of heart disease possessing anyone! 

When your body is alkaline, then there is no acidity to produce the natural effects of acidity (heart disease, etc).

Advertisements

Tags: , , ,

4 Responses to “Baking soda cures demonic possession by cancer”

  1. How a holistic model avoids the confusions of reductionist medical “demon worship” | power of language blog: partnering with reality by JR Fibonacci Says:

    […] For more info, see: https://jrfibonacci.wordpress.com/…/baking-soda-cures…/ […]

  2. Marty Pagel Says:

    You write “Changing the pH does not make the drugs effective. Changing the pH ends the effect of cancer.
    J:
    You could design an experiment to determine if that was the case.”

    We did this experiment. Changing the pH did not end the effect of the cancer, although it temporarily slowed its growth. Changing the pH AND treating with a pH-dependent chemotherapy had a much greater therapeutic effect.

    I suggest that you should design and perform your own experiment instead of make stuff up.

    Also, I took physics with calculus. I also took quantum mechanics at UC Berkeley. Again, get your facts straight before making stuff up.

    —Marty Pagel, University of Arizona.

    • jrfibonacci Says:

      Hi Marty, I do not often review the comments submitted but I thought I recognized your name… and I was right! Anyway, thanks for your reply and your interest. I did not keep up with your ongoing research lately and I would be glad to be updated on it. As for the prior content, I want to “retreat” a bit and then “try again” with a few questions.

      I get that a particular pH-based intervention might produce a favorable outcome (of whatever magnitude), plus that a particular chemotherapy intervention could be more or less effective depending on a variety of factors including pH. So yes, changing the pH in a particular way could logically be interpreted as “making something else work better” with that factor than without it. I was not questioning the specific results. I was raising a distinct point, which you did not address, so I will re-state it, but differently. In brief, I was questioning the conceptual models that guides how different people might describe the same effect.

      When we observe some phenomenon over time, we can see a pattern of changes. We can measure the electromagnetic charge (such as pH) of various areas and fluids. We can even cut someone open and see with our naked eyes “growths” of varying size. Or we can measure the size of a tumor through other methods that do not involve an incision.

      So far, there is no controversy. But then I raise a point of curiosity (not really a controversy).

      Is there such a thing as a cancer, as in a living thing? Does it “grow?”

      Or, did someone just MAKE UP that terminology / idea? When a pile of clothes in a laundry basket gets larger over time, is the pile alive? When plaque builds up in someone’s mouth, is the plaque “growing?”

      We do know that it is reasonably easy to produce the effect called cancer. in particular, bombarding living tissue with certain forms of radiation can create measurable effects not only in humans and rats, but in plants and bacteria. The
      “ionizing” of tissue is entirely an electromagnetic effect, right? (I assume that you are generally familiar with many decades of research establishing the detrimental effects on living tissue of of various kinds of radiation and radio-active waste: http://www.nrc.gov/about-nrc/radiation/health-effects/rad-exposure-cancer.html )

      So, in an experiment, we could turn up the intensity of radiation, causing the effects to increase. We could turn off or turn down the radiation, causing the effects to “change from a malignant demon that has possessed the organism and has been eating it… in to a benign cancerous growth that is no longer growing.”

      Why would some organisms have less damage? The short answer is “their electromagnetic health.”

      Why would some organisms be especially vulnerable to damage from radio-active waste? Again, while you may not be familiar with any research on that subject, I am.

      So, can altering the electromagnetic integrity of an organism (even a plant) improve it’s “resistance” to the potential damage of ionizing radiation? Of course. Just as lead provides protection, there are many other possible
      protective factors.

      An interesting example that might be uncontroversial involves damage to the thyroid gland in particular. What happens when iodine is exposed to ionizing radiation? If there is a deficiency of iodine (which I consider extremely common), then a significant portion of the iodine in an organism can be “made in to” radio-active iodine. That iodine will then damage various organs.

      These instructions from the CDC indicate that “KI (potassium iodide) is a salt… that can help block radioactive iodine from being absorbed by the thyroid gland, thus protecting this gland from radiation injury…. It only protects the thyroid, not other parts of the body, from radioactive iodine.”

      http://emergency.cdc.gov/radiation/ki.asp

      Is it simple to produce thyroid damage? Is it simple to even produce “thyroid cancer?”

      Below is a quote from Time magazine. First, in the same article, there is a reference to the damage that can result from consuming dairy products that contain radioactive iodine.


      When thyroid cells absorb too much radioactive iodine — either through the air or through contaminated food — it can increase the risk for thyroid cancer, says the American Thyroid Association [ATA]. ”

      http://healthland.time.com/2011/03/14/radiation-exposure-fast-facts-about-thyroid-cancer-and-other-health-risks/

      And here is a paragraph from the ATA:

      WHAT IS THE PROOF THAT KI WORKS?
      After the 1986 Chornobyl (formerly called “Chernobyl”) nuclear accident, shifting winds blew a radioactive cloud over Europe. As many as 3,000 people exposed to that radiation developed thyroid cancer over the next 10 years. Most victims had been babies or young children living in Ukraine, Belarus, or Russia at the time of the accident. The region of excess risk extended up to a 200 mi radius from Chornobyl. Poland, immediately adjacent to Belarus and Ukraine, distributed KI to >95% of their children within 3 days of the accident and does not appear to have had an increase in thyroid cancer.

      http://www.thyroid.org/nuclear-radiation-and-the-thyroid/

      One of the benefits of a diet high in iodine is that iodine can act as a donor of an electron. Electron donors are also called “anti-oxidants,” which means iodine can help to prevent or heal oxidation / combustion / inflammation / acidity. Below is a quote of a study detailing that the fact that high iodine levels correlate to low cancer rates:

      BACKGROUND:

      Seaweed is an important dietary component and a rich source of iodine in several chemical forms in Asian communities. Their high consumption of this element (25 times higher than in Western countries) has been associated with the low incidence of benign and cancerous breast and prostate disease in Japanese people.

      SUMMARY:
      ….In animal and human studies, molecular iodine (I2) supplementation exerts a suppressive effect on the development and size of both benign and cancerous neoplasias….

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23607319

      In other words, certain electromagnetic conditions create an effect called cancer. Distinct electromagnetic conditions (AKA “health”) prevent the damage that would be otherwise caused by radiation poisoning.

      Again, I am familiar with the specific of how different plants, animals, and humans will experience different results from the same causal factors. I can predict exactly where tumors will form in an organism, when it will not arise at all, and so on.

      Cancer does not EVER “spread.” However, the effects of certain electromagnetic conditions can show up in a predictable sequence. Electromagnetic vulnerability in one region can cause a voltage drain on other tissue. These voltage drains are predictable.

      Tumors can be predicted to show up in one place, then later in certain other places, but yet they are not alive. Cancer is not alive. Cancer is not a demon that possesses anyone. Even though people may worship the demon that they call cancer, it is just a diagnostic label that someone made up.

      I could share some research showing “very high correlations” (100%?) between certain “causal variables” and the effects commonly labeled “cancer.” Again, changing the electromagnetic properties of a tissue or cell (as in pH) can produce predictable effects.

      Strong acids will burn through bone. Lightning bolts can cause muscle contractions that cause bones to splinter. Those are [effects of electromagnetic causes].

      One can change the pH of a tissue- not just by adding a bit of “pH 8.3 Baking soda”- but actually resolving the short circuit that has produced an electromagnetic draining of that tissue’s voltage. What effect would predictably result from a very precise alteration of the electromagnetic properties of a tissue (or organism)?

      If you stop producing the effect called cancer, then the effect called cancer is no longer present. Prior accumulations of tumor can be eliminated (as in removed from the organism by the processes of a normal, healthy organism).

      Changing the pH *PROPERLY* will end the production of the effect called cancer. Promoting the electromagnetic functionality of the organism (human, cow, bush, etc) will promote elimination of any accumulations of “diseased or dead tissue.” Further, when electromagnetic conditions are optimal, an organism can withstand significant exposure to otherwise damaging radiation and yet have no detrimental effect.

      If you got this far, Marty, then congratulations on your tenacity. In the case that you are interested in corresponding further, please be aware that I found your prior response to be disrespectful. If you want my attention further, I am willing to consider offers of large amounts of money. 😉

  3. Sadhna jamal Says:

    Very well explained, thank you. I have started taking a teaspoon every night and morning as have been diagnosed with early breast cancer. I have refused and conventional method and am working on myself only naturally with good results so far. According to ultrasound I have no lymph nodes and the growth has gone smaller. I had lymph nodes before.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: