Results 1 to 5 of 5

Thread: Personalised cancer vaccines

  1. #1

    Default Personalised cancer vaccines

    I already knew that “virus hunters” have been trying to prove “scientifically” that cancer is caused by a virus, but this is still not the official story on cancer.
    I think I should add some arguments that the idea that vaccines can be used to fight cancer is ridiculous. But before I can, I have to figure out how anybody could believe such a thing in the first place.
    I can find lots of alternative ideas on health care. I haven’t found anything to show that treatment of cancer victims with vaccines is ridiculous.

    Furthermore the fact that this is customised (personalised) “treatment” means that it would be impossible to “scientifically” prove the efficacy.
    It is not intended to become a mono-therapy but only in combination with the surgical removal of cancer, radiation and/or chemotherapy. I can imagine that the cancer vaccines have less adverse (“side”) effects than radiation and chemotherapy.

    There have been earlier investigations into the possibility of cancer vaccines.
    Earlier, unsuccessful cancer vaccines usually targeted a single distinctive cancer protein shared among patients, but these new ones are specific to an individual patient’s tumour.

    For the last couple of months some articles have appeared about the revolutionary approach by the company BioNTech. This was based on a phase I trial of a total of 19 skin cancer victims of which 12 remained cancer free up to 32 months.
    If I understand correctly, the theory is that by injecting the body with similar “neoantigens” that can be found in a tumour, which look foreign to the immune system, the immune system (T-cells) learns to attack the cancer cells. These “neoantigens” are specific to an individual patient’s tumour.

    Similar results come from an international trial using a vaccine developed by Ugur Sahin of University Medical Center of Johannes Gutenberg University in Mainz, Germany.
    They injected RNA coding for tumour “neoantigens” into the lymph nodes of 13 advanced melanoma patients whose tumours had been removed. Eleven remain cancer-free up to 26 months later, including two whose tumours reappeared, then shrank or were surgically removed:

    Here’s another recent article.
    The small Phase I trials need to be followed by larger studies, but the impressive results suggest the new approach work far better than earlier cancer vaccines.
    These new cancer vaccines appears to have prevented early relapses in 12 people with skin cancer:

    To make this treatment more convincing nice photos like the following are shown. This supposedly shows a T-cell attacking a cancer cell.
    Last edited by Firestarter; 07-08-2017 at 10:49 AM.
    Do NOT ever read my posts.
    Google and Yahoo wouldn’t block them without a very good reason.

  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2


    An a Amish man (Samuel A. Girod) makes a chickweed salve and he is in jail for 6 years. Mundanes cannot say, "heal or cure" when they label their products but Big pHARMa can makes these claims because the FDA/CDC are their business buddies.

  4. #3

    Default Tooth vaccines

    According to the state media, there really isn’t any agenda to push for vaccines.

    Everybody knows that cavities in your teeth aren’t caused by vaccines, but an “amazing” vaccine is being developed to prevent tooth decay nonetheless:
    Regular visits to the dentist are an important part of keeping your teeth healthy. But what if you could give your oral health a boost by receiving a vaccine on top of your regular dental care routine?

    Researchers from the Wuhan Institute of Virology (WIOV) of the Chinese Academy of Sciences are working on such a vaccine, and their study has just been published in Scientific Reports.
    When mice without caries received this vaccine, it conferred a 64.2 percent prophylactic efficacy, and in those mice that had already developed caries, the vaccine produced a 53.9 percent therapeutic effect.
    The full study shows that there are some “side effects”, but don’t worry about those...
    Jingyi Yang et al – Second-generation Flagellin-rPAc Fusion Protein, KFD2-rPAc, Shows High Protective Efficacy against Dental Caries with Low Potential Side Effects (2017):
    Several studies have shown that flagellin triggers a prototypical systemic inflammatory response in mice, including the induction of proinflammatory cytokines and oxidative stress24,25,26. The flagellin–TLR5 axis might also trigger cardiac innate immune responses and result in cardiovascular dysfunction27.
    The flagellin/TLR5 axis-induced response is a double-edged sword for its adjuvanticity and side effects. On one hand, flagellin exerts its adjuvanticity by activating a range of innate immune cells secreting certain cytokines and chemokines, which trigger an adaptive immune response. On the other hand, flagellin triggers a prototypical systemic inflammatory response, including the induction and secretion of proinflammatory cytokines in the lungs, small intestine, liver, cardiovascular system, and kidneys27, 44
    Do NOT ever read my posts.
    Google and Yahoo wouldn’t block them without a very good reason.

  5. #4


    How to Remineralize Teeth Naturally & Reverse Tooth Decay

    How to Reverse Cavities Naturally & Heal Tooth Decay

    Your TEETH Are Alive

  6. #5

    Default HPV vaccines and cancer

    When I started this thread, I couldn’t find the right words to explain that the idea of fighting cancer with “personalised vaccines” is ridiculous, but I’ll give it a try now.

    It seems plausible that injecting the body with similar “neoantigens” that can be found in a cancer tumour, would cause cancer (or at the very least would cause harm) instead of fighting cancer.
    If these “neoantigens” don’t cause damage to the body, however, it seems implausible that cancer tumours would cause harm at all.

    Further reasoning leads to the conclusion that personalised cancer vaccines could only work, if our immune system fights cancer tumours, which could mean that cancer is caused by a deficiency of the immune system...
    If that hypothesis is correct, the best way to fight cancer is to give your immune system a boost, which can be done by a healthy and varied diet.

    When I started this thread, I didn’t even realise that the controversial HPV vaccines (HPV: Human PapillomaVirus) have been marketed as cervical cancer prevention. These HPV vaccines supposedly prevent infections with viruses that in turn cause cancer.
    The idea that a viral infection could cause cancer isn’t nearly as ridiculous as that the Zika virus can fight brain cancer:

    I will try to explain how easily statistics can be manipulated in relation with the HPV vaccines.
    The theory that having sex and becoming infected with certain viruses causes cancer could be “scientifically” proven in the following hypothetical way...
    If for example a large percentage of women in a trial are prostitutes, this could have the following consequences.
    Prostitutes are known to have many sexual encounters. It is also known that prostitutes have a high risk of certain diseases. Furthermore a relatively large percentage of prostitutes are drug addicts.
    If for example using hard drugs increases the risk of cancer, and combining this with certain diseases that often happen for prostitutes, this could already be used to create evidence...

    After writing the previous as sort of a writing exercise, I found the following information on the internet.

    Here’s the literature review M. Soohoo et al “Cervical HPV Infection in Female Sex Workers: A Global Perspective” (2013):
    In this article the conclusion is drawn that “In female sex workers (FSWs), the risk of HPV infection and cervical cancer is especially high”.
    The question is by what this is caused. My theory is that this is (or could be) caused by “recreational” drug abuse, but according to the state media this is caused by many sexual contacts.
    To make the manipulation of statistics more obvious, we can see the bizarre conclusion that “One study saw that HPV prevalence was higher in 20-year-old or younger women compared to women over 20 years old”. If younger FSWs (prostitutes) have been infected more with HPV than older FSWs, this contradicts the theory that sex causes HPV infection. Obviously this was written to convince women that especially sex at a young age causes cancer…

    It is also mentioned that many FSWs are HIV-positive, so if you follow the theory that HIV causes immune deficiency (AIDS), you could also reach the conclusion that cervical cancer is caused by immune deficiency.
    According to this literature review the median overall prevalence of HPV among HIV positive FSW is 73.3% (ranging from 32-87%). To manipulate the results, prostitutes with HIV infection were removed from the main analysis. This is especially doubtful, when you realise that there is no reliable HIV-test, which means that HIV-positive can’t be used for a scientific conclusion.

    Then I looked for a paper on the relation between drug abuse and cervical cancer. Strangely I couldn’t find much…
    The following paper focuses on cocaine in relation with HPV - H. Minkoff et al “The Relationship between Cocaine Use and Human Papillomavirus Infections in HIV-Seropositive and HIV-Seronegative Women”:
    Look at the formulation of this conclusion:
    Cocaine use is associated with an increased risk of detection of both prevalent and incident oncogenic HPV infection, as well as an increased risk of HPV-positive SIL over time.

    Another well-known risk factor in getting cancer is smoking; the cocaine users were often also heavy smokers:
    Table 1 shows the demographic characteristics of the study population at baseline. Women acknowledging crack/cocaine use were older, more likely to be African Americans, less likely to be Hispanic, had more sex partners in the last six months, and were more likely to report heavy cigarette use.
    Also interesting is that studies are referenced, which show that cocaine abuse causes immune deficiency:
    In one study of lymphocytes from individuals with cocaine in their urine, it was found that “Memory" CD8+ T cell subpopulations (i.e., CD45RO+) were reduced in the cocaine-positive patients leading the authors to conclude that this might “represent a disruption of particular immunologic cell networks which could ultimately influence host resistance to infection".
    Shen and colleagues, evaluating a mouse model in which cocaine was injected intraperitoneally found that all immune parameters, other than lymphocyte transformation of the splenic or the peripheral blood lymphocytes, were suppressed [11].
    Other investigators have shown that withdrawal from cocaine can also induce deleterious immune alterations. Using a rat model, Avila demonstrated that repeated exposure to cocaine followed by withdrawal led to activation of the neuroendocrine stress response, which alters cellular immunity and possibly contributes to an increased susceptibility to infection [13].
    Perhaps most germane to our findings is the work of Lopez [33] and colleagues, who found that daily cocaine administration induced a significant decrease in the number of IgA+ cells with a concomitant increase in the number of CD8+ cells per villi in the intestinal lamina propria (ILP).

    I have also found a more recent story (posted by Donnay) about the teenager Jasmin Soriat from Vienna, who died after being poisoned with the HPV vaccine, Gardasil, with interesting background information.
    Johan Missliwetz was ordered by the court to perform a second autopsy on Soriat’s body, and concluded that the HPV vaccine could have been the cause of death. After Missliwetz reported his results to the drug regulation authorities, he received many calls from “senior members of the medical establishment”. They attempted to “intervene” and many professors asked him to stop talking about vaccination tests. Missliwetz has subsequently taken an “early retirement”.

    The Independent published an article about 131 young women who suffered HPV vaccine injuries. Another 18 young women came forward only a week later.

    According to Bernard Dalbergue, who worked directly with Gardasil’s manufacturer, Merck:
    I predict that Gardasil will become the greatest medical scandal of all time because at some point in time, the evidence will add up to prove that this vaccine, technical and scientific feat that it may be, has absolutely no effect on cervical cancer and that all the very many adverse effects which destroy lives and even kill, serve no other purpose than to generate profit for the manufacturers. Gardasil is useless and costs a fortune!
    In addition, decision-makers at all levels are aware of it! Cases of Guillain-Barré syndrome, paralysis of the lower limbs, vaccine-induced MS and vaccine-induced encephalitis can be found, whatever the vaccine.
    Dianne Harper is one of the very few specialists on HPV in the world; she explained:
    the benefit to public health is nothing, there is no reduction in cervical cancers, they are just postponed, unless the protection lasts for at least 15 years, and over 70% of all sexually active females of all ages are vaccinated.
    According to Christian Fiala:
    No-one has shown that the HPV vaccine actually reduces the rate of cervical cancer.
    As long as we have no proof that cervical cancer is caused by HPV, it is fundamentally useless to vaccinate against HPV because the chances are the cancer will occur whether there is HPV or not.
    Peter Duesberg, who was once a highly respected biochemist, before he became ridiculed for his views on HIV/AIDS, takes this a step further:
    The [HPV] vaccine should be stopped until it’s proved that it protects against cancer… It has the highest number of side-effects ever of any vaccine.
    In the US, it has more side-effects reported than all other vaccines combined. Since there is no scientific evidence that it will do anything else than occasionally cause warts, which will be eliminated by the immune system, there is no need for vaccination against this virus.
    (archived here:
    Do NOT ever read my posts.
    Google and Yahoo wouldn’t block them without a very good reason.

Similar Threads

  1. Vaccines Will be Made from Human Cancer Tumors
    By donnay in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 12-01-2014, 07:56 PM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 05-13-2013, 12:16 PM
  3. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 12-28-2011, 09:03 AM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-29-2009, 07:34 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-15-2007, 09:58 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts