Substack Snippets Showing a Quickly Shifting Overton Window on Many Health Topics
The Overton Window is shifting fast. Are you ready for this? A round up of incredible health happenings in these unprecedented times. What a time to be alive. I'm so encouraged.
Three years ago, I felt like a lonely outsider in so many of my health beliefs. Today, the world is waking up in a way that I didn’t think possible.
Here is a conglomeration of some of the most exciting news.
Cracks are appearing in the vaccine narrative
More docs are questioning mainstream cancer drugs
The bad news about Tylenol is snowballing
The statin-dementia link deepens
A radical transformation in cancer care may be coming
Florida is putting aside money to study ivermectin for cancer
If you aren’t red-pilled enough, let’s talk about Darwinian evolution
But before we get into these happenings, I want to show you the screenshot of the poll from my post two weeks ago titled If I Had Advanced Cancer, Would I Do Mainstream Chemo with Natural Treatments?
You guys! That is so interesting! WOW!
1. Cracks Are Appearing in the Vaccine Narrative:
In the past, anyone questioning childhood vaccines was pigeonholed as an extremist antivaxxer science-denier. For the first time in decades, people are allowed to publicly acknowledge the fact that injecting children with huge amounts of chemical adjuvants may have devastating consequences on the immune system. The medicine may be worse than the disease, as the old adage goes.
2. More Doctors Are Questioning Cancer Drugs
Speaking of medicines that are worse than diseases, there is clinical evidence from drug trials showing that some chemo drugs kill people at a faster rate than the cancer left to itself. Although the drugs do in fact shrink the tumors, the side effects still lead to an earlier death.
Keep in mind that true scientific advancement has always come from questioning the official narrative, not blindly following the in-crowd, especially when there are financial incentives to invent newer and more lethal cancer drugs.
There is no one on the planet easier to extort than someone dying of cancer. Bad actors know this.
3. The Bad News about Tylenol Is Snowballing
Tylenol overdose is the leading cause of emergency room overdoses because it’s so harmful and dangerous that it’s very easy to overdose on it without realizing it. This is because it decreases your body’s most important antioxidant, glutathione. Without enough glutathione, you will die.
But wait—there’s more. A landmark 2015 study found that it also powerfully blunts people’s emotions, making them less empathetic towards others. Who knew?
Sayer Ji explains more in his post Tylenol: From Painkiller to Empathy Killer.
4. The Statin-Dementia Link Deepens
The video below isn’t just hearsay and guesswork. A study titled The Effect of HMG-CoA Reductase Inhibitors on Cognition in Patients With Alzheimer’s Dementia: A Prospective Withdrawal and Rechallenge Pilot Study found that patients with on statins with dementia symptoms had their symptoms greatly lessened when they went off statins and returned when they went back on. The more you know…
5. A Radical Transformation in Cancer Care May Be Coming
There are a lot of researchers putting in good work when it comes to studying cancer cures. But I think my two fave buddies are Dr. Paul Marik and Justus R. Hope (pen name), who write for Repurposed Drugs: Powers & Possibilities. One of their best posts is titled Why Ivermectin & Mebendazole have Transformed Cancer Care: Our ROOT9™ Protocol Marks a Paradigm Shift.
I’m feeling extra bossy today, so I think that everyone and their mother should just put aside time today and read the whole post. It might just blow you away.
Tl;dr mainstream research and drugs have targeted only regular cancer cells instead of cancer stem cells for decades. This approach often leads to cancer stem cell mutation, where the cancer returns and is now immune to chemo.
Newsflash: the old barbaric days of burning your insides alive with harsh chemo can be replaced with gentle, more humane treatments. The same drugs that specifically target cancer stem cells are much less toxic. Yes, I understand that we only have preclinical data (this means data from petri-dishes called “in vitro” data) and animal model data for these drugs. However, we have anecdotes.
At the word anecdote, I can feel the mainstream oncologists be like:
But why do we not have ANY clinical data? Because the cancer industry refuses to try the drugs in clinics. Then, when you bring it up to an oncologist, he says, “Well, we have no clinical data that this works.” We’ve been refused clinical data and then told we know it doesn’t work because there is no clinical data.
All we can have in this case is preclinical data and anecdotes because that’s all a corrupt industry allows. But I heard someone say recently that:
The plural of anecdote is data
This means that when you gather enough stories and you combine them with the preclinical data, we have all the evidence we need to move forward.
Along those lines:
6. Florida Is Putting Aside Money to Study Ivermectin for Cancer
I can’t say this too often: I’m actually not crazy, people. Many thought I was. At moments, I wondered if perhaps I was. It’s been a lonely road—knowing things and not knowing how to get people to read, understand, believe. But now, one of our own US states is acknowledging ivermectin for cancer!
BTW, mebendazole is almost identical to fenbendazole. Remember Joe Tippins, who was on hospice with 3 months to live after chemo failed to help, took fenben, and 3 months later had no cancer in his body?
An Odd Cure for Incurable Cancer
I love finding crazy stories that no one would ever believe if they weren’t so well documented.
When I wrote that post 2 1/2 years ago, I had no inkling that a day would soon arrive when state governments would be acknowledging the possibility of these drugs. What a sigh of relief. I used to lie awake at night wondering how many people were needlessly dying of late-stage cancer. The word is getting out. I’m so grateful!
7. Redpill #17: Darwinian Evolution
I can’t remember a time in my life when I considered Darwinian evolution a position that any truly honest scientist could hold.
Them’s fightin’ words, I know.
Let me state this another way. I’ve always been interested in science from my earliest memories. I’ve never seen a scrap of evidence that made me wonder if evolution could be true. Of course, species can adapt. But the concept of macro evolution—it has always seemed like one of the least scientifically backed positions one could hold.
I commend to you a great discussion from this post: Shattering the Myths of Darwinism
Richard Milton’s Shattering the Myths of Darwinism arrived in 1992 like a stone through the stained glass window of scientific orthodoxy. Here was a science journalist, not a creationist or religious fundamentalist, methodically documenting how the central theory of modern biology had become less a scientific framework than a kind of secular religion, complete with its own dogmas, heresies, and inquisitions. Milton discovered what anyone who dares to look closely at Darwin’s theory finds: that “survival of the fittest” is actually a meaningless tautology—those who survive are defined as fit because they survived—and that the entire edifice of evolutionary theory rests not on empirical evidence but on a series of circular arguments, unexamined assumptions, and what W.R. Thompson called “fragile towers of hypothesis on hypothesis.” The book wasn’t just another critique of evolution; it was an exposé of how science itself had been corrupted, transformed from a method of inquiry into an instrument of ideological enforcement.
You might disagree with me and think my statements ridiculous. If so, I double-dog dare you to carefully read the post.
If you don’t forward this post to at least 5 people you know, every time you’re running late, for the rest of your life, you will get behind someone driving extra slow.
Totally kidding! Remember when we used to get the old chain emails that came with threats about what would happen if we didn’t forward the email? 🤣🤣 🤣 Those were such good times. I kinda miss them. Just thought I’d inject a little humor. Seriously though, share the love. Others deserve to know.
Are you new around here? Welcome!
Allow me to show you around. I have some old posts you may be interested in.
Here’s a link to my health and weight loss coaching page
I’ve organized my archives into two courses:
A Fasting Course that teaches you how to do intermittent fasting
And a Health, Nutrition, and Chronic Disease Course with modules
Here are a few additional posts from my archives that you might be interested in:
An Odd Cure for Incurable Cancer
How I Transformed My Health Part 1: My Intermittent Fasting Journey
If You’re Looking for Health or Weight Loss Coaching, Here’s the Lowdown
The Day My Mom Almost Died: My mom almost died of COVID
Another great article, Leslie. Thanks for all the research you do. You have the gift of breaking things down and presenting it in an understandable way!
"The plural of anecdote is data" This is SO important. People in my profession in STEM are fond of dismissing real-life experience. They love to say "The plural of anecdote is not data". Of course it is!
I had an argument with a scientist on another website regarding the safety and effectiveness of vaccines. He cited one study after another. I cited actual real-life experience; real data. He was certain about the theory. I was certain about the facts. I realized we were living in two different universes. He would risk his life based on a theory. At that point, rational discussion fails.