The Study They Tried to BURY: Covid Shots Cause MASSIVE Spike in Cancer w/ Dr. Makis

Dr. William Makis joins me to break down a massive new South Korean study of 8.4 million people showing a dramatic spike in aggressive cancers after the Covid shots. We dig into what the data actually reveals, why cancers are suddenly hitting younger people in their 20s–40s, how fast these “turbo cancers” are progressing, and why hospitals seem completely unprepared for what they’re seeing. Dr. Makis also explains the mechanisms that could be driving this surge — and what people can do right now to assess their risk and protect their health.

Dr. Makis on X: https://x.com/MakisMedicine
Dr. Makis Substack: makisw.substack.com

Kimchi One from Brightcore – Improve your health, improve your life.
25% Off with code: MANINAMERICA at https://mybrightcore.com/maninamerica
Or dial [phone] for up to 50% OFF and Free Shipping – ONLY when you call!

To learn more about Red Light Therapy, visit http://myredlight.com and use promo code SETH to save.

To learn more about investing in gold & silver, visit http://goldwithseth.com, or call 626-654-1906

Follow my Substack: https://maninamerica.substack.com/

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:14):
Welcome to Man in America, a voice of reason in a
world gone mad. I'm your host,Seth Holehouse. So you may have
noticed that I haven't publishedfor, what, ten days or so, which
isn't normal for me. And, sothis is this is I guess you'll
you'll see the episode as itkind of plays out. But I

(00:36):
actually my father went into thehospital about two and a half
weeks ago and was diagnosed withlate stage cancer and passed
away just late last week.
And this was it was he had beenkind of declining a little bit.

(00:57):
Now, looking back, you see thesigns a lot more over the past
six months, especially, but itwas it was really unexpected.
And unfortunately, like many ofyou probably have experienced in
your own families, he wassomeone that trusted the medical
system, and kind of out of hiswill to do the right thing,

(01:19):
followed his doctor's advice andgot multiple, you know, COVID
shots and boosters and all that.And, you know, I can't say that
it's this, you know, the doctordidn't come out and say, Hey,
this is what caused it. But fromall the research I've done and
people like Doctor.
MacKus, who I'm interviewingtoday, I would say that, again,
my opinion, looked like he hadturbo cancer. I mean, it was so

(01:41):
rapid, literally from him beingon his own, kind of getting
sick, going into the hospital,having a diagnosis and dying two
weeks later. So that's obviouslybeen, it's consumed a lot of my
time over the past couple ofweeks. Live, you know, not in
Ohio anymore. It's about eighthour drive.
I've gone back and forthmultiple times, you know, to see

(02:04):
him. And and thankfully, I wasable to see him, and had some
really good discussions with himwhen he was still, you know,
kind of conscious and, was alsoable to take my my girls, my
wife and my two daughters. Weall went and we got to spend a
really good time with him. And,he said it was, it made his year
to see his little grandchildren.This was about a day or so

(02:24):
before he was no longer able tocommunicate with us.
Actually, here's, this is him.This is him about a little over
a year ago, which, you know, hewas healthy, full of life.
That's June and Grace, my twodaughters there. This is just in
our living room. And so this isjust a discussion with Doctor.

(02:45):
Mackus about turbo cancer andcancer and some new studies that
have come out, lot of researchbeing done showing the absolute,
I guess, the real impact ofthese these vaccines and and
what they're doing to people.And I know that the the COVID
shots and COVID are they're kindof a little bit old news now.

(03:07):
The the news cycle's gone on andwhich happens. But the reality
is a lot of people are stillliving with the decisions that
were made even a couple of yearsago, and they've got family and
and friends that are, goingthrough and experiencing this.
And and there's a lot of death.
And even within my own family,it's kind of crazy if I look at
it. You know, this is like thepast, say, year or two past two

(03:28):
years, I've had so manyrelatives. We've had now, with
my father being the third persondying, another person died of
rapid cancer, another persondied of a sudden heart attack.
And these are just immediatefamily, you know, like I'm
talking uncles and aunts andcousins and step parents, etc.
So this is, this is, it'simpacting us very closely.

(03:52):
And even people that haven'tdied, you know, a young woman in
her early 40s that had to have adouble mastectomy. You know,
another one that had lot ofreproductive issues, you know,
clots, heart attacks. I mean,the havoc, the the medical havoc
that we're seeing, and not justreporting on, like, from the

(04:13):
bigger picture, but just seeingin in, like, our daily lives is
just astounding. And so thisdiscussion with Doctor. MacKus
is just gonna be looking atwhat's going on.
What's the research showing?What, what, where are the trends
going? What are the ways thatpeople can treat themselves? If
someone got the vaccine andthey're scared, what can they

(04:35):
do? So anyway, so you'llprobably see my energy's a
little bit different in today'sshow.
And I feel like I stumbled on mywords more than I normally do in
the discussion with Doctor.MacKus. So I think, admittedly,
I'm not on my A game right now,but, I want to get the show

(04:56):
going back again and want to,you know, again, cover the
things that are important. Andas much as I've I've covered,
you know, probably a third of mycontent has been big pharma and,
you know, turbo cancer and andall the things that we're we've
talked about COVID and thevaccines. There's a big
difference when you're talkingabout something and covering it

(05:18):
and looking at statistics versuswhen it hits you in your real
life.
And so I know a lot of you havelost people, in your lives, and
I my heart goes out to you, justfor the loss that we're all
experiencing right now, not justas a nation, but as a race, the

(05:40):
human race and the amount ofdeath and destruction that's
happened to us. And this isparticularly difficult too,
because in 2015, lost my olderbrother to cancer. And so, you
know, I'm now the only survivingmale in my immediate family. I
had lost my father and mybrother both to cancer. And it's

(06:03):
kind of crazy to even just tothink about and reflect that.
But to see my dad go through asimilar, albeit sped up process
of my brother was a wholedifferent level of just kind of
yeah, just difficulty, and andseeing these patterns happening
again. And and, so, anyway, Iguess we'll get into the

(06:25):
interview. And it's not a Imean, it's a hard it's a heavy
subject, but we find some hopeand we find some silver lining.
And look, I'm just, you know,I'm doing great. Know, I mean,
it's not easy dealing with this,but I've got these beautiful
family around me that is justthis daily reminder that life
goes on.
And these little girls that,just warm my heart every day.

(06:47):
This is like, well, this now,like, it's now my responsibility
to raise them, right, and kindof make the next generations to
follow, right? It's just thecircle of life, right, as the
older generations pass and thenewer generations, come in. And,
so anyway, I hope you enjoy thisshow. If you do enjoy it, let me

(07:08):
know in the comments.
I do read your comments. Ireally do. I don't always
respond. But, and if you findthis has been a helpful
interview for you, please shareit with your friends or family.
Because I can't post this onYouTube.
I still have a strike from arecent interview that got pulled
down talking about these things,but we gotta we have to get this
information out there. Soanyway, please enjoy this

(07:31):
interview with doctor WilliamMacKus. Doctor William MacKus,
it's an honor to have you backon the show. It's been quite
some time, and I'm I'm reallylooking forward to this
discussion today.

Speaker 2 (07:41):
Thank you very much for having me again.

Speaker 1 (07:43):
So in in my mind, when I think of the two words of
cancer and vaccine, you're theperson that comes to mind.
There's been a lot of peoplethat have exposed, you know, the
truth and the reality of whatthe vaccines and specifically
the COVID vaccines and boostershave done. And there's been a
lot of people also talkingabout, you know, cancer and
turbo cancer, but you're someonewith a pretty impressive

(08:07):
background in cancer, but you'vealso been fearless in actually
calling a spade a spade andtying the two together. And
really since our firstinterview, which is probably,
you know, maybe two and a halfyears ago or so, you haven't
faltered. But now there's been alot of research and studies
coming out that are actuallyvalidating exactly what you've
been talking about.

(08:28):
And so I think we'll we'll begetting into some of those. And,
know, certainly, there's somevery important information that
is now, you know, kind ofdocumented, which we'll be
reviewing. But I also I I wantto kind of talk a little more on
the personal side of this. So Ithink a lot of people, a lot of
people I talk to, I see thecomments online, a lot of people

(08:50):
are now having friends, family,you know, spouse, etcetera,
getting cancer, dying fromcancer. It's much more common,
unfortunately.
And, so just last week, I lostmy dad, to cancer. He it was,

(09:11):
and I don't wanna it's funnybecause I not funny, but I
wanted to talk to youspecifically about this and be
able to kinda share this storywith you because and just get
your thoughts on it. But my somy dad, you know, you say
relatively healthy guy.Actually, here's a I've gotta
pull a picture of him. This ishim.
This is a little over a yearago. Right? This is him with my

(09:31):
two daughters in our livingroom. Yeah. You can see he's a
healthy looking guy.
He's in his late sixties. And,so, unfortunately, you know, he
got multiple, you know, COVIDshots and boosters. And I talked
to him and but it's hard to, youknow, it's hard to to to kinda
sway somebody, especially whenyou're when they're family,

(09:52):
right, against the advice thathis doctor's giving him. And so
you have to realize, and this ispart of the difficulty for a lot
of people, is that you can't,like, can lead a horse to water,
right, but you can't make themdrink. You can't change their
own decisions they're gonnamake.
And it's really, it's their ownfree will. But I'd say that
starting around maybe in thelast, say, eight months or so,

(10:15):
we noticed that he was kind ofdropping in his weight, you
know, but, you know, kind of asquicker than he should have been
at his age. And he maybe say sixmonths ago, say, hey, dad, know,
you're you're you're losing someweight. And he's like, yeah.
I've just I've been eating alittle bit less, and I actually
feel pretty good.
And, and he he kind of gotthinner and thinner. And then we
I was back in Ohio visiting himsix or eight weeks ago, and it's

(10:36):
kinda like, Daddy, you don'tlook very well. You know, you've
you've you're really you're tootoo slim, and are you feeling
okay? And, you know, hedescribed some issues. He went
to the doctor, and crazy enough,he went to the doctor at that
time to have a, you know,checkup, because he was feeling
kind of unwell, and they gavehim another COVID shot.
Like that was the recommend youknow, that was they gave another
COVID shot, and they ran sometests. And so fast forward to

(10:58):
about two and a half weeks ago,he got we got some numbers back
and some information back,basically that he had,
esophageal cancer, and it had,spread to some of his lymph
nodes. And at that point, theydidn't say he had liver cancer,
but his numbers from his liverwere showing that they looked
like it had spread to his liver.And this is two and a half weeks

(11:20):
ago. And so he went in went intothe hospital.
And as I mentioned, he heliterally just passed, in the
past three or four days. And sothat that was how rapid the
decline was, and it had gone. Idon't know the exact mechanism
that ended up kind of ultimatelyending his life, but it had gone

(11:41):
to his liver. His liver, histhere's a number called a
bilirubin, which kinda it's it'sa kind of basic number. His his
bilirubin numbers in his liver,over the course of say, three or
four days went from like a oneto a seven.
Like, just a rapid, increase, oryou say, decrease in the liver's
ability to function, you know,acute liver failure. And, you

(12:03):
know, is as much as I'veobviously, I've been covering
these things so much, when ithappens personally, it's a whole
new level of just experiencingthe just the reality of what we
live in and what's happeningwith these medications. And, I
mean, so obviously, you don'tknow you don't have his case

(12:25):
file in front of you and allthat, but, I mean, is this what
I'm telling you, is thissomething that you used to see
pretty commonly, say, ten yearsago, and you're still seeing it
today? Or is this a story thatwas not very common, how do you
make sense of, I guess, thestory that I'm kind of walking
you through?

Speaker 2 (12:43):
I'm really, really sorry for your loss. It's not
something that we would normallysee. This sort of rapid
progression.

Speaker 1 (12:54):
Ladies and gentlemen, our world is being poisoned.
Every day, we're exposed to morechemicals sprayed into our
skies, leaching into our food,and polluting our air and water.
From pesticides and heavy metalsto hormone disruptors and
synthetic additives, thesetoxins are bombarding our bodies
and silently destroying ourhealth. But there's something

(13:15):
you can do to fight back, and itstarts in your gut. Kimchi one
from Brightcore Nutritioncontains over 900 strains of
beneficial probiotics that willhelp flush toxins, restore gut
balance, and support your immunesystem.
Because when your gut is strong,your body can resist. You'll
feel the difference. Betterdigestion, more energy, clearer

(13:36):
thinking, stronger immunity, andeven improvements in your skin,
hair, and metabolism. And thisisn't just hype. Studies show
that fermented foods like kimchican reduce the risk of obesity,
improve blood sugar, and supporta whole body wellness.
Kimchi One is all natural, nonGMO, dairy free, gluten free,
and a 100% made in The USA by acompany that actually cares

(13:58):
about your health. And today,you can get an exclusive offer
just for my viewers, 25% offwith your code MAN IN AMERICA by
clicking the link below, or callmy friends at Brightcur for up
to 50% off your order and freeshipping. So give them a call
now at [phone], and theireducated staff will make sure

(14:20):
that Kimchi One is right foryou. Again, that's (888)
575-6488. All the links andinformation are in the
description below.

Speaker 2 (14:29):
Rapid progressions of cancer did happen in the past,
and, you know, time fromdiagnosis to death, whether, you
know, it's a few days or a weekor two, it did happen in the
past, but it was quite rare. I'mseeing it much more now, and I'm
seeing it in cases where youwould simply not expect it. And

(14:50):
so in the past few years, yousee these rapidly progressing
cancers and time to death fromdiagnosis to death that in many
cases is very shocking. The agesof people who have these rapid
progressions have also gone downdramatically. So, you start
seeing these rapid progressionsin 20 year olds, 30 year olds,

(15:12):
40 year olds.
We almost never saw that in thepast. So something has changed
dramatically in the past fewyears with cancer. I think the
oncologists are absolutelyswamped with cases, and so they
may not be seeing the patterns.We do see mainstream media
talking about the shift towardsa younger population with
aggressive cancers. We see a lotof talk about colon cancers

(15:36):
showing up in very young people.
Now they're talking aboutchanging the age of screening
colonoscopies from 50 down to asyoung as 30 and making this a
standard. They've done this withbreast cancers already. They've
moved the age of screeningmammograms from 50 to 40. And

(15:56):
again, really no one is talkingabout it. So there has been a
dramatic shift in the way canceris behaving, way cancer's
presenting, the rapid aggressiveprogression and really death
sometimes in a very, very quickperiod of time.
And I think, you know, I've beentalking about the vaccines as

(16:18):
being the potential cause ofthis for three years now, and
it's still not getting muchtraction.

Speaker 1 (16:24):
Unfortunately, isn't. And one thing also that I
noticed in this experience andso he was at the James Cancer
Center in Ohio, which is a youknow, it's a pretty well
recognized, very first classkind of facility. And a lot of
different teams came in and seehim, but one thing that I
noticed with this is that notonce did anybody say, here's why

(16:47):
we think he may have got here'swhy we may think he has cancer.
Like, no one looked at him andlooked at his lifestyle, looked
at there there was none none ofthat. It was almost as if he was
treated in the same way that assomeone who got hit by a car.
Was walking across the street,you got hit, you come in with
with some broken bones. It'slike it's like, it just happened
randomly. And then this isn't itlike, there was just there was

(17:10):
no questioning of that. Therewas no again, it's just as if,
like, oh, something very justthis random thing happened, and,
you know, your your father justhappened to be the unlucky
person that had this happen tohim. And that just to me also,
as I was reflecting on itafterwards, I think this
highlights another aspect ofjust where the medicine medical

(17:32):
system is here, is that there'sthere's no broader wisdom to it.
There's no bigger picture. Evenwe had all these different teams
coming in, and nobody could comein and say, okay, here's the big
picture of what's going on.We've got liver failure
happening. We've this happening.It was just these isolated teams
that would come in, and even ashe was, you know, what seemed to

(17:53):
be, you know, days within, youknow, kind of, you know, passing
as his condition worsened andworsened, you'd have one team
come in thinking, oh, well,maybe we should do a skin biopsy
to see what's happening there onhis chest.
And it's just like, like, do youdo you not see? Mean, it just
again, this is like one ofAmerica's probably most advanced
cancer centers, but it almostfelt like, as I was watching

(18:13):
these doctors, and now some ofthem, they they really cared and
that they put their heart intowhat they're doing, but it the
system is much bigger than that.It's like I was watching the
medicine being practiced in asecond or third world country.
If you look at the actual, like,protocols and just the lack of
information being given, it wasit was quite shocking.

Speaker 2 (18:31):
There has been a trend towards this sort of
guideline protocol drivenmedicine for the last two, three
decades, and I think it's onlygotten worse. And they've really
beaten the art out of thescience and art of medicine. It
didn't used to be just thescience of medicine, there

(18:53):
really was an art to it. That'swhy experience mattered, because
the experienced physician couldreally think outside the box,
rely on unusual cases they'veseen in the past, and all that
has been just drained out ofmedicine. It's really And
especially oncology, I find thatit is so guideline and protocol

(19:16):
driven.
And these guidelines, they'reset by the big medical
association, the Cancer Societyand so on. And what is in the
guidelines is really just asequence of big pharma drugs
that they want these doctors toadminister in a certain

(19:37):
sequence, and that's it. Really,there's no sort of inquiry,
let's look at the unusualfeatures of this case, why is it
happening, what's thebackground, what's the
environment, what's the diet,did the patient exercise or not?

(19:58):
What kind of drugs did theytake? What kind of vaccines did
they take?
There's no inquiry whatsoever.No attempt to find out what may
have caused the cancer. I thinkit's mostly assumed that these
are genetic anomalies that arisein cells or mutations. And

(20:19):
really the push is just And alot of cancer patients tell me
this, they just get pushed rightaway into chemo, chemo, surgery,
radiation, maybe some reallyexpensive drugs like
immunotherapy treatments,targeted therapy treatments. And
that's it, they get pushedimmediately into treatment.

(20:39):
And just a sequence of treatmentthat really maximizes money for
big pharma. And the cancer drugbusiness is the biggest profit
maker for big pharma. I'velooked into this and it is the
number one profit maker by far.Nothing else comes close. Heart
drugs don't come close, diabetesdrugs, blood pressure drugs,

(21:03):
blood clot drugs.
Cancer drugs are by far thebiggest moneymaker. And think
it's just become this sort ofmoney profit generation model
where the doctors are reallyjust pharma sales reps. I mean,
the oncologists, and many ofthem, like you said, they mean
well, they do care, there'soncology nurses that really

(21:25):
care, but they are in a system,they're really prisoners of a
system that makes them pharmasales reps instead of true
doctors.

Speaker 1 (21:37):
And I also noticed that most of the people that we
were dealing with, I would sayif I had say the average age not
not kinda nurses. The averageage of the doctors that we're
dealing with, if I had to guess,it would have been maybe late
30s or early 40s. There wasn't asingle instance of like what you

(21:57):
mentioned, the person who's seena lot and is coming in with that
wisdom and experience. Therewasn't the older person coming
in that's been, you know,treating seeing cancer for
thirty five years, coming in andsaying, well, look, I'm just
gonna talk to you. Here's what Isee.
That that didn't exist at all.It was younger people, and they
were very kind, and they weregood with their bedside manner,

(22:18):
actually much better than someof the older doctors I've dealt
with before when my brother wasgoing through cancer back in
2015. But there was no there wasnone of that, though. It was
just them coming in and kind ofworking through a sequence of
questions and not really givingmany answers, but they kept kind
of saying, Well, we need somemore data on that. We need some
more information.
We're gonna need to do anotherround of biopsies. It just,

(22:40):
anyway, it just, to me, I'venever felt the system was as
broken as what I felt when I wasactually inside of it watching.

Speaker 2 (22:51):
And this is what cancer patients tell me when
they come to me is they'reshocked at just how bad the
cancer system is. And I'mtalking about the best cancer
centers in The United States,whether it's the Mayo Clinic,
the Cleveland Clinic, theMemorial Sloan Kettering, MD
Anderson, John Hopkins, DanaFarber. I mean, and they're all
the same. It's this homogenousculture, this oncology culture

(23:19):
that is just it's in everycancer center. And patients see
just how broken it is and justhow bad it is.
And the senior members in this,and you've just alluded to this,
it's mostly young people thatare seeing the patients. Of
course, they don't have theexperience, sometimes they don't
have the expertise, but they'reat the front lines. What happens

(23:41):
is the older members of thesystem, if you've really sort of
ground your way through thesystem, you didn't get in
trouble with the medical boards,you didn't try to be creative or
bring the art of medicine intoit, well, you get promoted. And
so, you rise up the ranks ofadministration, you might become

(24:02):
the president of the hospital,you will certainly sit on the
boards of many pharmaceuticalcompanies. And so when you see
these senior oncologists, youknow, sit on 10 boards of
different pharmaceuticalcompanies.
They will be professors andchairs of oncology departments.
They will go to conferences.They will give presentations.
They will live a much moreluxurious lifestyle completely

(24:25):
disconnected from the frontlines of cancer care because
they were good boys and girls,they followed all the
guidelines, the protocols, theymade a ton of money for big
pharma, and so they getrewarded. There is this reward
system.
You get rewarded withpromotions, you get rewarded
with high positions. Of course,some of them will move into the

(24:46):
government. Doctor. Fauci, howmany patients do you think
Doctor. Fauci has seen in thelast twenty, thirty years as a
career bureaucrat?
We do see a lot of these doctorsbecome career bureaucrats
sitting at top positions inuniversities, hospitals, and so
on. So, yeah, it's tragic whathas happened. And really, this

(25:11):
assessment of cancer care beingalmost third world in The United
States, I'd even say it's worsethan that. Because what I see
the cutting edge investigationinto other treatments like the
repurposed drugs, likeivermectin, fimbenzol, and
mebendazole, that's happening inthe third world. Doctors in

(25:34):
Mexico are investigating.
They've actually did one of thebiggest research projects
looking at 28 different cancersand how they respond to
ivermectin, calculating thecancer cell deaths and so on,
Mexican doctors were doing it.Doctors in The Philippines were
pioneering the use of ivermectinin cancer while the pandemic was

(25:56):
raging because they noticed thatpatients who were taking a lot
of ivermectin because they werepanicked about COVID-nineteen
and were trying to protectthemselves while their tumors
were shrinking, and no one couldfigure out why because they
weren't getting chemotherapybecause they were in The
Philippines, they couldn'tafford chemotherapy. And so you
actually see a lot of progressbeing made in third world

(26:17):
countries, or what would bedescribed as third world
countries, because the doctorsare maybe forced by
circumstance, but they stillhave that. They still have that
passion, and they still havethat maybe they have the ability
to explore outside the confinesof the guidelines. So that's
really that's where the excitingresearch for me has come.

(26:39):
It's really been outside TheUnited States.

Speaker 1 (26:41):
And such an interesting point too, in saying
that it's actually that it'salmost worse than a third world
country from that perspectivethat it's like, yeah, maybe it
is, because if you think aboutit. Now, in terms of, say,
emergency medicine, you know, ifI get hit by a car, if I get in
a car accident, I've got apunctured lung, I'd rather not
go to a third world hospital in,you know, like Ecuador, right?

(27:04):
I'd prefer to go to a hospitalhere in America. Okay, there's
certain things like that. But interms of, you know, cancer and
these treatments, you're rightactually, it's almost as if the
closer a medical system is tothe the center of the heartbeat
of big pharma, the more it'sgonna just, in a lot of ways,
make sure the patient stays sickbecause a healthy cured person

(27:25):
is no longer a customer to them.
And so they're gonna they're notgonna be giving you ivermectin.
They're not gonna be talking toyou about Laetrile, you know, b
seventeen, you know, high dosevitamin c, any number of things.
When first heard, you know, kindof where my dad was at, was
thinking, gosh, maybe I can sendhim down to a clinic in Mexico.
We ran out of time for that, butI know that there's there's

(27:46):
clinics in Mexico you go, andthey'll give you the ivermectin,
or they'll do high dose Letrile.There's been amazing success
stories, and it just doesn'texist here.
But I wanna so I wanna pull upthis, recent study. Let me pull,
right here. Let's see. That yourecently had a post, on your
Substack about, because this isactually really significant. I

(28:07):
think you'll help us understandwhy it's so significant.
So, this says, you know, oneyear risks of cancers associated
with COVID-nineteen vaccination,a large population based cohort
study in South Korea. Now what'sinteresting is here is that
there's this little kind of notehere. This is a, you know,
scientific journal, publicationwebsite. They say, this kind of

(28:28):
little warning, readers arealerted that concerns with this
article have been raised withthe editors. Editorial action
will be taken as appropriateonce the concerns have been
fully investigated.
My my guess is people arereporting this because it's like
it doesn't fit into the overallnarrative. But, as far as what I
understand with this study isthey, over in South Korea, they

(28:49):
looked at almost eight and ahalf million individuals between
2021 and 2023, and analyzedwhich groups unvaccinated or
vaccinated were getting cancerat what rates. And so this is
seems to be a pretty significantand large sampling, but why
don't you walk us through whatthis kind of what this study

(29:10):
represents? Give us a littlebackground on it, and and why is
this important, what this isbeing presented, what
information it's showing us.

Speaker 2 (29:17):
So this is now the third large scale population
data paper that has come outshowing that the COVID
vaccinated are developing ahigher rate of cancers than the
unvaccinated. The first studywas actually from Japan. It was

(29:37):
about one to two years ago, andagain, a large population. And
they were showing that since therollout of the COVID vaccines,
that there has been an increasein cancers in the vaccinated
population, especially after therollout of the booster shots.
That there was so much pressureput on that paper that the

(29:57):
journal actually pulled thepaper.
More recently, there's been twostudies that have come out
showing, again, large populationstudies showing increased cancer
in the COVID vaccinated. Therewas an Italian study that came
out a couple of months ago withabout 300,000 people. They were
looking for something else, andthey incidentally discovered
this increase, and it was abouta twenty to thirty percent

(30:20):
increase of cancers in the COVIDvaccinated. And then this is the
most recent paper, this SouthKorean paper. And and you will
see the database is the Koreannational health database.
I mean, this is government data,8,400,000 people. This this is a
huge dataset, well analyzed. Andagain, this paper has come under

(30:42):
attack because it touches ataboo subject. And the taboo
subject is you are not allowedto show any association between
the COVID-nineteen vaccines andcancer. But in this paper, they
analyzed that entire population.
I believe three quarters of themwere vaccinated, one quarter

(31:04):
were unvaccinated. They matchedthe two groups, and they showed
that there was an increase incancers across the board.
Everything from twenty percentincrease for breast cancer up to
sixty nine percent increase forprostate cancer. There's an
increase in, you know, coloncancer, lung cancer, all of
these cancers that I've talkedabout as these most common turbo

(31:26):
cancers that I've been seeing inthe COVID vaccinated
populations, populations thatwere mandated, doctors, nurses,
teachers, you know, the police,firefighters, the military, the
mandates in the military. I'vebeen seeing a dramatic rise in
cancers in these populations,and this has been, you know,
breast cancers, colon cancers,lung cancers, and now we

(31:50):
actually have a very large studyout of South Korea that confirms
this.
And what they've shown is reallyjust an increase in cancers
after one year, and they lookedat the type of vaccines, and I
really want to draw yourattention to this because this
is really fascinating. This isactually the first evidence that
we have, that the DNA basedvaccines, AstraZeneca and

(32:14):
Johnson and Johnson, had anoverall forty seven increased
cancer risk, even higher thanthe Pfizer and Moderna mRNA
shots, which had about a twentypercent increased risk. And if
you were unlucky and you happento follow the advice of public
health officials who said youcan mix and match vaccines, so
you can get your Johnson andJohnson and follow that up with

(32:35):
a Pfizer booster shot, and maybeafter that another Moderna
booster shot. If you mixed andmatched vaccines, you had also
an increased cancer risksomewhere between the mRNA and
DNA shots, and it was about athirty four percent increased
risk in that study. And we hadour public health chief in
Canada said, mix and matchvaccines as you want, get

(32:57):
whatever vaccine you want, itdoesn't matter as long as you
take the vaccine.
And this was just absolutelyhorrible advice, medical
malpractice, and this alsocaused an increased risk cancer
and the vaccinated.

Speaker 1 (33:12):
So this is actually, I'm glad that you drew attention
to this because that's set to mewhen I was reading this article,
right? Where it's not just themRNA, because a lot of focus has
been on the mRNA technology, themRNA platform. And but here
though, and actually this is newto me, says cDNA were forty
seven percent higher overallrisk versus the mRNA were 20%

(33:35):
higher. So cDNA being theAstraZeneca and J and J. So I'm
quite familiar with mRNA becauseI've talked a lot about it with
guests like yourself and otherpeople that have explained it to
me.
But what are what is cDNA? Thisis this is, like, actually a
relatively new concept for me.

Speaker 2 (33:54):
So the the Johnson and Johnson and AstraZeneca
vaccines are DNA vector basedvaccines where the spike protein
sequence was entered into apiece of DNA and injected. Now
the problem with and this isactually fascinating because we

(34:15):
were always worried aboutintegration risks with these
vaccines, or with any geneticproduct, really. I mean, if
injecting genetic material thatshouldn't be injected, you know,
into a person, With the mRNAvaccines, there was always the
concern that there would be sortof a reverse transcription event

(34:37):
from the mRNA to the DNA, andthen that would get integrated
into, let's say, your cells onceyou got the vaccine. Now, that
was thought to be rare. It wasshown to be possible in a lab
experiment, but it was reallynever confirmed in humans.
And so mainstream medicine blewthis off and said, There's no

(34:59):
risk of integration. It can'tget into the nucleus, plus it's
mRNA. It can't integrate intoyour genome, so there's no risk
of genetic damage. But when youlooked at the Pfizer trial, they
specifically say, We did nottest for genotoxicity, and we
did not test forcarcinogenicity, because we

(35:20):
don't see how the mRNA could,you know, integrate into the
genome and cause cancer.

Speaker 1 (35:28):
Here's the hard truth
dollar loses half its buyingpower. That means a $100,000
savings account today could feellike $50,000 by 2031. And you
see it every time you fill upyour tank, buy groceries, or pay
the bills. Prices are up. Yourdollar's down.
But there's a simple way toprotect the value of your

(35:48):
savings with something real,something proven, gold, an asset
that holds its value over time.And that's why I trust Noble
Gold Investments. They make itsimple to protect your savings
with physical gold or silver. Nohigh pressure sales, no call
centers, just honest guidance,one on one support, and
transparent pricing. And rightnow, when you open a qualified

(36:11):
account, Noble Gold will sendyou a free 10 ounce silver
American flag bar as a thankyou.
So head over togoldwithseth.com, or call (626)
654-1906 today to learn more.Again, that's goldwithseth.com
or [phone]. Don't justprotect your wealth. Preserve

(36:34):
its power.

Speaker 2 (36:36):
That was until Kevin McKernan discovered that all the
mRNA vaccines are contaminatedwith DNA plasmids from the
manufacturing process, and theDNA plasmids have the spike
protein sequence in them, whichthen makes the mRNA. But they
also have within the spikesequence, they have the SV40

(36:57):
promoter sequence, and SV40 is acancer causing virus, simian
virus forty. And so this hasbeen a huge controversy. FDA and
Health Canada and theTherapeutic Goods Agency in
Australia have all come out andsaid, This is not a problem.
This is not going to cause anyclinical issues, but they didn't

(37:19):
do any testing.
And so a lot of focus has beenon mRNA vaccines and this DNA
contamination causing cancer,because this DNA could be easily
integrated into the genome. Infact, the SV40 sequence is
believed to actually make iteasier for that genetic material
to get into the nucleus, and sothat once it's once it's close

(37:43):
by in the nucleus, anintegration event can happen.
But with the DNA vector vaccine,that integration is much easier
because you don't have to gothrough that extra step of
converting, let's say, the mRNAto the DNA. You've just got the
DNA right there already. So it'sfascinating to me, this is the

(38:05):
first paper that has reallyshown an even higher risk of
cancer from the DNA vaccines.
And, you know, I want to tellyou, there's more of these
studies coming out. Just in thepast two months, there's been
five or six studies that havecome out looking at the
integration of the geneticinjections, the genetic vaccines

(38:29):
into the genome and causingcancer. There's the Italian
study of 300,000 people, theSouth Korean study of 8,400,000
people. There's now been a caseof an 85 year old Japanese woman
who had six mRNA vaccines. Afterher first three vaccines, which
were Pfizer, she developed abreast lump, she was diagnosed

(38:49):
with breast cancer, she had twomore vaccines, she had a
mastectomy, she was consideredcancer free, and then she had
her sixth vaccine, I believe itwas a Pfizer vaccine, And then
suddenly within a few weeks, shehas a new lump on her chest wall
because she she does.
She doesn't have her breastsanymore. New lump on the chest

(39:10):
wall. They biopsy it. They findout her breast cancer has come
back, but this time they stainit for the spike protein from
the vaccine, and they found thespike protein all over the
metastasis, the breast cancermetastasis. And they test for
nucleocapsid from the virus, nonucleocapsid.
So it couldn't have been thatshe got a COVID infection and

(39:32):
that lingering infection, thevirus is somehow integrated and
caused her cancer. So the that'sthis came out one month ago.
Proof that there was spikeprotein from the vaccine all
over her tumor recurrence. Thiswas after this was really the
sixth Pfizer shot caused hercancer to come back, and the
spike protein was in there,which means that there had been

(39:53):
integration into what became hercancer cells, her recurrent
cancer cells. We have anothercase that's been published in
the past month, literally withindays of this Japanese case.
It was a 31 year old woman whohad three Moderna vaccines and
developed an aggressive bladdertumor. The bladder tumor was
genetically sequenced and theresearchers found that it

(40:15):
contained an exact match, agenetic sequence that was an
exact match for the Pfizervaccine. Now it's interesting,
she had the Moderna vaccines.They found a match for the
Pfizer vaccine, but, you know,there are sequences that are the
same in both vaccines. And theyalso did further genetic
testing, they found that she hadall kinds of genetic

(40:38):
instabilities and damage thathad arisen after she had taken
these three mRNA vaccines.
Again, published just a monthago. Another paper that is being
attacked and and being pushedfor retraction is a paper that
sequenced the vaccine injuredindividuals. They took their
blood, they sequenced theirblood, and they found thousands

(40:59):
of genetic alterations that werecaused by the mRNA vaccines,
really, like, that it just doesall kinds of genetic damage that
they've been able to nowidentify by sequencing the blood
of a number of people who've hadthe vaccines. That paper is
being pushed for retraction. Andso there there's there's a heavy

(41:22):
push to, you know, really notlink not make any link between
the vaccines and cancer.

Speaker 1 (41:32):
Which is just it's just insane. If you think if you
really took a step back andlooked at it, it's like you you
could say, okay. Maybe they'redriven by profits or it's, you
know, the other motivators, butit's just evil. Like, if if you
were to say say you're from ahundred years ago and you could
look, you know, with the bird'seye view of what's happened in

(41:53):
our world, that we had this, youknow, pandemic that was really a
plandemic. It was, you know,planned, pre planned, hyped up.
It was a massive psychologicaloperation. It made people full
of fear, made people think thatthey couldn't hug their grandma
unless they got this vaccine. Somany people got the vaccines,
not because they were scared ofthe virus necessarily, but
because they wanted to protectothers around them. They thought

(42:16):
it was the responsible thing todo. Right?
So they're really they'replaying on that that compassion
or on that, you know, theAmerican spirit to do good for
your community. They're usingthat as a weapon. So that's,
like, kind of stage one, butthen they roll out this this
vaccine that, you know, I'vehad, doctor David Martin on here
multiple times where he's walkedthrough and shown they knew that

(42:38):
these ingredients to thevaccines were going to do what
they're doing now. And he said,look. Here's a study from, you
know, say, 2003 that shows thiscomponent is a known carcinogen.
Like, so it's like they theyknew that this would have this
effect. They still did it.Right? Now they're making tons
of money off of it, but thenthey're actually still, even to
this day, suppressinginformation, silencing, you

(43:02):
know, censoring medicaljournals. I I I got a strike on
YouTube.
I think I think I I well, Ithink I'm sure what I mentioned,
but talking about, I think,maybe it cancer or the vaccine.
Even briefly, I got my videopulled down on YouTube, you
know, it's probably two or threeweeks ago. So they're still
censoring. You know, you're inin Canada where you're at,
they're coming after you withthe entire weight of the federal

(43:23):
government to try to shut youdown. And it's just like again,
if you were looking at thesituation from a hundred years
ago, you would just think thatsociety has become so controlled
by evil that it's sickening.

Speaker 2 (43:38):
It's it's extremely evil. It's very corrupt. And I
and I think the the idea thatthe government, government
officials, you know, it's publichealth officials, all the way
to, you know, governorsthemselves who are pushing the
vaccines. Of course, everydoctor pushed the vaccine. The

(43:59):
media pushed the vaccines.
We had journalists push pushingthe vaccines.

Speaker 1 (44:03):
The United States Of America.

Speaker 2 (44:04):
The president pushing the vaccines, you know, you
know, threatening theunvaccinated with the winter of
death, which, of course, neverhappened. There's so much
liability, and there are so manypeople that are liable for their
actions, for pushing what was anexperimental pharmaceutical
product that turns out wascontaminated and is

(44:26):
carcinogenic. And imagine, youknow, I just think about the
liability of of anyone whopushed these these COVID
vaccines. And, you know, I canbring it back to the children
because if it had just stoppedat adults and they rolled out
these contaminated shots andsaid, look, this is an amazing,

(44:50):
you know, genetic product andyou can take it or not take it
if you want. We're not going togive it to kids.
And that's it, you know, like ifthey had at least not injected
kids, not injected pregnantwomen, if they made it optional,
said, look, you can take it. Youdon't have to take it. It's
totally up to you. I think wefirst of all, we wouldn't have
had any kids taking these cancercausing shots. We wouldn't have

(45:12):
had pregnant women having theproblems that they're having now
fertility issues.
And certainly most peopleprobably wouldn't have taken the
shots because there wascoercion. There was coercion to
really force people. And it waseverything from losing your job
to not being able to travel, tonot being able to play sports or
go to restaurants, to not beingable to see your elderly parents

(45:38):
in the hospital. I mean,decoration was on every possible
level, and it was apsychological operation to
attack people from as manypressure points as they possibly
could to get as many people totake these shots. But these
shots, and we've known about theDNA contamination for two years
now and the risk of increasedcancer.

(45:59):
In fact, I alerted the CanadianMedical Association back in
September 2022 that I sawvaccinated Canadian doctors
coming down with extremelyaggressive cancers, dying in
very, very short periods oftime. Now, I didn't call it
turbo cancer at the time. Youknow, I wasn't familiar with the
term. I called it veryaggressive cancers, and I was

(46:22):
called a Russian, you know,disinformation agent. This was
called misinformation.
They literally had meetings andconferences about how to fight
misinformation, like theinformation that I was trying to
share with the Canadian MedicalAssociation to try to save my
colleagues, my physiciancolleagues, and they buried it.

(46:43):
They've been burying it, youknow, for the last two-three
years. So it is very evil. Thisthis suppression of of the
scientific process and of datadata that is unequivocally
showing now increased cancer inthe vaccinated. You know, with
these these these databases ofmillions of people, 8,400,000

(47:05):
people, you know, from SouthKorea, that's going to be very
hard to sweep under the rug.
And more of these publicationsare being put out, so they won't
be able to suppress them all.They won't be able to retract
them all because you know, thereisn't that kind of influence out
there yet that you cancompletely suppress, you know,

(47:26):
science across the world. Andmany of us are trying to get
this information out, and it'sgoing to come like a tsunami. I
I see the number of publicationsabout the COVID vaccines and
cancer. It was a trickle in2023.
There were started to be a fewmore in 2024, case reports, more
cases, and really more papersabout potential mechanisms. I

(47:47):
published one of those papers onpotential mechanisms, the shift
to IgG4 antibodies. When youtake your booster shot, suddenly
your immune system starts toproduce IgG four antibodies,
which ignore the spike proteinand and the COVID virus, but
they also ignore cancer in yourbody. So you completely shut
down your cancer surveillance.One of the potential mechanisms,

(48:10):
you know, we're looking at.
And now in 2025, we're actuallystarting to see sequencing of
the genetic material in cancercells from the vaccines. We're
seeing sequencing or staining ofthe spike protein in the cancer
cells from the vaccines andthese large population studies
as well. They won't be able tosuppress it forever. But in the

(48:31):
meantime, millions of people aregetting cancer and many of those
cancers are are because of theCOVID vaccines, and no one is
really treating these patientsin any other different way other
than they did in the past. Andthese cancers are different.
They're behaving differently.They're more aggressive. The
patients have a much worseprognosis. And so if you take

(48:54):
the basic approach that everyoncologist is taking as they did
in the past that, oh, you know,we have, we'll give you chemo,
we'll give you radiation and youhave at least a few years that
we can give you. And the patientdies in a month or two, and the
families are completelydestroyed over it because
because the doctors didn't knowwhat they were dealing with.

Speaker 1 (49:13):
Exactly. Exactly. And it's it also seemed that as part
of this, you know, you mentionedthey're not kind of addressing
how quickly these these thingsare happening. Right? And
they're I noticed that as well.
It's like they they didn't seemto be in any rush. Whereas I was
seeing day to day that my dadwas declining so quickly, and
I'm thinking, If I extrapolatethis information, it's like,

(49:36):
he's gonna be gone in a week,and and he was. But it's like,
you know, I'm seeing thisprogression, but it's like that
they weren't there was no senseof urgency. And maybe, you know,
maybe they knew. Maybe and I wastalking to my wife about this.
It's like, maybe they're they'reso used to seeing these cancers,
they know when they they knowwhen it's this kind of a cancer.

(49:56):
And it's like, well, you know,they're not gonna come out and
tell us, look, there's no hope.And we've seen the same thing
happening over and over again.It's like, maybe they kind of
led us along thinking, okay,maybe there's something we can
do, maybe there's something wecan do until it was just too
late. But yeah, it was, youcould just see that it was like,
it was as if they didn't knowwhat they were actually handling

(50:16):
here.
Was like it was almost like, youknow, you see these movies of
these new outbreaks, these newdisease outbreaks, you know,
these kind of movies about, youknow, sci fi or zombie stuff.
And and at first, like, we'venever seen this before. It's
it's it's mutating. It'smultiplying. It felt like it was
that kind of an environment.
One question I have for you,because I know that obviously
you are an expert in helpingpeople understand the mechanisms

(50:39):
that are causing the cancers,and you've been documenting
this. You've also been treatinga lot of people. So I have two
things I want to hit on as we'rekind of rounding out the second
half of this. One being the whatyou're seeing working in terms
of treatments, which I think isreally important for people to
help them kind of lessen thatfear. But before we get into
that, I want to ask you, ifsomeone let's just say someone

(51:01):
got the COVID shot, say they gota J and J, and they got one
booster, and say, they're nowstarting to see kind of the
early signs of cancer, or maybethey're not, Have you see have
you seen any any indication thatwhatever damage kind of either
current or kind of potentiallyto be kind of unleashed in the

(51:23):
future that is there from thesevaccines in someone's body, can
they undo that?
It's like, or if someone got thevaccine and two boosters, are
they kind of a ticking timebomb? Or is there, are there
things that people can do to, tomaybe undo some of this and
maybe to help correct? Because II because I think that it look.
I didn't get any of thevaccines, nor did my my wife or

(51:46):
my, you know, my my my mom andand, you know, obviously, my my
girls didn't get any. I don'thave that worry about thinking
that there's a lot of peoplethat are, you know, watching and
following you or watching thesekinds of shows that maybe they
got the vaccine in one booster.
And now they're probably lookingat this thinking, like, oh my
gosh. Like, when's it gonnahappen to me? Like so are there
any mechanisms or ways thatpeople can be more preventative

(52:08):
with trying to stop or undowhat's what's happening?

Speaker 2 (52:12):
There there are. And and the way I would approach
this is my advice to anyone whotook one or more shots is that,
first of all, I mean, you don'tpanic because there are many
situations where, you know,people who took their shots,
maybe the genetic material wasbroken down, maybe there was

(52:34):
very little genetic material andyour body has dealt with it, has
handled it, has gotten rid ofthe foreign components, and you
might be fine. So it's importantnot to panic. I think that
that's the first thing. Then Iwould be more proactive than
reactive.
I wouldn't wait until I startseeing symptoms or until I, you

(52:57):
know, I start getting sickbecause some of these effects,
even the long term effects cancome on very rapidly. So, you
know, if if the vaccine has madeyou prone to clotting, you don't
want to wait until you have astroke or until you have a heart
attack and then deal with itafterwards. Or you don't want to
wait until you have thatdiscovery of the the heart

(53:18):
damage, the myocarditis, whichagain could lead to, let's say,
a cardiac arrest. You don't wantto wait until you get a cancer
diagnosis. And and so mysuggestion would be to look for
labs, look for doctors and lookfor labs that could actually
test whether you're making spikeprotein still, even though you
haven't had any booster shots ina while.

(53:41):
Check if you're making spikeprotein, check if you have
elevated spike antibodies. Andand so people who have had, you
know, the vaccine linger intheir system and then do damage
down the road, they do haveelevated spike protein in their
blood. They do have very, veryhigh levels of spike protein

(54:02):
antibodies.

Speaker 1 (54:03):
Sorry. Is that I want you to continue with that, but
is so is that one of the mainindicators? Like, that's one of
the things that shows you, like,is it the spike protein
antibodies? And is that the mainmechanism that's leading to the
cancer? So you can actuallydetect and see where those
levels are at within you to, Iguess, have an idea of what risk
you're at?

Speaker 2 (54:24):
Yeah. So there was a paper that came out about a
year, year and a half ago thatlooked at young people who
developed myocarditis, and theytested them. Or they tested a
group of young people, includingpeople who had young people who

(54:45):
had developed myocarditis. Theones who had developed
myocarditis had elevated spikeprotein circulating in the
systems in their system. Theones who didn't develop
myocarditis but did have thevaccines didn't have any spike
in their system.
So the spike protein is theagent that's causing a lot of
the damage. And so if you canget in touch with one of these

(55:06):
doctors that are, you know,working on these tests, spike
protein tests, it's not widelyavailable yet. That's that's the
problem is that it's not thatyou can walk into any family
doctor's office and ask for aspike protein test. They'll look
at you like, you know, you'refrom another planet. You do have
to find a doctor who has an ideaof what's going on and can maybe

(55:27):
get you connected with a labthat can do the test.
It can be done. It's notexpensive. That's what I would
be looking at. Look at becausethat will tell you if you're not
producing spike, you really havea lot less to worry about. And
you don't really have to do aspike detox because if your body
is not producing the spike atall, that may not be an issue

(55:48):
for you.
But, you know, try to get atleast one of these tests. It's
it's a lot easier to get a aspike antibody tests than an
actual spike test. But there's alot of groups that are working
on the spike test. It will beout in the next six months, six
to twelve months. And as we goforward, it will be more widely
available.
This type of testing. Now, ifyou are producing spike or you

(56:11):
have high levels of spikeantibodies, then I think you
need to take some kind of stepsto detoxify. We don't know yet
if it's possible to clear thisentirely from your system, but
you can take supplements andthings that can break down the
spike protein like nattokinase,serrapeptase, lumbrokinase,

(56:34):
bromelain, which is an enzymederived from pineapple,
nattokinase derived fromfermented soybeans. So you can
take these on a regular basis totry to get rid of some of the
spike protein in your system.Doctor.
Peter McCullough had sort offamously published his, you
know, spike proteindetoxification protocol, and it
does work in some people. Youcan take ivermectin or

(56:59):
quercetin. There's some othersupplements that will bind the
spike protein to prevent it fromdoing damage. And I think
fasting is very important if ifyou're in pretty good health,
you can do a prolonged fast,whether it's a three day water
fast, five day water fast, sevenday water fast, and the body
will actually start to clearsome of these spike damaged

(57:20):
cells from the system. Maybeyour immune system cells have
been damaged.
They're expressing spikeprotein. The body will actually
delete those, remove them, andyou will produce new stem cells
and and you will renew yourimmune system. Fasting actually
renews the immune system. And ifyou do it several times, you can
renew your immune system almostentirely. So these are things

(57:43):
you can do.
These are things, you know,within people's control. But I I
would really advise people to bemore proactive with their health
rather than reactive and waitinguntil that heart attack, until
that stroke. You really don'twant to be dealing with the
situation, you know, if the oncethe damage has been done.

Speaker 1 (58:03):
That makes that makes sense. That's actually really
helpful. It kind of takes itfrom that kind of shadowy, you
know, what if, what if to, okay,well, like, I can beat, have a
test done, look at the spikeantibody spike levels, then you
can kind of go from there. Interms of, obviously, the

(58:23):
mechanisms of if someone doeshave cancer, you know, whether
it's, you know, a small lumpthey're worried about, or stage
four, you know, that'smetastasized. I know there's,
you know, I've, I've focused alot on different methods that
are being used to verysuccessfully heal cancer, from,
you know, red light therapy,which my own wife, after the
birth of my second daughter, hada large lump in her thyroid.

(58:46):
And she did a handful of things.Actually, was a red light that I
think made the biggestdifference. And it was like,
basically gone within two monthsof consistent red light usage. I
know that Laetrile, you know,B-seventeen, amygdalin, those
are also, you know, key inhelping to be proactive and
helping also to kind of attackthose cancer cells. You are, I'd
say, one of the pioneers in,some of the medications, know,

(59:09):
ivermectin, fenbendazole,menbendazole, you know the word,
sorry, I'm kind of stuttering abit.
So what are you seeing assuccessful ways that people are
able to treat cancer? Like, aresome of the the, I guess, what's
some of the data that you'reseeing as being someone that is
actually, you know, spending alot of your time actually
treating these turbo cancers?And what results are you seeing?

(59:32):
And what do you rec what can yourecommend based on that
information?

Speaker 2 (59:36):
I can tell you that mainstream oncologists will not
look at your vaccine status.They may not even ask for it.
They will certainly not considerit in any of their treatment
plans. So whether you'reunvaccinated or whether you've
had 10 COVID vaccines andbooster shots, if you get
cancer, they're treating you thesame way. And I think this is a

(59:57):
big problem because the cancersin people who have been
vaccinated are much moreaggressive.
You have less time. You don'thave the luxury of time, which
is what sometimes oncologistsrely on. You know, if you have
even a young person who's comesin with a stage one breast
cancer, well, no one's going torush. The oncologists are not

(01:00:18):
going to rush. Maybe you wait afew months before you get your
surgery.
Maybe you have to wait four orfive, six months until you have
your lumpectomy. No one'srushing in these situations when
maybe they should be. And so theoncologists are not recognizing
the fact that the cancers andthe vaccinated are much more

(01:00:38):
aggressive. So it's that muchmore important for people to
take matters into their ownhands. They can work with the
oncologist, but do additionalthings to to really give
yourself a much better chance ata better outcome.
And so what I'm seeing is forthe past year and a half, I've

(01:00:59):
been working with antiparasiticsthat are being repurposed for
cancer. This is ivermectin,mebendazole, and fenbendazole.
And the reason is becausethere's a big body of research.
There are over 400 publishedpapers on ivermectin in cancer.
There are over two fortypublished papers on mebendazole

(01:01:21):
in cancer.
In fact, Johns Hopkins quietlysecured a patent in 2021 on
mebendazole for treatment incancer, specifically the most
aggressive cancer, which isglioblastoma, brain cancer,
extremely aggressive cancer.Johns Hopkins has the patent.
They are also running quietlyseveral clinical trials with

(01:01:43):
mebendazole in cancer. There'scolon cancer, gastric cancer and
brain cancer, includingchildren, children with brain
cancers as well. So this is notfringe.
This is not something that isfar out. There's actually real
science behind it, patentsbehind it. And when you search a

(01:02:06):
lot of the AIs, for example,Perplexity AI, and you ask what
are the most promisingrepurposed drugs for terminally
ill cancer patients today, itwill give you in its search in
the top three, you will getivermectin as number one,
mebendazole and fendazole.There's other antiparasitics
like hydroxychloroquine will bein the top 10. You will have

(01:02:29):
curcumin in the top 10.
You will have EGCG, which isfrom green tea extract in the
top 10 resveratrol in the top 10Metformin, which is a diabetes
drug, but also has anticanceractivity in the top 10 as well.
And what I have found workingwith these antiparasitics is
that there is a benefit topatients in at least seventy

(01:02:53):
five percent of the cases. Nowmost patients come to me very,
very late. They come whenthey've exhausted all other
options. They've put their bodythrough multiple rounds of
chemotherapy, radiation,immunotherapy, everything has
failed.
The doctor has told them we havenothing left to offer you. You
have three to six months tolive. And I get a lot of those
situations. So patients come tome very, very late. I wish most

(01:03:16):
patients would come to me earlywhen it's stage one or stage
two, even stage three.
And some do, you know, I I I doget breast cancer patients, for
example, who have large tumors,but they're waiting, they cannot
get surgery. So they're waiting,while they're waiting, they take
ivermectin, mebendazole andtheir tumor shrinks by half, or
it shrinks by two thirds. Sooverall, about seventy five

(01:03:38):
percent of patients have somekind of a benefit. It's not
always tumor shrinkage.Sometimes we can just stabilize
the tumor in brain cancers.
For example, we can stabilizethe tumor so it doesn't regrow
after the surgeon has taken mostof it out or that the tumor
doesn't come back. Braincancers, the tumors have a
propensity to come back veryoften skin cancers, they come

(01:03:58):
back bladder cancers. They comeback all the time, every three,
four months when the patient hasa cystoscopy, there's a new
tumor there. Theseantiparasthetics can stop those
tumors from coming back, forexample. Now you can take these
antiparasthetics likeivermectin, mebendazole,
fendazole.
You can take them with anyconventional cancer treatments.
As Obamacare or as Obama toldus, if you like your doctor, you

(01:04:21):
can keep your doctor, right? Soif you like your oncologist, you
can keep your oncologist and youcan work with your oncologist
and you can take theseantiparasitics with any chemo,
with any radiation therapy, withany immunotherapy, hormone
therapy, targeted therapy, youname it, you don't have to give
anything up. It's not a eitheror, you know, you don't have to

(01:04:43):
say, well, now I can't do chemoor I can't do a clinical trial
because I'm taking ivermectin.You can always do combination
treatments.
And I have found over the pastyear and a half that the
combination treatments tend tobe the most powerful and
patients tend to have the mostdramatic outcomes. Now, we're
dealing with, for example, stagefour pancreatic cancer or stage
four ovarian cancer, which arein many cases, death sentences.

(01:05:07):
I've had many of those cancerpatients go from stage four to
cancer free with combinationtreatments, chemo, ivermectin,
mebendazole, maybe somesupplements like curcumin, EGCG,
keto diet or low carb diet, alsovery important to fix your diet
so that you're not feeding thecancer with sugar, throw in some

(01:05:30):
prolonged fasting, a three dayor five day water fast, reboot
your body, clear some cancercells, stimulate and regenerate
your immune system so it fightsthe cancer better. And these
combination treatments that I'vebeen helping cancer patients
with, we've seen some very, verydramatic results. You know,
patients going from hospice tobeing cancer free, patients

(01:05:51):
going from having an appointmentfor euthanasia in Canada.
We have medical assistance indying or MAID. So some cancer
patients, they get theirappointment with their
oncologist and they get anappointment for euthanasia. And
I've had one patient who hadthat appointment and then few
months later became cancer free.

Speaker 1 (01:06:11):
Incredible. It's, yeah, you know, saying too
little too late, right? It'seasy to look back and say, gosh,
what could I have done? But, youknow, there's a certain way
things happen and that's it. So,as we're we're wrapping up, I
wanna well, first question is,if someone wants to get ahold of
you, say someone has cancer, arelative, I know that you're

(01:06:34):
very busy and and, know, butyou're working to expand your
ability to help people.
How can they get ahold of you?

Speaker 2 (01:06:41):
So one place, easy place to start is my Twitter
account or X accountMacusMedicine. And I post a lot
of testimonials there. I alsopost information, you know, the
success stories. There's a lotthat can be learned from the
success stories because I sharesuccess stories and emails from

(01:07:01):
patients themselves. You know, Ido very little write up or or
editorializing it's really fromthe patient's own words.
And then I would really directpeople to my substack
macsw.substack.com. Now mysubstack has now climbed to the
top three of all healthsubstacks. And so it is very

(01:07:24):
popular and I've got over 2,000articles including hundreds and
hundreds of testimonials. Andso, you know, if you can't get a
hold of me for a consult orlet's say, you know, a consult
is out of your rangefinancially, there is an
absolute wealth of informationon my substack. And again,
there's a lot that you can learnfrom all the various success

(01:07:47):
stories that I've been posting.
I've been trying to post atleast one success story every
single day because we have thatmany and and there's hundreds
that I probably won't even beable to post. But I try to get
those stories out there. If youwant to email me, you can email
me at infomacsw dot com againinfomacsw dot com. We are
absolutely swamped with requeststhough, and it really have been

(01:08:10):
for the entire year of 2025. Weget close to about a thousand
emails a day.
I have a very dedicated teamthat helps me, but you know, I'm
really looking forward to mayberunning a proper clinic, a large
clinic hiring and reallycollaborating with more like

(01:08:32):
minded doctors, like mindednurses, other healthcare
professionals. And I'm lookingat Florida. I'm looking at
Florida as being the placethat's leading the way in the
area of repurposed drugs likeivermectin, mebendazole and
fandenzil. What's fascinating isthat in the past month or two,
Florida Governor Ron DeSantishas committed at least

(01:08:56):
$60,000,000 to cancer researchinvolving ivermectin and other
repurposed drugs. And that can,I think, go up to about
$140,000,000 just for cancerresearch?
I think he's very excited by thepossibilities offered by
repurposed drugs. FloridaSurgeon General, Doctor. Joseph
Ladepoel is also on board, veryexcited about this, very eager

(01:09:18):
to learn more and to getresearch going in this area. So
I'm really looking at Florida asthe place that I'm going to be
doing a lot of work the nearfuture. And leading this, I
think this is a revolution incancer care.
And you know, I think it is thefuture of cancer care because

(01:09:39):
there's a lot of focus right nowon what is the next big money
making drug in cancer. And youwill see Larry Ellison, CEO of
Oracle, was at White Housegiving a presentation and
telling the world that him andhis other AI tech bros are going
to solve cancer. They're goingto invest $500,000,000,000 so
that we can have AI driven, AIgenerated mRNA cancer vaccines.

(01:10:05):
And that is just absolutenonsense. The mRNA technology is
broken.
It's dangerous. It doesn't work.It's actually causing these
aggressive cancer cases. So nowthey want to repurpose it and
treat, you know, cancer with thecancer that they caused with the
same type of technology. But whyare they doing it?
Because they will charge about$500,000 per treatment. An mRNA

(01:10:28):
cancer vaccine is not one littleinjection that you go get at
your doctor. It's planned to beabout 20 or 30 injections in
total. I think 10 of them aremRNA injections. 20 of them are
Keytruda injections.
Keytruda is an establishedcancer drug, so they want to
combine the mRNA cancer vaccinewith an established drug,

(01:10:49):
because that's how they're goingto hide the fact that the mRNA
cancer vaccine doesn't work. Andit's going be the other drug
doing all the heavy lifting. Ofcourse, Keytruda sets you back
about $100 $200,000 per year ifyou're getting that drug
already. And so it's a scam, butit's a profitable scam. And we
saw how profitable the COVIDvaccine scam was.

(01:11:11):
Pfizer recorded over$100,000,000,000 in revenue in
year 2022 and 2023. It washundreds of billions of dollars
were made on the COVID vaccinescam. No one was held
accountable. No one waspunished. Now millions of people
are getting cancer.
This doesn't, of course, includeall the people that have gotten
autoimmune diseases and bloodclots and heart damage and

(01:11:32):
neurological damage from theshots. And all these companies
that were selling and made theirmoney on the vaccines, they've
all shifted and put their focuson cancer. So now when you look
up what are the top 10 US cancerdrug makers by revenue, Pfizer
comes in at number four, Merckcomes in with number six. Merck

(01:11:53):
had a patent on ivermectin, butthey disavowed ivermectin during
the pandemic. And now they'reactually in partnership with
Moderna working on the mRNAcancer vaccine.
AstraZeneca no. Sorry. Johnsonand Johnson comes in at number
seven, cancer drugmaker now, andAstraZeneca comes in at number
nine. So all of these vaccinemakers have completely shifted

(01:12:15):
their business model, and nowthey're going to be making money
on the other end of this fromthe vaccine injuries. They're
gonna be making money on cancer.

Speaker 1 (01:12:23):
Okay. It's just crazy. It's it's yeah. It's just
a sign of times, I guess, ofwhere we're at. But it also
there is hope in all thisbecause I think a lot of people
are seeing through it and arelooking for alternative
solutions.
And And I'd be so excited tohear the news that you're
opening a clinic up in Florida.That'd be great. Especially if

(01:12:47):
you can get some money coming infrom the state as you deserve
it. So, Doctor. Maccas, thankyou again for, giving us your
time today.
I'll make sure that your links,your Twitter and your Substack
links are in the descriptionbelow. And yeah, yeah, just, you
know, thank you for doing whatyou're doing. It's been, it's
been good talking to you today.It's been difficult. It's not

(01:13:09):
not easy conversation for metoday.
But I'm glad that we had thisdiscussion. So thank you.

Speaker 2 (01:13:15):
Well, thank you for having me on. And and really
thank you for for for for givinghope. I think this this, you
know, this information, and Iand I know it's it's it's
depressing and sometimes it'sbut I think there's there's a
lot of hope here as well. AndI'm I'm seeing, you know, a lot
of benefit in patients who, youknow, who've had the vaccines,

(01:13:40):
they had cancer and they areseeing incredible results. You
know, some of them are cancerfree now.
And so I really want to leave onthat message, have hope, have
faith, and just don't give up.Keep fighting. And I think there
is a lot of hope on the horizon.

Speaker 1 (01:14:00):
I agree. I agree. Well, thank you again. It's it's
always nice to speak with you.Thank you so much.

Speaker 2 (01:14:06):
Thank you.

Speaker 1 (01:14:08):
Do you keep hearing more cases of your friends and
family getting a lifethreatening diagnosis of cancer,
or perhaps it's even happened toyou? Well, the unfortunate
reality is that turbo cancer isnow a worldwide epidemic. But
the question we should all beasking is, what can I do about
it? Well, the good news is thatthere are therapies that are
working and proven in thousandsof clinical studies. So one

(01:14:31):
study on PubMed found thatbreast cancer's growth rate
dropped by forty percent in onlytwenty four hours after using
red light therapy.
Another study on prostate cancerfound that forty nine percent of
the over four hundred maleparticipants went into remission
with just one red light therapysession. A lymphoma cancer pilot
study showed that three out ofthree of the patients became

(01:14:51):
cancer free. It soundsunbelievable, but it's true. And
you can discover all thisinformation and more in a
special training program frominvestigative medical journalist
Jonathan Otto, who will show youhow you can use red light,
including the specificwavelengths as proven by studies
for all different types ofcancer as well as tinnitus,

(01:15:11):
weight loss, wrinkles, acne,dementia, cognitive function,
depression, anxiety, long COVID,jab injuries, stem cell
regeneration, lower back pain,sciatica, the whole array of
autoimmune diseases, includingthyroid disease, arthritis,
lupus, and gut disorders, and somuch more. In fact, you can get
your own in home red lighttherapy device risk free as

(01:15:34):
you're completely covered by asixty day money back guarantee
and a three year warranty.
On top of that, you've gotfinancing options so you can get
it now and pay later. And thebest thing folks is that this
technology has become amazinglyaffordable. It's way less than
you'd with the smaller unitscosting only a couple $100. So
just go to myredlight.com tomake sure you don't miss out

(01:15:55):
this free special trainingprogram and claim the extremely
limited time bonus gifts anddiscounts, which include an
additional 10% off with thecoupon code Seth. Again, go to
myredlight.com to get access tothe free training.
And if you make a purchase, makesure you use a promo code Seth,
that's s e t h, to get anadditional 10% off the already

(01:16:15):
heavily discounted red lighttherapy products.