• THANKSGIVING SALE: 15% Off @ LifeGivingStore.com & SuchLabs.com Till November 28th With Coupon Code: THANKS2022
    Click Here For Lifegivingstore.com
    Click Here For SuchLabs.com
  • Due to excessive bot signups along with nefarious actors we are limiting forum registration. Keep checking back for the register link to appear. Please do not send emails or have someone post to the forum asking for a signup link. Until the current climate changes we do not see a change of this policy. To join the forum you must have a compelling reason. Letting us know what skills/knowledge you will bring to the community along with the intent of your stay here will help in getting you approved.

Using Urea And Creatine As A Cancer Treatment

Rachel

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
181
Location
San Antonio, Texas USA - for now
I was looking for more specifics on urea and ran across this...

Using Urea and Creatine as a Cancer Treatment

by Prof. Evangelos D. Danopoulos, M.D.

In 1987 in the Cancer Victors Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3 and in the Townsend Letter for Doctors (Feb./Mar. 1988) was published my article "The Possibility of Treating Malignancies with Urea."

Since this article was published, experience has led me to change my concept somewhat and to greatly improve my method of treating malignancies.

In the previous article I said that urea taken by mouth, once it has entered the blood circulation, is quickly excreted by the kidneys in urine. It is for this reason that urea, when administered intravenously, cannot reach organs with a high enough concentration to have anti-cancer effect.

Taken orally, urea reaches the liver via the portal vein in a high enough concentration to have a most helpful effect on a primary liver malignancy or on a liver metastasis. After passing through the liver, urea comes to other organs in too low a concentration to have anti-cancer effect, so that concentration of urea in organs other than the liver has to be enriched by other means.

During the winter of 1987-1988, in treating a patient with pancreatic cancer with metastases to the para-aortic lymph nodes, I was astonished to observe that his blood urea (BU) was in the range of 70 to 90 mg. % even though he was receiving the small daily dose of 20 to 30 grams a day of urea.

[NOTE: In Greece, laboratories measure Blood Urea (BU) rather than BUN, as in the USA. This accounts for the different numbers; a BU of 78-85 mg.% is equal to the American BUN of 35-45 mg.% . All numbers in this account are in BU not BUN, so please adjust accordingly.]

This high blood urea was unexpected. The patient had no sign of renal insufficiency, which meant that contrary to my previous thinking, he was excreting urea via the kidneys slowly. To my thinking this meant that the malignancy was making his kidneys excrete urea more slowly.

It was further noted that BU increased or decreased over a period of a few days, depending probably on the quantity of proteins and fluids of the food the patient takes. It was found that to maintain the constant high level of blood urea of 75 to 85 mg. %, it was needed to test for BU every 5 to 8 days and to change the dosage of urea to maintain a constant level of BU in the range of 75-85 mg. %.

When the patient was maintained in the level of BU of 75 to 85 mg. %, he showed vast improvement. This patient had unbearable abdominal pain as the enlarged lymph nodes pressed the nerves near the vertebral column. Before being treated with urea, he required morphia three times a day, however after taking urea and when his BU was maintained in the range of 75 to 85 mg. % his pain decreased to where he could get by with only 2 to 4 tablets of paracetamol a day.

If however his BU dropped to under the range of 75 to 85 mg. %, or got up over this, then he again suffered intense abdominal pain. This is the second very significant and surprising observation made during the treatment of this patient. There is namely an active level (AL) of BU, which must be kept constant during treatment, in order to achieve good results.

This same observation was confirmed with two other cancer patients suffering severe pain. It was found that patients reacted in different ways, that some excreted urea at a more rapid rate than others and that the same patient would excrete urea at different rates as days went by.

However, while the dosage of urea needed to maintain BU in the range of 75 to 85 mg. % varied from patient to patient and with one patient from time to time, when the active level of 75 to 85 mg. % was maintained, the patient had relief from pain. Note in the USA, BUN (blood urea nitrogen) is measured rather than BU and the proper range of BUN is 35 to 40 mg. %.

The story of my use of urea in the treatment of cancer began in 1954 when I discovered that urine has anti-cancer effect. After long research I discovered that the anti-cancer agent in urine is urea. In 1969, I began to treat cancer patients with oral urea with notable success in primary liver cancer or more often with liver metastases. Also it was soon found that injections of 15% to 50% urea in normal saline into and around skin cancers and malignant breast tumors were most effective.

In the meantime I had tried many other substances without effect. In 1980 I used for the first time creatine hydrate instead of creatinine which is very quickly excreted by the kidneys. Creatine is, on the contrary, very slowly excreted and then as creatinine to which it has been changed.

My first use of creatine hydrate as a monotherapy was with a patient with five small lung metastases from a sarcoma in his left thigh. After one month of treatment of this patient with 25 grams a day of creatine hydrate taken per os, all these small metastases vanished. They had been from 6 to 15 mm. in diameter.

This confirmed in my mind that creatine hydrate, like urea, has a marked anticancer effect.

Notation: Urea is water soluble. Creatine hydrate is not so. If 25 grams of creatine hydrate are put in a quart of water and quart is placed in a half gallon container, then the half gallon container can be shaken with vigor and a portion poured out and drunk. In this manner the creatine will act the same as if it were water soluble.

Next I treated two far advanced cancer patients with 25 grams a day of creatine hydrate per os. One had extensive adenocarcinoma metastases in both lungs. The other had extensive lung metastases from a primary sarcoma in a thigh. Neither of these patients were benefited by creatine hydrate as a monotherapy.

Then, with the knowledge that both urea and creatine hydrate have anti-cancer effect, I used the combination of urea and creatine hydrate in treating the aforementioned pancreatic cancer patient. I gave this patient sufficient urea to maintain BU in the range of 75 to 85 mg. %.

Then I added oral creatine hydrate to the treatment starting with 10 grams a day. Again keeping BU at 75 to 85 mg. % with oral urea, I increased the daily dosage of creatine hydrate to 25 grams a day. With this treatment the patient showed many signs of regression of his cancer. His appetite improved, his pain decreased, and his erythrocytes sedimentation rate fell from 110/1 hr. to 47/1 hr.

Then to test how effective was this combination treatment, I discontinued the use of urea for four days. His BU decreased to 45 mg. % and his condition deteriorated. On adding urea to his treatment to achieve BU of 75 to 85 mg. % again....his condition once again improved.

Then I withdrew creatine hydrate from treatment for nine days. Again the patient showed a deteriorated condition. When I resumed treatment with creatine hydrate, I used a dosage of 40 grams a day, then slowly decreased it back to 25 grams a day.

Thereafter, on enough urea to maintain BU at 75 to 85 mg. % and 25 grams of creatine hydrate a day, this patient showed progressive and gratifying improvement. It is to be regretted that five months and 11 days after the beginning of combined urea and creatine hydrate treatment, this patient suffered a fatal episode of myocardial infarction.

I then obtained the same good results with this combined treatment of urea and creatine hydrate with 10 more patients with cancers of various locations in the body. These cases will be published in a medical journal.

I will note here that unlike the two above mentioned patients where creatine hydrate was used as a monotherapy, the patients treated with the combination of urea and creatine hydrate all showed improvement. If the patient suffers severe pain, then the patient can understand the benefit of this treatment as the pain decreases.

In cancer patients where only the liver is involved with malignancy, the test for BU or BUN is not needed because the liver always gets a proper concentration of urea as urea taken orally goes via the portal vein to the liver.

However, where there is concern that there may be metastases in other parts of the body, then it would be well to do BU or BUN testing every 10 days and to maintain BU to 75 to 85 mg. %. In treating liver cancer only, 14 grams a day of urea are needed, along with 21 grams of creatine hydrate.

This combination need be taken every hour and a half throughout the waking day. One suggestion is this. If urea alone is to be taken, put the urea, 14 grams or how many is to be used in a quart of water. If treating liver cancer also with creatine hydrate, then 21 grams of creatine hydrate is also added to this quart of water.

With the quart in a half gallon container, one can shake the container with vigor, then 1/7th of a quart is poured out and drunk every hour and a half.

The same is true when 25 grams of creatine hydrate are being used.

In cases of severe liver cancer with great enlargement of this organ, we can increase the dose of urea only a little, from 14 grams to 18 grams a day and the dose of creatine hydrate to 25 to 30 grams a day.

In case of liver metastases when the primary cancer (of the pancreas i.e.) is not removed, we cannot increase the dose of urea to obtain the AL because the liver cannot tolerate large doses of urea. Therefore we give 14 to 18 grams of urea and 25 to 30 grams of creatine hydrate.

Creatine hydrate is more slowly excreted than urea, hence there is no need to measure the blood level of creatine as in the case of the need to measure BU or BUN in order to keep a constant AL.

The question arises, will the combination of urea and creatine hydrate be beneficial in the treatment of bone metastases? If the cancer is in the bone marrow which has a good supply of blood (myeloma), then good results are possible. Bone metastases are irrigated poorly by blood and the results of treatment with the combination of urea and creatine hydrate may be poor.

A vast majority of deaths from solid malignant tumors results from distant metastases. In any form of cancer therapy, it is of utmost importance that metastases are not permitted to form. I am certain that, after surgery, to excise a primary malignant tumor, the taking of the combination of urea and creatine hydrate for six months or more, while maintaining BUN in the range of 35 to 40 mg. %, will abolish the very small undetectable metastases that so often later grow into the large metastases that kill so many patients. The same is true with the possible remnant cancer cells from the primary tumor after it has been excised.

In conclusion, both urea and creatine hydrate have been demonstrated as having anti-cancer effect. Both are remarkably non-toxic. Both are non-drugs that require no prescriptions. I have used urea in water orally in treating liver cancer or liver metastases since 1969 and it has been ever so effective. Also urea in normal saline injected into skin cancers has been just as effective.

By the use of the combination of urea and creatine hydrate it has been possible to obtain remarkable regressions of cancer in organs of the body other than the liver. Furthermore, one can with this treatment, prevent the growth of any metastases after surgical removal of the primary and prevent recurrences.

Urea / Urine | ENCOGNITIVE.COM.
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,066
Hans Nieper used urea too: he mentioned in his papers that a spanish doctor, Dr Joaquín Amat Larraz , used urea extensively in Spain for tens of years before being hounded down by authorities.

In 1986, he published an ultra-rare 1000 pages spanish book on his experience, that Nieper considered the bible of urea treatment for cancer, but it's only available in libraries.
 

Birdie

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
5,184
Location
USA
Hans Nieper used urea too: he mentioned in his papers that a spanish doctor, Dr Joaquín Amat Larraz , used urea extensively in Spain for tens of years before being hounded down by authorities.

In 1986, he published an ultra-rare 1000 pages spanish book on his experience, that Nieper considered the bible of urea treatment for cancer, but it's only available in libraries.
Do you know if these treatments are available anywhere?
 

Birdie

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
5,184
Location
USA
I was looking for more specifics on urea and ran across this...

Using Urea and Creatine as a Cancer Treatment

by Prof. Evangelos D. Danopoulos, M.D.

In 1987 in the Cancer Victors Journal, Vol. 21 No. 3 and in the Townsend Letter for Doctors (Feb./Mar. 1988) was published my article "The Possibility of Treating Malignancies with Urea."

Since this article was published, experience has led me to change my concept somewhat and to greatly improve my method of treating malignancies.

In the previous article I said that urea taken by mouth, once it has entered the blood circulation, is quickly excreted by the kidneys in urine. It is for this reason that urea, when administered intravenously, cannot reach organs with a high enough concentration to have anti-cancer effect.

Taken orally, urea reaches the liver via the portal vein in a high enough concentration to have a most helpful effect on a primary liver malignancy or on a liver metastasis. After passing through the liver, urea comes to other organs in too low a concentration to have anti-cancer effect, so that concentration of urea in organs other than the liver has to be enriched by other means.

During the winter of 1987-1988, in treating a patient with pancreatic cancer with metastases to the para-aortic lymph nodes, I was astonished to observe that his blood urea (BU) was in the range of 70 to 90 mg. % even though he was receiving the small daily dose of 20 to 30 grams a day of urea.

[NOTE: In Greece, laboratories measure Blood Urea (BU) rather than BUN, as in the USA. This accounts for the different numbers; a BU of 78-85 mg.% is equal to the American BUN of 35-45 mg.% . All numbers in this account are in BU not BUN, so please adjust accordingly.]

This high blood urea was unexpected. The patient had no sign of renal insufficiency, which meant that contrary to my previous thinking, he was excreting urea via the kidneys slowly. To my thinking this meant that the malignancy was making his kidneys excrete urea more slowly.

It was further noted that BU increased or decreased over a period of a few days, depending probably on the quantity of proteins and fluids of the food the patient takes. It was found that to maintain the constant high level of blood urea of 75 to 85 mg. %, it was needed to test for BU every 5 to 8 days and to change the dosage of urea to maintain a constant level of BU in the range of 75-85 mg. %.

When the patient was maintained in the level of BU of 75 to 85 mg. %, he showed vast improvement. This patient had unbearable abdominal pain as the enlarged lymph nodes pressed the nerves near the vertebral column. Before being treated with urea, he required morphia three times a day, however after taking urea and when his BU was maintained in the range of 75 to 85 mg. % his pain decreased to where he could get by with only 2 to 4 tablets of paracetamol a day.

If however his BU dropped to under the range of 75 to 85 mg. %, or got up over this, then he again suffered intense abdominal pain. This is the second very significant and surprising observation made during the treatment of this patient. There is namely an active level (AL) of BU, which must be kept constant during treatment, in order to achieve good results.

This same observation was confirmed with two other cancer patients suffering severe pain. It was found that patients reacted in different ways, that some excreted urea at a more rapid rate than others and that the same patient would excrete urea at different rates as days went by.

However, while the dosage of urea needed to maintain BU in the range of 75 to 85 mg. % varied from patient to patient and with one patient from time to time, when the active level of 75 to 85 mg. % was maintained, the patient had relief from pain. Note in the USA, BUN (blood urea nitrogen) is measured rather than BU and the proper range of BUN is 35 to 40 mg. %.

The story of my use of urea in the treatment of cancer began in 1954 when I discovered that urine has anti-cancer effect. After long research I discovered that the anti-cancer agent in urine is urea. In 1969, I began to treat cancer patients with oral urea with notable success in primary liver cancer or more often with liver metastases. Also it was soon found that injections of 15% to 50% urea in normal saline into and around skin cancers and malignant breast tumors were most effective.

In the meantime I had tried many other substances without effect. In 1980 I used for the first time creatine hydrate instead of creatinine which is very quickly excreted by the kidneys. Creatine is, on the contrary, very slowly excreted and then as creatinine to which it has been changed.

My first use of creatine hydrate as a monotherapy was with a patient with five small lung metastases from a sarcoma in his left thigh. After one month of treatment of this patient with 25 grams a day of creatine hydrate taken per os, all these small metastases vanished. They had been from 6 to 15 mm. in diameter.

This confirmed in my mind that creatine hydrate, like urea, has a marked anticancer effect.

Notation: Urea is water soluble. Creatine hydrate is not so. If 25 grams of creatine hydrate are put in a quart of water and quart is placed in a half gallon container, then the half gallon container can be shaken with vigor and a portion poured out and drunk. In this manner the creatine will act the same as if it were water soluble.

Next I treated two far advanced cancer patients with 25 grams a day of creatine hydrate per os. One had extensive adenocarcinoma metastases in both lungs. The other had extensive lung metastases from a primary sarcoma in a thigh. Neither of these patients were benefited by creatine hydrate as a monotherapy.

Then, with the knowledge that both urea and creatine hydrate have anti-cancer effect, I used the combination of urea and creatine hydrate in treating the aforementioned pancreatic cancer patient. I gave this patient sufficient urea to maintain BU in the range of 75 to 85 mg. %.

Then I added oral creatine hydrate to the treatment starting with 10 grams a day. Again keeping BU at 75 to 85 mg. % with oral urea, I increased the daily dosage of creatine hydrate to 25 grams a day. With this treatment the patient showed many signs of regression of his cancer. His appetite improved, his pain decreased, and his erythrocytes sedimentation rate fell from 110/1 hr. to 47/1 hr.

Then to test how effective was this combination treatment, I discontinued the use of urea for four days. His BU decreased to 45 mg. % and his condition deteriorated. On adding urea to his treatment to achieve BU of 75 to 85 mg. % again....his condition once again improved.

Then I withdrew creatine hydrate from treatment for nine days. Again the patient showed a deteriorated condition. When I resumed treatment with creatine hydrate, I used a dosage of 40 grams a day, then slowly decreased it back to 25 grams a day.

Thereafter, on enough urea to maintain BU at 75 to 85 mg. % and 25 grams of creatine hydrate a day, this patient showed progressive and gratifying improvement. It is to be regretted that five months and 11 days after the beginning of combined urea and creatine hydrate treatment, this patient suffered a fatal episode of myocardial infarction.

I then obtained the same good results with this combined treatment of urea and creatine hydrate with 10 more patients with cancers of various locations in the body. These cases will be published in a medical journal.

I will note here that unlike the two above mentioned patients where creatine hydrate was used as a monotherapy, the patients treated with the combination of urea and creatine hydrate all showed improvement. If the patient suffers severe pain, then the patient can understand the benefit of this treatment as the pain decreases.

In cancer patients where only the liver is involved with malignancy, the test for BU or BUN is not needed because the liver always gets a proper concentration of urea as urea taken orally goes via the portal vein to the liver.

However, where there is concern that there may be metastases in other parts of the body, then it would be well to do BU or BUN testing every 10 days and to maintain BU to 75 to 85 mg. %. In treating liver cancer only, 14 grams a day of urea are needed, along with 21 grams of creatine hydrate.

This combination need be taken every hour and a half throughout the waking day. One suggestion is this. If urea alone is to be taken, put the urea, 14 grams or how many is to be used in a quart of water. If treating liver cancer also with creatine hydrate, then 21 grams of creatine hydrate is also added to this quart of water.

With the quart in a half gallon container, one can shake the container with vigor, then 1/7th of a quart is poured out and drunk every hour and a half.

The same is true when 25 grams of creatine hydrate are being used.

In cases of severe liver cancer with great enlargement of this organ, we can increase the dose of urea only a little, from 14 grams to 18 grams a day and the dose of creatine hydrate to 25 to 30 grams a day.

In case of liver metastases when the primary cancer (of the pancreas i.e.) is not removed, we cannot increase the dose of urea to obtain the AL because the liver cannot tolerate large doses of urea. Therefore we give 14 to 18 grams of urea and 25 to 30 grams of creatine hydrate.

Creatine hydrate is more slowly excreted than urea, hence there is no need to measure the blood level of creatine as in the case of the need to measure BU or BUN in order to keep a constant AL.

The question arises, will the combination of urea and creatine hydrate be beneficial in the treatment of bone metastases? If the cancer is in the bone marrow which has a good supply of blood (myeloma), then good results are possible. Bone metastases are irrigated poorly by blood and the results of treatment with the combination of urea and creatine hydrate may be poor.

A vast majority of deaths from solid malignant tumors results from distant metastases. In any form of cancer therapy, it is of utmost importance that metastases are not permitted to form. I am certain that, after surgery, to excise a primary malignant tumor, the taking of the combination of urea and creatine hydrate for six months or more, while maintaining BUN in the range of 35 to 40 mg. %, will abolish the very small undetectable metastases that so often later grow into the large metastases that kill so many patients. The same is true with the possible remnant cancer cells from the primary tumor after it has been excised.

In conclusion, both urea and creatine hydrate have been demonstrated as having anti-cancer effect. Both are remarkably non-toxic. Both are non-drugs that require no prescriptions. I have used urea in water orally in treating liver cancer or liver metastases since 1969 and it has been ever so effective. Also urea in normal saline injected into skin cancers has been just as effective.

By the use of the combination of urea and creatine hydrate it has been possible to obtain remarkable regressions of cancer in organs of the body other than the liver. Furthermore, one can with this treatment, prevent the growth of any metastases after surgical removal of the primary and prevent recurrences.

Urea / Urine | ENCOGNITIVE.COM.
Thanks for this and the link.
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,066
Do you know if these treatments are available anywhere?

I very much doubt they would be available in industrialized countries, where the medical monopoly reigns.

If they are, they must be concealed.
 

Birdie

Member
Joined
Aug 10, 2012
Messages
5,184
Location
USA
I very much doubt they would be available in industrialized countries, where the medical monopoly reigns.

If they are, they must be concealed.
Yes, too bad. Thank you.
 

Nikki

Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2016
Messages
118
Yet another agent that fights cancer and fungus.
 

burtlancast

Member
Joined
Jan 1, 2013
Messages
3,066
Here's another excellent insight by Gar Hildenbrand (21.00 in the first audio file)

"Danopoulos wasn't the first medic to propose urea for medical use: the first was Robert Nalbandian, M.D, at Walter Reed Army Medical Center Hospital in the 1960's (he proposed to treat sickle cell anemia with 400 gr urea infusion on a 24 hour IV drip)(because urea was a well known protein hydrophobic bond breaker) (it was applied experimentally then published; then it was reproduced with intentional methodology error by university investigators in order to decredibilize it)( tumor cells adhere together with hydrophobic protein bonds; urea makes tumors dissociate; they desegregate, split apart, and then when they are isolated, they are easy prey to the immune system)"
http://gerson-research.org/lectures/
 
Last edited:

Nikki

Member
Joined
Jul 28, 2016
Messages
118
Whether or not fungal infection is the cause of tumors or simply a correlational pathogenisis, I'd still opt to attack fungus in any body with cancer (meaning, one noticeably affected by "cancer"). I keep coming across cancer treatments which are also anti-fungal. Does anyone know of an effective cancer treatment which isn't also antifungal? If there was such a thing, I would instead (or in addition to) opt for something to also kill fungus.

On that note, someone in some message thread had mentioned that the test parameters for determining (if a biopsy contains) cancer are very similar or identical to those for diagnosing a fungal infection. Does anyone have any further information on this? I know a dermatopathologist, so I can ask him, but his English is limited and I am not sure translation will come through accurately.

"Possibly one of the most dramatic and significant events in the pathogenesis of candidiasis is the ability of the normally commensal C. albicans to switch its water-interactive surface state from hydrophilicity to hydrophobicity.....hydrophobic yeast cells are more resistant to...phagocytes"


Biochemistry. 2013 Apr 23;52(16):2783-92. doi: 10.1021/bi4001276. Epub 2013 Apr 11.
Control activity of yeast geranylgeranyl diphosphate synthase from dimer interface through H-bonds and hydrophobic interaction.
Chang CK1, Teng KH, Lin SW, Chang TH, Liang PH.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,194
Location
Manila
Yet another agent that fights cancer and fungus.
Interesting take on urea, regarding fungus.

Dr. Simoncini says that cancer is caused by fungus, but his solution is baking soda.

I've used urea recently, and saw my liver enzymes AST and ALT drop steadily significantly over a month of daily use. My ESR also dropped a lot, but it was a sudden big drop at the end of the month.

That time, I was sick with dengue like symptoms with fever, a drop in platelet count but only to the low range of normal, but my urine was very dark amber which was confirmed as hemolysis by my skin and eyes being jaundiced.

I now think that the lower platelet count I had, and still have, is due to platelets acting as immune cells in destroying fungus. But the fungus is in the form of cell wall deficient (CWD) bacteria that actually resides inside red blood cells and as it multiplies and comes off the RBCs, platelets devour them and die and the remnants are phagocytized by neutrophils and macrophages.

I believe the CWD bacteria has been with me for the longest time, as looking back my urine has always been dark amber colored. And that my neutrophils and monocytes have always been high, and my platelet count possibly low (not sure as CBC tests until recently excluded platelet count).

I connect these together to explain why my blood pressure has always been very high. The reason being that with high phagocytic activity, a lot of spillover ROS is bound to occur, and this oxidative stress is continually being neutralized by the antioxidant action of serum albumin with its cysteine thiol molecules.

The oxidized albumin is used up and excreted in urine (as manifested in bubbles and froths in urine) and this constant usage of albumin depletes my serum plasma of albumin stores, which leads to lower blood volume as albumin agglomerates with NaCl salt,and salt attracts water to build plasma volume.

When I had dengue-like symptoms, it was probably precipitated by my prior intake of erythromycin, which would lead to production of more CWD bacteria (see Lida Mattman's book) leading to more depletion of platelets and more phagocytisis creating higher ROS spillover which led to more acid production that my body could not keep up with in neutralizing at that time. I had cramps all over and it was only by use of carbogen to supply my body with CO2 that would keep me from deteriorating. Probably taking bicarbonates like baking soda and mag bicarbonate would have helped as well.

CWD bacteria is halfway between a microbe being of a milder bacterial form and the same microbe being of a virulent fungal form that approaches parasitism. This is based on the pleomorphic and terrain theory, which is markedly different from the monomorphic and infectious or germ theory of conventional medicine.

I am not sure if using urea and creatine hydrate will be helpful in helping my body and red blood cells get rid of rhe CWD bacteria but it's something I have a mind to try. Not by itself but in conjunction with isopathic therapy which I have using for 2 weeks now with only slight improvement.

I'm very selective on what to use for treatment as I've found that using the 'thrown the kitchen sink' approach not only doesn't work but offers nothing by way of learning what works and what doesn't. Plus, it is a waste of time, effort, and money. And bound to leave frustration, desperation, and hopelessness in its wake.
 
Last edited:

sunny

Member
Joined
Nov 6, 2020
Messages
417
I remember episodes of The HERB Doctors talking about Danopoulos and Simoncini.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,194
Location
Manila
I remember episodes of The HERB Doctors talking about Danopoulos and Simoncini.
Yes, I've heard that as well, and probably mentioned by Peat again in an ORN interview with Pat Timpone.

I've never heard it explained why urea does what it does with cancer. I've never bothered to ask, and no one else has. It just seems it's one of those things with an unwritten rule that thou shalt not ask why.

But if cancer goes away just by making the foci more alkaline thru the use of baking soda, then it would be reasonable to assume that urea makes the foci more alkaline as well.

If fungus were involved in cancer, the fungus must be such that it is virulent and parasitic, and such fungus would be much larger sized and killing it would not be possible by phagocytosis where it is eaten up by neutrophils and macrophages. It would have to be killed by eosinophils which would spew ROS on it to kill it. This method though is messy as a lot of spillover ROS happens and this tends to make the foci acidic.

If urea were to cure cancer, its use should have the effect of making the foci more alkaline. But how would urea do that? Does urea cause the eukaryotic fungus to pleomorph into the simpler prokaryotic life form as a bacteria? If all that is left of the fungi is bacteria, then killing the bacteria would involve less acid production, given that phagocytosis of bacteria involves less spillover ROS.

Or does urea simply break down cellular debris which feeds the fungus thus depriving it of the ability to live as a fungus, much less to multiply. As this method of action is what is going on when urea is applied on an external wound, and the wound heals because there is no debris for the microne to feed on.

I think it is the latter mechanism that is in effect with using urea. As when I use urea, I do not experience the respiratory burst of phagocytosis, which when in action would cause my spO2 levels to dip because of the heavy usage of oxygen.

If this were the case, urea uses together with creatine monohydrate could just be the best lifesaver hiding in plain sight.

The more I think about this, the more irresistible it is for me to try the comBo for my own issue with high bp, which I am more convinced has a fungal aetiology, and which has the microbe residing intracellularly - inside my red blood cells.

And this may also be the reason why urine therapy has been used in less advanced cultures where making people more sick and dependent on expensive drugs to become filthy rich has not yet been discovered.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,194
Location
Manila
Am on my third day of taking 14g urea and 21g creatine monohydrate as instructed by Dr. Danopoulos.

I would check my urine and saliva pH each time I urinate.

What I've noticed is that my urine doesn't anymore reach a pH of 5.5 when it used to. The most acidic it reaches is 6.

Mostly, I get nice urine pH values that are considered alkaline by urine standards.

Since I'm not taking anything else, I can say that urea can have an effect on improving my acid base balance. I'm hoping this counts as improving the terrain.

And though I'm not having any cancer issues, I still think this would improve overall homeostasis.

I am of the opinion that urea (and creatine monohydrate) clears the small blood vessels of debris. Less food for bacteria. Less particles also that gets in the way of tissue oxygenation possibly as I think I notice lower spO2 levels ( seeing more 96 and 97 instead of 98).

It may be seen as a negative side effect, but my increased blood pressure may just be the result of increased sugar.metabolism due to increased tissue oxygenation. I also feel my temperature going to as high as 37.4 My ECG graph confirms this.

Maybe there is foci that is anaerobic that is no longer as a result of higher tissue oxygenation. The toxic putrefactive products of anaerobic metabolism such as guanidine, as mentioned by William Koch, may also be gone.

I would gladly take higher blood pressure of that accompanies higher metabolism induced by use of urea and creatine. I would note that I had taken urea alone in the past, at a larger quantity of 30g per day, but I had not seen the metabolic effects I experience now.
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,194
Location
Manila
I have stage 4 rectal cancer with lung mets, I am thinking of trying this thing out
It won't hurt to try it.

I think it would also help if you monitor your urine and saliva pH and breathing rate as you assist your body attain a good acid base balance. This at least puts your body in a better position to deal with the cancer.
 

Philomath

Member
Joined
May 23, 2013
Messages
737
Age
52
Location
Chicagoland
@yerrag what brand of Creatine Monohydrate and urea are you using? I purchased urea on amazon before, I still have it but it's hard as a rock now - better to buy new. I am considering this Danopoulos method instead of the Adjuvant radiation therapy that I'm being pushed toward. I may start taking Baking Soda until I procure the creatine and urea. I do have test strips, what PH level should someone with cancer (or with the potential for metastasis) shoot for?
 

yerrag

Member
Joined
Mar 29, 2016
Messages
10,194
Location
Manila
I get my urea from Lab Alley. The creatine I get is from an online store in the Philippines, but it shouldn't be hard to get a good and safe product since it is commonly taken by people who work out to develop muscles. You can still use the urea you have by wrapping it in cheesecloth and pounding it with a mallet.

I don't really have personal experience with cancer, but I imagine that the urine and even the saliva would be very acidic. But it is also possible that if the body is very acidic, the urine may even be alkaline to such extent that saliva pH would be more acidic than urine pH. As normally, and in a better state, saliva would be more alkaline than urine.

Urine pH at 6.5 and above is fine, although when it is often at 8 would mean that there is a UTI infection. And a saliva pH higher by 1 over the urine pH is ideal, but if not it's still okay as long as the saliva has a higher pH than that of urine.

However, if urine pH goes as low as 4.5 it is not a big concern as it means that the kidneys are able to excrete excess acidity out of the system, just as long as it does not stay that way all throughout the day. This means that you have to take pH measurements throughout the day, and a good time to take them is when you urinate. It's good to have a log so in a tabular format so you can easily observe how the pH fluctuates during the day and over days.

You may notice that you wake up with lower pH ( higher acidity) and during the day the pH increases.

Based on your observations, you can then decide how much baking soda to take to improve the pH.

A person with excellent sugar metabolism and a good internal microbial terrain would find it easy to have optimal acid base balance all throughout the day and would never need to supplement with baking soda. It is because he produces a lot of CO2 and very little lactic acid. He also has little need to produce acids involved in killing pathogens. In a body that is is very imbalanced, for example, it would likely have fungal parasites that require immune responses that produce a lot of acids. This creates a chronically highly acidic condition, and encourages cancer to grow.

So it's important to assist the body heal itself by doing everything we can do bring rhe body to improve its acid base balance.
 

Similar threads

Top