Mike, what is your opinion of a great protocol for cancer

[Guest guest]

hello mike

thanks for all the great knowledge, i really respect your opinion and see you

have a wealth of knowledge and are obviously very intelligent.

what in your opinion would you regard as a great protocol?

kind regards

bobby

From: Mike Golden

Sent: Sunday, July 26, 2009 8:56 PM

Hello Bret,

One more time with this major point, Bret. A virus that exists in an

oxygen free environment is no more an anaerobe than a piece of rock

that exists in an oxygen free environment. Neither respires and

neither is alive. Scientific terminology is specific. The terms

aerobic and anaerobic refer to the respiratory style of the entity

you are talking about. Viruses do not have a metabolism, ergo they

cannot be anaerobic. Any use of this term otherwise is an error.

Also, Herculean efforts at forcing hemoglobin to carry more oxygen in

order to create a steeper concentration gradient are essentially

useless due to homeostatic feedback mechanisms. But, perhaps this is

a point you are making in other words.

And, finally, getting more oxygen into mitochondria might put the

stop to certain alternative cancer therapies which depend on low

oxygen pressure to cause mitochondrial membrane disruption (Poly MVA,

Budwig, DCA, paw paw, etc.), some by suppressing respiration and some

by " revving " it up.

Even when these types of therapy are not being used, increasing oxygen

pressures in the

mitochondria probably (no evidence I've seen) won't change the

situation much once the pathology is established. Oncogenesis has

already, likely, started a mutageic cascade that prevents reversal.

Mike