An important update to yesterday’s turbo cancer article…
…because there is a very good reason that the Centers for Disease Crimes (CDC) is refusing to release cancer data since shortly after the passing of the criminal “emergency” use authorization (EUA) for the Modified mRNA slow kill bioweapon “vaccines;” to wit:
4 YEARS. That’s how long the CDC has been sitting on updated cancer data. In a world where we can track everything in real-time, this "oversight" is more than just a delay—it’s a red flag. It’s time to demand transparency.
We already know that there is a burgeoning turbo cancer epidemic underway that will only get worse:
Across all major cancer-tracking indices - diagnosis rates, treatment expenditures, public and institutional attention, and mortality - a clear and consistent signal is observable. All four inflected in temporal concurrence following the introduction of mRNA vaccination.
The signal is not “skyrocketing.” Hyperbolic language should be treated with caution; it is frequently cited in rhetorical flak by less-than-honest actors.
In systems terms, this cancer signal is coherent and persistent, with increased Shannon entropy in the cancer-type distribution—indicating a shift away from dominance by historically primary cancers toward a broader array of secondary and less common types, increasingly observed in younger age brackets compared to just seven years ago.
What makes this signal concerning is the combination of factors: the rise in less common cancers, their novel prevalence among traditionally less-susceptible cohorts, and the signal’s overall magnitude.
As a system-level phenomenon, it exceeds—by a wide margin—the corresponding signals historically associated with tobacco exposure or the introduction of agricultural pesticides.
Except that to call cancer rates ‘skyrocketing’ is actually anything but hyperbolic, and thanks to recent VAERS data we have irrefutable proof that this turbo cancer phenomenon has in fact exploded:
The collective world-wide evidence from 2020–2025 underscores a biologically plausible connection between COVID-19 vaccination and cancer. The recurring clinical findings documented across many reports of de-novo cancer onset, rapid tumor progression, viral reactivation, and reawakening of dormant disease, highlight critical gaps in knowledge and understanding of how large-scale immune changes produced by the vaccine interacts with cancer biology.
Both SARS-CoV-2 infection and COVID-19 vaccination engage overlapping biological pathways that could, in principle, influence cancer risk, yet they differ in mechanism, magnitude, biodistribution, and duration of their effects. Shared mechanisms include activation of the innate immune system, robust interferon signaling, cytokine induction, oxidative stress, and transient disruption of immune-cell homeostasis. These changes can theoretically expose latent malignancies, promote clonal expansion of preexisting mutant cells, or create microenvironmental contexts permissive to tumor progression.
In addition, both infection and vaccination induce spike protein expression, which interacts with ACE2-expressing tissues and can trigger endothelial activation, inflammation, and cellular stress pathways implicated in oncogenic signaling. Both can also lead to prolonged inflammatory and tissue-injury states, all of which could contribute to genomic instability, epigenetic remodeling, and chronic immune dysregulation.
However, unique mechanisms distinguish COVID-19 vaccination from natural infection. Vaccination involves widespread biodistribution, intracellular uptake and persistence of modified nucleic acid templates that drive synthesis of an unnatural Spike protein both at the injection site but also throughout the body. The presence of the residual or fragmented DNA combined with the LNP-mediated delivery to immune and non-immune tissues, and sustained spike expression for month to years represent vaccine-specific factors that could theoretically promote insertional mutagenesis, perturb immune surveillance, or accelerate growth of preexisting malignant clones. As such there is much to be learned from human tissue and blood samples as well as autopsies to better understand the interplay between COVID infection, vaccination and cancer mechanisms.
To this end, Spike protein presence and persistence along with the biological effects that are cell autonomous or that depend on host immune interactions need to be studied to establish connections to cancer initiation and progression. Accordingly, we propose that tumors arising after documented SARS-CoV-2 infection or following COVID-19 vaccination be evaluated using a standardized immunohistochemical classification framework.
At minimum, this should include assessment of viral antigen expression patterns by IHC. Spike-positive/nucleocapsid-positive, spike-positive/nucleocapsid-negative, and spike-negative/nucleocapsid-negative phenotypes should be defined. This assessment should be integrated with detailed characterization of proliferative activity (e.g., Ki-67), cell-death and DNA-damage response markers, tumor-suppressor and oncogene pathway signatures, and the immune tumor microenvironment.
Implementing this type of reporting across clinical pathology and autopsy evaluations would allow more precise discrimination among tumors potentially driven by infection, by vaccine-related antigen expression, or by unrelated oncogenic processes, and would enable aggregation of comparable cases across institutions. Establishing uniform criteria of this kind is essential for building a coherent evidence base, supporting mechanistic research, and ultimately determining whether observed associations reflect coincidence, unmasking of latent disease, immune perturbation, or true causal relationships.
Establishing causality between SARS-CoV-2 infection, COVID-19 vaccination, and cancer requires a level of evidence far beyond temporal association. In oncology, causation is never determined by a single observation or study; it emerges only when multiple, independent lines of evidence converge over time. This includes mechanistic data (such as genomic integration analyses, clonal evolution trajectories, immune-profiling, and epigenetic changes), pathology-based findings (including autopsies with molecular characterization), experimental models that accurately reflect human tissue biology (organoids, humanized systems, long-read sequencing of exposed tissues), and population-level epidemiologic studies capable of detecting small but meaningful signals against background incidence. Only by integrating these approaches can we distinguish coincidence from unmasking of latent disease, expansion of preexisting malignant clones, or true de novo oncogenesis. Importantly, the need for rigorous evidence should not be used to dismiss emerging patterns.
Transparent discussion of biologically plausible mechanisms and surveillance strategies is essential to determine if this temporal association is causally linked. Current reliable epidemiologic data is lacking to provide evidence that vaccination does not increase population-level cancer incidence. Peer-reviewed literature is not completely or easily indexed. Establishing a framework for post-vaccination cancer surveillance, could help detect rare adverse patterns early and enable mechanistic follow-up without compromising public confidence. The goal of this review is not to estimate population-level cancer risk but to provide a structured synthesis of the existing peer-reviewed literature, identify recurring clinical and biological themes, and delineate critical gaps that require rigorous epidemiologic and mechanistic follow-up. This will enable a better understanding of the full spectrum of immune responses to inform safer immunization strategies and illuminate previously underappreciated links between immunity and cancer biology.
The scientific imperative moving forward should be a coordinated framework combining longitudinal surveillance and mechanistic experimentation to allow us to distinguish coincidence from causality and to refine future vaccine platforms accordingly. In doing so, we stand to gain not only a clearer understanding of vaccine safety, but also a deeper insight into the fundamental links between immunity, infection, and cancer emergence.
Not a single vaccine injected into the deltoid offers even a scintilla of immunity whatsoever to any disease; or why there is not a single quality RCT with placebo control that has ever shown any safety or efficacy, so what these depopulation injections are inducing is in fact are all risk (infections, cancers, prion-based diseases and other adverse event VAIDS symptoms) and no reward (zero immunity, no attenuation of symptoms, etc.).
In other words, transforming people into walking spike protein factories which causes the direct suppression of the p53 protein responsible for preventing cancer, and concurrently genetically modifying the recipients with highly carcinogenic SV40 promotor sequences means that this skyrocketing turbo cancer epidemic can only become far more acute over time.
Thankfully, as readers of this Substack have known for many years now, the following treatment approach may not only be the ‘holy grail’ cancer cure in plain sight, but may also treat Alzheimer’s, mood disorders, Parkinson’s, Lyme Disease, myocarditis, Hashimoto’s Disease, leukemia, Lupus, skin conditions, and various other “incurable” ailments, as well as the common cold and seasonal flu:
The Ultimate Disease Cure & Prophylaxis Protocol
Tocotrienol and Tocopherol forms (all 8) of Vitamin E (400-800mg per day, 7 days a week). A product called Gamma E by Life Extension or Perfect E are both great.
Bio-Available Curcumin (600mg per day, 2 pills per day 7 days a week). A product called Theracurmin HP by Integrative Therapeutics is bioavailable.
VIR-X immune support which also greatly increases the bioavailability of both FenbendazoleandHydroxychloroquine (2 capsules per day) —for prophylaxis 2 capsules per day
Removing sugars and carbohydrates (cancer food) from your diet and replacing table sugar with a zero glycemic index, zero calorie, keto friendly rare sugar like FLAV-X
And here is additional information on why Hydroxychloroquine was also added to this protocol as a most viable anticancer compound:
As the Mockingbird MSM is continuously deployed to cover up horrifying truths, the Medical-Industrial Complex is desperate for you to never know about this disease cure-all protocol.
Do NOT comply.
THE 25% OFF LIFESAVING FLASH SALE has been extended by another day, so please use code IVM25to receive 25% off on the newest product Hydroxychloroquine, as well as ALL of the amazing lifesaving products that you have been purchasing for many years now like the Nobel Prize winning miracle compound Ivermectin, the no less miraculous Fenbendazole, Doxycycline, the full spectrum organic CBD oil containing 5,000 milligrams of activated cannabinoids and hemp compounds CBD, CBN & CBG, the powerful immune support nutraceutical and spike support formula VIR-X, and the sugar craving reducing, blood sugar balancing and even anti-cancer allulose sugar substitute FLAV-X!
THE MASSIVE 25% OFF WEEKEND FLASH SALE ends tonight, February 24th (midnight eastern time), 2026.
Upon adding products to your cart, please go to the cart icon at the top right corner of your browser page and click it, then choose the VIEW CART option whereby you will be redirected to a page where you can enter the code IVM25 in the Use Coupon Code field.
Only the RESOLVX HEALTH website offers all of the authentic products that this Substack promotes.
Please contact the company directly with any product questions: info@resolvx.health
The VAERS system was set up to produce safety signals in the data set.
But like most of progressive positions, they can ignore reality and tell us what is clearly yellow is actually purple.
So much of our society debates things that are black/white, things that a thinking person will undoubtedly discern as right/wrong. But we let them tell us it's the opposite.
PS the VAERS URF (underreporting factor) is anywhere from 40-100x.
The VAERS system was set up to produce safety signals in the data set.
But like most of progressive positions, they can ignore reality and tell us what is clearly yellow is actually purple.
So much of our society debates things that are black/white, things that a thinking person will undoubtedly discern as right/wrong. But we let them tell us it's the opposite.