>Banks can just buy banks but Microsoft buys Activision and every guberment in Europe is shitting their pants about it.
But but muh Call of Duty!!!
>i'm not asking for covid
>but for cancer
ask a doctor, maybe a vet.
Don't trust info on here, especially not when it's life or death.
Of course Ivermectin may be a way to get rid of cancer, but it's all an experiment.
There is also Chlorine Dioxide, maybe you don't know that yet.
https://patents.google.com/patent/US10105389B1/en
>extremely dangerous.
Actually no.
Not trivial to create.
It's chlorine dioxide solution.
And that's safe.
It's a very very low dosage.
Remember Trump speaking about injecting disinfectant? He was probably talking about that one, at the same time making it obvious that doctors have no clue regarding disinfectants in vaccines.
I personally took it orally, worked fine. I'm not dead.
You can inject it. Can also inhale it.
But these two should only be done by professionals.
>Not trivial to create.
What I mean if you try to create it by yourself as an amateur, you can actually poison yourself.
It's actually trivial to create as a pharmacist and cheap.
And it's used by hospitals to disinfect hospital rooms. If it was deadly, that would not be the case. It destroys basically everything that is bad. It's a universal antidote.
>so is chemotherapy.
No, that's bullshit.
Chemotherapy is poison.
There is nothing good coming out of it.
>I'm an expert
I don't give a shit, who you claim to be.
Have you actually made it. I doubt it.
Have you actual experience with it? I also doubt that.
It's used in South America by some hospitals, because it actually works.
I took it myself, it's very very very low dosage and you even take a few drops only and put these in 1 liter of water and drink that over the day. That's the recommended dosage. There are various ways of treatment.
It's not Chlorine, if you think it's chlorine, you are wrong. That part is only relevant when you CREATE the solution., which you shouldn't do as an amateur. The solution itself is fine, I have it in my fridge atm.
I had no problems at all, and I am actually chronically sick and my body is very weak.
Try again.
And I also got chemo therapy some time ago, which almost destroyed me.
Claiming those would be the same is fucking retarded and I see through your bullshit.
German book about Chlorine Dioxide Solution (CDS) with specific treatment protocols
Also documentary
THE UNIVERSAL ANTIDOTE OF CHLORINE DIOXIDE… FULL DOCUMENTARY
https://www.bitchute.com/video/WLIpsL3DAbdq/
>a book says it's dangerous, so that must be the case
Raw milk is not dangerous either
I took it, you have no personal experience with it at all
>because what you took in all likelihood was not chlorine dioxide
I said it's actually CHLORINE DIOXIDE SOLUTION (CDS). That's what it's actually called.
The gas can be dissolved perfectly in water. That's what you actually take in. You should know that as a "chemist".
>EXTREMELY DANGEROUS
Yeah, like raw milk.
You trust bullshit books that exist to keep you away from it. The fake news uses the same BS arguments against it. OMG It's bleach!!!!
meanwhile recommends vaccines, which contain different disinfectants.
You have obviously no personal experience with it, you simply quote books.
>Raw milk is actually better for you than pasteurized
>better than
Actually raw milk is real milk.
Pasteurized milk is dead milk.
Dead milk causes all sorts of shit in your body. Causes inflammations. Causes mucus.
Raw milk doesn't. It does the opposite.
Raw milk also doesn't go bad, literally.
That's why the fake news and google go against raw milk, because they want to push their poisonous dead milk instead for the corporations.
That's why in some countries you can't even buy raw milk on markets or super markets. At best you can only get it directly from a farmer, which is ridiculous.
>lame ass strawman argument all you got, shillboi?
Let the mask slip. I didn't insult you.
>go drink a gallon of it, assfuck.
Drink 10 liter of water, "chemist"
Oh, that isn't good for you either. Oh noes.
I guess water is evil and poison too now. Don't touch water!
>scientific info
All you got is books.
>NOT medical disinfo
It is. I took it personally in the recommended dosage and I'm fine. cope
It's 0,3% CDS/CDL.
>You were warned
Who the fuck do you think you are?
>you're OBVIOUSLY a real assfuck retard.
I never insulted you, your mask is slipping.
>scientific info
>NOT disinfo
Oh really
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28327506/
Efficacy and Safety Evaluation of a Chlorine Dioxide Solution
Abstract
In this study, a chlorine dioxide solution (UC-1) composed of chlorine dioxide was produced using an electrolytic method and subsequently purified using a membrane. UC-1 was determined to contain 2000 ppm of gaseous chlorine dioxide in water. The efficacy and safety of UC-1 were evaluated. The antimicrobial activity was more than 98.2% reduction when UC-1 concentrations were 5 and 20 ppm for bacteria and fungi, respectively. The half maximal inhibitory concentrations (IC50) of H1N1, influenza virus B/TW/71718/04, and EV71 were 84.65 ± 0.64, 95.91 ± 11.61, and 46.39 ± 1.97 ppm, respectively. A 3-(4,5-Dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) test revealed that the cell viability of mouse lung fibroblast L929 cells was 93.7% at a 200 ppm UC-1 concentration that is over that anticipated in routine use.Moreover, 50 ppm UC-1 showed no significant symptoms in a rabbit ocular irritation test.In an inhalation toxicity test, treatment with 20 ppm UC-1 for 24 h showed no abnormality and no mortality in clinical symptoms and normal functioning of the lung and other organs.A ClO₂ concentration of up to 40 ppm in drinking water did not show any toxicity in a subchronic oral toxicity test.Herein, UC-1 showed favorable disinfection activity and a higher safety profile tendency than in previous reports.
Where did I call you a liar.
I said you obviously have no personal experience with it, because all you do is quote books.
So how many people did you kill with it?
How many people did you treat with it?
What protocols did you use?
>passive-aggressive
is the result of you being aggressive from the start, as if I pushed a button.
Ah of course.
First i'm a shill, then I'm a liar, because I can't have taken it myself, because it's 100% evil poison and then recent studies are lies too.
>hypocrite
Incredible.
You are the self proclaimed exper on chlorine dioxide solutiont, you should have known that study.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7151765/
1982: Toxicological effects of chlorite in the mouse
Abstract
When exposed to a maximum level of 100 ppm chlorine dioxide in their drinking water, neither A/J or C57L/J mice exhibited any hematologic changes.Chlorite exposure under similar conditions produced increases for red blood cells in osmotic fragility, mean corpuscular volume, and glucose-6-phosphate dehydrogenase activity for both strains. Chlorite exposure of pregnant A/J mice resulted in a significant decrease in the weight of pups at weaning and a lower average birth to weaning growth rate. Mice exposed to as much as 100 ppm sodium chlorite (NaClO2) in their drinking water for up to 120 days failed to demonstrate any histopathological changes in kidney structure.
https://academic.oup.com/jee/article-abstract/65/1/19/2210444?redirectedFrom=fulltext&login=false
Oxodene: Longevity of Honey Bees
Abstract
Oxodene® (chlorine dioxide) at concentrations of 10 or 100 ppm in 50% sucrose solution significantly increased the longevity of caged workerA pis mellifera L., but higher concentrations reduced longevity. Bees that were fed 10,000 ppm chlorine dioxide defecated excessively and died within 1 week. Compared with untreated bees there was no significant difference in consumption of food (sucrose solution) or water.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22348507/
Six-month low level chlorine dioxide gas inhalation toxicity study with two-week recovery period in rats
Abstract
Methods: CD gas at 0.05 ppm or 0.1 ppm for 24 hours/day and 7 days/week was exposed to rats for 6 months under an unrestrained condition with free access to chow and water in a chamber so as to simulate the ordinary lifestyle in human. The control animals were exposed to air only. During the study period, the body weight as well as the food and water consumptions were recorded. After the 6-month exposure and the 2-week recovery period, animals were sacrificed and a battery of toxicological examinations, including biochemistry, hematology, necropsy, organ weights and histopathology, were performed.
Results: Well regulated levels of CD gas were exposed throughout the chamber over the entire study period.No CD gas-related toxicity sign was observed during the whole study period. No significant difference was observed in body weight gain, food and water consumptions, and relative organ weight.In biochemistry and hematology examinations, changes did not appear to be related to CD gas toxicity. In necropsy and histopathology, no CD gas-related toxicity was observed even in expected target respiratory organs.