TOXICOLOGIE EN TOC.

[Sophocle]

Tout un homme, fait de tous les hommes et qui les vaut tous et que vaut n'importe qui.

Je n'ai encore peu cité Sartre, mais voici LA phrase que je préfère.

[Sophocle]

-----------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY



The causes of cancer set out by the Collège de France are attached (pollution, infection, metabolism, anxiety).




Yet these causes are not treated by oncologists or general practitioners.

The same applies to all chronic illnesses (Alzheimer's, etc.).

This is rather unusual.



Official diagnoses are based on blood tests. But blood is not representative of the body.



The alternative is to administer the heavy metal treatment and analyse the urine one and a half hours later. According to the French Toxicology Societies, metals appear in all those analysed.



Poison treatments are banned because Western health agencies have not carried out population-based studies. These treatments are not banned for scientific or medical reasons, but solely for administrative reasons. 95% of the body is therefore neglected by medicine and science.



The studies will express a value in a healthy population. This value will be the reference. In a sick person, the value will be compared with the reference value. And we will treat until the value falls back to the reference value. As the reference value has not been established, Western health agencies have prohibited treatment, including in patients showing symptoms of intoxication. Western health agencies will refuse to carry out these studies because they will show that current official analyses are flawed. The Policy must therefore force the health agencies to carry out these studies.



All the official diagnoses of poisoning (organic and inorganic) are wrong. This could explain the lack of treatment for many intoxicated people.



Under French law, Poison Control Centres are responsible for ensuring the public's good health. Unbeknownst to the institutions, the Poison Control Centres are not fulfilling this mission, on the grounds that they have not done their job in terms of biological references. What's more, Poison Control Centres make public threats against doctors who treat poisons. It is therefore impossible to receive treatment in France.



I have written a plea for post-processing analyses to be taken into account. This plea is available following this message.



I have also written a treatise on the removal of all oxidising particles from all organs, including the brain. My treatise is available free of charge at https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/vie ... 14#p121814 . Based on this treatise, the authorities will be able to establish all the references that are essential for destocking oxidising particles. This treaty is written in French.







-----------------------------------------------------------

PLEADING



A scientific study of 2,000 people with dental amalgams shows that urinary mercury levels after treatment are 47 microgrammes of mercury per gramme of creatinine and that urinary levels without treatment are 1.7 microgrammes of mercury per gramme of creatinine. The reference without treatment in the general population is 4 microgrammes of mercury per gramme of creatinine. The full study can be found at https://www.forum-depression.com/downlo ... p?id=10668. The header is available at https://oem.bmj.com/content/61/6/535.full. The levels after treatment are therefore very worrying, whereas the levels without treatment are reassuring.



Yet the entire official Western medical system is based on studies without treatment. All official toxicological studies are therefore falsely reassuring. Medical devices (dental amalgams, aluminium vaccines, mercury vaccines, etc.) are therefore poorly evaluated. All chronic diseases (Alzheimer's, cancer, arthritis, autism, multiple sclerosis, etc.) are poorly assessed. Chronic diseases are therefore neither diagnosed nor treated. As a result, patients are getting worse.



I quote from an article entitled "Mercury Toxicity and Treatment: A Review of the Literature" in the form of a review of the scientific literature, which states in its introduction: "(...) techniques for the clinical assessment of mercury burden are not universally accepted. The purpose of this document is to review published data on these issues and to evaluate published clinical experience with the use of ASD to remove mercury from the human body". So there is some controversy among scientists about validated analyses. According to this article: "It is difficult to diagnose mercury overload. The methods commonly used (concentrations in blood, urine and/or hair) do not correlate with the total body burden and offer little useful diagnostic information. DMPS challenge appears to offer a more accurate assessment of body burden". This article is available free of charge at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3253456/. According to this article, validated analyses (blood, urine, hair without treatment) do not provide useful information for diagnosing mercury poisoning, while analyses after treatment give a better indication. This article therefore implies that the many public surveys of the general population using validated biological analyses are totally inadequate. This article indicates that diagnosis after treatment (provocation test) provides a better assessment of the true body burden.



The French toxicology agencies have published a scientific article stating that only diagnoses without treatment are valid for the vast majority of metals, including heavy metals. The article is available at https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/dow ... hp?id=1017. The official page is https://www.em-consulte.com/article/100 ... aux-ou-des. This article states that only validated biological analyses (blood tests, urine samples, hair samples) should be used to establish intoxication. It adds that the treatment is abusive. It implies that references in the general population after treatment have not been established and that, in this context, analyses after treatment cannot be interpreted. According to the French Toxicology Societies, in the absence of interpretation, treatment should not be given even if the post-treatment diagnoses are very worrying.



The national and international toxicology networks have therefore not done their job. They have not established general population references for either body burden or post-treatment biological analyses. The establishment of these references makes it possible to validate a biological analysis by establishing a value for which the general population is in good health. To mask their shortcomings, these networks have therefore adopted a general consensus among international health agencies that consists of passing off unreliable analyses (blood tests, urine samples, hair samples) that are falsely reassuring as the absolute truth. However, the entire French toxicology sector is demanding that intoxication assessments be carried out using only validated, unreliable analyses. The worrying levels of heavy metals found in post-treatment analyses are therefore systematically dismissed by health agencies in the general population.



Blood is finely filtered continuously by the kidneys, liver, intestines, lungs and skin. Urine reflects the blood. Heavy metals therefore have no time to accumulate in the blood, urine or hair. The hair retains the blood's history very temporarily. Poisoning of the blood and urine is called acute poisoning. For example: an attempted suicide due to arsenic ingestion or a worker in a lead recycling plant. Such poisoning can be treated by stopping exposure and treating the heavy metals, as the treatment neutralises the harmful effects of the heavy metals in the body. Heavy metals gradually accumulate in other organs (brain, muscles, joints, bones, marrow, etc.). The intoxication of these tissues is called chronic intoxication because the intoxication occurs over time with slow, continuous intoxication. The heavy metal treatment circulates in the organs, including the brain. It binds to the heavy metals fixed in the organs. It then circulates again in the body with the heavy metals and is intercepted by the kidneys. Urinalysis after treatment therefore reveals whether there are stocks of heavy metals in the body. Untreated urine and blood tests therefore conceal fixed stocks of excess heavy metals in the tissues.



To establish totally reliable body charges, a post-mortem body must be dissolved. As this is not ethically feasible, reliable body references will never be established. The links between chronic diseases and metals can therefore never be established. In the absence of such links, toxicology chains will dictate that no treatment should be given. What's more, it will never be possible to say whether a biological analysis carried out during a patient's lifetime is reliable, because it cannot be compared with the body burden. Validated biological analyses are therefore validated by national and international health agencies without checking whether these analyses were reliable or representative of the body burden. However, these validated analyses are used exclusively for official studies. All the conclusions reached by national and international toxicology bodies are therefore null and void. The only recourse is to treat excess metals with post-treatment analyses. Treatment does not give a reliable body burden, but it does indicate whether there are excess metals in the tissues.



In the toxicology treatise CHELATION THERAPY (https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/dow ... php?id=972 ), at the beginning of chapter 4, it states:

"Metal overexposures, ranging from non-symptomatic high body levels to acute or chronic life-threatening poisoning, should generally be treated by removing the source of exposure, through various decontamination procedures and symptomatic treatment. However, in a sizeable number of cases, various chelation therapy programmes offer an effective means of managing the adverse effects of metal overexposure, either by reducing the toxicity of the metal by forming a less toxic complex, modifying the toxicodynamics of the metal, thereby reducing the interaction of the metal with a vulnerable target and/or modifying the toxicokinetics of the metal, thereby reducing its absorption and/or enhancing its excretion." This treatise runs to 370 pages. Chapter 4 is entitled: Chelation therapy in acute and chronic metal overexposure - experimental and clinical studies. Chapter 4 devotes 122 pages to chronic intoxications, yet chronic intoxications are totally denied by the French toxicology industry because the French toxicology industry has not carried out any general population benchmarking of post-treatment diagnoses. The French toxicology industry is therefore in total contradiction with the scientific literature.

Chapter 3.5 of the toxicology treatise CHELATION THERAPY states:

"In the diagnosis of lead poisoning, difficulties can arise when exposure has ceased some time ago and much of the lead has been transferred from the blood to the bones. In such cases, blood lead concentrations may have returned to the reference range during the diagnostic attempt. In vivo determination of lead in bone, preferably finger bone, by X-ray fluorescence has been used for biological monitoring of deposited lead (Skerfving, Gerhardsson, Schutz and Stromberg, 1998). A CaNa2-EDTA challenge test was also used to estimate body lead burden. A standard dose of CaNa2-EDTA will increase urinary excretion of stored lead". This treatise confirms that heavy metal poisoning exists despite the fact that there are no heavy metals in the blood. This treatise confirms that the treatment of heavy metals eliminates the heavy metals present in the body beyond the blood. Despite the lack of references, this treatise confirms that chronic intoxication is assessed in practice by post-treatment analyses (provocation test).



Chapter 2.2.5 states: "Calcium disodium acetate (CaNa2EDTA ) is indicated in acute and chronic lead poisoning and lead encephalopathy to reduce blood concentrations and stores of the toxic metal ion in both children and adults". According to this treatise on toxicology, the treatment of body stores of heavy metals in tissues as part of chronic heavy metal intoxication is explicitly indicated. These excesses are not eliminated naturally, so their excretion must be forced. However, the Poison Control Centres refuse to allow French doctors to diagnose and treat poisons and chronic poisoning on French territory. On French soil, heavy metal safety is not a priority. What takes precedence is a seriously flawed consensus.



Furthermore, according to the French Societies of Toxicology: "The majority of metallic elements are present and measurable in most individuals and the administration of a chelating agent increases urinary excretion in all of them" (see https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/dow ... hp?id=1017). This indicates that excess metals affect all individuals, whether symptomatic or not. This indicates that, according to the French toxicology societies, validated biological analyses are not representative of the body burden in the general population. This indicates that the French toxicology societies have been informed that the validated biological analyses are flawed. Their lack of reaction is therefore deliberate. However, this article adds that references without treatment cannot be recovered for post-treatment analyses, because the analysis conditions are different. This allows the Poison Control Centres to reject a post-treatment analysis. I lodged a complaint against Poison Control Centres, but the courts confirmed that Poison Control Centres should not treat poisons. So that the Poison Control Centres could legally escape their mission, the French Societies of Toxicology declared, unbeknownst to everyone, that heavy metals in the body are not part of the consensus. As there is no international consensus on treating heavy metals in the body, no country treats heavy metals without its government knowing about it. Let me remind you that the Poison Control Centres are a public service responsible for the good health of the French people. The French Societies of Toxicology are not motivated by medical or scientific considerations; it's purely an administrative arrangement. Toxicologists are making a mockery of the world. The absence of references also allows health agencies to deny the presence of heavy metals in the body of the general population. It is extremely shocking that the post-treatment references have not yet been established by the toxicology sector. The references are the values for the general population in good health. Thanks to these general population values, an individual biological analysis can be compared with a healthy population. Establishing these reference values in the general population therefore makes it possible to validate a biological analysis. Establishing reference values after chelation will make it possible to significantly improve the health of French people.



According to the Collège de France https://www.college-de-france.fr/fr/age ... ommensales at 00:05:00, autoimmune diseases have been on the rise since the post-war period. The cocktail of pollutants is thought to be a co-factor in this increase. What's shocking is that the toxicology sectors have not installed any preventive or treatment measures against pollution. According to article D6141-41 of the French Public Health Code, Poison Control Centres are involved in preventing poisoning and educating the public about health issues. In the absence of physical references, Poison Control Centres cannot fulfil their public health mission. Public health is therefore put at risk by Poison Control Centres.



WITCH HUNT

The French Poison Control Centres have made public threats against a hospital doctor in Orléans who was treating chronic poisoning with post-treatment diagnoses. These threats can be found on the following page: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/a ... 815000645#. Despite the fact that the scientific literature reports that post-treatment diagnosis is commonly used by doctors to assess chronic poisoning, the Poison Control Centres claim that post-treatment diagnosis is an "organised swindle". The Poison Control Centres are concealing the fact that the international and national networks have not done their job in terms of body and post-treatment references, and that it is for this reason that they are refusing to allow chronic intoxication to be diagnosed by post-treatment analyses. The Poison Control Centres are blaming a fault of their own. This is profound malice. The Poison Control Centres are also concealing the fact that their validated protocols are totally flawed. As a result of these threats, the hospital has closed its chronic intoxication treatment service: https://toute-la.veille-acteurs-sante.f ... ommunique/. As a result, it is now impossible to get conventional treatment for heavy metals in France. I lodged a complaint, but the courts did not wish to look into the matter. You should know that the French justice system does not want government departments to be taken to court. The diagnosis, treatment and cure are an affront to consensus. They make the Poison Control Centres look ridiculous. The Poison Control Centres have therefore set themselves up as an autocrat who looks down on therapists and patients. The Poison Control Centres have decided to nip protest in the bud before it spreads, because they know that their failings lead to scandal. The same applies to general medicine, with traditional medicines ridiculing conventional medicine.



For forty years, French toxicology has repeatedly violated the Constitution, because Article 10 stipulates: "The Nation shall guarantee to the individual and to the family the conditions necessary for their development". The first post-treatment study was published in 1980.



Post-treatment diagnostics are admittedly imperfect because they lack references, but the protocols of the French toxicology network are far more defective. The French system denies the body and threatens any specialist who does not. The stakes are high, because we're not just talking about a few cases. The failure of validated protocols concerns all French people, because the failure is at the level of blood sampling. According to the Aphp, 20 million French people suffer from chronic diseases. French patients are multiplying like cancer. A large proportion of these patients can be attributed to the widespread failure of validated biological analyses (blood tests, urine samples, hair samples). Blood represents only 5% of the body. So 95% of the body is deliberately excluded from French toxicology and science. No cause is treated by conventional medicine. When a cause is treated unconventionally, the French Medical Association and Poison Control Centres go after the therapists.



Oncologist Hugues de Thé, Professor and Chair of Oncology at the Collège de France, asserts at the Collège de France that metabolism suppresses cancerous tumours.

source: https://www.college-de-france.fr/fr/age ... llulaire-3 from 00:05:26 and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kkz5gnvJ8ek. Catherine Picard, President of Unadfi (Union nationale des Associations de Défense des Familles et de l'Individu victimes de sectes) states that metabolism does not cure cancer. She declared on a major radio station that people who advocate metabolism are cults: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JyWPQWN2lSM . The State therefore considers as sectarian people who advocate techniques that the Collège de France qualifies as effective. Neither the State nor the health institutions have checked the state of science. What's more, the virtues of metabolism have been known for thousands of years.



Dr Melet claimed that dental amalgams caused mercury poisoning. Despite the fact that the scientific literature confirms this, he was hunted down by the Ordre des Médecins because French medical institutions declared that amalgams did not cause intoxication https://www.non-au-mercure-dentaire.org ... -melet.php. Perverted by the French toxicology industry, the French State and medical institutions embarked on a witch-hunt without checking the state of science. The French Medical Association and the State also took the case to court. In turn, the courts have been perverted.



HEALING CHRONIC ILLNESSES

The testimonies of patients who claim to have been cured of chronic illnesses (cancer, autism, etc.) correspond to the treatments for the causes reported by the Collège de France. https://www.college-de-france.fr/fr/age ... ss-oxydant at 00:14:55 + https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/dow ... hp?id=1056 + see attached file STRESS OXYDANT.png. Treating exposure and the body burden of pollution, infections and metabolism would have cured cancer, autism and other diseases. Yet the causes, treatments and testimonies of those cured are totally denied by conventional medicine and by the French toxicology industry. Diseases are therefore neither prevented nor cured in the general population. According to the testimonies, family doctors told these patients that there was no chance of being cured. The national toxicology network is therefore not listening to the scientific literature, the Collège de France or to patients who have been cured using alternatives to doctors. Toxicology sufferers and people who have recovered from chronic illnesses by treating the causes listed by the Collège de France will be labelled as delusional or sectarian by the Ordre des Médecins and by the State https://www.conseil-national.medecin.fr ... m_psnc.pdf. In this report, the French Medical Association states: "Thus, we speak of therapeutic aberration when doctors make prescriptions that are not in line with scientific knowledge" (Page 27). Conventional medicine and science that deny 95% of the body are neither medicine nor science. To reuse the vocabulary of the Ordre des médecins in its report, this is a charlatan and sectarian drift. However, in this context, the monopoly position of the Ordre des médecins gives it a totalitarian aspect. The Ordre des médecins did not consult the Collège de France or the scientific literature. For example, in its report, the Ordre des médecins disputes the virtues of fasting without citing its sources. A multiplicity of medical orders would have been a safeguard. Page 35 of the report states that the Ordre des médecins wishes to put an end to unconventional practices. Having neglected chronic health in conventional practices, the Ordre des médecins is now imposing this neglect on the whole country. What matters is not good health, but that the Ordre des médecins does not lose a crumb of its juicy monopoly by maximising its economy. Patients who consult unconventional therapists would prefer to get answers from conventional doctors because the consultation and therapy are reimbursed. If unconventional practices are booming, it's because the Ordre des Médecins denies the Collège de France. Instead of hounding therapists who treat body burdens, the Order should return to the benches of the Collège de France. The Ordre des Médecins will be too proud to admit its mistakes. The State will have to impose the inclusion of traditional medicines in conventional medicine.



The scientific literature certainly reports that the treatment of heavy metals does not cure a majority of autistic people, but this is no reason to confiscate the treatment of excess metals. It is healthy to eliminate heavy metals even if this does not cure the pathology. Heavy metals have delayed effects. Diseases appear after they have disappeared. Cells have a certain number of cycles. Heavy metals speed up these cycles to compensate for the disappearance of the cells. The heavy metals are then eliminated after 20 years, but the cells degenerate because they have reached the end of their cycle. According to the scientific literature, heavy metals have an impact on foetal development. The disease is therefore set in stone in terms of development. Conventional medicine should therefore prevent and treat the causes of the chronic diseases identified by the Collège de France. These are health techniques that have all been confiscated by the French toxicology sector, which has not carried out its reference work. Urine is a homogeneous mixture. It is therefore easy to extract inorganic heavy metals from analyses and references. But stools are not homogeneous. Analyses and references for organic oxidising particles are therefore very uncertain. So we have to treat without analysis and without reference. Science is 95% flawed, and cannot be used as a pretext to confiscate health techniques (cupping, Ayurveda, fasting). Many chronic diseases are set in stone, so it makes sense to prevent them by treating the causes identified by the Collège de France. What's more, some chronic diseases are reversible, so it makes sense to treat the causes identified by the Collège de France (exposure and body burden). However, in practice, conventional and experimental medicine only treats exposure.



In its PNSE3 (National Environmental Health Plan) 2015-2019, the Government asked the STC (Society of Clinical Toxicology) to draw up recommendations for good practice in the treatment of pregnant women heavily impregnated with mercury. Action 21 https://sante.gouv.fr/IMG/pdf/pnse3_v_finale.pdf. The STC's response can be found on the following page: https://www.toxicologie-clinique.org/re ... -a-naitre/. This STC response denies body mercury in mothers and babies. It also denies post-treatment diagnoses. It is based on validated analyses that are falsely reassuring. STC does not disinfect the body, so it is not responding to the Government's demands. What's more, after applying the faulty STC protocol, the practitioner will falsely claim to the patient that she will be completely free of mercury. The right approach is to diagnose women of childbearing age after treatment. What's more, the PNSE3 has been ratified by Parliament, so the STC has betrayed the French people. Among French toxicologists, the lack of international consensus takes precedence over Parliament. The STC should be dissolved immediately.



According to the Government, neurodevelopmental disorders affect 5% of the population, or around 35,000 births a year, https://handicap.gouv.fr/la-strategie-n ... -2018-2022 .



In addition, there are organic oxidising particles (pesticides, squalene vaccines) which have never been analysed in the body. Organic oxidising particles in the brain cannot be analysed while the patient is still alive using official protocols. The toxicology sector therefore denies the existence of these oxidising particles. Ayurveda, cupping and fasting treat these particles. Ayurveda is a medicine practised in hospitals in India. The treatment involves ingesting a large quantity of vegetable oil. The oil circulates in the body and drains the organic oxidising particles. The oxidising particles are found in the emunctories (intestines, etc.). They are then eliminated. Analyses have never been carried out by national or international toxicology networks. However, in the absence of references for the body, these networks will take the liberty of declaring that toxic organic compounds are non-toxic. As for references in the general population, we can count on the international and national toxicology networks never to carry them out. The failure of the national toxicology network is extremely wide-ranging. This network should be looking at all the oxidising particles listed by the Collège de France. The only thing that counts for the toxicology network is its failing consensus, even if it means leaving the general population in poor health. According to these networks, no one should be diagnosed or cured outside their consensus. Populations are therefore put at risk by the toxicology networks.

HYPER ELECTROSENSITIVITY (EHS)
Here's another example. Anses has published a 350-page report on electrosensitivity https://www.anses.fr/fr/system/files/AP2011SA0150Ra.pdf. The report concludes that the scientific literature has not found the causes of electrosensitivity (sensitivity to waves). The main report states on page 203: "There are currently no scientific studies on the tissue concentrations of heavy metals and their urinary elimination in people declaring themselves to be EHS. The results of the only study analysed on blood concentrations of heavy metals are not sufficient to conclude whether or not there is an association between heavy metal intoxication and the onset of EHS". Heavy metals in the body have therefore not been studied and the conclusions are based on blood in which no heavy metals appear. However, in appendix 1 page 100 https://www.anses.fr/fr/system/files/AP ... a-Anx1.pdf, a sociologist who carried out a survey of electrosensitive people testified: "To enter into a healing process, EHS sufferers have to take hold of other diagnoses, such as heavy metal poisoning or Lyme disease". Electrosensitive people therefore treat themselves for heavy metal poisoning and infections, and recover from illnesses that health agencies declare they cannot cure. So ANSES is not listening to the testimonies of the cured or the sociologists, and is officially ignoring the body burden. What's more, the Collège de France knows how to cause discomfort to patients by applying waves. To do this, it claims that patients need to be poisoned with heavy metals https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjU7YbO4OOE. This proves that ANSES does not listen to the Collège de France. ANSES only listens to articles that lead nowhere.



The same applies to mercury and aluminium vaccines. The same applies to chronic diseases. The French Minister of Health told the Senate that the entire medical chain (WHO, French medical academies, the High Council for Public Health, the FDA, the European Medicines Agency) had concluded that aluminium in vaccines was harmless https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UurxTu3FqVc. It adds that hundreds of millions of doses have been injected worldwide. However, without a body reference, it is strictly impossible to conclude that aluminium in vaccines is harmless. The flaw is structural, so the entire institutional chain is in error. The benefit/risk calculation takes no account of violent reactions (psychological disorders, autism, death), chronic illnesses or all the doses of heavy metals administered in all vaccines. With 20 million chronically ill people, taking these factors into account will eventually turn the benefit-risk calculation on its head. However, it is already shocking that the treatment of heavy metals should be banned. What's more, heavy metals can inflict irreversible damage and then be eliminated by the body. Diagnosis and treatment will therefore be in vain. In other words, the link between chronic illness and heavy metals cannot be established, even in post-mortem analyses. These chronic diseases will therefore escape the benefit/risk balance. The references are therefore not a totally reliable indicator for the general population. What's more, some diseases may appear late (Alzheimer's) because the tissues have been worn down at an early stage. These diseases should therefore be included in the benefit/risk calculation, because the body is a dynamic thing that cannot be confined to science, and because the onset of illnesses occurs at a distance from the injection or the amalgam filling. In its report, science is the leitmotiv of the Ordre des Médecins, but science is merely a pretext for stepping on toes and increasing doctors' incomes. "All fashionable vices pass for virtues", Molière. For complete information, all vaccines and amalgams must be taken into account. Medicine is the biggest source of public exposure to toxicity. Following my messages, the Chairman of the HAS Vaccines Commission informed me that all the mercury in all vaccines had been removed. It wasn't the government that took this initiative, it was the anti-vax campaigners who won the day. This shows that you have to fight for your health. Today, only 5% of the body is covered by the state. So we have to fight for 100% of the body to be taken into account in studies. The only thing the state wants is not to contradict itself. So 95% of the body will be denied as long as no one disputes.


There are accounts of autism being cured by treating pollution and/or infections and/or metabolism. There are accounts of cancer being cured by diet, metabolism or cold baths. To give yourself the best chance of curing a chronic disease, you need to treat all the causes listed by the Collège de France. For example, pesticides cause inflammation, which in turn causes cancer. Pollution can be treated with chelating agents and Ayurveda (ingestion of vegetable oil). These techniques also treat the brain. Calorie restriction and cupping also eliminate oxidising particles. Infections are treated with anti-micro-organism products (essential oils, medicines, etc.). Metabolism is treated by calorie restriction and exposure to cold. Roman
thermal baths had cold baths. Exposure to cold was therefore a public health policy. Metabolism is the combination of catabolism and anabolism. In other words, metabolism is the combination of the nucleus (production of proteins) of the cell and the mitochondria (destruction of carbon chains) of the cell. According to the Collège de France, the nucleus and the mitochondria need to talk to each other. The nucleus must therefore be in a favourable state to produce proteins and the mitochondria must be young and fresh to eliminate all the carbon chains, otherwise it is oxidising. However, there is no diagnosis or reference in the general population on the state of the nucleus and the state of the mitochondria. The causes and cures of disease are therefore denied by conventional medicine. Youtubers who do not deny the causes and cures of chronic illnesses are enjoying resounding success, because conventional medicine has created a sidereal vacuum. Conventional medicine's rejection of traditional medicine is a serious mistake, because the Collège de France and patients are in favour of traditional medicine. As chronic disease remissions are low, it is preferable to invest in prevention.



According to the Collège de France, calorie restriction and the ketogenic diet unfold DNA and enable the transcription of proteins https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jaejfvXXEg0. The cell can finally respond to aggression. According to the slide on the screen, neurons surviving Alzheimer's disease are protected by this diet. With the ketogenic diet and calorie restriction, the nucleus expresses anti-cancer genes. The metabolism therefore treats the cancer. This sometimes makes it possible to reduce the need for toxic conventional treatments and surgery. Conventional treatments are expensive (several tens of thousands of euros). Metabolism is free. Treating all the causes of chronic disease is inexpensive, but requires chronic application. This explains the success of therapists on YouTube, because the terrain favourable to chronic disease is not limited by conventional medicine. This rightly feeds the conspiracy theory that doctors encourage the onset of chronic illnesses. There is medical proof that calorie restriction cured a terminally ill person who was told by oncologists that she was doomed within 3 months. I've never found any decisive statistics on remissions. According to Dr Laurent Schwartz, cancer patients report that their metabolism improves but is limited. No technique can therefore claim to replace another. One cancer patient combined the techniques reported by the Collège de France (calorie restriction, metabolism, chemotherapy, cold baths). His oncologist was astonished by his total remission. However, his oncologist stated that he was not interested in the techniques reported by the Collège de France. This doctor is denying science, and is therefore involved in a therapeutic drift that could be sanctioned by the French Medical Association. Laurent Schwartz was expelled from the APHP for his audacity. This indicates that treating the causes of disease will be considered an affront to medicine. Only politicians will be able to impose treatment of the causes.



Cancer is thought to arise from mitochondrial dysfunction (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SO1472QvAMA). But there is a spiral of causes. In the absence of a functional mitochondrion, sugar molecules are broken into two pieces in the cell in order to create the energy the cell needs. However, these two half-sugar pieces remain in the cell and accumulate. The cell therefore grows abnormally in size. As soon as it doubles in size, it divides. Cancer is the result of this process running out of control. To prevent the cell from growing and dividing, we need to stop eating sugar. According to the Collège de France, autophagy through calorie restriction eliminates failing mitochondria (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QBe49Abm8aU), so it would help to resolve cancers over time. Furthermore, according to the Collège de France, mitochondrial biogenesis can be revived by taking cold baths. This would allow the complete combustion of sugar. The cell would not increase in size and would not need to divide, even in the presence of sugar. With cold baths, hair loss and relapse are better prevented. However, it is not useless to treat other categories of oxidising particles (heavy metals, pesticides, anxiety, etc.) because, according to the Collège de France, all oxidising particles contribute to cancer. With calorie restriction, some patients recover and do not relapse because the causes of the cancer are treated. With chemotherapy alone, the Collège de France claims that patients relapse because this treatment only treats the symptoms https://www.college-de-france.fr/fr/age ... -moderne-5 at 00:40:20. As long as a single cause remains neglected, the risk of recurrence is not minimised. Chronic diseases are a synergy of factors, and conventional medicine is a patchwork quilt. It is therefore up to the GP to treat all the causes one by one. To treat all the causes, you need to combine a number of medicines (contemporary and traditional). Because of its multidisciplinary nature, only the Collège de France will be able to dissect the panoply of techniques to be used and accurately select the steps to be taken to eliminate all categories of oxidising particles.



The following page lists all the conventional treatments offered by the Institute of Cancer Research: https://web.archive.org/web/20230306170 ... raitements. None of these treatments addresses the causes of cancer identified by the Collège de France. What's more, under the heading "Miracle Treatments", the Institut du Cancer discourages the use of any other treatment (including the causes) (https://web.archive.org/web/20230306170 ... s-miracles).


The Collège de France is France's highest university. Professors are chosen for their work, not for stupidly repeating the consensus. Anarchy has a small part of truth that the State must take into account. But the Collège de France is there to filter out the truths, because science is nothing but a shambles. According to the Collège de France, heavy metals and mitochondrial dysfunction are common features of neurodegenerative
diseases: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT9dcKBQtz4. According to the Collège de France, cold baths and diets promote the activity and massive biogenesis of mitochondria: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sHXCojIDrt8. The mitochondrion is the site of heat production and the destruction of carbon chains: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B4wOK0TSEe8, the mitochondrion regulates proteins. Cold baths also increase the number of capillaries. This restores tension. It brings oxygen closer to the cells. This massively accelerates healing. A series of cold baths provides lasting tissue regeneration. The range of illnesses improved by cold baths is vast (paralysis, osteoarthritis, depression, MS, arrhythmia, etc.). See WIM HOF's testimonials of miraculous cures (https://www.youtube.com/@wimhof1, 2.6 million subscribers). Properly conducted, a cold bath has no side effects.



According to the toxicology treatise CHELATION THERAPY (page 334):

"However, it is particularly interesting to note that high levels of copper and iron are present in insoluble beta-amyloid plaques in the post-mortem brains of patients suffering from Alzheimer's disease." However, the validated toxicological profiles of Alzheimer's patients do not show an excess of iron and copper. This illustrates the general illusion that validated analyses do not reveal intoxication. French toxicology societies have banned the treatment of metals. Alzheimer's patients will therefore never be treated for excess metals. One million French people are carriers of Alzheimer's disease. 20% of French people are likely to develop Alzheimer's. The number of victims of French toxicology is therefore extremely high. This suggests that the French should be treated for chronic diseases before they fall ill. This is the same approach as a vaccine. Given the scale of the public health problem, only politicians can act above and beyond the health agencies. The health system is paralysed by its shortcomings. Dependency and its management will be significantly reduced by prevention.



At the Collège de France https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JjqJ6708src, guest Professor Bernard Meunier asserts that current Alzheimer's treatments are toxic and have no effect on the course of the disease, but according to this Professor, it would be impossible to leave Alzheimer's patients untreated. Treatments cost several thousand euros a month. For a very high price and at public expense, seriously ill people are being poisoned without any benefit. This is a therapeutic abuse that should be punished by the French Medical Association, and the Court of Auditors should also examine this situation. The slide on the screen shows that blood is neither representative of healthy brains nor of the brains of people with Alzheimer's disease. The Professor adds that the brains of post-mortem Alzheimer's patients show serious abnormalities in the levels of copper, iron and zinc compared with healthy brains. He recommends metal treatment. However, the international and national health authorities have failed to identify any abnormalities in the validated analyses (blood, urine, hair) of Alzheimer's patients. They will therefore have to retract their statements. In view of their extremely aggressive practices against doctors who make post-treatment diagnoses, these networks will refuse to back down. They will prefer to leave large numbers of patients without treatment for excess metals. The courts should rule on their liability. Conventional medicine is at a loss when it comes to chronic diseases, and refuses to take account of the Collège de France or the scientific literature. Its loss is therefore unjustified.



According to the toxicology treatise CHELATION THERAPY (page 176):

"Gonzales-Ramirez et al (1995) used the ASD mobilisation test to study mercury exposure in dentists and dental technicians. Urinary mercury excretion after challenge with DMPS was significantly higher than in controls not exposed to mercury, and higher in dentists. Mercury excretion post-DMPS and pre-DMPS were highly correlated. The amount of mercury mobilised by DMPS and neurobehavioural test results showed a significant inverse relationship. This indicates a potential value of the test in the diagnosis of undesirable exposure to mercury." This toxicology treatise therefore reports that post-treatment tests are a potential diagnosis of mercury poisoning. However, the French toxicology industry refuses to accept this diagnosis.



According to the toxicology treatise CHELATION THERAPY (page 175):

"Aposhian et al (1992) used the ASD mobilisation test to study mercury exposure and systemic mercury load in populations not occupationally exposed to mercury. In a group of volunteers, a statistically significant correlation was observed between the "amalgam score" (number and size of dental amalgams) and the urinary excretion of mercury caused by DMPS". However, the French health authorities have stated that amalgams pose no risk because their biological analyses are untreated. However, this extract shows that analyses after mercury treatment are correlated with the number of amalgams present in the mouth. In other words, despite declarations by French health agencies, dental amalgam intoxicates those who wear it. Post-treatment studies have been pointing the finger at amalgam for forty years. The toxicology departments have never responded to these accusations. Their only response is to assert their faulty protocols to the government and to denigrate the effective protocols. According to the Ministry of Health (https://sante.gouv.fr/soins-et-maladies ... ble%C3%A9s): "To date, no rigorous scientific study has been able to demonstrate any harmful effects of amalgam fillings on patients' general state of health". Post-treatment studies have therefore been rigorously ruled out because the references have not been established by the Intuitions in charge of these references. Yet it is these same institutions that reject post-treatment studies. Doubt has not been removed, because removing doubt compromises the French toxicology industry. The State has relayed the word of the French toxicology industry, so the State will have to back down. Only the President of the Republic will take the initiative to disown the State. A Minister of Health will never take the initiative of contradicting the Ministry of Health.



According to the toxicology treatise CHELATION THERAPY (page 324):

"Low exposure to mercury in children could result from the addition of the antiseptic agent thiomersal to vaccines. Thiomersal is metabolised to ethylmercury in the human body. It has been claimed that this mercury, even in minute doses, can cause autism, a serious illness. This hypothesis has led to the proposal of mercury chelation by DMPS or DMSA as a therapy for autism. However, no peer-reviewed articles have reported excess mercury in the blood, urine or hair of subjects suffering from autism. Critical reviews have concluded that there is insufficient scientific support for mercury chelation in autism." This extract illustrates that autism has not yet been the subject of a mercury body burden study. According to this extract, the scientists are contesting the validated biological analyses. They state that these studies are insufficient to express a definitive opinion. They added that studies of body burden caused by the treatment of heavy metals were lacking. Parents who claim that the vaccine has made their child autistic are being challenged by conventional medicine. However, scientifically and in the light of the literature, when a doctor vaccinates a child with mercury or aluminium, he must officially tell the parents that he does not know what he is doing.



However, the French toxicology societies state: "Contrary to what some para-scientific publications (and with them, some practitioners) claim, there is insufficient evidence of a causal association between contamination by a metallic element and certain conditions, such as autism, multiple sclerosis, Parkinson's disease, chronic fatigue syndrome, gout, cardiovascular disease, macular degeneration or macrophage myofascitis". Source: https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/dow ... hp?id=1017. Given the lack of evidence, French toxicology societies have banned the treatment of heavy metals in France. However, the methodology for compiling the evidence is officially flawed. The French toxicology societies are therefore concealing the fact that the official studies on which they base their conclusions are flawed. The French toxicology industry is based on these validated and flawed diagnoses. It therefore conceals the fact that its approaches and conclusions are heavily contested by scientists in the literature. The French toxicology industry refuses to take into account the body from all sides: the government, scientists, scientific literature, the Collège de France, patients and the French people. This is a sectarian drift that could be sanctioned by the French Medical Association. Science has become a pretext for systematically increasing the economic activity of doctors. The French toxicology industry has adopted a communications policy designed to prevent the right questions being asked, because these questions challenge the general consensus reached between national and international health agencies. Medicine is making the most of the trust placed in it by the State and the French people.



Furthermore, according to the toxicology treatise CHELATION THERAPY (pages 74-75) :

"A CaNa2-EDTA challenge test was also used to estimate the body burden of lead. A standard dose of CaNa2-EDTA increases urinary excretion of stored lead. However, reference values are not defined for this test, and the rationale for using the EDTA test has been questioned." The body burden assessment is therefore being challenged on administrative grounds: national and international toxicology channels have not carried out the reference work. According to this extract, the fact of looking for heavy metals in the body is contested. Heavy metals are therefore taboo in the toxicology field. The international consensus of the health agencies is therefore to blindly rely on biological analyses without treatment, even if this means sacrificing the study of body burden, and even if it means sacrificing public health.



No general population, whether in good health or suffering from chronic illness, has yet been the subject of a study of body burdens of mercury, any other metal, any other organic oxidising particle or any pollution. The range of body burdens is extremely broad. What's more, according to the APHP, 20 million French people suffer from chronic illnesses. This very high number of patients may therefore be partly explained by the failure to take blood or urine samples without treatment. Everyone wrongly believes that toxicologists examine the whole body. In reality, however, the Poison Control Centres require only the unrepresentative 5% to be taken into account.



The French toxicology industry is caught in a lie. What's more, it has embarked on a witch-hunt. What's more, it has perverted the State and the justice system. So there's no going back. In contact with patients, the mission of the Poison Control Centres was to prevent the failure of the international health system. What's more, the French toxicology network will make it impossible to produce references for post-treatment analyses, because these references will reveal that dental amalgams are intoxicating. With these references, the French toxicology sector will have to disavow itself. With these references, it will no longer be possible to have confidence in the French toxicology sector. To cover up their failure, they will prevent progress. It will therefore continue to make public threats against the doctors who treat patients. And it will continue to deny the scientific literature. To break the deadlock, the Politicians must force the French toxicology industry to do its job of setting the standard. What's more, it is extremely shocking that the toxicology industry should confiscate the treatment of heavy metals in France. The Ministry of Health should open care centres that treat all oxidising particles, even if there are no references for the general population. Heavy metals wear away tissue. Heavy metals are eventually eliminated. Ten years later, the tissues degenerate. It is very difficult to reverse degeneration. People with excess metals need to be treated even if they have no symptoms, because excess metals have delayed effects (cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, osteoarthritis, ageing). There is an alternative to references, which is to treat as long as the analyses after treatment reach the values without treatment, which indicates that the molecules have treated what they could treat.



Post-treatment studies will express a value in a healthy population. This value will be the reference. In a sick person, the value will be compared with the reference value. And treatment will continue until the value falls back to the reference value. As the reference has not been established, Western health agencies have banned the treatment. Western health agencies will refuse to carry out these studies because they will show that the current official analyses are flawed. The President must ask for these analyses to be carried out.



According to the French Toxicology Societies, the treatment of heavy metals causes rare treatment incidents. The French toxicology societies are therefore playing on patients' fears. However, according to the German Toxicology Association KMT, its protocols are incident-free, see FAQ no. 2 https://www.metallausleitung.de/f%C3%BCr-patienten/faq/. Contrary to what the French toxicology societies claim, it is therefore possible to treat patients with complete peace of mind. The treatment protocols of French poison control centres are therefore also flawed.



I was treated in a medical environment by a doctor who had trained in the United States and was working in France illegally. The doctor injected a 5cl ampoule intravenously every month. Only this type of packaging is available on the market. The active ingredient was therefore highly concentrated in a small volume. After six months of treatment, I experienced very little relief from my symptoms (headaches). So I thought I'd be cured in several decades. What's more, the doctor said that patients were reporting that they still had symptoms after the tests had become negative because the treatment doesn't circulate in the brain. So I bought some powdered treatments on the internet, which cost 30 euros. I mixed them with a large quantity of water and oil. Diluting them in a large volume of water is the usual protocol in herbalists' shops. In just 3 months, I was cured of all the electro-sensitivity and headaches I'd had for 15 years. The high dilution percolates deep into the brain like wine. This is not the case with doctors' procedures. Highly concentrated doses do not percolate through the body, so they are not very effective. Heavy metals are arranged in a cloud, so the active ingredients have to be administered in a cloud. The methods of administration currently used in the medical field therefore have significant progress to make. My full protocol is available on the following page: https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/vie ... 14#p121814. I have added a summary of the treatment of all categories of oxidising particles. With my protocol, the complexity of treating heavy metals is significantly simplified. My protocol is a hundred times more effective than those used by doctors. With my protocol, the references will be a hundred times finer. What's more, it's possible to divide up the doses and take them daily at home. This will avoid the cardiac accidents caused by decalcification associated with the large, highly concentrated monthly doses used in medical practice and brandished by Poison Control Centres to frighten patients. An effervescent tablet should be invented, to be bought in pharmacies on prescription. An effervescent tablet straddles the line between industry and herbal medicine. At home, you don't have to bother a doctor dozens or a hundred times to give an intravenous injection. This considerably simplifies patient care. On an empty stomach, the active ingredients, diluted in water or oil, enter the bloodstream directly. An intravenous injection is therefore not essential. Bones store heavy metals, but the treatment does not penetrate them. After an initial course of treatment, the bones slowly release their heavy metals and reintoxicate the soft tissues. Treatment campaigns will therefore have to be repeated annually. So treatment is hard work. That's why chronic poisoning should be treated by a GP. Acute poisoning remains the responsibility of the Poison Control Centre, as it is a specific, one-off intervention. I would remind you that my treatise is available free of charge; the link is given at the beginning of this message.



According to the toxicology treatise CHELATION THERAPY (page 35), treatments are sensitive to acidity. After capturing heavy metals in the body, they release them en masse in an acid organ (kidneys). The organ is therefore heavily and permanently damaged. In an alkaline environment, the treatments capture and bind the heavy metals. Acidity therefore creates insidious treatment incidents. These incidents are rare, but doctors play them down. With my protocol, it is possible to add a high dose of sodium bicarbonate (pH8) to the drinking solution. This reduces the risk of incidents and increases the effectiveness of the treatment. I have set out all my recommendations for incidents in chapter 2.3 of my protocol. With my protocol, the French Poison Control Centres will no longer be able to frighten patients. Morning urine is acidic (pH 5.5) because acid migrates to the bladder at night. The digesting stomach is also acidic, so the treatment must be taken on an empty stomach. The body is most alkaline after the first morning's urine. It is therefore preferable to take the treatment at this time.



According to the mining experts invited to the Collège de France, there are several dozen parameters governing the interactions between atoms https://www.college-de-france.fr/fr/age ... xtractives. These mining experts are appointed by the French government. They manage the stability of abandoned mines in France to prevent the spread of heavy metals into the environment through run-off by throwing lime (pH13) onto the slag heaps. Acid rain releases heavy metals. It seems that pH is a dominant parameter over the other parameters. But these experts should be consulted by toxicologists to consolidate the effectiveness and safety of heavy metal treatments.



The Germans have set up a metal treatment industry. One hundred doctors work in Germany https://www.metallausleitung.de/. The Belgian Poison Control Centre told me that chronic poisoning was a complex problem with no simple solution. For the Germans, chronic poisoning is a simple problem with a simple treatment.



Since 2021, I've already contacted 10,000 managers. I have received several hundred replies. The French and American Societies of Toxicology have not responded. The French and American poison control centres have not replied. The Anses and Santé Publique France have acknowledged receipt of my texts, but have not given any action plan. The Direction Générale de la Santé (DGS) has acknowledged receipt of my texts. It promised to reply but did not do so despite my reminders. The Director of a French health agency replied. She implied that she was satisfied with internationally validated analyses. I replied that validation is a cancer of the mind that eliminated the Collège de France. I contacted the APHP's ComPare study of 50,000 chronic disease patients. They told me that the causes of chronic diseases were outside the scope of the study. I contacted the American Health Agencies, which establish the references that the rest of the world uses. The Director General of the NIH (National Institute of Health, 20,000 employees) replied at length on letterhead (https://www.forum-depression.com/downlo ... p?id=10669). The Director General of the CDC (Centre for Disease Control, 20,000 employees) wrote that I was raising an important issue. I would remind you that it is forbidden to lie in the United States, so the American Health Agencies plead guilty to the absence of body references.



The official blood lead level (without treatment) is extremely high at 50 µg/L. This level does not come from the general population, but from a consensus. Consensus is therefore established to depart from science and to get rid of the majority of poisoning cases. According to Inserm : https://web.archive.org/web/20240106192 ... aturnisme/ : "This is an intervention threshold, triggering mandatory reporting to the health authorities, an environmental investigation and protective measures. However, much lower concentrations are widespread and deleterious, particularly in children. ". The toxicology industry is therefore cheating all over the place. The State will therefore have to apply preventive quality control at every stage of the regularisation process. I would remind you that the references must be established in a healthy population that has never been exposed to oxidising particles. People who smoke, have amalgam fillings or have been vaccinated must all be excluded from the process of establishing references. To regain their health, the consensus will all have to be cancelled. Failing that, biological analyses should announce the value in the general population and the consensus, so that those analysed can judge the role of the toxicology channels. If general practitioners treated poisoning, the health agencies would not be tempted to manipulate the reference values.



German laboratories offer biological analyses at around 100 euros for 30 metals. French laboratories offer metal-by-metal analyses at between 10 and 50 euros each. The price of 30 metals in a French laboratory is therefore around 1,500 euros. German laboratories are therefore much more economical and relevant.



One witness reported that a person was turned away several times from the hospital's toxicology department because she naively claimed that her poisoning came from amalgam. She was not treated until she had proved her case. I would remind you that the Hippocratic Oath forbids refusing a patient because of his or her beliefs. In this case, all the safeguards were breached https://www.radiofrance.fr/francecultur ... ns-1345293 from 00:25:00 onwards.



Positioned between theory and practice, the Poison Control Centres carried out their dirty work with zeal. Chronic intoxicants have been turned away en masse. People with amalgam fillings have been turned away en masse, and are excluded from at-risk populations. People suffering from poisoning are referred to psychologists by the Poison Control Centres. The Poison Control Centres have therefore been issuing false diagnoses en masse. The doctors who treat patients have been threatened by the Poison Control Centres. And prevention has been confiscated by the Poison Control Centres, despite the fact that they are in charge of prevention. Poison Control Centres are officially at the beginning of the warning chain https://web.archive.org/web/20240106194 ... ovigilance. The Poison Control Centres are therefore dedicated to stifling alerts. Here is Mr Nicolin's question: "Mr Yves Nicolin asks the Minister for Social Affairs and Health about chronic heavy metal poisoning, which, unlike the acute form, is not recognised in France. Heavy metal poisoning is an increasingly common phenomenon, manifesting itself in a series of pathologies that are on the increase. In most cases, the link between toxic substances and morbidity is unsuspected, and the victims, who are neither diagnosed nor treated, wander the medical world, at a dramatic cost to society. The cumulative effect of toxic metals in low doses is compounded by the many environmental toxins that accumulate over time in our cells and potentiate each other. If we continue to ignore these two parameters, France is likely to hold its record for the use of psychotropic drugs and the number of illnesses labelled 'psych' for a long time to come. In this context, he would like to know why these chronic intoxications are not yet officially recognised and whether partial or total reimbursement of treatment is not envisaged in the long term." http://questions.assemblee-nationale.fr ... 6233QE.htm. The Minister's response points to the PNSE3, which does nothing to resolve the situation.



GREAT AUTHORS

Conventional doctors systematically refuse any effective technique that does not require a doctor. What's more, the State has given doctors a blank cheque. 95% of the body is therefore denied by the State and by medicine. To reduce its expenditure, the State will have to impose that 100% of the body is taken into account. What's more, the state should acquire the skills to criticise what doctors say. According to Victor HUGO, "A whole science can sleepwalk. Medicine is particularly prone to this accident (...) However, anyone can die" https://fr.wikisource.org/wiki/Proses_p ... ium_somnii. The Contestation can therefore be found among the great authors (Molière, Hugo, Shakespeare). By prohibiting the treatment of the causes of chronic diseases, doctors have taken the health of the French hostage. The state never listens to scientists who challenge conventional procedures. In Corneille's Cid, proximity increases betrayal, so the shrinks have been more heavily betrayed by the toxicologists than the French.





The original French text is available at https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/vie ... 15#p123009.

[Sophocle]

Voici un témoignage de Christophe SERRESSEQUE de guérison du cancer sur la chaine CANCER THERAPY par Guy TENEBAUM.

Ce témoignage est précieux et complet car il brosse l'ensemble des questions à se poser rapidement.

Dès l'annonce du cancer, il s'est lancé dans la naturopathie, puis il a pris le risque de retarder les chirurgies au vu des améliorations analysées par les oncologues...
Puis il a fait une chimio préventive sans effets secondaires grâce au jeûne.


Mon discours de fond est le suivant :
-la médecine conventionnelle est insuffisante car elle ne traite que les conséquences et non les causes.
-la naturopathie est insuffisante car elle traite les causes et non les conséquences.

C'est au patient de doser l'application de chaque médecine.
L'enjeu est au niveau de la chirurgie car elle est irrémédiable.

C'est ce qu'a fait ce patient : il a combiné les 2 médecines et il a réussi à s'en tirer sans séquelles. Nous arrivons à la même conclusion : la mitochondrie est l'enjeu du cancer... les bains froids ont peut-être été essentiels.





https://youtu.be/epicoDbRi00?si=hFmh_2XHmmM8B8rM
ou
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=epicoDbRi00

[Sophocle]

C'est une pièce de Molière. 

Elle fait polémique parce que Molière a mélangé femmes et science.

Je rappelle que Molière veut dire femme en italien classique.

Cette pièce laisse un peu entendre que les femmes demeurent les garde-fous des hommes, et à ce titre les femmes ne devraient pas être scientifiques car, selon Molière, la science est une trahison secrète de notre monde et qu'il faut garder les femmes comme gage de vérité. Une femme scientifique va donc se servir de son gage de vérité pour corrompre le monde.


Je laisse à Molière le débat sur les femmes car je ne m'y aventurerai absolument pas par crainte de représailles féminines.


Ce qui est interressant dans cette pièce, c'est que la femme sans diplôme demeure critique de la femme savante. Je mets donc de coté les femmes et je garde l'idée que les personnes sans diplôme demeurent les garde-fous des scientifiques....


Moi, je ne suis pas scientifique et je reproche aux toxicologues de ne pas avoir appliqué le discours de la méthode avec les revues générales en autant de fois que nécessaire. Les toxicologues se sont donc, par négligence, contenté du sang qui ne represente absolument pas le corps. Et cela a peut-être mené à l'hecatombe de maladies chroniques, Alzheimer, cancers, ...

[Sophocle]

texte de la plainte : https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/vie ... 85#p123158

Pour info, le médecin ordinal qui va présider la séance est médecin biologiste dans un grand groupe d'analyses médicales.
il est donc celui qui fait des analyses fiables à 5% en laissant entendre aux analysés qu'elles sont fiables à 100%...

[Sophocle]

Lorsque je me suis inscrit sur le forum, je connaissais bien Sophocle mais peu Shakespeare.
J'avais donc choisi Sophocle comme pseudo.
Mais, pour ceux qui me lisent, ils savent que Shakespeare est désormais mon préféré.

Il est très difficile de départager Sophocle de Shakespeare.

Je dirai que Sophocle est un individuel qui nous parle à nous tous,
alors que,
Shakespeare est un individuel qui parle à chacun d'entre nous.

Il y a tant de génie chez l'un comme chez l'autre qu'il est inapproprié de les départager.

Comme fait Victor HUGO, il faut passer par les personnages pour s'expliquer.
Antigone de Sophocle est l'essence de la Justice.
Elle est donc une particularité qui nous parle de façon générale.

Alors que
Cordélia de Shakespeare, elle est une femme et la femme.
HUGO dit qu'elle devient la mère de son père car son père devient sénile.


Mon cœur ne se départira jamais de savoir lequel d'entre Sophocle et Shakespeare, je préfère...

[Sophocle]

Au : Tribunal judiciaire de Paris
Parvis du Tribunal de Paris
75 859 PARIS CEDEX 17

Objet : Retrait du Dépôt de plainte auprès du Procureur

Madame, Monsieur le Procureur de la République,

Je retire la plainte contre le Docteur X que je vous ai adressé le 19 août 2024 -

car :
- L'Ordre des médecins a pris en charge cette affaire (Voir pièce attachée),
et car
- Il n'y a pas de préjudice moral ou physique.

La prise en charge par l'Ordre des médecins me convient très bien.

Je vous prie, Madame, Monsieur le Procureur d'accepter l'expression de ma plus haute considération.

Paris, le 9 septembre 2024.





PIÈCES ATTACHÉES
- Lettre de l'Ordre des médecins

Je rappelle que seul le Procureur peut retirer définitivement une plainte.

J'ai également retiré la réclamation à l'ARS.

[Sophocle]

En mars 2024, le DGS a répondu à mon plaidoyer.
Le DGS, Directeur Général de la Santé, est l'échelon entre le Ministre et les Agences de santé.
Le DGS est au-dessus des Agences de santé et il est au-dessous du ministre.
Sa réponse est placée au post suivant : https://www.forum-melodie.fr/phpBB3/vie ... 25#p123087, (voir copie en fin de post)

Ci-après le dernier paragraphe du DGS car il est engageant :

Bien évidemment, en ce qui concerne la prise en charge des personnes particulièrement imprégnées, des
travaux de recherche devront encore être menés pour optimiser cette prise en charge et l'étendre à tous les
polluants d'intérêt. Ces travaux pourront conduire à des recommandations officielles.

Pour obtenir cette réponse, j'ai adressé des menaces au DGS:
je lui ai écrit que, lorsque l'affaire éclatera, je règlerai mes comptes avec les responsables qui ne m'auront pas aidé à régler ce grave problème de santé publique.
Suite à ces menaces, il m'a envoyé son courrier sur lettre à en-tête.

la peine encourue pour des menaces est de 6 mois de prison ferme. Il y a des variantes avec des menaces de mort et avec des ordres à exécuter.
Mais il y a une faille dans la loi, pour que des menaces soient reconnues comme menaces, il faut qu'elles soient répétées une deuxième fois.
Cela est étonnant, mais la loi est ainsi.

Pour le DGS, je n'ai pas répété mes menaces et j'ai répondu qu'il ne s'agissait pas de menaces...
Et il a quant-même envoyé sa lettre ... engageante.

Quant à l'interprétation de sa lettre, c'est le mot DEVRONT sur lequel il faut s'attarder.
C'est le verbe devoir dans un futur non déterminé : "des travaux de recherche devront encore être menés".
il s'agit d'un impératif auquel il manque une échéance.
Cela est donc une fuite discrète du DGS.
Cela suggère que l'ordre doit être donné par le Ministre car le DGS n'est pas habilité à donner cet ordre car cet ordre bouscule les politiques actuelles de santé.
Le DGS n'exécute que la politique du Ministre, il ne peut pas initier des ordres sans l'aval du Ministre, me semble-t-il.

Début Juillet, la Vice-Présidente de l'ANSES m'a répondu qu'elle avait demandé une réponse à l'Anses concernant mon plaidoyer.
J'ai fait une relance début septembre, mais je n'ai pas nouvelles.
Je lui ai donc donc adressé le message suivant :
Lorsque l'affaire éclatera, je publierai nos échanges de façon à montrer aux journalistes que vous avez recherché à dissimuler le scandale sanitaire.

Cette fois-ci, ce ne sont pas des menaces mais c'est une déclaration d'intentions. C'est une version soft.

Je rappelle que, en 2020, j'ai obtenu le pot aux roses de la part des Centres antipoison en faisant des menaces de porter plainte.
Ils m'ont filé le papier avec toute leur arnaque.


En 2021, j'ai fait des menaces au CAP, cette fois-ci j'ai été convoqué au commissariat, le flic m'a dit qu'une enquête administrative a été ouverte suite à mon courrier à l'Elysée et que les poursuites à mon encontre sont abandonnées. Ouf.

Dans cette affaire, les menaces ont été payantes.

Bon, il me reste 2 lettres à obtenir : l'une de l'Anses et l'autre du Ministre... jamais personne n'aura obtenu autant de difficultés que moi pour que la santé règne...

L'Élysée m'a écrit 5 fois environ dont 3 par courrier postal. Que des promesses...
Matignon a écrit une fois
Le Ministre Américain de la Santé
Le DGS
La HAS a botté en touche vers l'Anses
L'ANSM a laissé entendre que les protocoles validés sont au-dessus de la santé des français

Il me manque les 2 réponses essentielles : Ministre et ANSES...

Avec le DGS, je pourrai peut-être faire tomber l'un et l'autre.




REPONSE DU DGS

[Sophocle]

Je publie ici une réponse à mon plaidoyer que j'ai reçu en 2021 :
Cette réponse parvient d'un membre de la SFTA, Société Française de Toxicologie Analytique.
A l'époque de la réponse, ce membre était Responsable des jeunes scientifiques .
Aujourd'hui il est Président électif.

Dès la première ligne, cette réponse est intéressante car elle laisse deviner en creux tout ce qui manque à la toxicologie:

M. (Sophocle),


Concernant les métaux lourds (Ex : cadmium, mercure, plomb, arsenic..) nous connaissons les concentrations normales chez l’homme dans le sang, les cheveux , les ongles, le foie



En toxicologie et en pharmacologie, il est toujours difficile d’avoir une estimation précise de l’effet d’une molécule à un instant t à partir de la mesure d’une concentration (Ex : le dosage d’un antibiotique est réalisé au niveau du sang alors qu’un dosage au site infectieux permettrait d’avoir une estimation plus précise de l’effet antiinfectieux associé). Pour cette raison, les dosages sont dans la majorité des cas réalisés sur des matrices peu invasives pour les patients (salive, sang, urine) et les concentrations obtenues sont interprétées à partir d’études réalisées chez des patients traités/intoxiqués.

Il est vrai que connaître la charge corporelle totale des métaux lourds serait intéressant et plus pertinent, pour ce faire, il faudrait chez une personne décédée, la digérer intégralement dans de l’acide nitrique (pas d’incinération, plomb et mercure sont volatils) et réaliser le dosage sur le lysat. Comme cette option parait difficilement envisageable éthiquement, nous sommes obligés de nous contenter d’une estimation de la charge corporelle réalisée à partir de prélèvements +/- invasifs.



Concernant l’administration de chélateur pour estimer la charge corporelle, cela parait difficilement envisageable. Les chélateurs entrainent une redistribution tissulaire à partir des compartiments profonds (moelle osseuse, os, tissus adipeux, organes, tissus musculaire) et une élimination urinaire. Mais cette élimination est partielle, et mineure le plus souvent comparée à la charge corporelle.


Les métaux lourds peuvent présenter une toxicité aigüe ou chronique. Pour la toxicité aigüe, il est possible d’estimer l’exposition d’un individu à partir de la concentration sanguine, pour la toxicité chronique, il est possible d’explorer l’exposition à partir de concentrations sanguines, capillaires ou unguéales.



A titre d’exemple, dans notre laboratoire nous dosons le plomb, principalement pour le saturnisme infantile chez l’enfant et la femme enceinte. Ce dosage nous permet de déterminer si le patient souffre d’une intoxication aiguë ou chronique, la demi-vie d’élimination du plomb étant de 0,4 à 3,6 ans.



Si vous manquez de références, je vous conseille le livre « Disposition of toxic drugs and chemicals in man » de Randall C. Baselt



Bonne fin de journée



Cordialement

(Prénom - NOM)

Pharm D Ph D

13005 Marseille

La toxicologie dispose du Sang, cheveux, ongles, foie.
tout le reste manque, soit 95 % du corps, du cerveau jusqu'aux os en passant par les tripes...
Autrement dit, (excusez-moi de ma brutalité), mais la toxicologie est à poil.