The evidence is convergent. Multiple independent sources reach the same conclusion, the underlying mechanism is well-characterized, and even the field's most cautious voices treat it as worth doing.
he lived 30 months which is far longer than most people with a glioblastoma he was doing really well on metabolic therapy we pushed off the standard of care for 3 months so we did surgery after three weeks of therapeutic ketosis debulk the tumor most of it because you never get well GBM and then we didn't we didn't do we were forced into the radiation therapy after three months even though the guy was doing remarkably well
Every Sunday: the week’s new conflicts and verdict changes — and nothing else.
Native comments, Twitter mentions, and Reddit threads about this claim — surfaced together so the conversation isn't fragmented across platforms.
Bookmarking — the dossier-vs-overview split is the right call. Most of the time I want overview; sometimes I want receipts.
Would love a "what would change this verdict" RSS feed. Sign me up if it exists.
he had an inoperable glioblastoma after two years he decides to let me that he had an inoperable glioblastoma after metabolic therapy so they debunked it and now after another year he doesn't have any to him I left and he never had radiation he never had chemo he had surgery very delayed
there's a GBM patients alive yes at four years yes Pablo Kelly in fact I'm gonna be there next week he's gonna be sitting in the audience
those patients that I know who rejected radiation and chemo took surgery after two years a year are doing well they're out for years
Whole-body MRI screening in healthy adults produces more incidentaloma harm than cancer-mortality benefit.
Starting colonoscopy screening at 45 (vs 50) prevents enough early-onset cancers to justify the population cost.
Multi-cancer liquid-biopsy tests like Galleri detect early cancers at a stage that meaningfully improves survival.