Conventional cancer screening doesn’t spot tumors at a formative stage of development, and is neither accurate nor dependable.
Whether your doctor orders up a mammogram, a PET or CT scan, a PSA test, a colonoscopy or a biopsy, there are considerable downsides to all of them. The procedures may actually help cancer get started, make it worse, or cause other serious complications.
In addition, the tests are marred by high rates of false positives and negatives. This means they can indicate you’ve got cancer when you don’t (false positive), or can fail to find cancer when you do have it (false negative).
If only there was a safe, reliable method of detection that could identify cancer up to ten or twenty years before conventional testing finds it.
If there was such a test, cancer would be an almost completely curable disease.
Well there is such a test. It’s called the ONCOblot Tissue of Origin Cancer Detection Test. Here’s the scoop. . .
Continued below. . .
Simple bathroom habit
You brush your teeth… You wash your face…
Could this simple bathroom habit increase your risk of a sudden, early death by 530%?
That’s exactly what the FDA is now being forced to admit.
“It’s as risky as smoking cigarettes,” one study revealed.
And it’s nearly as addictive.
The worst part, though, is that you’re doing this 1 thing every single night. It’s part of your pre-bed routine… yet, it’s killing you slowly and silently.
So what is this deadly bathroom habit?
And what can you do to fix it?
Weed killer provides a clue to cancer cure
Even at the age of six James Morré was inquisitive. He was extremely curious about nature. So around 1950, when he was a teenager, he got a job at the department that deals with soil management and crop production at the University of Missouri.
One of his tasks was to spray weeds with herbicide 240. This prompts the weeds to grow out of control and die.
James was interested in why this happened. So he went to the library and read everything he could find.
In one medical journal a scientist wrote that when we figure out how herbicide 240 kills plants, we’ll understand cancer and how to cure it.
James took this to heart.
He went on to earn a Ph.D. in Biochemistry from the California Institute of Technology and became Dow Distinguished Professor of Medicinal Chemistry at Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana. He wrote more than 750 papers before he passed away in 2016.
A protein found only in malignant cancer cells
Early in his career he solved the riddle of the weed killer. He discovered that it targeted compounds called NOX proteins. In normal cells these proteins are well regulated; in cancer cells, they run wild.
After many years of research together with his wife Dr Dorothy Morré, he finally found a form of the protein that only exists in cancer cells. It’s called tNOX.
In 1999 the husband and wife team were the first to offer scientific evidence to explain how EGCG, a compound found in green tea, inhibits cancer cell growth. It does so by inhibiting tNOX.
Dorothy Morré explains: “…when tNOX activity is inhibited, the cancerous cells eventually die. In the presence of EGCG the cancer cells literally failed to grow or enlarge after division. Then, presumably because they did not reach the minimum size needed to divide, they underwent programmed cell death, or apoptosis.”1
After further research, the Morrés realized that tNOX (now called ENOX2) could be used as a marker for detecting cancer. This is possible because it is only expressed on the cell surface of malignant cells. From there it is shed into the circulating blood and can be traced in the serum.
Detects tumors conventional tests can’t find
Unlike blood tests for cancer, which look for elevated levels of markers that are normally present in the blood, ENOX2 will be found only where there are malignant cancer cells.
If ENOX2 is detected in the blood, then cancer must exist in the body. Remarkably, they also discovered that each form of cancer has its own distinctive ENOX2. Depending on the organ from which the tumor originated, the protein will have a different molecular weight and pH (level of acidity or alkalinity).
This means that not only does a positive blood test let you know you have cancer, but you also know where it kicked off in your body. ONCOblot can achieve this for 27 different cancers from a single blood test. For the few organs not covered, ONCOblot will still test positive if cancer is present, but its location will not be known.
ONCOblot can detect a tumor mass as small as 0.8 mm diameter or about 2 million cells. This compares to a mammography which picks up a 7mm breast tumor just half of the time. To achieve a 100% detection rate, a mammogram requires a 32 mm tumor containing 1.3 trillion cells.
Positive research findings
To test its accuracy in lung cancer, the Morrés and their research team determined levels of the protein in 421 volunteers — 104 with lung cancer, 175 smokers not diagnosed with cancer, 117 randomly selected outpatients and 25 healthy adults.
Dr. James Morré summed up the findings:
“In healthy individuals, we have 0 out of 25 false positives. In lung cancers, 103 of the 104 patients were positive for tNOX. In smokers older than 40 years of age, 12% were positive, which is about the normal incidence picked up with high resolution scanning techniques.”2
In 2008, they published findings showing that their test detected cancer even at grade 1 where cells resemble normal cells and are growing slowly. This was demonstrated in patients with breast, non-small cell lung, colon, prostate, and ovarian carcinomas.3
In the most recent study, published last year, Dr. Morré’s team worked with researchers from Australia to test ONCOblot in people who had been exposed to asbestos, but had not been diagnosed with mesothelioma, the cancer linked to this mineral.
The researchers found that two mesothelioma-specific ENOX2 variants were picked up from four to ten years prior to clinical diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma in 17 patients. In 15 subjects whose disease was benign, either one or both variants were missing.4
Early detection paves the way for a cure
Several years earlier a cancer prevention trial was published. The idea was not only to detect cancer at an early stage but also to treat it.
110 men and women aged between 40 and 84 with no evidence or clinical symptoms of cancer were enrolled.
ONCOblot proved positive for 40% of them; a result that’s not unexpected since this is the same percentage of the population that contracts the disease in the course of a lifetime.
The test picked up nine with non-small cell lung cancer, seven with breast cancer, four with colorectal cancer, and three each for prostate, ovarian, cervical and blood cancers. It also picked up squamous cell, melanoma, mesothelioma, bladder, thyroid and uterine cancers.
All who tested positive were given a supplement called Capsol-T, a combination of green tea concentrate and Capsicum powder. These are potent inhibitors of ENOX2. This was taken every four hours for three to six months. The volunteers were then tested again. 94% subsequently tested negative.5
This study suggests that cancer is almost always curable if picked up early.
Test is almost never wrong
ONCOblot has been shown to be 99.8% accurate in detecting and confirming cancer based on more than a thousand patients. It has a false positive rate of 0.07%; that’s one mistake for every 1500 patients. It can correctly identify the organ of origin in 96.7% of cases based on 1500 patients. Wrong identification mainly occurs in early stage cancers.6
The only downsides are that it cannot tell how much cancer is in the body nor whether it has spread to other organs. It detects the presence of the protein and the organ of origin only.
The Morrés’ book ECTO-NOX Proteins: Growth, Cancer and Aging, published in 2013, summed up their five decades of research. In a review, veteran cancer reporter Ralph Moss writes, “…the burden of proof shifts from these remarkable scientists to the large and well-funded government and private agencies, which have the capacity to carry out large-scale testing.
“The fact that they have not done so is both puzzling and frustrating. One hopes this is not another instance of the determined suppression of a generic and non-toxic approach in the interest of entrenched medical interests.”7
The National Institutes of Health had the opportunity to support the test but declined because they could not accept the idea of a universal cancer marker. In their minds the test had to be flawed.
So do not expect to be offered this test, which must be ordered by a doctor. However there are a number of integrative physicians who see the value of ONCOblot and are already making use of it.8
Dr. James Morré summed up his hopes for the future:
“The ultimate goal is to utilize this technology to prevent cancer; to reduce cancer from an acute illness, life-threatening and almost universally fatal, to a chronic disease that can be detected early, treated early, and cured.”