Public Forum
Default group for all members. Biological family sometimes get you down? Come join your logical family!
Organizers:
- Organized by
-
-
HPV and pre cancerous cells
-
HPV and pre cancerous cells
Anyone hear about using IVM for pre-cancerous cells from HPV found during routine pap smear? Daughter had low grade squamous intraepithelial lesions. Not sure if IVM is warranted but thought I would check. Not a lot of faith in the doctors to provide all options. TIA
-
10 Replies
-
Hi Lisa, thanks for your question. I pass it on to my qualified colleagues and hopefully get you a helpful answer. Cheers Greg
-
Any luck with potential answers? Thanks for reaching out to other professionals.
-
Hi Lisa they haven’t yet, so I went a did a little looking up. Here’s some info that may or may not help, and please know I’m not medically trained, so this is just info.
We also have our Provider Directory here (The here is linked, please mouseover to highlight it)
And here’s some info I found in the meantime:
“LSIL is a common abnormal result on a Pap test and does not mean your daughter has cancer. It indicates mild abnormalities in the cervical cells, usually linked to human papillomavirus (HPV) infection. Most cases of LSIL do not progress to cancer and often resolve on their own.
Regarding the use of ivermectin (IVM) for pre-cancerous cells from HPV:There is currently no established medical evidence supporting the use of ivermectin for treating pre-cancerous cervical lesions or HPV infections.
The standard approaches for managing LSIL focus on monitoring and, if necessary, targeted treatments to remove abnormal cells.It’s crucial to follow the advice of your daughter’s healthcare provider. They will recommend the most appropriate course of action based on her specific situation, which may include regular monitoring, further testing, or other established treatments if needed.
Remember, LSIL often resolves on its own, and the progression from HPV infection to cervical cancer typically takes many years”
There’s also this webinar page (click here), where Dr. Biss noted:
“Pap Smear Problems on the Horizon?
A Pap smear is a routine test that checks a woman’s cervix for abnormalities. The test was developed in the 1940s to solve the leading cause of death for women at the time, cervical cancer.
During the COVID-19 pandemic, Dr. Biss said she observed a 15% increase in abnormal Pap smear results from 2020 to 2021. This rise led to more women needing surgery and other medical interventions. The increase may be linked to changes in Pap smear guidelines and the potential reactivation of viruses like HPV due to COVID-19 vaccinations.
“I will tell you lots of women that have not had an abnormal Pap smear, either ever or it’s been maybe 10 or 15 years since they had an abnormal Pap smear. Now they’re having abnormal paps, and some of them have required surgery, so this is causing a problem.”
Dr. Biss advocates for annual Pap smears instead of the current extended intervals (every three years for women aged 21-29 and every five years for women aged 30-65). She believes more frequent screening is crucial for early detection and reducing cervical cancer risk.”
-
Hi Lisa – this from one of my colleagues.
————————————————
“Ivermectin has been tested in vitro for cervical cancer – https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0041008X22002186?casa_token=TEqi8cyWifkAAAAA:iJJ_Hcvd7u-IktwrSI-zlZ78UdrzgGPHZkHM8OrmMupL9vfKPJaWpYV0kMZFN707g1oU6HJheA and ovarian cancer https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13167-020-00209-y and https://europepmc.org/article/med/22495656.
Unfortunately, human clinical data is limited. The first study used IVM on cervical cancer cell lines and found a 50% reduction in cancer cells at 1.7uM. This concentration is considered quite high, to quote the first source.
After oral administration of a typical approved dose of ~200 μg/kg to human subjects, the peak total plasma concentration (C<sub>Max</sub>) has been estimated to be ~50 nM. Taking into account that 93% of ivermectin in the plasma is bound to serum proteins(Klotz et al., 1990), this results in an estimated free ivermectin concentration of <5 nM (Schmith et al., 2020).”
This physiological peak total plasma concentration is 34 times lower than the concentration at which 50% of the cancerous cells died in the first source. Still, this does not rule out IVM’s potential effects on cervical cancer cells.
When it comes to treating HPV, which may contribute to the incidence of cervical cancer, the antiviral IVM has not been tested directly. Activity is possible, but there is not evidence to suggest so at this moment.
Usually, doctors will advise waiting, and potentially the following therapies if progression is observed.
a) Cryotherapy: Freezing the abnormal tissue, which is effective for small, easily accessible lesions.
b) LEEP (Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure): Uses a thin, low-voltage electrified wire loop to remove abnormal tissue. This is more common if there’s a progression or if the lesion persists.
c) Conization: Removal of a cone-shaped piece of tissue from the cervix, which might be considered in some cases or for diagnosis of more severe conditions.”
————————————————-
The above is in line with what vegandan shared – “I believe that more likely than not there is a potential for a positive result.”
Please keep us updated as to what you both decided to do, if you can share the info.
And, as always, if anyone else has a thought/comment, feel free to add your note to the discussion.
-
Thank you for the information, very appreciative. Will see if she is willing to try a round of IVM. Now need to figure out the dosage.
-
Hi Lisa
In the Cancer Care Monograph new second version on page 92, you’ll find the below
Hope this helps.
-
-
-
-
-
I am not a medical person either, so take my remarks with a grain of salt. There are at least 20 MOA’s for IVM of which at least one involves targeting epithelial cells. Of course there is no scientific evidence for positive or negative results from using IVM in cancer because no one is currently doing any research in this field. That is what the current effort by the FLCCC and others is all about to help establish some research to support the use of IVM in cancer. My thinking is that it is highly unlikely that using IVM would have a negative impact on a cancer patient’s health. I am more inclined to give it a try like the early pioneers in Covid did in early 2020. I believe that more likely than not there is a potential for a positive result, or at least no change, rather than a negative or worsening of the cancer. Just my opinion.
-
That is my thinking as well do not think it will harm. Thanks!
-
-
I agree with this statement. Cancer cells are killed by chemotherapy, but microscopic cells all too often survive. We feed these “baby” cells with high sugar/carb foods and create a metabolic state conducive to cancer growth. In the past cancer fighting pathways created by the innate immunity, would assist with eliminating the remaining microscopic cells. At the very least, the cells would be kept suppressed for many years. Since the Spike Protein was introduced to our bodies, whether injected or infected, the very important cancer fighting pathways are now rendered ineffective. The results are aggressive, turbo-like cancers are becoming more and more prevalent and deadly.
-
Hi bsfisher, I just read your response and am further interested in your thoughts. Do you think the spike protein from contracting virus can still cause cancer, turbo cancer etc…. or do believe that most of the cancers now are solely from the injection? I really value peoples opinions from this FLCCC group as I am lost.
-
Log in to reply.