A-gyo and UN-gyo achieved 100% complete tumor regression in animal models of human colorectal, ovarian, and pancreatic cancer, with no observable systemic toxicity.

***

A remarkable study published in Nature Biomedical Engineering reports 100% complete tumor regression in mouse models of human colorectal, ovarian, and pancreatic cancer using a naturally occurring bacterial combination.

Researchers at the Japan Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (JAIST) demonstrated that two highly synergistic soil- and water-associated bacterial species could fully eliminate established tumors, even in mice with severely compromised immune systems.

The results were extraordinary across the tested human cancer xenograft models:

• Colorectal cancer: 100% tumor elimination
• Ovarian cancer: 100% tumor elimination
• Pancreatic cancer: 100% tumor elimination

Two Naturally Occurring Bacteria Working Together

See this video.

Two intravenous doses of a bacterial combination consisting of Proteus mirabilis and Rhodopseudomonas palustris produced complete tumor regression in the experimental groups.

The researchers named this combination AUN, consisting of two complementary bacterial strains that perform distinct biological functions.

1. Proteus mirabilis (A-gyo): The Primary Tumor Destroyer

A-gyo is the principal tumor-destroying component of the combination. After administration, the bacteria selectively accumulate and proliferate inside tumor tissue, where they contribute to the destruction of tumor blood vessels, extensive tissue necrosis, and cancer-cell death.

Remarkably, the bacterial combination induces localized thrombosis, disrupting the blood supply that tumors depend on for continued growth:

See this video.

A-gyo also undergoes structural changes that increase its ability to move through and penetrate cancerous tissue:

2. Rhodopseudomonas palustris (UN-gyo): The Protective Synergistic Partner

UN-gyo suppresses A-gyo’s potentially harmful biological activity while promoting its transformation into highly motile, tumor-penetrating forms.

The researchers found that the presence of UN-gyo moderates bacterial activity, reduces hemolytic effects, and enhances cancer-specific activity.

The combination initially consists of approximately 3% A-gyo and 97% UN-gyo, illustrating how a relatively small population of tumor-destroying bacteria can operate alongside a larger population of regulatory bacteria.

Complete Tumor Regression Without Observable Systemic Toxicity

Despite its extraordinary anticancer activity, the bacterial combination demonstrated a favorable safety profile at the tested therapeutic doses in mice.

Researchers reported no observable systemic toxicity or cytokine release syndrome, and long-term histological examinations conducted 150 days after treatment revealed no apparent tissue damage in major organs, including the heart, lungs, liver, spleen, and kidneys.

Importantly, safety depended on the precise bacterial ratio and dosing regimen. Excessive doses or improperly proportioned bacterial mixtures caused fatal reactions in mice, highlighting the importance of maintaining the naturally occurring 3:97 ratio of A-gyo to UN-gyo.

Conclusion 

The central discovery is remarkable: two naturally occurring bacterial species, working synergistically, eliminated established tumors in multiple experimental cancer models while demonstrating favorable tolerability at the tested therapeutic regimen.

Nevertheless, this remains preclinical research. Human safety, optimal dosing, and clinical efficacy have not yet been established. Further research on this promising bacterial combo is urgently needed as cancer rates continue to climb.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/study-natural-soil-bacteria-combo-completely-eradicates-tumors-across-multiple-human-cancer-types-mice/5944730

On October 27, Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre held a 90-minute phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin.

At the request of Helsinki and Oslo, they discussed ways to end the war in Ukraine, planned trilateral talks in Abu Dhabi in November involving Russia, Ukraine, and the United States, and security issues in the Baltic Sea and northern Europe. According to the Kremlin, the sides also agreed to maintain direct phone contact.

Immediately afterward, Stubb and Støre called Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who thanked them for their active support. The Finnish and Norwegian leaders emphasized that they spoke as representatives of their countries, not on Europe’s behalf. Stubb described the discussion as frank and substantive, noting that the war’s outcome will directly affect Nordic and broader European security and that ending it requires direct dialogue. Støre stressed the importance of de-escalation.

The call was unexpected, given that Stubb has previously made negative remarks not only about the Russian state but also about Russian culture, identity, and history. The timing is significant, though. In recent weeks, Stubb has emerged as one of the European figures most often mentioned as a possible mediator or channel for the European Union in any settlement process. Only days earlier, Zelensky publicly said he wanted the EU at the negotiating table.

European capitals increasingly recognize that an upcoming trilateral meeting among the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, and the US will likely produce major decisions about the war, leaving Europe on the sidelines. A direct channel would allow Helsinki and Oslo to bring European perspectives into the discussion. However, greater European involvement could complicate and delay the process, giving Zelensky more grounds to postpone or condition talks, while Europe continues its futile attempt to weaken Russia.

Moscow’s acceptance of the call is notable because Russian officials have repeatedly said they prefer to address core issues with the US, yet they were willing to engage with Stubb and Støre. This strengthens Stubb’s credentials as a potential European interlocutor in the eyes of other EU leaders and shows that the Kremlin is prepared to talk with him despite earlier rhetorical clashes.

Finland and Norway both border Russia. Finland has suffered particularly severe economic consequences from the anti-Russia sanctions: trade, energy, and logistics ties once vital to its economy have been severed. Norway, meanwhile, is an Arctic coastal state with a direct stake in the emerging Northern Sea Route and does not want to be left out.

The phone call immediately sparked a rare public split among the Nordic states. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said she was “very skeptical” of the uncoordinated move and claimed Russia’s ongoing military pressure on Ukraine as evidence that Putin has no serious interest in peace. Frederiksen likened the call to earlier unilateral initiatives, including Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s visit to Moscow, and argued that Europeans have long insisted on acting together rather than allowing individual countries to open separate channels.

Swedish Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson said he believed everyone except Putin wants peace, that he had low expectations for direct talks of this kind, and that such discussions risk dividing Europe. He added that any talks that make Russia more willing to accept a decent peace on Ukraine’s terms would be welcome.

All four leaders were in Helsinki for a Nordic Council session when the news broke, underscoring how unusual this open disagreement is among countries that have otherwise remained closely aligned on Ukraine, sanctions, and military support.

Despite reactions in Copenhagen and Stockholm, Zelensky publicly defended Stubb and Støre, describing their relations as very good and noting that they have provided genuine practical help. He said Putin’s diplomatic isolation had already been broken by the Alaska meeting with Trump and that Europeans have maintained contact with Russia since then, though usually less openly. According to Zelensky, the Finnish-Norwegian call simply made the channel transparent.

There were also other European reactions beyond Denmark and Sweden. Italian officials were irritated as the call underscored the lack of an agreed European representative. A source in Rome warned that constantly changing formats and separate national initiatives weaken Europe’s influence, adding that Europe “cannot continue to act randomly.” The European Commission spokesperson simply noted that the call was bilateral and that negotiations were already underway in several formats involving the EU.

At the same time, European involvement in the peace process could mean that, within months, Putin and Zelensky may be dealing with different leaders, depending on election and coalition outcomes across the continent.

The Finnish-Norwegian call shows that Europe’s claim to a seat at the table still hinges on individual capitals acting alone. Brussels has not even identified a suitable interlocutor to open channels with Putin, so states will now act independently of the bloc to defend their interests, which have been ravaged by the boomerang effects of anti-Russia sanctions.

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/finland-norway-reach-out-putin-peace-talks-loom/5944808

There is no clear winner in the Israeli election as of October 29. The Netanyahu bloc received 53 seats, the Opposition Eisenkot bloc received 48 seats, and the Arab bloc received 19. If Eisenkot allies with the Arab bloc, Netanyahu’s extremist gol be out.

But, if Benjamin Netanyahu is able to remain in power, there will be significant implications for the future of the Middle East, shaping regional security, relations between Israel and its Arab neighbors, and the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict. His continued leadership may influence tensions with Iran, the prospects for peace, and efforts to establish a Palestinian state.

As the region continues to face political uncertainty and conflict, Netanyahu’s return to power raises important questions about whether the Middle East will move toward greater stability or experience further tensions and confrontation.

Journalist Steven Sahiounie interviewed Nizar Sadawi, a Palestinian journalist and Middle East correspondent for TRT World. Mr. Sadawi is giving his own personal analysis, and not representing the views of TRT World.

Steven Sahiounie (SS): How could the election results influence Israel’s policy towards Iran? Could they change the course of military confrontation?

Nizar Sadawi (NS): I believe the election results may change how Israel manages its confrontation with Iran, but not necessarily its strategic objectives. There is a broad consensus across Israel’s political and security establishment that Iran represents a major strategic threat.

The main difference lies in approach. Netanyahu has relied heavily on military pressure and confrontation, while Eisenkot, as a former military chief, may place greater emphasis on strategic calculations, coordination with Washington, and the political costs of military operations.

However, an Eisenkot-led government would not necessarily mean an end to military confrontation. Ultimately, US policy, regional dynamics, and the calculations of both Israel and Iran may prove more decisive than the identity of Israel’s next prime minister.

SS: What impact could the election results have on settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem, and on Palestinian statehood?

NS: A Netanyahu-led government, particularly one dependent on far-right parties, would likely continue expanding settlements and pursuing policies that further undermine the possibility of an independent Palestinian state.

An Eisenkot-led government could adopt a more restrained approach towards settlement expansion and settler violence, particularly under international pressure. However, this should not be confused with a fundamental shift towards ending the occupation or recognising Palestinian statehood.

The fundamental problem is that much of Israel’s political debate concerns how to manage the occupation rather than how to end it.

In my view, changing the Israeli government alone will not revive the two-state solution. That requires concrete steps to end the occupation, halt settlement expansion, and recognize Palestinians’ right to self-determination and an independent, sovereign state.

SS: Could Netanyahu and Eisenkot form a national unity government despite their political rivalry?

NS: The election has created a complicated parliamentary situation, with neither camp securing a clear majority. Ironically, the Arab parties could hold the balance of power with their historic parliamentary representation, yet most major parties in both camps remain unwilling to rely on them to form a government.

I see two main scenarios. The first involves defections or political realignments within the opposition that could give Netanyahu the additional seats needed to reach a majority of 61.

The second is a national unity government, despite the deep mistrust between Netanyahu and Eisenkot.

Of course, these scenarios face significant political obstacles, particularly given Eisenkot’s previous resignation from Netanyahu’s war cabinet and their disagreements over the conduct of the war.

Ultimately, political necessity could push the two rivals towards an agreement, but even a unity government would not necessarily signal a fundamental change in Israel’s policies towards the Palestinians.

SS: How could the election results shape the wider Middle East conflict, and what are the prospects for a political solution guaranteeing Palestinian rights?

NS: Israel’s election will undoubtedly influence regional dynamics, particularly given the growing interconnectedness of the Iranian, Lebanese, and Palestinian fronts. However, I believe it would be a serious mistake to treat the Palestinian question merely as an extension of the confrontation with Iran.

The Palestinian struggle predates these regional rivalries by decades. Its roots lie in occupation, displacement, and the denial of Palestinian national rights.

A change in Israeli leadership could create opportunities for diplomacy and de-escalation, but it would not automatically produce a meaningful peace process.

The experience of recent years has demonstrated that managing the conflict through military superiority and temporary security arrangements does not address its underlying causes.

In my view, lasting regional stability requires a political settlement based on ending the occupation, stopping settlement expansion, and guaranteeing Palestinians’ right to self-determination and an independent, viable state.

Without addressing these fundamental issues, any change in Israeli leadership risks becoming a change in tactics rather than a genuine turning point towards peace.

SS: What is the real disagreement between Netanyahu and Eisenkot over the wars in Gaza and Lebanon? Is it about their military objectives, or rather the timing of operations and their political costs?

NS: The disagreement is mainly about strategy, timing, and the political cost of military operations, rather than the objectives themselves. Both Netanyahu and Eisenkot share broadly similar security priorities, but differ on how to achieve them.

In Gaza, Eisenkot has criticized Netanyahu for prolonging military operations without a clear political strategy.

[…]

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/netanyahu-extremist-government-fall-eisenkot-transform-israel-moderate-state/5944827

As millions of American children prepare to go trick-or-treating this Halloween, troubling findings from the Florida Department of Health are raising serious concerns about toxic contaminants in some of the nation’s most recognizable candy brands.

Through its Healthy Florida First initiative, Florida tested 46 popular candy products and reported detectable arsenic in 28—over 60% of those tested:

I joined Finnerty on NEWSMAX to discuss these alarming findings and the potential health risks associated with arsenic exposure, particularly among children. Dr. Kelly Victory also joined the discussion to explain how arsenic can enter candy through contaminated ingredients and food-processing practices.

.

Click here to watch the video

Inorganic arsenic is an established human carcinogen and a systemic toxicant capable of damaging multiple organ systems, including the brain, heart, liver, kidneys, and nervous system.

Particularly concerning are Florida’s extraordinarily low estimated annual consumption limits for certain candies.

How Much Candy Can Children Consume Per Year?

According to Florida’s published calculations, the following are the approximate annual consumption amounts for children before exceeding the state’s estimated arsenic exposure safety limit:

• Hershey’s Cookies ‘N’ Creme: 1.2 bars per year
• Kit Kat: 2.4 pieces per year
• Snickers: 2.4 pieces per year
• 3 Musketeers: 2.4 pieces per year
• SweeTarts Ropes: 3 ropes per year
• Laffy Taffy Banana: 4 pieces per year
• Twizzlers Strawberry: 4 pieces per year
• Jolly Rancher Sour Apple: 6 pieces per year
• Jolly Rancher Strawberry: 6 pieces per year
• Twizzlers Cherry: 8 pieces per year
• Tootsie Rolls: 8 pieces per year
• Tootsie Roll Vanilla: 8 pieces per year
• Tootsie Fruit Chew Lime: 8 pieces per year
• Swedish Fish: 8 pieces per year
• Trolli Sour Brite Crawlers: 12 pieces per year
• Sour Patch Kids Watermelon: 12 pieces per year
• Dots: 12 pieces per year
• Black Forest Gummy Bears: 16 pieces per year
• Twizzlers Watermelon: 18 pieces per year
• Sour Patch Kids Tropical: 18 pieces per year
• Nerds Gummy Clusters: 24 pieces per year
• Sour Patch Kids Original: 36 pieces per year
• SweeTarts Original: 48 pieces per year
• Original Skittles: 48 pieces per year
• Nerds Grape: 96 individual pieces per year
• Nerds Strawberry: 96 individual pieces per year
• SmartSweets Caramel: 1 bag per year
• SmartSweets Sweet Fish: 1 bag per year

Which Candies Had No Arsenic Detected?

Thankfully, several recognizable candies had no arsenic detected in the tested samples, including:

• Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups
• Hershey’s Milk Chocolate
• M&M’s
• Twix
• Milky Way
• Whoppers

Conclusion

It is deeply concerning that arsenic, a toxic element whose inorganic forms are established human carcinogens, was detected in so many popular candies consumed by children.

With Halloween approaching, parents would be well advised to avoid the specific candy products flagged in Florida’s testing until their arsenic levels and potential health risks are independently clarified.

Via https://www.globalresearch.ca/millions-children-fill-halloween-bags-arsenic-contaminated-candy/5944872