@elonmusk I agree here, and the only way to implement this would be to make official IDs free of charge for US Citizens. Once that’s done, it’s checkmate for rational opposers.
1931: Dr. Otto Warburg wins the Nobel Prize for discovering cancer cells cannot survive without glucose. They're glucose-dependent.
This suggests depriving cancer cells of glucose might treat cancer. Warburg proposes testing therapeutic ketosis: cancer cells need glucose, healthy cells run on ketones.
The hypothesis is brilliant. Clinical trials should begin immediately.
They don't.
Why? Chemotherapy research is exploding. Pharmaceutical companies can patent chemotherapy drugs. They cannot patent "stop eating sugar."
Throughout the 1960s-70s, scattered researchers test ketogenic diets for cancer. Small studies show promising results. Cancer cells shrink when glucose is restricted.
These studies are published in minor journals. No major institution picks them up. No pharmaceutical company funds larger trials.
Dr. Thomas Seyfried at Boston College rediscovers Warburg's work in the 2000s. After 15 years researching cancer metabolism, his conclusion: Cancer is metabolic, not primarily genetic. Ketogenic diets should be first-line therapy.
He publishes "Cancer as a Metabolic Disease" in 2012. Comprehensive. Meticulously researched.
The oncology establishment ignores it completely.
When Seyfried lectures at medical schools, oncologists walk out. They call his work "dangerous." Not because the science is wrong. Because suggesting diet could treat cancer threatens the entire chemotherapy industry.
Current standard cancer treatment: Poison the patient with chemotherapy, then send them home with advice to eat "healthy whole grains" that feed the cancer.
Current research funding for metabolic cancer therapy: Essentially zero.
Warburg won the Nobel Prize 95 years ago. We've known cancer is glucose-dependent since 1962.
We're still feeding cancer patients sugar and calling it supportive care.
Because ketogenic therapy can't be patented.
@sweatystartup Agree here. Not that it’s one or the other…I agree that I think a lot about this (too much). And also about colds and other illnesses as well in the same frame of reference.
1/5
The Iran crisis is spiraling—missile strikes, nuclear sites bombed, proxies folding. But peace is possible.
I worked with @ChatGPT to draft a serious plan: 3 phases to de-escalate fast and lock in real stability.
A 🧵 for @SenTomCotton, @RichardGrenell, @TulsiGabbard, @chairmang, and anyone else thinking 3 moves ahead:
4/5
@realDonaldTrump, if you’re looking for a real foreign policy win—this is the play.
Your 2020 “maximum pressure” campaign put Iran in a corner.
Now’s the time to turn that into a long-term deal without endless war.
Peace through strength and smart structure.
5/5
This idea came from a convo with @ChatGPT (credit where it’s due).
Iran is weak at home. Proxies are pinned. The nuclear clock is ticking.
Let’s get ahead of the next war and lock in a win for peace, power, and principle.
– @jeffrey589
4/
@realDonaldTrump, if you’re looking for a real foreign policy win—this is the play.
Your 2020 “maximum pressure” campaign put Iran in a corner.
Now’s the time to turn that into a long-term deal without endless war.
Peace through strength and smart structure.
3/5
🛡️ Phase 3 – Long-Term Stability
•20-year enrichment cap
•Proxy freeze (Houthis, Hezbollah)
•Iran joins new Middle East economic framework
All verified by @iaeaorg, with real enforcement.
Not appeasement—leverage with discipline.