I know this is an older show but it is one that has stuck with me since the results Bengston reported were so undeniably amazing; curing mice of the same cancer which in 100s of previous experiments produced a 100% mortality rate. There really is no conventional explanation that could account for the results Bengston reported. I would really love to hear from the other people involved in the experiments to get their point of view. I have looked everywhere, read Bengstons book, etc., but nowhere can I find statements made by others who witnessed or participated in the experiments and I think it would be a valuable follow up show. The most obvious candidate is David Krinsley, whose contact information could be found here http://geology.uoregon.edu/courtesy-appointments/ He has apparently had a very prestigious academic career, published multiple times in Nature. Probably up there in years now. His name is on the original paper with Bengston but unfortunately nowhere is his perspective recorded as far as I can tell. Would be fascinating to here if he can confirm or add a new perspective. So just wanted to put that out there in case Alex also thought it would be worth following up.