Cancer Killing Drug?

tgass

tgass

Member
Awards
0
Cheap, 'safe' drug kills most cancers - health - 17 January 2007 - New Scientist


Cheap, 'safe' drug kills most cancers

* Updated 16:37 12 December 2007 by Andy Coghlan

New Scientist has received an unprecedented amount of interest in this story from readers. If you would like up-to-date information on any plans for clinical trials of DCA in patients with cancer, or would like to donate towards a fund for such trials, please visit the site set up by the University of Alberta and the Alberta Cancer Board. We will also follow events closely and will report any progress as it happens.

It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that kills almost all cancers by switching off their "immortality". The drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe.

It also has no patent, meaning it could be manufactured for a fraction of the cost of newly developed drugs.

Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, and his colleagues tested DCA on human cells cultured outside the body and found that it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, but not healthy cells. Tumours in rats deliberately infected with human cancer also shrank drastically when they were fed DCA-laced water for several weeks.

DCA attacks a unique feature of cancer cells: the fact that they make their energy throughout the main body of the cell, rather than in distinct organelles called mitochondria. This process, called glycolysis, is inefficient and uses up vast amounts of sugar.

Until now it had been assumed that cancer cells used glycolysis because their mitochondria were irreparably damaged. However, Michelakis's experiments prove this is not the case, because DCA reawakened the mitochondria in cancer cells. The cells then withered and died (Cancer Cell, DOI: 10.1016/j.ccr.2006.10.020).

Michelakis suggests that the switch to glycolysis as an energy source occurs when cells in the middle of an abnormal but benign lump don't get enough oxygen for their mitochondria to work properly (see diagram). In order to survive, they switch off their mitochondria and start producing energy through glycolysis.

Crucially, though, mitochondria do another job in cells: they activate apoptosis, the process by which abnormal cells self-destruct. When cells switch mitochondria off, they become "immortal", outliving other cells in the tumour and so becoming dominant. Once reawakened by DCA, mitochondria reactivate apoptosis and order the abnormal cells to die.

"The results are intriguing because they point to a critical role that mitochondria play:

they impart a unique trait to cancer cells that can be exploited for cancer therapy," says Dario Altieri, director of the University of Massachusetts Cancer Center in Worcester.

The phenomenon might also explain how secondary cancers form. Glycolysis generates lactic acid, which can break down the collagen matrix holding cells together. This means abnormal cells can be released and float to other parts of the body, where they seed new tumours.

DCA can cause pain, numbness and gait disturbances in some patients, but this may be a price worth paying if it turns out to be effective against all cancers. The next step is to run clinical trials of DCA in people with cancer. These may have to be funded by charities, universities and governments: pharmaceutical companies are unlikely to pay because they can't make money on unpatented medicines. The pay-off is that if DCA does work, it will be easy to manufacture and dirt cheap.

Paul Clarke, a cancer cell biologist at the University of Dundee in the UK, says the findings challenge the current assumption that mutations, not metabolism, spark off cancers. "The question is: which comes first?" he says.

Cancer - Learn more about one of the world's biggest killers in our comprehensive special report.

If you would like to reuse any content from New Scientist, either in print or online, please contact the syndication department first for permission. New Scientist does not own rights to photos, but there are a variety of licensing options available for use of articles and graphics we own the copyright to.
 
Zero V

Zero V

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
This is a great find! I wonder how long the major pharmaceutical companies making billions off of cancer are gona take this...

I will keep this stuff in mind and trace it, with any luck it should be in use in 2-3 years. I only fear the existence of current companies will try to find ways to discredit, or ban it.
 
fightbackhxc

fightbackhxc

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
or wait I wonder if the United States will find some way to ban this drug.....
 
Whacked

Whacked

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established
Ahh not so fast.............

Some studies discuss its carcinogenic attributes. As such, it's likely you wil never see this on the market.



The carcinogenicity of dichloroacetate and trichloroacetate have been investigated in B6C3F1 male and female mice. Mice were administered dichloroacetate and trichloroacetate in their drinking water at concentrations of 1 or 2 g/L for up to 52 weeks. Both compounds were found to induce hepatoproliferative lesions (HPL) in male mice which included hepatocellular nodules, adenomas, and hepatocellular carcinomas within 12 months. The induction of HPL by trichloroacetate was found to be linear with dose. However, the response to dichloroacetate increased sharply with the increase in concentration from 1 to 2 g/L. Suspension of dichloroacetate treatment at 37 weeks was found to result in the same number of HPL at 52 weeks that would have been predicted on the basis of the total dose administered. However, none of the lesions progressed to hepatocellular carcinomas when treatment was stopped at 37 weeks. On the otherhand, suspension of trichloroacetate treatment at 37 weeks caused a decrease in HPL compared to the number of HPL observed at 52 weeks. Throughout treatment, dichloroacetate-treated mice had enlarged livers characterized by a marked cytomegaly and massive accumulations of glycogen in hepatocytes throughout the liver and areas of focal necrosis were observed throughout the liver. Lipofuscin accumulation was less well marked than that observed for trichloroacetate. Trichloroacetate induced small increases in cell size and a smaller amount of glycogen. Focal necrotic damage did not occur in trichloroacetate-treated animals. Trichloroacetate produced marked accumulations of lipofuscin in the liver. The authors report that these data indicate that dichloroacetate and trichloroacetate and capable of inducing hepatic tumors in B6C3F1 mice and conclude that the mechanisms involved in tumor induction differ substantially between the two compounds. They state that tumorigenesis by dichloroacetate may depend largely on stimulation of cell division secondary to hepatic damage. On the otherhand, trichloroacetate appears to increase lipid peroxidation, suggesting that production of radicals may be responsible for its effects [Bull et al., 1990].

Another..........

Fundam Appl Toxicol. 1991 Aug;17(2):376-89. Links
90-Day toxicity study of dichloroacetate in dogs.Cicmanec JL, Condie LW, Olson GR, Wang SR.
Toxicology and Microbiology Division, Health Effects Research Laboratory, Cincinnati, Ohio 45268.

Male and female juvenile beagle dogs were dosed daily for 90 days with dichloroacetate (DCA). The compound was administered orally via gelatin capsules at doses of 0, 12.5, 39.5, and 72 mg/kg/day. Each dose group consisted of five males and five females. The dogs were observed clinically and blood samples were taken at 15-day intervals for hematologic and serum chemistry values. Decreased total erythrocyte count and hemoglobin levels were observed in mid- and high-dose dogs beginning at Day 30. Serum concentrations of LDH were elevated at Days 30 and 45 in females and at Day 75 in males treated with DCA at 72 mg/kg/day. One female of the high-dose group died at Day 50 and two high-dose males died at Days 51 and 74. Hindlimb partial paralysis was observed in many high-dose dogs. Vacuolization of myelinated white tracts of cerebrum, cerebellum, and/or spinal cord was observed in many high-dose dogs as well as some mid- and low-dose subjects. Degeneration of testicular germinal epithelium and syncytial giant cell formation was noted in males of all dose groups. Hepatic vacuolar change and chronic hepatitis appeared only in DCA-treated dogs. In addition, suppurative bronchopneumonia and chronic pancreatitis were noted in many high-dose and some middose subjects. A "no-adverse-effect level" was not determined in this study.

PMID: 1765225 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
 
MrBigPR

MrBigPR

NutraPlanet Rep
Awards
1
  • Established
Cure for cancer has already been invented....all about the money...
 

hardknock

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Cure for cancer has already been invented....all about the money...
You really need documented proof, or similar, perhaps an inside scoopbut not just propaganda...Until I see substantial proof, it's just words.
 
MrBigPR

MrBigPR

NutraPlanet Rep
Awards
1
  • Established
It won't be released, many pharmaceutical companies would go out of business.

There is no "Cure" for many things out there; only meds to suppress symptoms.
 
fightbackhxc

fightbackhxc

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • RockStar
  • Established

hardknock

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
It won't be released, many pharmaceutical companies would go out of business.

There is no "Cure" for many things out there; only meds to suppress symptoms.
I wouldn't say they would go out of business if they released the cure for cancer, if said item existed. Cancer is only one of MANY issues out there that are killing people. Bigpharma has PLENTY of other diseases, and viruses to sink its teeth into without cancer existing.
 
MrBigPR

MrBigPR

NutraPlanet Rep
Awards
1
  • Established
Every med prescribed has other meds which it affects. So without these cancer suppressing drugs some drugs aren't even activated.
 
MrBigPR

MrBigPR

NutraPlanet Rep
Awards
1
  • Established
I'd be happy to discuss this over PM instead of hijacking the op's thread
 

hardknock

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Every med prescribed has other meds which it affects. So without these cancer suppressing drugs some drugs aren't even activated.
Not disagreeing; I did 3 yrs as a rep, Im well aware of what goes on behind close doors. But to say that pharma comps would go bankrupt is putting it a bit overboard, i'd say, way overboard. Pharm comps make billions of dollars through drugs that go to individuals with other ailments, and not any particulars to cancer.

It's kinda like saying that if everyone quit taking cough syrup, those companies would go bankrupt, it just doesn't work that way unless that is the ONLY product the company produces.

When's the last time we found a "cure" for anything? that's my only point. There are too many diseases and viruses floating around for that one particular to cause a company to go bankrupt. i don't disagree that pharma comps are holding on to info which could help millions, but there should be documented proof...
 

hardknock

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I've already said too much...
If you know something substantial, it should be on the 10'oclock news, not am.com...

What's the worse that can happen? You'd get celebrated as a hero?
 
RoadBlocK

RoadBlocK

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
If you know something substantial, it should be on the 10'oclock news, not am.com...

What's the worse that can happen? You'd get celebrated as a hero?
Worst thing would be winding up dead in the gutter on some dead end street for trying to let the cat out of the bag?

:dead:
 
nparisi

nparisi

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
Doses of around 5g a day of ginger extract(min. 5% gingerols) has been shown to shrink/eliminate tumors. There was a great super human radio show done on this recently. Check it out at superhumanradio.com I think that particular show is called the uber herb
 

hardknock

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Worst thing would be winding up dead in the gutter on some dead end street for trying to let the cat out of the bag?

:dead:
... if I knew something of that magnitude, it would be world wide...my death can only happen once, so be it...
 

hardknock

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Dutchman

Dutchman

Active member
Awards
1
  • Established
If you want to fight cancer, before or after you get it, then you need Vitamin
D3. It prevents/reduces about 77% of the known cancers we face. It affects a good 200 genes involved in our immune system. It probably by now has a 1000 test studies, mostly from around the world because our Big Pharma can't make any money on it, which detail its exceptional ability to fight cancer of lungs, breasts, prostate etc etc. Google it and spend a few days catching up. If you really want to go further, then do some Sulphorophane (Cruciferous Veggies), Curcumin (Turmeric), Selenium and Halofuginone all well documented.
 
AdelV

AdelV

Well-known member
Awards
2
  • Established
  • First Up Vote
Could u get this anywhere? My mum had breast cancer, id like to get her anything which may help!
 

314

Member
Awards
0
as far as natural supps go i've heard some good things about aspargus. The people that used it took 1-3 glasses aday.
 
Zero V

Zero V

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Take that to the other thread, no place for dancing on the bible here bro'
Maybe he meant they could use Voodoo and raise his body from the grave, and kill him repeatedly with said cycle.
 

TaPo31

New member
Awards
0
As a scientist that actually does cancer research, obviously unlike many people posting in this thread, let me just say that anyone that thinks that cancer has been cured and this cure is being hidden are out of their minds. Let me ask a few questions. Do you know how many diseases the term cancer encompasses? So which of these hundreds of cancers has been cured and hidden? Considering the molecular makeup varies drastically between diseases even within the same tissue, just how many of these hidden cures are there? There are certain cancers that do have a very high cure rate, but some of the blasphemy that I have read in this thread blows my mind and is honestly very offensive to both scientists doing this research any person who has lost a loved one to the hundreds of diseases that comprise cancer. Also, go ahead and take a look at the list of the highest grossing pharmaceutical agents out there today and tell me how many are cancer chemotherapeutics, there won't be many if any at all.
 
Zero V

Zero V

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Tapo, since you work on it I have a question. I have seen it taught that if you keep your body in an alkaline state, cancer cant live, nor most other diseases for that matter. Is there truth to this?

If there is even a little bit, one of the first treatments of cancer should be to 100% change the patients diet to an alkaline diet(they suck hardcore), and then continue treatment.

There have been a few people that crossed my path who use this diet, they could smear someone who has the flues not all over themselves and not get sick. Its like they are immune to anything, and I have not seen people with this diet ever contract a disease.

Its an interesting concept and your input, or the input of another in the field would be valued. Which makes sense, its just the fact that no one wants to maintain an alkaline diet, it makes keto diets look like a joy ride.
 
matthias7

matthias7

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
Tapo, since you work on it I have a question. I have seen it taught that if you keep your body in an alkaline state, cancer cant live, nor most other diseases for that matter. Is there truth to this?
Infectious disease not a chance - malaria has been hitting mammals for millions of years. Anyway you're body will resist an 'alkaline state' like crazy, stomach alone is pH1.

TD bleach?

BTW Zero V ... loner extraordinaire, how come you have so many friends? Shouldn't it be zero?

Anyway good post on dichloroacetate. I'm sure I'll forget it but when the risk factors start stacking high its time to take a chance on that sort of thing.
 

TaPo31

New member
Awards
0
Tapo, since you work on it I have a question. I have seen it taught that if you keep your body in an alkaline state, cancer cant live, nor most other diseases for that matter. Is there truth to this?

If there is even a little bit, one of the first treatments of cancer should be to 100% change the patients diet to an alkaline diet(they suck hardcore), and then continue treatment.

There have been a few people that crossed my path who use this diet, they could smear someone who has the flues not all over themselves and not get sick. Its like they are immune to anything, and I have not seen people with this diet ever contract a disease.

Its an interesting concept and your input, or the input of another in the field would be valued. Which makes sense, its just the fact that no one wants to maintain an alkaline diet, it makes keto diets look like a joy ride.
I personally have seen no research which supports this as a beneficial therapy or prevention of cancer. I think this is likely attributed to a couple things. Will cancer cells die in an alkaline environment? Sure, but so will healthy, normal cells. If it was all about just being able to kill the cancer cells, we would have cured the diseases decades ago (it is essentially what cancer chemotheraphy is). The problem is that you have to kill all of the cancerous cells while leaving the normal cells alive, this is what make cancer such a difficult thing to treat. Also, I doubt that the body would allow a shift in pH from enough from physiological levels substantial enough to kill those cells even if it would work.
 
BBB

BBB

Well-known member
Awards
1
  • Established
I personally have seen no research which supports this as a beneficial therapy or prevention of cancer. I think this is likely attributed to a couple things. Will cancer cells die in an alkaline environment? Sure, but so will healthy, normal cells. If it was all about just being able to kill the cancer cells, we would have cured the diseases decades ago (it is essentially what cancer chemotheraphy is). The problem is that you have to kill all of the cancerous cells while leaving the normal cells alive, this is what make cancer such a difficult thing to treat. Also, I doubt that the body would allow a shift in pH from enough from physiological levels substantial enough to kill those cells even if it would work.
Vitamin B17 has been undermined by our government but it is used extensively in other countries as a first line therapy for treating cancer. It selectively seeks out a kills cancer cells while actually nourishing normal cells. It has been extensively studied in animals and when used in conjunction with chemotherapy significantly reduces the detrimental effects of chemo and also reduces the amounts necessary for treatment. There is volumes of information about this product on the internet. Ignore anything published by our government and you will be overwhelmed by the positive information on this product. I first became aware of B17 after talking to my wife’s uncle who actually cured himself of throat cancer using B17 therapy. After which I found an “on-line” website where you can call and talk to people who have been cured with this vitamin. It didn’t take long to convince me of the value of this product. I and my entire family have been taking 100 mg of vitamin B17 for many years as a defense against cancer.
 
PublicEnemy

PublicEnemy

Member
Awards
1
  • Established
Nice find!

I can think of a drug i like which shows promise in regulating cancer.

Now if I only switched a method which doesn't involve smoking it... I could legitimately say its good for me then!
 

Similar threads


Top