Cancer Cured - Read Quickly - May Be Pulled

[Zero Tolerance]

It works 100% of the time to eradicate cancer completely, and cancer does not recur even years later. That is how researchers describe the most convincing cancer cure ever announced.

The weekly injection of just 100 billionths of a gram of a harmless glyco-protein (a naturally-produced molecule with a sugar component and a protein component) activates the human immune system and cures cancer for good, according to human studies among breast cancer and colon cancer patients, producing complete remissions lasting 4 and 7 years respectively. This glyco-protein cure is totally without side effects.

Read the full article here:
Cancer Cured For Good

I'm hearing that webmasters are being asked to remove links to this article.

 

[papapumpsd]

It works 100% of the time to eradicate cancer completely, and cancer does not recur even years later. That is how researchers describe the most convincing cancer cure ever announced.

The weekly injection of just 100 billionths of a gram of a harmless glyco-protein (a naturally-produced molecule with a sugar component and a protein component) activates the human immune system and cures cancer for good, according to human studies among breast cancer and colon cancer patients, producing complete remissions lasting 4 and 7 years respectively. This glyco-protein cure is totally without side effects.

Read the full article here:
Cancer Cured For Good

I'm hearing that webmasters are being asked to remove links to this article.

There's probably a good reason for this.

The article, at the end, has this info:

"Addendum: Sadly, the treatment you have just read about is not available anywhere. Its inventor is attempting to patent a version of it to profiteer off of it even though there is no need to improve upon the GcMAF molecule - - it worked without failure to completely cure four different types of cancer with no long-term remissions and without side effect. While GcMAF is produced by every healthy adult, there are no centers available to extract it from blood samples and inject it into patients with malignancies. Hopefully, someday, doctors will write protocols to do this and submit them to institutional review boards so GcMAF treatment can be performed on an experimental basis. GcMAF is a naturally-made molecule that cannot be patented. This article was written to reveal that there are proven cancer cures that go unused. Of interest, not one oncologist has requested information about GcMAF since this article was written, while I have been barraged with inquires from cancer patients, their families and some interested physicians who are not cancer doctors.
-Bill Sardi "

I think Oncologists are more intelligent than cancer patients and patients will scramble to any potential 'cure' for their illness. Of course he's going to be bombarded w/e-mails from patients.....that's obvious.

 

[brk_nemesis]

thing is, is how much money will cancer "clinics" and treatment centers lose if a "cure" for cancer is ever found? LOTS. Same goes for AIDS. thats why there will nvr be a "cure" for cancer, just discovering better treatments. I hate to be pessimistic about it, but money is money.

 

[papapumpsd]

thing is, is how much money will cancer "clinics" and treatment centers lose if a "cure" for cancer is ever found? LOTS. Same goes for AIDS. thats why there will nvr be a "cure" for cancer, just discovering better treatments. I hate to be pessimistic about it, but money is money.

Yes! Think about all the unemployment there would be if a cure for cancer was found. Very similar to the bankruptcy of the auto industry. Suppliers, manufacuters (of radiation therapy equipment and reagents), sales reps., technicians (doctors/nurses/physicists), etc would be out of work.

But I'm not an Oncologist, so I'm not sure if A cure for all cancers would even be possible. I'm doubtful one drug/therapy would cure all.....or even most. Just speculating here.

 

[brk_nemesis]

Yes! Think about all the unemployment there would be if a cure for cancer was found. Very similar to the bankruptcy of the auto industry. Suppliers, manufacuters (of radiation therapy equipment and reagents), sales reps., technicians (doctors/nurses/physicists), etc would be out of work.

But I'm not an Oncologist, so I'm not sure if A cure for all cancers would even be possible. I'm doubtful one drug/therapy would cure all.....or even most. Just speculating here.

Yup,..my point actually. The truth sux, but it is what is is.

 

[badfish51581]

It looks pretty legit...

Immunotherapy for Prostate Cancer with Gc Protein-Derived Macrophage-Activating Factor, GcMAF1

Serum Gc protein (known as vitamin D3-binding protein) is the precursor for the principal macrophage-activating factor (MAF). The MAF precursor activity of serum Gc protein of prostate cancer patients was lost or reduced because Gc protein was deglycosylated by serum α-N-acetylgalactosaminidase (Nagalase) secreted from cancerous cells. Therefore, macrophages of prostate cancer patients having deglycosylated Gc protein cannot be activated, leading to immunosuppression. Stepwise treatment of purified Gc protein with immobilized β-galactosidase and sialidase generated the most potent MAF (termed GcMAF) ever discovered, which produces no adverse effect in humans. Macrophages activated by GcMAF develop a considerable variation of receptors that recognize the abnormality in malignant cell surface and are highly tumoricidal. Sixteen nonanemic prostate cancer patients received weekly administration of 100 ng of GcMAF. As the MAF precursor activity increased, their serum Nagalase activity decreased. Because serum Nagalase activity is proportional to tumor burden, the entire time course analysis for GcMAF therapy was monitored by measuring the serum Nagalase activity. After 14 to 25 weekly administrations of GcMAF (100 ng/week), all 16 patients had very low serum Nagalase levels equivalent to those of healthy control values, indicating that these patients are tumor-free. No recurrence occurred for 7 years.

 

[badfish51581]

Dude...WTF...so, why isn't this a bigger deal?

Immunotherapy of metastatic colorectal cancer with vitamin D-binding protein-derived macrophage-activating factor, GcMAF.
Yamamoto N, Suyama H, Nakazato H, Yamamoto N, Koga Y.

Division of Cancer Immunology and Molecular Immunology, Socrates Institute for Therapeutic Immunology, 1040, 66th Ave, Philadelphia, PA 19126-3305, USA. [email protected]

Serum vitamin D binding protein (Gc protein) is the precursor for the principal macrophage-activating factor (MAF). The MAF precursor activity of serum Gc protein of colorectal cancer patients was lost or reduced because Gc protein is deglycosylated by serum alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase (Nagalase) secreted from cancerous cells. Deglycosylated Gc protein cannot be converted to MAF, leading to immunosuppression. Stepwise treatment of purified Gc protein with immobilized beta-galactosidase and sialidase generated the most potent macrophage-activating factor (GcMAF) ever discovered, but it produces no side effect in humans. Macrophages treated with GcMAF (100 microg/ml) develop an enormous variation of receptors and are highly tumoricidal to a variety of cancers indiscriminately. Administration of 100 nanogram (ng)/ human maximally activates systemic macrophages that can kill cancerous cells. Since the half-life of the activated macrophages is approximately 6 days, 100 ng GcMAF was administered weekly to eight nonanemic colorectal cancer patients who had previously received tumor-resection but still carried significant amounts of metastatic tumor cells. As GcMAF therapy progressed, the MAF precursor activities of all patients increased and conversely their serum Nagalase activities decreased. Since serum Nagalase is proportional to tumor burden, serum Nagalase activity was used as a prognostic index for time course analysis of GcMAF therapy. After 32-50 weekly administrations of 100 ng GcMAF, all colorectal cancer patients exhibited healthy control levels of the serum Nagalase activity, indicating eradication of metastatic tumor cells. During 7 years after the completion of GcMAF therapy, their serum Nagalase activity did not increase, indicating no recurrence of cancer, which was also supported by the annual CT scans of these patients.

Immunotherapy of metastatic breast cancer patients with vitamin D-binding protein-derived macrophage activating factor (GcMAF).
Yamamoto N, Suyama H, Yamamoto N, Ushijima N.

Division of Cancer Immunology and Molecular Biology, Socrates Institute for Therapeutic Immunology, Philadelphia, PA 19126-3305, USA. [email protected]

Serum vitamin D3-binding protein (Gc protein) is the precursor for the principal macrophage activating factor (MAF). The MAF precursor activity of serum Gc protein of breast cancer patients was lost or reduced because Gc protein was deglycosylated by serum alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase (Nagalase) secreted from cancerous cells. Patient serum Nagalase activity is proportional to tumor burden. The deglycosylated Gc protein cannot be converted to MAF, resulting in no macrophage activation and immunosuppression. Stepwise incubation of purified Gc protein with immobilized beta-galactosidase and sialidase generated probably the most potent macrophage activating factor (termed GcMAF) ever discovered, which produces no adverse effect in humans. Macrophages treated in vitro with GcMAF (100 pg/ml) are highly tumoricidal to mammary adenocarcinomas. Efficacy of GcMAF for treatment of metastatic breast cancer was investigated with 16 nonanemic patients who received weekly administration of GcMAF (100 ng). As GcMAF therapy progresses, the MAF precursor activity of patient Gc protein increased with a concomitant decrease in serum Nagalase. Because of proportionality of serum Nagalase activity to tumor burden, the time course progress of GcMAF therapy was assessed by serum Nagalase activity as a prognostic index. These patients had the initial Nagalase activities ranging from 2.32 to 6.28 nmole/min/mg protein. After about 16-22 administrations (approximately 3.5-5 months) of GcMAF, these patients had insignificantly low serum enzyme levels equivalent to healthy control enzyme levels, ranging from 0.38 to 0.63 nmole/min/mg protein, indicating eradication of the tumors. This therapeutic procedure resulted in no recurrence for more than 4 years. Copyright 2007 Wiley-Liss, Inc.

Antitumor effect of vitamin D-binding protein-derived macrophage activating factor on Ehrlich ascites tumor-bearing mice.
Koga Y, Naraparaju VR, Yamamoto N.

Laboratory of Cancer Immunology and Molecular Biology, Albert Einstein Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19141, USA.

Cancerous cells secrete alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase (NaGalase) into the blood stream, resulting in deglycosylation of serum vitamin D3-binding protein (known as Gc protein), which is a precursor for macrophage activating factor (MAF). Incubation of Gc protein with immobilized beta-galactosidase and sialidase generates the most potent macrophage activating factor (designated GcMAF). Administration of GcMAF to cancer-bearing hosts can bypass the inactivated MAF precursor and act directly on macrophages for efficient activation. Therapeutic effects of GcMAF on Ehrlich ascites tumor-bearing mice were assessed by survival time and serum NaGalase activity, because serum NaGalase activity was proportional to tumor burden. A single administration of GcMAF (100 pg/mouse) to eight mice on the same day after transplantation of the tumor (5 x 10(5) cells) showed a mean survival time of 21 +/- 3 days for seven mice, with one mouse surviving more than 60 days, whereas tumor-bearing controls had a mean survival time of 13 +/- 2 days. Six of the eight mice that received two GcMAF administrations, at Day 0 and Day 4 after transplantation, survived up to 31 +/- 4 days whereas, the remaining two mice survived for more than 60 days. Further, six of the eight mice that received three GcMAF administrations with 4-day intervals showed an extended survival of at least 60 days, and serum NaGalase levels were as low as those of control mice throughout the survival period. The cure with subthreshold GcMAF-treatments (administered once or twice) of tumor-bearing mice appeared to be a consequence of sustained macrophage activation by inflammation resulting from the macrophage-mediated tumoricidal process. Therefore, a protracted macrophage activation induced by a few administrations of minute amounts of GcMAF eradicated the murine ascites tumor.

 

[MentalTwitch]

My GFs step dad was just diagnosed with lung cancer. He is going to be going to Rush Hospital, one of the best her in Chicago, especially for cancer. I Am goin to print this article and present them with it to see if they can contact anyone or see what they have to say. Ill let you guys know what i hear.
It may seem foolish and naieve, but its worth a shot.

 

[dirtydeweyjr]

It may seem foolish and naieve, but its worth a shot.

it's absolutely worth a shot. such a tragic thing to befall any persona or family.

best of luck fighting the good fight to your "future father in law"

 

[Trauma1]

I've sub'd this, and will give it a read later. I have some things to add as well.

 

[Palo Alto Labs]

Yes! Think about all the unemployment there would be if a cure for cancer was found. Very similar to the bankruptcy of the auto industry. Suppliers, manufacuters (of radiation therapy equipment and reagents), sales reps., technicians (doctors/nurses/physicists), etc would be out of work.

But I'm not an Oncologist, so I'm not sure if A cure for all cancers would even be possible. I'm doubtful one drug/therapy would cure all.....or even most. Just speculating here.

A strong economy is directly related to a strong population. We have an overabundance of housing in this country, overabundance of undeveloped land; unemployment is just off right now because of the housing slump.

I highly doubt anyone would be richer if cancer was cured.

And they announced a cure for Aids last week.

By your logic, our economy would be bankrupt based on the fact that people now live into their 80s rather than their 40's or 50's as they did a century ago. But a longer life expectancy has only increased the power of our economy. The more people we have, the more we need as a country.

 

[papapumpsd]

A strong economy is directly related to a strong population. We have an overabundance of housing in this country, overabundance of undeveloped land; unemployment is just off right now because of the housing slump.

I highly doubt anyone would be richer if cancer was cured.

And they announced a cure for Aids last week.

By your logic, our economy would be bankrupt based on the fact that people now live into their 80s rather than their 40's or 50's as they did a century ago. But a longer life expectancy has only increased the power of our economy. The more people we have, the more we need as a country.

'
I am sorry Dave, but I do not see the connection between my post above and your responses.

I will comment on some of your material though.

And they announced a cure for Aids last week.

I never mentioned AIDS. I do not see the connection between cancer and AIDS. Maybe elaborate for me/us?

We have an overabundance of housing in this country, overabundance of undeveloped land; unemployment is just off right now because of the housing slump.

I never mentioned housing statstics or land development. I'm not sure what you're saying here Dave. I'm not going to comment too much on our current housing 'slump'. That's a whole other debate on how to define the current housing condition.

By your logic, our economy would be bankrupt based on the fact that people now live into their 80s rather than their 40's or 50's as they did a century ago.

I am completely lost with this one bud. Please elaborate so I can respond. I never mentioned mortality/mobidity/longevity. Not sure how my logic parallels your content.

I'm thinking you meant to respond to someone else?

 

[Trauma1]

The problems related to successful treatment modalities, and remission of cancer in general is many fold.

For starters, many people aren't aware of these issues at times until it's already too late. Many cancer related findings are completely incidental in nature. The truth of the matter is if it's progressed to a certain point, there isn't much that can be done other than buying some time.

Another factor to look at is the complexity of the immune system response. Our bodies immune system is designed to destroy foreign antigens/bacteria/viruses, however it's not as cut and dry as it seems.

The problem with many cancer treatments is this. Some cancer cells are completely undetected by our immune system, and are allowed to proliferate very precipitantly in some instances. It is not known why this happens, but many new treatments are geared towards helping the immune system recognize these cells, and destroy them early on.

Cancer also has a primary site, and can metastasize to other parts of the body. This complicates an effective treatment modality even further. At this point, there is new research and studies that have developed with some promising new treatment methods, but as far as a cure all, it just doesn't exist yet, and very well may never.

Now here's another example in regard to effective treatments of a viral component of terminal illness such as HIV. The reason why HIV is unable to be eradicated from the body is for a variety of reasons, many of which make a vaccine or cure an almost impossible task at this point in modern medicine.

Hiv is known as a retrovirus. It primarily attacks CD4 lymphocyte cells that are responsible for organzing an effective immune response (It also infects many other cells in the central nervous system and GI tract as well) by injecting a reverse transcriptase component into the CD4 cell. This basically invades the cells DNA structure and programs it to make replications of the HIV virus. Eventually, that cell bursts and hundreds of thousands of new HIV viral particles are released.

Now, the reason this is so hard to treat is complicated. The HIV virus primarily resides within the lymphatic system (or where our immune system is based from in attempt to limit systemic involvement.) The HIV virus also has some circulating in your blood, as well as your nervous system and GI tract. It's very good about once outside the lymphatic system in hiding from the immune system. This is primarily why your body can't fight it off completely, as it isn't able to detect all the viral particles that exist and destroy them. Another difficult compnent is the bodies ability to recognize already infected cells to destroy them before more viral particles are released.

HIV also has an uncanny ability to mutate, and form resistance to antiviral/protease inhibitor treatments. In other words, eventually with our current treatments available, the virus is able to alter its protein coat antigen rendering antiviral medications useless. Now this takes a long time, but it can be precipitated if people aren't compliant with their medication regimen.

Our immune system puts up a valiant struggle to control it, and it does for a long time in most (on average 10 years before aids criteria is met), but eventually the virus is able to overtake the immune systems response. The result is the inablity of your body to form an effective immune response to foreign invasion, and you succomb to opportunistic infections. HIV doesn't kill you per se, the opportunitic infections that are allowed to proliferate do resulting from an ineffective organized immune response.

I still haven't read this article completely yet, so i'll go do that now.

/rant :lol:

 

[Steveoph]

I'm tempted to take this to a cancer research tomorrow at my university and see what they say. You guys pick through it first and make sure it's legit though, I'm working on a lab Or atleast should be lol.

 

[papapumpsd]

The problems related to successful treatment modalities, and remission of cancer in general is many fold.

For starters, many people aren't aware of these issues at times until it's already too late. Many cancer related findings are completely incidental in nature. The truth of the matter is if it's progressed to a certain point, there isn't much that can be done other than buying some time.

Another factor to look at is the complexity of the immune system response. Our bodies immune system is designed to destroy foreign antigens/bacteria/viruses, however it's not as cut and dry as it seems.

................

/rant :lol:

Very nice Trauma. Thanks for elaborating.

Let's not forget though that canver and HIV(AIDS) are VERY different diseases. Cancer is due to mutations independent of infection while HIV is acquired via infectious agent. HIV is viral, cancer is not. So the treatments to these diseases is hugely different.

Both, though, are immune diseases. And both involve the excessive proliferation of cells and/or particles (cancer is the uncontrolled proliferation of various cells while HIV involves virus particle proliferation via a hostile takeover of cells' metabolic and reproductive machinery).

I will briefly comment on HIV. It's a b!tch to get rid of because...it's a virus. Viruses are neither living nor dead. They're bastar.d infections that nobody can deal with effectively. Why? Because viruses integrate their genetic material into the host. This is bascially a cloaking mechanism that give the virus invisibility by both the host's immune system and medical treatments. And, as Trauma eluded to, viruses have the ability to mutate, and often times do so at high rates. So, while you may have a flu vaccine for this winter, epidemiologists really don't know for sure that the vaccine will work again the speculative strain as the strain may have mutated and now the vaccine is worthless (or greatly ineffective).

That's why we don't even have a cure for the common cold. We're putting people on the moon and sending people into the Marianna's Trench >3 miles deep into the ocean, but there's no cure for a virus that infects millions and millions of people each year and has been doing this since the dawn of man, and earlier. SOB viruses.

 

[Trauma1]

Very nice Trauma. Thanks for elaborating.

Let's not forget though that canver and HIV(AIDS) are VERY different diseases. Cancer is due to mutations independent of infection while HIV is acquired via infectious agent. HIV is viral, cancer is not. So the treatments to these diseases is hugely different.

Both, though, are immune diseases. And both involve the excessive proliferation of cells and/or particles (cancer is the uncontrolled proliferation of various cells while HIV involves virus particle proliferation via a hostile takeover of cells' metabolic and reproductive machinery).

I will briefly comment on HIV. It's a b!tch to get rid of because...it's a virus. Viruses are neither living nor dead. They're bastar.d infections that nobody can deal with effectively. Why? Because viruses integrate their genetic material into the host. This is bascially a cloaking mechanism that give the virus invisibility by both the host's immune system and medical treatments. And, as Trauma eluded to, viruses have the ability to mutate, and often times do so at high rates. So, while you may have a flu vaccine for this winter, epidemiologists really don't know for sure that the vaccine will work again the speculative strain as the strain may have mutated and now the vaccine is worthless (or greatly ineffective).

That's why we don't even have a cure for the common cold. We're putting people on the moon and sending people into the Marianna's Trench >3 miles deep into the ocean, but there's no cure for a virus that infects millions and millions of people each year and has been doing this since the dawn of man, and earlier. SOB viruses.

Cancer incidence is not always necessarily directly independent in its origin, and can result due to a coexisting infectious state. Cancer often can develop as a secondary complication directly related to a primary disease state. HIV infection alone increases the risk of certain cancers such as lymphoma, and Kaposi's Sarcoma significantly. This is specifically due to HIV's ability to damage an organized immune response that would normally kill cancer related cells, and not allow cancer cells to proliferate in a normally immunocompetent individual.

HIV and AIDS is often used interchangably by some people when it really shouldn't be. HIV is the specific virus that slowly damages the immune system, and its ability to organize/maintain immunocompetency. AIDS is a syndrome consisting of specific criteria that needs to be met (presence of significant and specific opportunistic infections, crippled CD4 T-cell count, high Viral Load) in order to say the individual has an "Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome." Being HIV positive does not necessarily denote a concurrent AIDS diagnosis.

Some people infected with HIV are longterm non-progressors. They still don't understand why certain people are more effectively able to control/contain the HIV virus from overtaking the immune system, and delaying progression of AIDS criteria to be met. This could be for any number of reasons ranging from endogenous to exogenous factors.

I'm well versed in oncology and viral pathophysiology. I think that maybe my 8 years of emergency nursing may have something to do with that....

 

[MentalTwitch]

PP and T1, battle of the beasts....lets be plesant about this fellas....quit yelling....I SAID QUIT YELLING!!!

haha, i re-read the article a few times and came to this conclusion, the guy who has the patent to the structure and not neccessarily the patent for it to be made is a douche.

Basically he is saying, i know what it is if you can figure it out, go to town...

Its frustrating that they are getting close. Even though its still minor it what it can be used in, if the 13 of 13 breast cancer testers had no sign for 4 years, thats great.

The only place that makes me think 2x is the D vit. reference but not being directly required? I have a feeling not all the beans are spilled in this article.

 

[Trauma1]

PP and T1, battle of the beasts....lets be plesant about this fellas....quit yelling....I SAID QUIT YELLING!!!

haha, i re-read the article a few times and came to this conclusion, the guy who has the patent to the structure and not neccessarily the patent for it to be made is a douche.

Basically he is saying, i know what it is if you can figure it out, go to town...

Its frustrating that they are getting close. Even though its still minor it what it can be used in, if the 13 of 13 breast cancer testers had no sign for 4 years, thats great.

The only place that makes me think 2x is the D vit. reference but not being directly required? I have a feeling not all the beans are spilled in this article.

Yelling? :think: I'm being very civil.

There are so many experimental treatment modalities right now in clinical trials. It's not nearly as cut and dry as many people think. The majority of these new treatments are designed to help the body more readily recognize and effectively destroy cancer cell proliferations. So in other words, boosting our own immune based "cell mediated" response to the issue.

 

[Frank Reynolds]

Cancer scares the **** out of me.. It seems like everyone is getting that **** these days.:run:

 

[hardknock]

Some people infected with HIV are longterm non-progressors. They still don't understand why certain people are more effectively able to control/contain the HIV virus from overtaking the immune system, and delaying progression of AIDS criteria to be met. This could be for any number of reasons ranging from endogenous to exogenous factors.

Such as Magic Johnson whom was diagnosed with HIV, what, in 1992? That is like 16 years and they said that the trace is almost undetectable now (that was like 4 years ago) ... Im beginning to think that he was misdiagnosed, but that's pretty much 1,000,000 in 1 chance.

 

[Trauma1]

Such as Magic Johnson whom was diagnosed with HIV, what, in 1992? That is like 16 years and they said that the trace is almost undetectable now (that was like 4 years ago) ... Im beginning to think that he was misdiagnosed, but that's pretty much 1,000,000 in 1 chance.

If i remember correctly, i believe he was involved with some experiemental HIV treatments way back that were taken place out of this country (England i think). Who really knows though.

If you stay on top of it, you can continue to delay progression for quite a while, however as for the situation with the long term non-progressors, who knows. Even our nations best virology/infectious disease experts have no clue.

Edit: With the advancements of PCR and bDNA testing, coupled with the enhanced sensitivity and specitivity of current ELISA/Western Blot antibody screens, detection is at damn near 100%. When they say it's undetectable, they say that because the viral load (or circulating virus in the blood) is undetectable.

These people will still test postive on the antibody screens. While the medication and immune system may have negated the virus to an undetectable "viral load" level by our technologies limitations, a positive antibody test (ELISA/Western Blot confirms the diagnosis.