Re: Off topic: Goodbye cancer!

[Guest guest]

Hm ... this will be an

interesting sociological experiment. If an inexpensive natural

substance turns out to be a cure for most or even many types of cancer

.... think of the bruised egos and threatened vested interests ... the

billions of dollars in the so-called war on cancer. Will they find a

way to bury this, or co-opt it by changing it slightly to make it

patentable? Money talks and BS walks.

I sure hope this is as huge as you think, and that the news gets out

too quickly to be controlled or co-opted.

If the media is strangely silent / unexcited about this, and a parade

of "experts" comes out calling it "interesting but needing more study",

then we'll know the answer.

This news has been out for a couple of weeks already ... it hit MSN a

week ago ... but a quick scan of Google seems to show that no other

major sites have picked this story up. I'm not the only one who

wonders about this, by the way:

http://media.www.studentprintz.com/media/storage/paper974/news/2007/01/23/Opinion/Scientists.Cure.Cancer.But.No.One.Takes.Notice-2667600.shtml

Fingers crossed,

--Bob

rvankonynen wrote:

Hi, all.

I want to let you know about what appears to me to be a major

breakthrough in research on cancer treatment. I'm not selling

anything, and I was not involved with the research, but I think it's

very exciting! I hope you won't think I've parted company with my

sanity when I tell you this.

I'm referring to work recently published by researchers at the

University of Alberta in Canada. The full paper can be found at the

following site:

http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/cancer_cell.pdf

I'm not exaggerating when I call this a major breakthrough.

Briefly, these researchers have found that a relatively simple, non-

patentable substance, namely dichloroacetate, which has been used in

the past to control lactic acidosis in children with mitochondrial

disease, is able to knock out a variety of types of cancer cells

without causing systemic problems. They have demonstrated this by

experiments in three types of human cancer cell cultures and in mice.

This substance works by blocking the enzyme pyruvate dehydrogenase

kinase, causing pyruvate to be converted to acetyl Co-A and be fed

into the Krebs cycle, instead of being reduced to lactic acid as

normally occurs in cancer cells, and thus forcing the cancer cells to

change their metabolism from glycolysis to oxidative phosphorylation,

like normal cells. As a result of this change, they are able to

cause these cells to undergo apoptosis and die, rather than being

immortal as cancer cells are. In the mice, they put this substance

in their driinkinig water, and they began to see effects on their

cancer within one week!

Because it operates on a feature that is common to all cancer cells

(as shown by Otto Warburg in 1930, for which he won the Nobel prize),

this substance promises to be a universal treatment for all types of

cancers.

Because it is nonpatentable, it should be relatively inexpensive.

This also means that non-pharma money will have to be found for the

phase II and III clinical trials, and they've started a fund for

that. Because there is already a history of using this substance in

humans to treat lactic acidosis in mitochondrial disease, it is

already known that the side effects are mnimal.

I am fairly familiar with the biochemistry of the intermediary

metabolism, and I can tell you that the paper looks good to me. I

would invite comments from others on this. If this is what it looks

like to me, the ramifications are huge to society, the economy, the

cancer industry, and to all of us as individuals. I think this will

make it even more imperative that we figure out what to do for

Alzheimer's, because the average life expectancy is going to jump.

When futurists used to talk about the possibility of "a cure for

cancer" being found, I always thought they were nuts! I don't think

so anymore.

Rich

[Guest guest]

Thanks, Bob. I think that is a very well-written piece that you

cited. Sara in Vancouver B.C. says the the papers have been

full of it up there, but you're right, I haven't seen anything about

it here in the San Francisco Bay area. I think it will be hard to

ignore, though. Maybe nobody believes it, and then, again, maybe

they know on which side their bread is buttered.

Rich

>

> Hm ... this will be an interesting sociological experiment. If an

> inexpensive natural substance turns out to be a cure for most or

even

> many types of cancer ... think of the bruised egos and threatened

vested

> interests ... the billions of dollars in the so-called war on

cancer.

> Will they find a way to bury this, or co-opt it by changing it

slightly

> to make it patentable? Money talks and BS walks.

>

> I sure hope this is as huge as you think, and that the news gets

out too

> quickly to be controlled or co-opted.

>

> If the media is strangely silent / unexcited about this, and a

parade of

> " experts " comes out calling it " interesting but needing more

study " ,

> then we'll know the answer.

>

> This news has been out for a couple of weeks already ... it hit MSN

a

> week ago ... but a quick scan of Google seems to show that no other

> major sites have picked this story up. I'm not the only one who

wonders

> about this, by the way:

>

>

http://media.www.studentprintz.com/media/storage/paper974/news/2007/01

/23/Opinion/Scientists.Cure.Cancer.But.No.One.Takes.Notice-

2667600.shtml

>

> Fingers crossed,

>

> --Bob

[Guest guest]

Someone posted this on cpnhelp and I read the text over a few times

(but didn't work through the data).

I understood how DCA affects the allosteric reg of the commitment

step toward the Krebs cycle, and that normalization of flux thru the

Krebs / electron chain equals more ROS equals better apoptosis

sensitivity.

It's a very neat discovery that cancers shunt pyruvate off of the

Krebs in order to achieve a pro-survival redox status.

I didn't quite grasp what they were saying about how DCA caused

changes in ion channel expression.

I'm sure trials will start ASAP, so here's hoping.

> Hi, all.

>

> I want to let you know about what appears to me to be a major

> breakthrough in research on cancer treatment. I'm not selling

> anything, and I was not involved with the research, but I think

it's

> very exciting! I hope you won't think I've parted company with my

> sanity when I tell you this.

>

> I'm referring to work recently published by researchers at the

> University of Alberta in Canada. The full paper can be found at

the

> following site:

>

> http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/cancer_cell.pdf

>

> I'm not exaggerating when I call this a major breakthrough.

>

> Briefly, these researchers have found that a relatively simple, non-

> patentable substance, namely dichloroacetate, which has been used

in

> the past to control lactic acidosis in children with mitochondrial

> disease, is able to knock out a variety of types of cancer cells

> without causing systemic problems. They have demonstrated this by

> experiments in three types of human cancer cell cultures and in

mice.

>

> This substance works by blocking the enzyme pyruvate dehydrogenase

> kinase, causing pyruvate to be converted to acetyl Co-A and be fed

> into the Krebs cycle, instead of being reduced to lactic acid as

> normally occurs in cancer cells, and thus forcing the cancer cells

to

> change their metabolism from glycolysis to oxidative

phosphorylation,

> like normal cells. As a result of this change, they are able to

> cause these cells to undergo apoptosis and die, rather than being

> immortal as cancer cells are. In the mice, they put this substance

> in their driinkinig water, and they began to see effects on their

> cancer within one week!

>

> Because it operates on a feature that is common to all cancer cells

> (as shown by Otto Warburg in 1930, for which he won the Nobel

prize),

> this substance promises to be a universal treatment for all types

of

> cancers.

>

> Because it is nonpatentable, it should be relatively inexpensive.

> This also means that non-pharma money will have to be found for the

> phase II and III clinical trials, and they've started a fund for

> that. Because there is already a history of using this substance

in

> humans to treat lactic acidosis in mitochondrial disease, it is

> already known that the side effects are mnimal.

>

> I am fairly familiar with the biochemistry of the intermediary

> metabolism, and I can tell you that the paper looks good to me. I

> would invite comments from others on this. If this is what it

looks

> like to me, the ramifications are huge to society, the economy, the

> cancer industry, and to all of us as individuals. I think this

will

> make it even more imperative that we figure out what to do for

> Alzheimer's, because the average life expectancy is going to jump.

> When futurists used to talk about the possibility of " a cure for

> cancer " being found, I always thought they were nuts! I don't

think

> so anymore.

>

> Rich

[Guest guest]

Pretty exciting stuff. I hope it's true. Please keep us posted. pennyrvankonynen <richvank@...> wrote: Hi, all.I want to let you know about what appears to me to be a major breakthrough in research on cancer treatment. I'm not selling anything, and I was not involved with the research, but I think it's very exciting! I hope you won't think I've parted company with my sanity when I tell you this.I'm referring to work recently published by researchers at the

University of Alberta in Canada. The full paper can be found at the following site:http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/cancer_cell.pdfI'm not exaggerating when I call this a major breakthrough. Briefly, these researchers have found that a relatively simple, non-patentable substance, namely dichloroacetate, which has been used in the past to control lactic acidosis in children with mitochondrial disease, is able to knock out a variety of types of cancer cells without causing systemic problems. They have demonstrated this by experiments in three types of human cancer cell cultures and in mice.This substance works by blocking the enzyme pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase, causing pyruvate to be converted to acetyl Co-A and be fed into the Krebs cycle, instead of being reduced to lactic acid as normally occurs in cancer cells, and thus

forcing the cancer cells to change their metabolism from glycolysis to oxidative phosphorylation, like normal cells. As a result of this change, they are able to cause these cells to undergo apoptosis and die, rather than being immortal as cancer cells are. In the mice, they put this substance in their driinkinig water, and they began to see effects on their cancer within one week! Because it operates on a feature that is common to all cancer cells (as shown by Otto Warburg in 1930, for which he won the Nobel prize), this substance promises to be a universal treatment for all types of cancers.Because it is nonpatentable, it should be relatively inexpensive. This also means that non-pharma money will have to be found for the phase II and III clinical trials, and they've started a fund for that. Because there is already a history of using this substance in humans to treat lactic acidosis in mitochondrial

disease, it is already known that the side effects are mnimal.I am fairly familiar with the biochemistry of the intermediary metabolism, and I can tell you that the paper looks good to me. I would invite comments from others on this. If this is what it looks like to me, the ramifications are huge to society, the economy, the cancer industry, and to all of us as individuals. I think this will make it even more imperative that we figure out what to do for Alzheimer's, because the average life expectancy is going to jump. When futurists used to talk about the possibility of "a cure for cancer" being found, I always thought they were nuts! I don't think so anymore.Rich

[Guest guest]

Now that is brilliant..Getting the crap out of your system is such an

important piece of many puzzles.

KNoi

>

> Hi, all.

>

> I want to let you know about what appears to me to be a major

> breakthrough in research on cancer treatment. I'm not selling

> anything, and I was not involved with the research, but I think

it's

> very exciting! I hope you won't think I've parted company with my

> sanity when I tell you this.

>

> I'm referring to work recently published by researchers at the

> University of Alberta in Canada. The full paper can be found at

the

> following site:

>

> http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/cancer_cell.pdf

>

> I'm not exaggerating when I call this a major breakthrough.

>

> Briefly, these researchers have found that a relatively simple, non-

> patentable substance, namely dichloroacetate, which has been used

in

> the past to control lactic acidosis in children with mitochondrial

> disease, is able to knock out a variety of types of cancer cells

> without causing systemic problems. They have demonstrated this by

> experiments in three types of human cancer cell cultures and in

mice.

>

> This substance works by blocking the enzyme pyruvate dehydrogenase

> kinase, causing pyruvate to be converted to acetyl Co-A and be fed

> into the Krebs cycle, instead of being reduced to lactic acid as

> normally occurs in cancer cells, and thus forcing the cancer cells

to

> change their metabolism from glycolysis to oxidative

phosphorylation,

> like normal cells. As a result of this change, they are able to

> cause these cells to undergo apoptosis and die, rather than being

> immortal as cancer cells are. In the mice, they put this substance

> in their driinkinig water, and they began to see effects on their

> cancer within one week!

>

> Because it operates on a feature that is common to all cancer cells

> (as shown by Otto Warburg in 1930, for which he won the Nobel

prize),

> this substance promises to be a universal treatment for all types

of

> cancers.

>

> Because it is nonpatentable, it should be relatively inexpensive.

> This also means that non-pharma money will have to be found for the

> phase II and III clinical trials, and they've started a fund for

> that. Because there is already a history of using this substance

in

> humans to treat lactic acidosis in mitochondrial disease, it is

> already known that the side effects are mnimal.

>

> I am fairly familiar with the biochemistry of the intermediary

> metabolism, and I can tell you that the paper looks good to me. I

> would invite comments from others on this. If this is what it

looks

> like to me, the ramifications are huge to society, the economy, the

> cancer industry, and to all of us as individuals. I think this

will

> make it even more imperative that we figure out what to do for

> Alzheimer's, because the average life expectancy is going to jump.

> When futurists used to talk about the possibility of " a cure for

> cancer " being found, I always thought they were nuts! I don't

think

> so anymore.

>

> Rich

>

[Guest guest]

Here's a much more

comprehensible article for the those non-technical folks who want to

read about this in plain English. It also mentions possible side

effects of DCA and some other useful tidbits.

www.newscientist.com/article/dn10971-cheap-safe-drug-kills-most-cancers.html

Those able and willing to donate to fund the human trials can go here

and click the donation links at the bottom of the page. Also from

links on this page it appears that Newsweek has picked up the story,

though not in a huge way.

www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca

--Bob

rvankonynen wrote:

Thanks, Bob. I think that is a very well-written piece that you

cited. Sara in Vancouver B.C. says the the papers have been

full of it up there, but you're right, I haven't seen anything about

it here in the San Francisco Bay area. I think it will be hard to

ignore, though. Maybe nobody believes it, and then, again, maybe

they know on which side their bread is buttered.

Rich

[Guest guest]

This is so strange. Sounds so much like what our community talks about a lot of the time, the malfunctioning of the mitochondria etc. I wonder if DCA will have any applications for cells that have been taken over by bacteria? penny Bob Grommes <bob@...> wrote: Here's a much more comprehensible article for the those non-technical folks who want to read about this in plain English. It also

mentions possible side effects of DCA and some other useful tidbits.www.newscientist.com/article/dn10971-cheap-safe-drug-kills-most-cancers.htmlThose able and willing to donate to fund the human trials can go here and click the donation links at the bottom of the page. Also from links on this page it appears that Newsweek has picked up the story, though not in a huge way.www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca--Bobrvankonynen wrote: Thanks, Bob. I think that is a very well-written piece that you cited. Sara in Vancouver B.C. says the the papers have been full of it up there,

but you're right, I haven't seen anything about it here in the San Francisco Bay area. I think it will be hard to ignore, though. Maybe nobody believes it, and then, again, maybe they know on which side their bread is buttered.Rich

[Guest guest]

Rich

I posted some time ago about the ability of tetracyclines to

interfere with mitochondria and cited, among others, the work by AM

Kroon on cancer:

http://www.cfsgroups.org/discussion/view_topic.php?

id=4636 & forum_id=74

Here is a recent paper showing that doxycycline is proapoptotic in

cancer cells:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=17131308

Do you think doxy might be synergistic with DCA?

Matt

>

> Hi, all.

>

>

> I am fairly familiar with the biochemistry of the intermediary

> metabolism, and I can tell you that the paper looks good to me. I

> would invite comments from others on this.

>

> Rich

>

[Guest guest]

Rich,

How does DCA (dichloroacetate) relate to vinegar (acetic acid)?

Remember how some naturopathic practitioners used to rave about apple cider vinegar and also about alkaline diets. I wonder how this all relates.

This is probably naive as I am not a chemistry head

Nelly

[infections] Off topic: Goodbye cancer!

Hi, all.I want to let you know about what appears to me to be a major breakthrough in research on cancer treatment. I'm not selling anything, and I was not involved with the research, but I think it's very exciting! I hope you won't think I've parted company with my sanity when I tell you this.I'm referring to work recently published by researchers at the University of Alberta in Canada. The full paper can be found at the following site:http://www.depmed.ualberta.ca/dca/cancer_cell.pdfI'm not exaggerating when I call this a major breakthrough. Briefly, these researchers have found that a relatively simple, non-patentable substance, namely dichloroacetate, which has been used in the past to control lactic acidosis in children with mitochondrial disease, is able to knock out a variety of types of cancer cells without causing systemic problems. They have demonstrated this by experiments in three types of human cancer cell cultures and in mice.This substance works by blocking the enzyme pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase, causing pyruvate to be converted to acetyl Co-A and be fed into the Krebs cycle, instead of being reduced to lactic acid as normally occurs in cancer cells, and thus forcing the cancer cells to change their metabolism from glycolysis to oxidative phosphorylation, like normal cells. As a result of this change, they are able to cause these cells to undergo apoptosis and die, rather than being immortal as cancer cells are. In the mice, they put this substance in their driinkinig water, and they began to see effects on their cancer within one week! Because it operates on a feature that is common to all cancer cells (as shown by Otto Warburg in 1930, for which he won the Nobel prize), this substance promises to be a universal treatment for all types of cancers.Because it is nonpatentable, it should be relatively inexpensive. This also means that non-pharma money will have to be found for the phase II and III clinical trials, and they've started a fund for that. Because there is already a history of using this substance in humans to treat lactic acidosis in mitochondrial disease, it is already known that the side effects are mnimal.I am fairly familiar with the biochemistry of the intermediary metabolism, and I can tell you that the paper looks good to me. I would invite comments from others on this. If this is what it looks like to me, the ramifications are huge to society, the economy, the cancer industry, and to all of us as individuals. I think this will make it even more imperative that we figure out what to do for Alzheimer's, because the average life expectancy is going to jump. When futurists used to talk about the possibility of "a cure for cancer" being found, I always thought they were nuts! I don't think so anymore.Rich

[Guest guest]

Hi, Nelly.

Vinegar is indeed a dilute aqueous (water) solution of acetic acid,

with other substances in addition, depending on the source of the sugar

that was originally converted to alcohol by yeasts and then converted

to acetic acid by certain bacteria.

The chemical formula for acetic acid is C(H)3COOH. The chemical

formula for dichloracetic acid is CH(Cl)2COOH. In other words, two of

the hydrogen atoms in the acetic acid molecule have been replaced by

chlorine atoms. So they are chemically related. Dichloroacetate is

the ionized form of the molecule, CH(Cl)2COO- . That is, a hydrogen

ion has been removed from the COOH (or carboxyl) group on the molecule,

leaving a negatively charged ion (anion). Acetate is related in a

similar way to acetic acid.

Dichloracetate behaves differently in the body from the way acetic acid

or acetate does. Dichloroacetate binds to the enzyme pyruvate

dehydrogenase kinase, while acetate does not. Acetate, on the other

hand, is used by the body for producing energy by forming acetyl CoA

and entering the citric acid cycle. The colonocytes (cells lining the

colon) in particular burn a lot of acetate, which in that case is made

by bacteria in the lumen (inside cavity) of the colon from indigestible

fiber, as one of the so-called short-chain fatty acids.

The method of using vinegar- or citric acid-containing foods to produce

alkalination comes from the fact that in these foods some of the

acetate or citrate is balanced by positive ions such as sodium,

potassium, magnesium or calcium. When the cells burn up the citrate or

acetate in their citric acid cycles, these positive ions are left

over. In water solution, they produce a basic (alkaline) solution, in

which the negative ions are hydroxide (OH-) ions. When the excess is

excreted into the urine, it thus ends up producing more alkaline urine.

This can be advantageous for detoxing certain toxins from the body,

because they act as what are called weak acids. When the urine is

alkaline passing through the kidneys, these toxins tend to be ionized,

whereas in a more acid urine they would be in their associated

(uncharged) state. In their ionized (negatively charged) state, they

are less likely to be reabsorbed into the blood by the kidneys, and are

more likely to be excreted into the urine. In toxicology, this is

called " ion trapping. "

It's interesting to me that cholestyramine, which Dr. Shoemaker uses to

bind biotoxins coming into the gut with the bile, is an anion exchange

resin. That is, it binds negatively charged toxins. I suspect that

some of the toxins he is binding this way probably act as weak acids,

and thus it might be possible to excrete them in the urine more readily

if the urine were more alkalinized.

This is all interesting biochemical stuff (at least interesting to us

biochemical nerds), but no, it isn't related to what dichloroacetate

does.

Cheers!

Rich

>

> Rich,

>

> How does DCA (dichloroacetate) relate to vinegar (acetic acid)?

>

> Remember how some naturopathic practitioners used to rave about apple

cider vinegar and also about alkaline diets. I wonder how this all

relates.

>

> This is probably naive as I am not a chemistry head

>

> Nelly

[Guest guest]

Hi, Matt.

Thanks for giving me a heads-up on this work. I looked at the paper

by Kroon et al. and the abstract of the other paper.

I find this work kind of puzzling, when comparing it to the recent

Michelakis et al. paper. The mechanism in the former seems to be to

impede the production of proteins by the mitochondria, and thus

interfere with their operation, which then somehow leads to apoptosis

of the cancer cell. I don't quite understand this, because in cancer

cells the mitochondria aren't very active without the tetracycline.

On the other hand, the work by Michelakis et al. involves forcing

more fuel to be burned by the mitochondria, which would seem to

encourage their operation, and eventually this leads to apoptosis

because of excessive production of hydrogen peroxide, perhaps because

the cancer cells do not have sufficient antioxidant enzyme

protection.

So in some ways these two approaches seem opposite, and I can't say

for sure that they would be synergistic.

Rich

>

> Rich

>

> I posted some time ago about the ability of tetracyclines to

> interfere with mitochondria and cited, among others, the work by AM

> Kroon on cancer:

>

> http://www.cfsgroups.org/discussion/view_topic.php?

> id=4636 & forum_id=74

>

> Here is a recent paper showing that doxycycline is proapoptotic in

> cancer cells:

>

>

> http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?

> db=pubmed & cmd=Retrieve & dopt=AbstractPlus & list_uids=17131308

>

>

> Do you think doxy might be synergistic with DCA?

>

> Matt

[Guest guest]

Thanks, Rich, for this very clear exposé. Lemon seems to help when I feel really bad (toxic feeling).

Nelly

[infections] Re: Off topic: Goodbye cancer!

Hi, Nelly.Vinegar is indeed a dilute aqueous (water) solution of acetic acid, with other substances in addition, depending on the source of the sugar that was originally converted to alcohol by yeasts and then converted to acetic acid by certain bacteria.The chemical formula for acetic acid is C(H)3COOH. The chemical formula for dichloracetic acid is CH(Cl)2COOH. In other words, two of the hydrogen atoms in the acetic acid molecule have been replaced by chlorine atoms. So they are chemically related. Dichloroacetate is the ionized form of the molecule, CH(Cl)2COO- . That is, a hydrogen ion has been removed from the COOH (or carboxyl) group on the molecule, leaving a negatively charged ion (anion). Acetate is related in a similar way to acetic acid.Dichloracetate behaves differently in the body from the way acetic acid or acetate does. Dichloroacetate binds to the enzyme pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase, while acetate does not. Acetate, on the other hand, is used by the body for producing energy by forming acetyl CoA and entering the citric acid cycle. The colonocytes (cells lining the colon) in particular burn a lot of acetate, which in that case is made by bacteria in the lumen (inside cavity) of the colon from indigestible fiber, as one of the so-called short-chain fatty acids.The method of using vinegar- or citric acid-containing foods to produce alkalination comes from the fact that in these foods some of the acetate or citrate is balanced by positive ions such as sodium, potassium, magnesium or calcium. When the cells burn up the citrate or acetate in their citric acid cycles, these positive ions are left over. In water solution, they produce a basic (alkaline) solution, in which the negative ions are hydroxide (OH-) ions. When the excess is excreted into the urine, it thus ends up producing more alkaline urine. This can be advantageous for detoxing certain toxins from the body, because they act as what are called weak acids. When the urine is alkaline passing through the kidneys, these toxins tend to be ionized, whereas in a more acid urine they would be in their associated (uncharged) state. In their ionized (negatively charged) state, they are less likely to be reabsorbed into the blood by the kidneys, and are more likely to be excreted into the urine. In toxicology, this is called "ion trapping." It's interesting to me that cholestyramine, which Dr. Shoemaker uses to bind biotoxins coming into the gut with the bile, is an anion exchange resin. That is, it binds negatively charged toxins. I suspect that some of the toxins he is binding this way probably act as weak acids, and thus it might be possible to excrete them in the urine more readily if the urine were more alkalinized.This is all interesting biochemical stuff (at least interesting to us biochemical nerds), but no, it isn't related to what dichloroacetate does.Cheers!Rich >> Rich,> > How does DCA (dichloroacetate) relate to vinegar (acetic acid)?> > Remember how some naturopathic practitioners used to rave about apple cider vinegar and also about alkaline diets. I wonder how this all relates.> > This is probably naive as I am not a chemistry head> > Nelly