Re[4]: Re: Urine Ph

[Guest guest]

Hello Bret,

Sunday, August 2, 2009, 2:17:36 AM, you wrote:

BP> Dr. Otto Warburg proved that internal ph of cancer cells ranged

BP> 6.5 to 7. Also here is a quote for Dr. Brewer who tested Warburg's findings:

........I suppose you drive a car built in 1933 also. A lot has

happened since Warburg. Gross averaging of pH throughout the cancer

cell cytoplasm and its organelles and vessicles would indicate an

environment that was more acidic than normal. But, cancer cells not only

pump H+ out of cells, they also sequester it into acidic vessicles.

In Warburg's time the pH measurements were on a grosser level. Todays

science allows for pH measurement in specific compartments of the

cell. The cancer cells actually use the acidic vessicles as part of

the direct invasion and metastatic processes. The vessicles also help

them keep the cytoplasm, where mitotic events expose the chromosomes

to that environment, at a neutral to slightly alkaline level.

BP>  

BP> Brewer Writes:

BP>  

BP> In the absence of oxygen, the glucose undergoes fermentation to

BP> lactic acid. The cell pH then drops to 7 and finally down to 6.5.

BP>

And then proton pumps dump lactate out of the cell or sequester H+

within cytoplasmic vessicles. This raises the cytoplasmic pH and

keeps it in a range favorable to mitosis.

BP>  

BP> Step 3

BP> In the acid medium the DNA loses its positive and negative

BP> radical sequence. In addition, the amino acids entering the cell

BP> are changed. As a consequence, the RNA is changed and the cell

BP> completely loses its control mechanism.

As a " consequence " ? How is this supposed to work? How do " changes "

in amino acids change RNA? I'm not sure if you are quoting someone

here, but this is jibberish.

BP>  

BP> Step 4

BP> In the acid medium the various cell enzymes are completely

BP> changed. Von Ardenne has shown that lysosomal enzymes are changed

BP> into very toxic compounds.

Lysosomal enzymes already ARE toxic compounds.

BP> These toxins kill the cells in the main

BP> body of the tumor mass. A tumor therefore consists of a thin layer

BP> of rapidly growing cells surrounding the dead mass [3]. The acid

BP> toxins leak out from the tumor mass and poison the host.

Acidity driven pain in cancer is a result of the lactate which is

actively pumped from viable cancer cells. Tumor lysis syndrome is

a completely different animal.

BP> They thus

BP> give rise to the pains generally associated with cancer. They can also act

as carcinogens.

There is a tremendous range of viability of cells within tumor

masses. In fact, much of the tumor mass is not even cancer. There

are normal cells in there as well as leukocytes and cancer cells.

The cancer cells at the core of a tumor might be dead in some cases,

but might also be very " healthy " and functional in other cases. A lot

of this depends on the available blood supply. Cancer cells depend on

blood supply for glucose, fatty acids and amino acids, and, yes,

oxygen. They also need to remove waste products including lactate

via the blood.

BP>  

BP>  

BP> So, some very profound researches don't share your belief that

BP> higher alkalinity is good for cancer bad for the patient. In fact they feel

the opposite!

Brewer and the like never got anywhere with any of this. They are

not " profound researchers " . I think , from the things that you point

to, you are in the same place I was a few years ago. Reading the

internet legends (Brewer et al). This goes nowhere. This has

become an endlessly repeated feedback loop on the net. It has a life

of its own. When you try to trace things back to concrete,

substantial and confirmable data, it's just not there. I've watched

several people die now, " fighting " their cancer with the cesium

chloride protocol. This is not the way to go.

My point was that increases in alkalinity within cancer cells can go

both ways. A bit of an increase stimulates mitosis. A bit more might

make the cell too alkaline to continue. There is no way,

that I can see, where you can know which way it is going to go. A

better stratgy might be to acidify the cells, as is being done with

proton pump inhibitors. This way, it either works or doesn't, but

there is no possibility of stimulating mitosis.

BP>  

BP> Here are some highly technical links for you to comment on!

BP>  

BP>  

BP> http://www.mwt.net/~drbrewer/highpH.htm

That one I saw 4 years ago. It's the type of unsubstantiated material

that is repeated ad infinitum. It is not a paper, just a monolog by

an adherent to this idea.

BP>  

BP>  

BP> http://www.kangen1info.com/files/New_Dr_Otto_Warburg.pdf

That pdf is simply a poster with information about Otto Warburg. Not

helpful in any way. I already know about Warburg and his work. This

pdf is on the Kangen website. Hopefully you have not purchased one of

those grossly inflated multi-level marketed items.

BP>  

BP>  

BP> Could you comment please!

We've had 70 years of enhanced understanding of cell biology since

Warburg.

BP>  

BP>  

BP>  

In response to your original question....Normal cells placed in an

alkaline in vitro environment become stimulated metabolically.

Normal cells placed in an acidic in vitro environment become sluggish.

Cancer cells create their own acidic environment by alkalizing their

cytoplasms. Their " pumps " keep them viable despite the milleau.

Mike