Go Back   David Icke's Official Forums > Main Forums > Health / Natural Healing / Therapies / Nutrition

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-10-2018, 06:01 PM   #801
time4truth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 119
Likes: 119 (54 Posts)
Default

we may be getting nearer.. Today Doctors in UK can prescribe Cannabis for "certain" illnesses !!! Hope People demand it to cure CANCER and MS Motor Neurone Disease and all horrific diseases.
Likes: (1)
time4truth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-10-2018, 06:27 PM   #802
grimstock
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 2,181
Likes: 1,048 (637 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by time4truth View Post
we may be getting nearer.. Today Doctors in UK can prescribe Cannabis for "certain" illnesses !!! Hope People demand it to cure CANCER and MS Motor Neurone Disease and all horrific diseases.
There will be no intention to cure anything. Past history indicates it will be mixed with a deadly toxin, so that they can patent it, and then you have to keep going back for more powerful medication each time. They may even say it doesn't work, as they have done with other popular cancer cures, after mixing dodgy drugs in with the stuff.
Likes: (1)
grimstock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 12:57 PM   #803
time4truth
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Posts: 119
Likes: 119 (54 Posts)
Default

Yes Grimstock your prob right.. how stupid of me to think we may be getting closer to cureing unfortunate people
Likes: (1)
time4truth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 02:46 PM   #804
grimstock
Premier Subscribers
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 2,181
Likes: 1,048 (637 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by time4truth View Post
Yes Grimstock your prob right.. how stupid of me to think we may be getting closer to cureing unfortunate people
No, not stupid at all - just like all of us, hoping for honesty and the will to help others takes the foreground, rather than the eternal increase in profits.

Last edited by grimstock; 12-10-2018 at 02:47 PM.
Likes: (1)
grimstock is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-10-2018, 05:29 PM   #805
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by time4truth View Post
Yes Grimstock your prob right.. how stupid of me to think we may be getting closer to cureing unfortunate people
In the ZUMA-1 trial those enrolled with different types of hematologic malignancies were mostly stage IV. The majority had become refractory to 2nd or later-line therapy, relapsed after a stem cell transplant and had three median prior lines of therapy (1-12). Such patients' have just months to live.

Despite that a single infusion of their own immune cells engineered to target CD19 caused most to have an objective response (tumour shrinkage) and these have been durable. If you look at the data around 70% of those who achieved a complete response (the absence of all detectable cancer after treatment) are still alive at 23 months. In those with a partial response around 50% are still alive at 23 months too https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1707447

The company behind that are working on improved versions. These will be able to target many antigens, not just one (e.g. CD19)[1,2]. They will secrete certain cytokines into the tumour microenvironment to help reverse the immunosuppressive effects[3], be controlled via a 'switch' that is activated by an oral drug and much more [4-7].

Current cost and production times will be reduced by using allogeneic cells from healthy donors [8] and stem cells [9].

Refs:
1 https://www.jci.org/articles/view/83416
2 https://academic.oup.com/neuro-oncol.../4/506/4159414
3 https://link.springer.com/article/10...262-012-1202-z
4 https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S...674(16)00052-0
5 https://www.cell.com/cell/fulltext/S...674(16)31244-2
6 https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-018-22252-6
7 http://science.sciencemag.org/content/361/6398/156.long
8 https://endpts.com/all-in-gilead-map...f-car-t-drugs/
9 https://www.nature.com/articles/nmeth.4237
__________________
''Chlorine is a deadly poison gas employed on European battlefields in World War I. Sodium is a corrosive metal which burns upon contact with water. Together they make a placid and unpoisonous material, table salt. Why each of these substances has the properties it does is a subject called chemistry'' - Carl Sagan

Why is it that the loudest critics of ''Big Pharma'' are Big Placebo?

Last edited by dumbcritic; 12-10-2018 at 05:47 PM.
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-01-2019, 06:23 AM   #806
bamboozooka
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 744
Likes: 543 (316 Posts)
Default

cancer cured within a year
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/a...ings-thin.html
bamboozooka is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-01-2019, 07:10 PM   #807
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bamboozooka View Post
It's irresponsible and unethical for the Fail to have published this. Paul Ehrlich, postulated creating 'magic bullets' in the fight against human diseases. By analogy with infectious diseases, many developed the mindset that someday, a 'magic bullet' could be found that would cure all cancers, exploiting a common weakness of all of them. Unfortunately, given what we know today, the likelihood that a cure for all of the hundreds of different types will ever be found is zero

The company has not even published any preclinic data. If they do conduct human clinical trials, these will take 10-15 years for just one type of cancer and aren't cheap https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...67629616000291
__________________
''Chlorine is a deadly poison gas employed on European battlefields in World War I. Sodium is a corrosive metal which burns upon contact with water. Together they make a placid and unpoisonous material, table salt. Why each of these substances has the properties it does is a subject called chemistry'' - Carl Sagan

Why is it that the loudest critics of ''Big Pharma'' are Big Placebo?

Last edited by dumbcritic; 30-01-2019 at 08:59 PM.
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-01-2019, 08:30 PM   #808
andy1033
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 8,657
Likes: 1,537 (885 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bamboozooka View Post
Who cares?

A country that shoots little kids playing in gaza, are not people worth listening to on anything.

Anything they supposedly discover, is probably stolen research.
__________________
"You put 10 tonnes of proof in front of people, if they are not ready to accept an idea, they will not accept the proof. No amount of evidence will suffice to prove anything, it is the jury that will decide, and you are the jury."
William Cooper - behold a pale horse video
^^
So true
andy1033 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 30-01-2019, 08:59 PM   #809
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dumbcritic View Post
It's irresponsible and unethical for the Fail to have published this. Paul Ehrlich, postulated creating 'magic bullets' in the fight against human diseases. By analogy with infectious diseases, many developed the mindset that someday, a 'magic bullet' could be found that would cure all cancers, exploiting a common weakness of all of them. Unfortunately, given what we know today, the likelihood that a cure for all of the hundreds of different types will ever be found is zero

The company has not even published any preclinic data. If they do conduct human clinical trials, these will take 10-15 years for just one type of cancer and aren't cheap https://www.sciencedirect.com/scienc...67629616000291
I've just came across this (another red flag) https://www.timesofisrael.com/israel...lish-findings/
__________________
''Chlorine is a deadly poison gas employed on European battlefields in World War I. Sodium is a corrosive metal which burns upon contact with water. Together they make a placid and unpoisonous material, table salt. Why each of these substances has the properties it does is a subject called chemistry'' - Carl Sagan

Why is it that the loudest critics of ''Big Pharma'' are Big Placebo?
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2019, 10:42 AM   #810
da2255
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Intergalactic Space
Posts: 289
Likes: 158 (102 Posts)
Default

Treating Cancer with dicholoroacetate (DCA), a cheap drug that can't be patented, which mainstream oncology obviously will have little to no interest in.

Looks like it has minor side effects and works by reestablishing the mitochondrial function of the cancer cells and not killing healthy cells too.

It really should be obvious why if you continue to have even your healthy cells attacked then its just going to be a downward spiral and a nice stack of $$$$ for big pharma.

https://www.portmoodyhealth.com/canc...chloroacetate/



I was made aware of it over a decade ago and still mainstream medicine people don't care:

https://www.newscientist.com/article...-most-cancers/

Don't they themselves realise that they or one of their loved ones is going to have to be faced with cancer too? It should be obvious why turning life threatening illnesses into big business is immoral.

Last edited by da2255; 06-02-2019 at 11:11 AM.
Likes: (1)
da2255 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-02-2019, 10:58 PM   #811
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by da2255 View Post
Treating Cancer with dicholoroacetate (DCA), a cheap drug that can't be patented, which mainstream oncology obviously will have little to no interest in.

Looks like it has minor side effects and works by reestablishing the mitochondrial function of the cancer cells and not killing healthy cells too.

It really should be obvious why if you continue to have even your healthy cells attacked then its just going to be a downward spiral and a nice stack of $$$$ for big pharma.

https://www.portmoodyhealth.com/canc...chloroacetate/



I was made aware of it over a decade ago and still mainstream medicine people don't care:

https://www.newscientist.com/article...-most-cancers/

Don't they themselves realise that they or one of their loved ones is going to have to be faced with cancer too? It should be obvious why turning life threatening illnesses into big business is immoral.
DCA inhibits a gate keeping enzyme called pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase. It forces more pyruvate into the cell's mitochondria (power plants) where it undergoes oxidation to become energy. This helps with the restoration of mitochondria function, reversal of the Warburg effect and consequently apoptosis (programmed cell death).

There have only been three studies to date. The first was published back in 2010 and five patients with GBM were treated. Three of them had recurrent GBM with disease progression after a number of treatments. The remaining two were newly diagnosed and after debulking surgery it was administered in addition to standard of care. Patients were treated with a starting dose of 12.5mg/kg orally twice a day for 1 month, at which point the dose was increased to 25mg/kg orally twice a day. Following this, a dose de-escalation protocol was initiated, whereby the dose was decreased by 50% when a dose-limiting toxicity (side-effects of a drug or other treatment that are serious enough to prevent an increase in dose or level of that treatment) occurred. Patients were followed for 15 months. None had hematologic (blood), hepatic (liver), renal (kidney), or cardiac (heart) toxicity. Peripheral neuropathy (damage to the nerves) was the only apparent toxicity and it resolved when the dose was decreased to 6.25mg/kg orally twice a day. Three of the patients showed evidence of radiologic regression on MRI. Four of the patients were clinically stable at month 15 of DCA therapy and alive at month 18 [1].

In the second study 15 patients with brain malignancies were recruited and eight completed at least one 4-week cycle revealing no acute toxicity. The patients remained with stable disease according to radiographic and clinical evaluation and received DCA for an average of 75.5 days. Two patients experienced paresthesia (abnormal sensation such as tingling, tickling, pricking, numbness or burning usually felt in the hands, arms, legs, or feet, but can also occur in other parts of the body) [2].

Then following that there was a dose-escalation study enrolling 24 patients with various solid tumours. The safe oral treatment dosage was 6.25 mg/kg. At 12.5 mg/kg, three patients experienced dose-limiting fatigue, vomiting and diarrhea. FDG-PET scans demonstrated no tumour response and stable disease in eight patients [3].

These results should be regarded as preliminary and beneficial data exist in support of a favourable toxicity profile rather than any anticancer efficacy.

There are a number of case reports in the literature. The first testing IV DCA [4], the second showing a long term complete remission using it as an adjuvant [5] and the third showing it can stop cancer growth for years [6]. A fourth and fifth showing a complete response after disease progression [7,8].

Inhibiting another enzyme (lactate dehydrogenase) should improve efficacy. Inhibition prevents the conversion of pyruvate to lactate and has been demonstrated effective in inhibiting tumour growth [9,10]. Doing so alone will cause accumulation of pyruvate, but will not push pyruvate into mitochondria. This is why you would need DCA as well.

I also know that I researchers at the University of Georgia produced a new way to deliver DCA directly to cancer cells mitochondria. Not only did it reduce the side-effects, but was three orders of magnitude more potent than the original. They also found it suppressed the production of lactic acid, which is one of the ways cancer cells use to avoid detection by the body's immune system [11].

Refs:
1 http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/2/31/31ra34.long
2 https://link.springer.com/article/10...637-013-0047-4
3 https://rd.springer.com/article/10.1...637-015-0221-y
4 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25362214
5 https://ibimapublishing.com/articles/ACRT/2012/441895/
6 https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v4/i10/336.htm
7 https://link.springer.com/article/10...863-012-9496-2
8 https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jo/2010/414726/
9 http://www.jbc.org/content/236/2/278.long
10 http://www.jbc.org/content/236/2/285.long
11 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/cb400944y
__________________
''Chlorine is a deadly poison gas employed on European battlefields in World War I. Sodium is a corrosive metal which burns upon contact with water. Together they make a placid and unpoisonous material, table salt. Why each of these substances has the properties it does is a subject called chemistry'' - Carl Sagan

Why is it that the loudest critics of ''Big Pharma'' are Big Placebo?

Last edited by dumbcritic; 06-02-2019 at 11:02 PM.
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2019, 09:31 AM   #812
da2255
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Intergalactic Space
Posts: 289
Likes: 158 (102 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dumbcritic View Post
DCA inhibits a gate keeping enzyme called pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase. It forces more pyruvate into the cell's mitochondria (power plants) where it undergoes oxidation to become energy. This helps with the restoration of mitochondria function, reversal of the Warburg effect and consequently apoptosis (programmed cell death).

There have only been three studies to date. The first was published back in 2010 and five patients with GBM were treated. Three of them had recurrent GBM with disease progression after a number of treatments. The remaining two were newly diagnosed and after debulking surgery it was administered in addition to standard of care. Patients were treated with a starting dose of 12.5mg/kg orally twice a day for 1 month, at which point the dose was increased to 25mg/kg orally twice a day. Following this, a dose de-escalation protocol was initiated, whereby the dose was decreased by 50% when a dose-limiting toxicity (side-effects of a drug or other treatment that are serious enough to prevent an increase in dose or level of that treatment) occurred. Patients were followed for 15 months. None had hematologic (blood), hepatic (liver), renal (kidney), or cardiac (heart) toxicity. Peripheral neuropathy (damage to the nerves) was the only apparent toxicity and it resolved when the dose was decreased to 6.25mg/kg orally twice a day. Three of the patients showed evidence of radiologic regression on MRI. Four of the patients were clinically stable at month 15 of DCA therapy and alive at month 18 [1].

In the second study 15 patients with brain malignancies were recruited and eight completed at least one 4-week cycle revealing no acute toxicity. The patients remained with stable disease according to radiographic and clinical evaluation and received DCA for an average of 75.5 days. Two patients experienced paresthesia (abnormal sensation such as tingling, tickling, pricking, numbness or burning usually felt in the hands, arms, legs, or feet, but can also occur in other parts of the body) [2].

Then following that there was a dose-escalation study enrolling 24 patients with various solid tumours. The safe oral treatment dosage was 6.25 mg/kg. At 12.5 mg/kg, three patients experienced dose-limiting fatigue, vomiting and diarrhea. FDG-PET scans demonstrated no tumour response and stable disease in eight patients [3].

These results should be regarded as preliminary and beneficial data exist in support of a favourable toxicity profile rather than any anticancer efficacy.

There are a number of case reports in the literature. The first testing IV DCA [4], the second showing a long term complete remission using it as an adjuvant [5] and the third showing it can stop cancer growth for years [6]. A fourth and fifth showing a complete response after disease progression [7,8].

Inhibiting another enzyme (lactate dehydrogenase) should improve efficacy. Inhibition prevents the conversion of pyruvate to lactate and has been demonstrated effective in inhibiting tumour growth [9,10]. Doing so alone will cause accumulation of pyruvate, but will not push pyruvate into mitochondria. This is why you would need DCA as well.

I also know that I researchers at the University of Georgia produced a new way to deliver DCA directly to cancer cells mitochondria. Not only did it reduce the side-effects, but was three orders of magnitude more potent than the original. They also found it suppressed the production of lactic acid, which is one of the ways cancer cells use to avoid detection by the body's immune system [11].

Refs:
1 http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/2/31/31ra34.long
2 https://link.springer.com/article/10...637-013-0047-4
3 https://rd.springer.com/article/10.1...637-015-0221-y
4 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25362214
5 https://ibimapublishing.com/articles/ACRT/2012/441895/
6 https://www.wjgnet.com/2307-8960/full/v4/i10/336.htm
7 https://link.springer.com/article/10...863-012-9496-2
8 https://www.hindawi.com/journals/jo/2010/414726/
9 http://www.jbc.org/content/236/2/278.long
10 http://www.jbc.org/content/236/2/285.long
11 https://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/cb400944y
The 2010 study was oral administration, which makes it less powerful, are they retards or something? It's almost as though they don't want it to work, I wonder why....
da2255 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-02-2019, 09:41 AM   #813
da2255
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Intergalactic Space
Posts: 289
Likes: 158 (102 Posts)
Default

WHAT IS INTRAVENOUS VITAMIN C CANCER TREATMENT?
Intravenous vitamin C refers to the method of administering vitamin C parenterally (i.e. to bypass the gut and liver), in order to achieve therapeutic levels in the blood, tissues, and organs. By comparison, oral administration of vitamin C is dependant on absorption through the gut and must be processed by the liver before it enters the bloodstream and other tissues in the body. There are limits as to how much vitamin C can be absorbed through the gut and consequently alter plasma (blood) levels of vitamin C to have an effect. Intravenous vitamin C is used clinically to achieve plasma levels of vitamin C far exceeding what can be achieved by oral supplementation.

Extensive research over the past 35 years provides compelling evidence that intravenous vitamin C (IVC), when infused at high doses and moderate frequency in conjunction with radiation or chemotherapy, kills cancer in the early stages. [1,2,3] In the case of late-stage cancer, IVC may improve the quality of life. [4,5]

There is a vast amount of literature that exists on the topic of ascorbic acid (vitamin C) and cancer. As early as 1949, ascorbate use was proposed for cancer therapy. [6] Pioneering work by scientist and two-time Nobel Prize recipient Linus Pauling laid the groundwork for much of the discovery around the therapeutic effect of vitamin C on cancer patients.[7] Since 1952, ascorbate has been proposed as a chemotherapeutic agent.[8,9] In the past 25 years, thousands of studies including cell, animal, and human studies have added to the growing body of evidence for the clinical and scientific basis of vitamin C use in cancer.[10,11]

Linus Carl Pauling was an American chemist, biochemist, peace activist, author, and educator. He was one of the most influential chemists in history and ranks among the most important scientists of the 20th century
Some of the most significant and compelling research has come from the Riordan Clinic Research Institute in Wichita, Kansas. Dr. Hugh Riordan, M.D. is largely responsible for carrying forward the work of Linus Pauling. He and his team of researchers are responsible for the groundbreaking work in defining the therapeutic range for IVC therapy as a chemotherapeutic and biologic response modifier.[12-15] The “Riordan IVC Protocol” forms the basis of the intravenous vitamin C treatments offered at our clinic.

HOW DOES INTRAVENOUS VITAMIN C TREATMENT WORK?
Evidence from both in vitro and in vivo studies have proven a multitude of anti-cancer effects from vitamin C when therapeutic levels (therapeutic range: 350-400 mg/dL) are achieved in the blood. The only method to achieve this therapeutic range is via intravenous infusion of vitamin C. Scientific and clinical data supports that, at therapeutic levels, vitamin C has the following actions:

Direct cytotoxic (cell killing mediated by toxicity) effect on human cancer cells;[16-19]
Induces apoptosis (cell death) in catalase-deficient cancer cells while sparing non-cancerous (healthy, non-catalase deficient) cells from oxidative damage;[20-23]
Concentrates in cancerous cells due to the increased number of glucose receptors expressed by malignant cells (vitamin C has been shown to accumulate up to five times the concentration than in normal cells), selectively inducing apoptosis of cancer cells;[24-26]
Similar to chemotherapy agents, vitamin C generates significant hydrogen peroxide (H202) which destroys cancer cells;[27-29]
Promotes healthy mitochondria function;[30,3]
Reduces oxidative damage to the tumor suppressor gene p53 caused by chemo and radiation;[31,32]
Stimulates the immune system to increase production of agents such as interferon and natural killer (NK) cells that engage in the cancer-killing process as well as prevent the growth and spread of the tumor;[33-35]
Decreases the production of inflammatory cytokines such as prostaglandin E2 (PGE2), C-reactive protein (CRP), TNF-alpha, IL-8 and others, thereby reducing the inflammatory response that is responsible for growth, spread and recurrence of the disease (inflammation and elevated CRP are associated with poor prognosis and decreased survival in many types of cancer);[36-38]
Exerts direct and indirect anti-angiogenic effects on tumor (inhibits the formation of blood vessels by the tumor used to support its growth, spread, and invasion);[39]
Protects higher oxygenated, non-cancerous tissues while simultaneously acting as a selective pro-drug in cancer tissue [40]



I’VE BEEN TOLD BY MY ONCOLOGIST TO AVOID ANTIOXIDANTS. WILL INTRAVENOUS VITAMIN C INTERFERE WITH MY CHEMOTHERAPY OR RADIATION TREATMENTS?
Intravenous Vitamin C effecting the body. No. Research has shown that using IVC concurrently with chemotherapy or radiation will not decrease the effectiveness of these treatments. In addition, studies performed at the Riordan Cancer Treatment & Research Center have concluded that the tumor cells become susceptible to high-dose vitamin C at plasma levels of 350-400 mg/dL, known as the ‘therapeutic range’. At this concentration in blood, vitamin C acts a pro-oxidant, rather than an anti-oxidant.[40,41,42] As a pro-oxidant, IVC appears to augment the effectiveness of chemotherapy and radiation. [14,42-46].

Results of a large-scale, multicentre study in Germany, published in 2011 in the journal In Vivo, concluded that complementary treatment of breast cancer patients with IVC enhanced tolerability and effectiveness of standard tumor-destructive therapies (in particular, this study looked at patients receiving radiation and/or chemotherapy) and reduced quality of life-related side effects from chemo and radiation. [46]

The pro-oxidant effect of IVC is similar to chemotherapy, in that it induces apoptosis (cell death) in cancer cells. However, unlike chemotherapy, the pro-oxidant effects of IVC spare non-cancerous (healthy) cells from oxidative damage. In essence, IVC acts as a pro-drug.[40] IVC does not interfere with the majority of chemo agents, as evidenced by in vitro (cell) and in vivo (animal and human) research in addition to clinical evidence.[14] The IVC protocol is not administered in conjunction with methotrexate chemotherapy.

It is well established that cancer cells can be resistant to the anti-cancer effects of radiation treatment.[47] When used concurrently with radiation therapy, IVC helps sensitize cancer cells to the anti-cancer effects of radiation therapy, effectively enhancing the outcome of treatment.[48-52] In addition, IVC provides support for the body’s immune system, thereby facilitating recovery and healing post-radiation, as well as minimizing the many side effects of radiation.

Based on extensive research conducted at the University of Kansas Hospital, physicians there recommend administering IVC on the same day as the chemotherapy and/or radiation treatment.[53,54] A phase I trial has been completed and a phase II trial is currently underway at the University of Kansas integrative medicine research center to evaluate the effects of IVC in combination with gemcitabine and erlotinib (chemo agents) in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. Conventional treatment approaches have had little impact on the course of pancreatic cancer, which has the highest fatality rate among cancers. Gemcitabine, the primary therapeutic agent for pancreatic carcinoma, produces minimal survival benefit as a single agent. The human trial was initiated after results of an animal model study conducted at the university found therapeutic levels of ascorbate (vitamin C) synergizes with gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer cell lines.[55] The phase I trial results (published Jan 2012) revealed no increased toxicity with the addition of IVC to the chemo protocol, and positive outcomes were observed in the combo treatment group.[56] The results are now being followed up with a longer, phase II trial.

A similar randomized phase I/IIa pilot trial was conducted to assess the safety and benefit of administering high-dose IVC in combination with chemotherapy (first line carboplatin and paclitaxel) in newly diagnosed advanced stage III ovarian cancer or stage IV ovarian cancer. Ovarian cancer represents the leading cause of death from all gynecological malignancies and remains the fifth leading cause of cancer-related deaths among women. Due to the lethality of ovarian cancer and the need for improved treatment options, this population was selected to evaluate IVC in combination with standard treatment to explore the benefits of an outcome. Results revealed the combination treatment is remarkably safe and suggested a trend to benefit on outcomes, warranting further study of greater magnitude in the future.[57]

The belief of some oncologists that vitamin C as an ‘antioxidant’ may reduce the effectiveness of chemotherapy and radiation was due in part to an article published by Agus et al in 1999, in which they described how cancer cells acquire and concentrate vitamin C.[58] The authors suggested that this increased intracellular concentration of vitamin C might provide malignant (cancerous) cells with a metabolic advantage. Despite the significant misunderstanding of the detailed biochemistry of ascorbic acid in cancer cells with the conclusions drawn from this one study, some medical practitioners have embraced and held on to the belief that vitamin C in cancer may be harmful.

In actual fact, cancer cells use glucose as the main energy for fuel.[11] This has been the premise for much of the recent evidence for how low-glycemic (low carbohydrate) and calorie-restricted diets improve survival in cancer patients, reduce the rate of recurrence and overall lower the risk of cancer.[59,60] Because vitamin C has a similar molecular structure as glucose, the glucose transporters that are more heavily expressed (4-6 fold) on cancer cells, facilitate the entry and concentration of vitamin C intracellularly.[11,61] Once heavily concentrated inside the cell, vitamin C is cytotoxic (toxic to the cancer cells) and thereby acts as a pro-oxidant drug, effectively killing the cancer cells and reducing tumor burden.[40]

To address the concern about the use of antioxidants with cancer treatments, it’s important to recognize that a vast body of literature exists on this topic and an overwhelming majority of studies have demonstrated that antioxidants when prescribed appropriately, enhance the effects radiation and chemotherapy.[48-51,62-63]

In 2007, Dr. Keith Block, MD and others led a systematic review of evidence gathered from MEDLINE, Cochrane and other esteemed medical and scientific databases. The study was published in Cancer Treatment Review and found that, of the 845 trials meeting inclusion criteria for the review, none of the trials reported evidence of significant decreases in efficacy from antioxidant supplementation during chemotherapy. In fact, the authors concluded, “many of the studies indicated that antioxidant supplementation resulted in either increased survival times, increased tumor responses, or both, as well as fewer toxicities than controls”. [64]

It must be emphasized here that the type of antioxidants, dosage and frequency must be carefully assessed on a case-by-case basis and depends largely on the type of disease and specific treatment(s). Some antioxidants can interfere with the effectiveness of radiation and certain chemotherapy. If you take antioxidants, you must be under the care and guidance of a naturopathic or medical physician specially trained in integrative cancer care.

IF I TAKE ORAL VITAMIN C (ASCORBATE) WILL IT PROVIDE THE SAME RESULTS?
No. Oral vitamin C is an antioxidant with limited absorption. Most individuals cannot absorb more than 8 grams per day of vitamin C. In addition, with oral ascorbate, we cannot attain blood levels of vitamin C high enough to kill cancer cells. Ascorbate is more efficient when administered intravenously than when given orally because it bypasses the gut and higher circulating levels are achieved for longer periods of time. Furthermore, the therapeutic target of plasma vitamin C levels (described above) can only be attained through the intravenous route, on average with 50 grams or more of vitamin C per infusion.[11,13,14]

However, we advise patients take oral vitamin C (at least 3 grams daily) in order to maintain the serum vitamin C levels between treatments. Oral supplementation of vitamin C also helps prevent a possible vitamin C “rebound effect” on days when IVC infusion is not given.[14] In addition, oral vitamin C supplementation (and other antioxidants) has been used to help prevent cancer onset and its recurrence. [11]

WHAT TYPES OF CANCER WILL BENEFIT FROM INTRAVENOUS VITAMIN C TREATMENT?
Studies (human and animal) on intravenous vitamin C have shown benefit in every type of cancer, including breast, ovarian, colon, lung, kidney, prostate, liver, pancreatic, skin, thyroid, gastric, brain and blood-borne cancers such as leukemia’s and lymphomas.[65] However, there are many factors that will determine the degree of effectiveness of any given therapy. This includes epigenetic factors (i.e. diet, smoking and other lifestyle factors will influence the effectiveness of therapies), other treatments used synergistically with intravenous vitamin C, individual genetic mutations and variation, as well some unique characteristics of the primary cancer cells and cancer stem cells (CSC’s) or circulating tumor cells (CTC’s).[66-68]

Specialized tests we use at our clinic (from international research centers and laboratories) have been extremely helpful in identifying which treatments in particular (both natural substances and pharmacologic agents) will specifically target the CTC’s and CSC’s in a given patient.

Vitamin C and Cervical Cancer:

HOW FREQUENTLY ARE THE INTRAVENOUS VITAMIN C TREATMENTS ADMINISTERED?
We begin patients with a low dose (15 grams) and raise the dose incrementally with subsequent infusions until the therapeutic level is attained. We measure post-IVC plasma levels to ensure that these levels are being maintained at the recommended frequency. The average frequency of treatments is 2-3 per week. Each infusion takes between 1-3 hours, depending on the amount of IVC administered.

Based on a large and growing body of evidence, the following conclusions about the clinical use of vitamin C are firmly established:

IVC can be effective as a stand-alone therapy but is most commonly used in combination with conventional chemotherapeutic and radiation regimens.
Concurrent IVC with chemo/radiation may reduce side effects and enhance the quality of life.
Concurrent IVC helps to preserve immunocompetence (critical functional anti-cancer capabilities of the immune system) during chemotherapy and radiation.
Peer-reviewed scientific and clinical literature reveals over 8000 patients who have benefited from either IVC therapy or other concurrent antioxidant regimens
CAN IVC TREATMENTS BE USED TO TREAT OTHER CONDITIONS?
Many chronic illnesses can benefit from IVC. We have had great results with IVC as part of a successful treatment plan for patients suffering from Lyme disease, chronic fatigue, arthritis and chronic or recurrent infections. [38,69-72]

IV nutrient therapy is routinely administered to our patients to protect from the undesirable and hazardous consequences of certain dental procedures. Many dental procedures will consequently result in a substantial release of toxins and pathogenic microbes into the bloodstream and surrounding tissues.[73-75] Vitamin C and glutathione are critical components to assist the body with the removal of hazardous toxins and bacteria, thereby offering protection to the systems that are most vulnerable and likely to be harmed in the process: the immune system, heart, lungs, liver, kidneys, and brain.[76] Vitamin C and glutathione have a molecular composition whereby they are able to chelate (bind) toxins – including heavy metals.[77] In these situations, low-dose vitamin C is administered (as an anti-oxidant, not a pro-oxidant), coupled with other vitamins and antioxidants to support the body’s immune and detoxification capabilities.

https://www.portmoodyhealth.com/canc...ous-vitamin-c/

Last edited by da2255; 07-02-2019 at 09:41 AM.
da2255 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:47 PM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.