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

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 19-04-2017, 08:20 PM   #1461
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by falconet View Post
Hi, I'm new here as a poster, been lurking these forums for a while though. as someone who has recently lost his mom to cancer and has done lot's of research in this field, mostly on alternative treatments since my dear mom decided to stop chemo at some point, I felt like I can be of some help here.
now from what I've written so far you may jump to this conclusion that alternative therapies won\t work because it didn't for my mother but this is not necessarily true as we mostly lost this battle because of the restrict regulatory system of my country which made it hard for me to get my hand on some the best alternative therapies.
I'm sorry to hear about your mother.

Quote:
Originally Posted by falconet View Post
back to the topic, something that seems to be the core of the argument here is the role of pharmaceutical companies and cancer research which is indeed very fundamental regarding finding an actual cure for this difficult disease.
something that needs to be considered here is that you won't ever see a off-patent cancer fighting agent going into a proper trial for this simple fact that it can not be patented and there is zero benefit in doing so as clinical trials cost a lot. this includes both herbal and synthesized chemicals that show promise against cancer. as there are many. from herbal extracts like hemp oil to honokiol, Curcumin, Quercetin to chemicals like DCA (sodium Dichloroacetate) 3bromopyruvate, Salinomycin and recently repurposed drugs in oncology like Mebendazole, Albendazole, Cimetidine, Metformin etc.
You can patent plants, chemical synthesis, extraction methods, delivery, structural analogues, synthetics and more. I know a number of non-profits have tested some of these. My views on the antitumour effects of the phytocannabinoids remain the same. I'm not impressed based on the data. As for quercetin and honokiol then I can't find out a great deal.

A number of Phase I studies have been conducted using curcumin. These have found at least 12 g/d can be administered orally to both healthy volunteers http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/17/6/1411.long https://bmccomplementalternmed.biome...1472-6882-6-10 and cancer patients https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11712783 http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.or...0/20/6847.long with no dose-limiting toxicities. Grade 1-2 diarrhea and nausea have been reported. But due to very poor oral bioavailability and a short half-life doses greater than 8 g/d don't lead to any further increases in plasma levels http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021...edchem.6b00975 Many have tried to improve upon nature using liposomes, structural analogues, or nanomaterials http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...59644611002996 https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/394264/ http://link.springer.com/article/10....280-011-1673-1

In the first cancer trial I could find 25 patients, including 3 chemo-naive with pancreatic cancer, were enrolled and they used 8 g/d. Twenty-two could be evaluated for a response, with one showing stable disease that lasted for over 18 months and another showing a partial response in a liver metastasis (73% decrease in size), although this lasted for only 1 month. Furthermore, curcumin was found to be safe in patients with pancreatic cancer, and no toxicity was associated with the intake http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.or...4/14/4491.long

In another curcumin at 8 g/d was tested in pancreatic cancer patients who had become resistant to gemcitabine-based chemotherapy. In total, 21 patients who showed disease progression during previous gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were enrolled in the study. The observed median survival was 5.4 months with a 1-year survival rate of 19%. These were promising results, particularly considering the poor prognosis of patients who are resistance to gemcitabine-based chemotherapy http://link.springer.com/article/10....280-010-1470-2

Another looked at the feasibility and efficacy of curcumin in combination with gemcitabine monotherapy in chemo-naive patients with advanced pancreatic cancer using 8 g/d. That study reported that 5 patients (29%) discontinued the curcumin after a period of several days to 2 weeks due to intractable abdominal fullness and/or pain. The dose was eventually reduced to 4 g/d due abdominal complaints in 2 other patients. The researchers discussed the possibility that increased gastrointestinal toxicity could be caused by the combination of curcumin and gemcitabine, and they concluded that 8 g oral curcumin is not a viable treatment dose when combined with gemcitabine in patients with pancreatic cancer. Of the 11 evaluable patients then one (9%) had partial response, 4 (36%) had stable disease, and 6 (55%) had tumour progression. The median overall survival was 5 months https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21058202/

Nanoparticle-based curcumin (THERACURMIN) showed an improved oral bioavailability in healthy humans which lead to higher plasma levels than those achieved with conventional versions http://link.springer.com/article/10....280-011-1673-1 This was then tested in cancer patients. A total of 16 (14 with pancreatic and 2 with biliary tract) who failed standard gemcitabine-based chemotherapy were enrolled in the study. With respect to efficacy, no responses were observed in this study based on RECIST. However, the median survival was 4.4 months for the 14 patients with pancreatic cancer, and three patients (21%) survived for over 12 months following it. Quality of life (QOL) scores were significantly improved following it as well http://link.springer.com/article/10....280-013-2151-8 In five patients, the fatigue score improved by over 20 points, which was interpreted as a significant and clinically relevant change http://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/jco.1998.16.1.139

It is unstable and has poor PK/PD properties. Sometimes chemists can alter the structure of potential compounds to give it the properties it needs to be a good drug. But this has just not worked out yet https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28245778 http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/...edchem.6b00975 From this http://blogs.sciencemag.org/pipeline...aste-your-time Dr. Lowe states: ''The paper cites a long list of references demonstrating that curcumin participates in pretty much every undesirable behavior possible in an assay: it reacts with proteins, it’s a redox cycler, it coordinates metal ions, it aggregates, it disrupts membranes nonspecifically, it interferes with fluorescent readouts, and it decomposes. Other than that, it’s a perfectly good hit.'' Another https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4791574/ calls it an ''invalid metabolic panacea.''

As for DCA then there have only been three studies to date. The first was published back in 2010 and five patients with primary GBM were treated. Three of these patients 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 http://stm.sciencemag.org/content/2/31/31ra34.long

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) https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4455946/

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 http://link.springer.com/article/10....637-015-0221-y 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.

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

There are four case reports in the literature. The first testing IV DCA https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25362214 the second showing a long term complete remission using it as an adjuvant http://ibimapublishing.com/articles/ACRT/2012/441895/ the third showing it can stop cancer growth for years https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5067498/ and the forth showing a complete response after disease progression http://link.springer.com/article/10....863-012-9496-2

I know researchers at the University of Georgia produced a new way to deliver this drug directly to cancer cells mitochondria (the power plants of a cell). Not only did it reduce the side-effects but it was three orders of magnitude more potent than the original. They also found it suppressed the production of lactic acid in cancerous cells, which is one of the ways they use to avoid detection by the body's immune system http://pubs.acs.org/doi/full/10.1021/cb400944y

I hope more trials of DCA and Mito-DCA happen.

The preclinical antitumour effects of 3BP have been very impressive. This paper http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/co...2/14/3909.long in rabbits could suppress the growth of liver tumours and lung metastases. Then in another Dr. Ko treated rats with large hepatocellular carcinoma tumors using 3-BP and reported that in all 19 animals ''advanced cancers were eradicated without apparent toxicity or recurrence'' http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...06291X04020625 In humans it put one child with a rare type of primary liver cancer into remission https://link.springer.com/article/10...863-012-9417-4 In an adult with metastatic melanoma caused large reductions in serum LDH. When combined with paracetamol it went down by around 99% https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4110469/ It can be administered aerosolized http://cancerpreventionresearch.aacr...t/5/5/717.long http://www.prnewswire.com/news-relea...277467361.html Using citrate with this should have an additive or synergistic effect http://www.medical-hypotheses.com/ar...151-X/fulltext https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4750747/ http://www.sciencedirect.com/science...06291X16307082 There are some case reports for citrate http://www.medical-hypotheses.com/ar...203-5/fulltext https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21345759

Salinomycin has shown effects in humans https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3516046/

The repurposed drugs in oncology are getting a number of trials funded by a private charity http://www.anticancerfund.org and here in the UK the private Care Oncology Clinic (COC) in London is conducting another http://www.telegraph.co.uk/wellbeing...g-cure-cancer/

Crowdfunding is an option http://www.telegraph.co.uk/men/healt...rs-investigat/

Quote:
Originally Posted by falconet View Post
another thing that needs to be take into account is that taking any of these to a clinical trial doesn't necessarily mean anything as the outcome of clinical trials can and has been manipulated. a clinical trial can be designed in way to fail or show favourable result regarding an specific agent. if any of these ever going to such trials the hands of pharmaceuticals should be cut without a question as they are clearly biased.
No company or charity wants to set up a trial to fail. As for manipulation then the only way to know is to read the purpose, arms, interventions, eligibility and data that comes of them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by falconet View Post
that of course doesn't mean that chemo doesn't work. we have all seen or heard about the people who have put in remission through the treatments offered by the current established system. but there are also thousands if not millions of people who are let down by that. if this high rate of mortality was caused by a Virus there would be a worldwide panic and yet when it comes to cancer everyone acts like it's natural.
The increase in deaths isn't as fast as the increase in new cases and based on that they say we are winning the war. If 1,500 were dying of a virus in the US then it would lead to an outcry. Yet in cancer it seems they accept it or just think that's the way its been for years. In my view the path researchers have gone down is wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by falconet View Post
another thing that imo gives the whole conspiracy theories such credit is that there are ways to make chemo more effective and also ways to make chemo resistant cancer cells , sensitive to chemo again, yet you see zero interest in giving patients such advice.
this is an interesting read regarding the outcome of clinical trials:
https://www.technologynetworks.com/d...mpanies-279772
A number of companies are trying to improve the effectiveness of chemo and reduce the side-effects as well. Third generation abraxane is one example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4479148/ Then CytRx is working on a tumour-targeted doxorubicin. This drug combines doxorubicin conjugated with albumin and some others have created structural analogues.
__________________
''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; 20-04-2017 at 02:10 PM.
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2017, 08:48 PM   #1462
unoficialtruth
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2017
Posts: 23
Likes: 17 (12 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by les_paul_robot View Post
where can you get hemp oil?
Is this it?

http://www.goodwebsite.co.uk/
Rick Simpson oil is from cannabis... his website is http://phoenixtears.ca

He teaches about the oil and how to make it yourself... you may like to check out his facebook page too for the most recent updates

As far as I know there are no officially related websites that sell his oil... this was from an update that he posted on facebook

Technically cannabis is high in thc and hemp is classed as low to nil thc... same species of plants just different cannabinoid profiles

Most hemp oil is high in cbd for its medicinal benefits and you can find some here- http://***********.com

Cheers!

Last edited by unoficialtruth; 19-04-2017 at 08:49 PM.
Likes: (1)
unoficialtruth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 19-04-2017, 11:46 PM   #1463
supertzar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,455
Likes: 2,995 (1,865 Posts)
Default

Dumbcritic, you say you are not impressed. Well a whole lot of people are. No one in this whole world though is impressed with you. You can't answer anything I say without resorting to fallacy. Here you are today pretending like you didn't get schooled again.

Last edited by supertzar; 20-04-2017 at 12:04 AM.
supertzar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-04-2017, 03:57 AM   #1464
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by supertzar View Post
Dumbcritic, you say you are not impressed. Well a whole lot of people are. No one in this whole world though is impressed with you. You can't answer anything I say without resorting to fallacy. Here you are today pretending like you didn't get schooled again.
Why would anyone be impressed with only one published paper (M Guzmán et al 2006) to date which showed the median survival of the group was no greater than what's generally expected with those who have rGBM?
__________________
''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 20-04-2017, 11:00 AM   #1465
supertzar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,455
Likes: 2,995 (1,865 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dumbcritic View Post
Why would anyone be impressed with only one published paper (M Guzmán et al 2006) to date which showed the median survival of the group was no greater than what's generally expected with those who have rGBM?
GW's product has shown results in exactly that disease. You know that so why are you lying?

https://globenewswire.com/news-relea...in-Glioma.html


Edit: so funny how you lurk around. Whenever I post you need time to think about what to do. I answer everything right away and expose your lies with ease always.

Last edited by supertzar; 20-04-2017 at 01:04 PM.
supertzar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-04-2017, 04:59 PM   #1466
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by supertzar View Post
GW's product has shown results in exactly that disease. You know that so why are you lying?

https://globenewswire.com/news-relea...in-Glioma.html


Edit: so funny how you lurk around. Whenever I post you need time to think about what to do. I answer everything right away and expose your lies with ease always.
During the Q1 2017 earnings call the CEO Justin Gover dodged stating it's hard to image CNS tumours but the results were consistent with survival and that the OS data hasn't yet matured. Which in my view is another way of saying that there weren't any objective responses seen under RANO criteria. They are sitting on the DDI data until the adcom docs are released which isn't a good sign either. The p-value was close between the two groups (0.042) and the sample size in the treatment arm was small (N = 21). But apart from all that the results were positive! It works so well they aren't planning to present any data at this years ASCO.

The upside (if any) is they plan to develop an oncology portfolio http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...is-medication/
__________________
''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; 20-04-2017 at 05:17 PM.
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-04-2017, 04:59 PM   #1467
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

From this http://ir.gwpharm.com/releasedetail....leaseid=983571 ''THCV Phase 2 study in type 2 diabetes completed, primary endpoint not achieved.'' It was randomised, double blind, placebo controlled and a multi-centre Phase IIb trial. No press release on any subgroup analysis either.
__________________
''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; 20-04-2017 at 05:16 PM.
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-04-2017, 05:20 PM   #1468
supertzar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,455
Likes: 2,995 (1,865 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dumbcritic View Post
During the Q1 2017 earnings call the CEO Justin Gover dodged stating it's hard to image CNS tumours but the results were consistent with survival and that the OS data hasn't yet matured. Which in my view is another way of saying that there weren't any objective responses seen under RANO criteria. They are sitting on the DDI data until the adcom docs are released which isn't a good sign either. The p-value was close between the two groups (0.042) and the sample size in the treatment arm was small (N = 21). But apart from all that the results were positive! It works so well they aren't planning to present any data at this years ASCO.

The upside (if any) is they plan to develop an oncology portfolio http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/...is-medication/

Yeah, that's why their stock skyrocketed recently after the study showing 83% one year survival vs. 53% in the placebo group (from your link.)

Last edited by supertzar; 20-04-2017 at 05:23 PM.
supertzar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 20-04-2017, 06:00 PM   #1469
supertzar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,455
Likes: 2,995 (1,865 Posts)
Default

Dumb, make yourself useful and find out what the dosage was in that recent study. While you're at it get the Lennon-Gastault high and low dosages too. I would truly appreciate it.

Last edited by supertzar; 20-04-2017 at 06:00 PM.
supertzar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-04-2017, 02:01 PM   #1470
supertzar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,455
Likes: 2,995 (1,865 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by unoficialtruth View Post

Technically cannabis is high in thc and hemp is classed as low to nil thc... same species of plants just different cannabinoid profiles

Marijuana varieties can have any cannabinoid profile as long as it has a significant amount of something. There are lots of low-THC/high-CBD strains now. Historically hemp varieties have been developed primarily for fiber so the morphology is different. They tend to grow straight up with little branching. In the current legal climate hemp plants are required to have minimal THC. Presumably there has been THC-rich hemp in a lot of places in the past.

Last edited by supertzar; 25-04-2017 at 02:02 PM.
supertzar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-05-2017, 09:57 PM   #1471
billybleach
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 969
Likes: 353 (188 Posts)
Default

Type in cannabis oil cure success stories into google. Tells you all you need to know. If you have a facebook account, search for cannabis oil succes stories. There are many many different groups with tens of thousands of members. Dozens of people posting their own cannabis success stories EVERYDAY of wifes, husbands, children who were left for dead by thier doctors with an "incurable" disease and told to go home and enjoy what time you have. They have bought them back from the brink...using a plant.
__________________
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQ_o6...rom=PL&index=9
Saul Williams - Not In Our Name (The Pledge of Resistance)

Last edited by billybleach; 04-05-2017 at 09:58 PM.
Likes: (1)
billybleach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2017, 07:03 PM   #1472
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by supertzar View Post
Yeah, that's why their stock skyrocketed recently after the study showing 83% one year survival vs. 53% in the placebo group (from your link.)
That's the market for you. But the data is the only thing that matters.
__________________
''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 08-05-2017, 07:09 PM   #1473
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by billybleach View Post
Type in cannabis oil cure success stories into google. Tells you all you need to know. If you have a facebook account, search for cannabis oil succes stories. There are many many different groups with tens of thousands of members. Dozens of people posting their own cannabis success stories EVERYDAY of wifes, husbands, children who were left for dead by thier doctors with an "incurable" disease and told to go home and enjoy what time you have. They have bought them back from the brink...using a plant.
You could search for a number of other unproven cancer treatments and find similar results. A great example of selection bias, lack of follow up/incompleteness and others at work. It's why Dr. Novella has said in the past: ''If you are basing your claims on anecdotal experience, then any treatment will seem to work for anything and everything.''

At least there are companies such as GW, Zelda Therapeutics http://www.zeldatherapeutics.com/ PharmaCyte Biotech http://ir.pharmacytebiotech.com/pres...h-program-sees and others who are developing oncology portfolios using cannabinoids and will properly test these in clinical trials.
__________________
''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; 08-05-2017 at 11:18 PM.
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2017, 07:23 PM   #1474
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by supertzar View Post
That makes no sense at all. They are supplying THC and CBD rich medicine for the study, something GW has failed to do. I told you you everything you say is wrong and I have proven over and over with simple reasoning that what I said is true.
The study testing Tilray's drug is a small Phase IIa. Assuming it passes this then a controlled Phase IIb needs to happen. If it gets approved then it will come a number of years after epidiolex has been in Canada. As for GW not using THC for epilepsy then this is based on their preclinical research and the fact it causes psychotropic effects which would have increased the adverse events. This then changes the benefit-risk ratio of it.
__________________
''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; 08-05-2017 at 07:25 PM.
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2017, 07:49 PM   #1475
supertzar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,455
Likes: 2,995 (1,865 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dumbcritic View Post
The study testing Tilray's drug is a small Phase IIa. Assuming it passes this then a controlled Phase IIb needs to happen. If it gets approved then it will come a number of years after epidiolex has been in Canada.
So what? Already you've gone from "It can't work because there is no evidence" (stupidest, most unscientific attitude ever) to this.

Quote:
As for GW not using THC for epilepsy then this is based on their preclinical research and the fact it causes psychotropic effects which would have increased the adverse events. This then changes the benefit-risk ratio of it.
You don't know that. I mean if you consider getting high an adverse event then sure. That's dumb though.
supertzar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-05-2017, 07:51 PM   #1476
supertzar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,455
Likes: 2,995 (1,865 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dumbcritic View Post
That's the market for you. But the data is the only thing that matters.
But I just posted the data and it shows a significant increase in survival. Strong evidence you are wrong about Cannabis and cancer considering this is only one of the first clinical trials of people ingesting concentrate for cancer. It is going to keep getting worse for you. Time will prove what a piece of crap you are for calling Rick Simpson a charlatan and lying every time you open your mouth about the herb. Research will continue to prove it more and more.

Last edited by supertzar; 08-05-2017 at 11:34 PM.
supertzar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-05-2017, 03:52 PM   #1477
eurosianguy
Quiz Champ
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 1,649
Likes: 902 (509 Posts)
Default

https://www.theguardian.com/science/...y-suggests-thc
__________________
The 5 laws of creation:
1. You exist
2. Every thing is Here & Now
3. The One is All and the All are One
4. What you put out is what you get back
5. Everything changes, except the first 4 Laws
eurosianguy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2017, 10:54 PM   #1478
dumbcritic
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 2,678
Likes: 560 (294 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by supertzar View Post
But I just posted the data and it shows a significant increase in survival. Strong evidence you are wrong about Cannabis and cancer considering this is only one of the first clinical trials of people ingesting concentrate for cancer. It is going to keep getting worse for you. Time will prove what a piece of crap you are for calling Rick Simpson a charlatan and lying every time you open your mouth about the herb. Research will continue to prove it more and more.
Simpson is much, much worse than a lying charlatan. He believes his own bull about healing 5,000 people and much more besides. Even more worrying is that he makes out the success rate for those with terminal cancer using the oil is 70% and its able to put such patients into remission in around 90 days http://hightimes.com/read/rick-simps...p-oil-medicine

Back to the topic then based on the p-value of the trial we can't conclude that a significant difference exists for those in the treatment arm. The single agent activity is almost non-existent and I can't seeing it being approved for this indication. Even if it was deemed statically significant then you can't make any major conclusions based on a small number of patients treated. I know the company are waiting for the results of a biomarker analyses. If these are independently verified then they should run another Phase IIa in patients who are likely going to respond. The data generated from that could help with the design of a Phase IIb. But they aren't going down that route and instead are in talks with regulatory agencies on a pivotal clinical development program for it.

Something GW should be doing is initiating combination trials with other treatments that will have an additive or synergistic effect. In vascular endothelial cells that help make up the tumour vasculature, cannabinoid receptor activation inhibits their proliferation, migration and induces apoptosis http://www.fasebj.org/content/early/...2-0795fje.long http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/wol1/...jcp.20954/full Cannabinoids also block the activation of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway which is an inducer of angiogenesis. Specifically, it and the active receptors (VEGFR1 & 2). So these would be downregulated (reduced) with treatment and this has been shown in preclinical studies in glioma http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/co...4/16/5617.long http://www.fasebj.org/content/early/...2-0795fje.long and some data from a clinical trial https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2360617/

One such drug that targets angiogenesis differently is VB-111 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOoFPTM-5QA It is in a pivotal Phase III (NCT02511405) under an SPA https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FDA_Sp...col_Assessment Based on Phase II data in a larger population then the increase in median overall survival (16 months) shown in the treatment arm was statically significant https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4638628/

Then there is perillyl alcohol (POH) which is in a Phase I (NCT02704858). The ease of administration, in combination with the lack of serious side effects, resulted in very high patient compliance reported as over 95%. In addition, this produced encouraging clinical outcomes http://www.worldneurosurgery.org/art...833-6/fulltext https://link.springer.com/article/10...432-010-0873-0 http://ar.iiarjournals.org/content/33/12/5625.long

But what you and others need to keep in mind is that if VB-111 or Ad-RTS-IL-12 http://ir.ziopharm.com/releasedetail...easeID=1018819 get approved then Sativex will have to improve the mOS against either of them. I know ZioPharm plan to test Ad-RTS-IL-12 in combo with a PD1 inhibitor and their ''off-the-shelf'' NK cells https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_killer_cell In one preclinical study the former had a major synergistic effect so this will improve the mOS even further http://www.cell.com/molecular-therap...016(16)33318-4 Other immuno-oncology treatments like NKTR-214 http://www.nektar.com/application/fi...4_ABS_1598.pdf and/or ALT-803 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...ijc.29686/full could be used with it as well.
__________________
''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; 11-05-2017 at 06:14 PM.
dumbcritic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-05-2017, 11:13 PM   #1479
supertzar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,455
Likes: 2,995 (1,865 Posts)
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dumbcritic View Post
Based on the p-value we can't conclude that a significant difference exists for those in the treatment arm. Even if it was deemed statically significant then you can't make any major conclusions based on a small number of patients treated. I know the company are waiting for the results of a biomarker analyses. If these are independently verified then they should run another Phase IIa in patients who are likely going to respond. The data generated from that could help with the design of a Phase IIb. But they aren't going down that route and instead are in talks with regulatory agencies on a pivotal clinical development program for it.
I'm guessing 30% is considered significant. You are going to have to keep backing the fuck up on everything you have said for the rest of your life.
supertzar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25-05-2017, 11:17 PM   #1480
supertzar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 13,455
Likes: 2,995 (1,865 Posts)
Default

It's so funny how you talk to yourself in comments sections, dumb. Trying to make it look like someone agrees with you?
supertzar 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 11:20 AM.


Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2020 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.