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

Thread Tools
Old 09-02-2010, 05:51 PM   #1
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: here now
Posts: 4,735
Likes: 1 (1 Post)
Default DMSO and mms

A New Way to Administer MMS
By staff at The Institute for Advanced MMS Studies. April, 2009

In Jim Humble's book (Volume 2), Chapter 21 page 10, Jim wrote about a Dr. Koch who cured cancer patients in 1917 based on theories that are being re-examined today - as will be shown herein.

He also wrote about Royal Rife who, during the 1930's, invented a special microscope that proved in thousands of documented observations and with many different scientists that a pleomorphic cancer organism was present in nearly all types of cancerous cells. Thousands of people during the 1930's and 40's were cured of cancers until the FDA stopped the practice and destroyed all of the Rife microscopes.

In summary, this article will describe how the drug store liquid "DMSO" can be used to carry MMS into the body with the goal of killing cancer microbes. It's a standard practice for doctors to sometimes use DMSO mixed with antibiotics or other drugs to deliver a drug through the skin directly into muscle or flesh.

Before recommending DMSO as a carrier for MMS, Jim Humble tested MMS mixed with DMSO years ago. He also tested the effect of drinking (in overdose) as much as two tablespoons of DMSO along with 30 drops of activated MMS twice a day and with many different size doses of DMSO and MMS. There was no observable problem.

Thousands of people have taken weakened DMSO orally as a general muscle and pain reliever. One particular use was reported years ago by a DMSO book which has now been banned and burned by the FDA. The book recommended using DMSO to stop strokes. One teaspoonful of DMSO in juice was to be taken every 15 minutes until the stroke has passed. At one time this was a suggested use of DMSO.

If you never head of DMSO, then for your reassurance you should read about it at http://dmso.org/articles/information/muir.htm A few words from that article reveals the forgotten popularity and characteristics of DMSO: More than 40,000 articles on [DMSO] chemistry have appeared in scientific journals, which, in conjunction with thousands of laboratory studies, provide strong evidence of a wide variety of [DMSO] properties.

Worldwide some 11,000 articles have been written on the medical and clinical implications of DMSO, published in 125 countries throughout the world, including Canada, Great Britain, Germany, and Japan, doctors prescribe it for a variety of ailments, including pain, inflammation, scleroderma, interstitial cystitis, arthritis, and elevated inter-cranial pressure. (Dr. Muir's writing)
California and a few other states have made DMSO into a prescription-only "drug." In other states it's sold in drug stores - available like peroxide and other common chemicals. Most farm animal supply companies sell DMSO which is used on horses and large animals. You can order DMSO on the Internet.

Standard medical research about cancer has had no explanation about how cancer spreads. They reject the possibility that cancer can be caused by a microbe or germ. So how then is cancer able to spread from one place to another? For example, prostate cancer - even after surgical removal - even after being told "we got it all," still cancer frequently returns somewhere else - in a bone, or the liver, or as a tumor somewhere else in the body. Surgery doesn't guarantee that cancer won't return. How come?

Back in 1900 to 1917 scientists demonstrated persuasively that normal cells were triggered into a cancerous state by viral or fungal components. Their microscopes at that time were not adequate to prove this visually but other empirical evidence led them to that conclusion. Cancer treatments (at that time) were formulated around that concept and easily 100,000 people were finally cured of cancer using strategies such as were published by Dr. Koch, (above) for example. Then during the 1930's Royal Rife's microscope "proved visually" that cancer was caused by a morphing microorganism.

Treatments for cancer by the medical community today rely on using radiation to directly kill tumors and cancers, or they rely on the alternate "chemo" method - the chemical killing of cancerous cells, usually followed by surgery, Chemo, radiation, and surgery are the three methods that doctors are allowed to discuss with patients today. These methods existed 100 years ago and no real improvement has been allowed in standard medical practice. Radioactive RADIUM was the radiation source in the 1900s so little has changed except that microwave radiation is used today.

Jim Humble wrote about this in his two books, especially Volume Two of The Miracle Mineral Solution of the 21st Century." Chapter 21 Pg 7. "The ...unaccepted theory of cancer is that cancer is caused by a very unusual virus that changes it's size and shape from a virus to a bacteria and back to virus again. . . .The theory is called pleomorphism. Research into this theory is not allowed. No money is available for such research and those who try hit a blank wall." (Jim Humble - quote from the book.)
What is the standard practice today? Today's costly "remedies" aim to kill billions of cancer cells - entire tumors. Current approved procedures all cause collateral damage to normal cells as well as cancer cells. Also, long-term illness, loss of the immune system, and no guarantees about the outcome. Patients become super nauseous and sick while paying up to $800 per chemo capsule in some cases.

If you are diagnosed as having cancer you are instantly worth between $100,000 and $350,000 to hospitals, doctors, and pharmaceutical companies. You can see why the idea that a morphing virus or morphing microbe might cause cancer - that idea is understandably not welcome in the business of sickness. Viewed from the sickness industry perspective, they can visualize millions of dollars slipping through their fingers if people are taught to think a germ causes cancer. So don't ask your doctor about it because he or she will have to change the subject - enforced by AMA policy.

Fortunately, in 2007 and 2008 various independent scientists used electron microscopes and published findings that support the ancient theories about pleomorphic bacteria - namely that there is a microbe that is almost always present and visible to electron microscopes where cancer exists. They claim to be able to watch bacteria/viral/fungal microbes morphing from one state to another. They claim it's the wandering bacteria-microbe that causes cancer to spread to other parts of the body. They claim that if you could remove those microbes, cancer cells would simply revert back to normal oxygen-breathing cells and you wouldn't have to kill or remove them at all.

Theoretical basis for a new approach: If that alleged cancer microbe can be cleansed from cancer cells they would be normalized and the immune system will integrate cancer cells back into normal body use and function. Even surplus tumor cells would slowly be eliminated as "unneeded" by the body. The immune system knows how to let unnecessary cells to fade away over time according to this theory. If true, billions of cancer cells would not need to be radiated or excised by surgery in most cases according to this theory.

Several scientists have published research findings that support this theory. You can read their writings at these sites:
http://www.rense.com/general74/cant.htm (Forum Interview with Dr. Cantwell - 2006)
http://www.rense.com/general80/canc.htm "Cancer is an Infection Caused by Tuberculosis-Type Bacteria. (2008)
If this research is validated, MMS (ClO2) is probably the most qualified and potent method of finding and killing any morphing viral/fungal/bacteria. There are other alternate strategies for stopping and eliminating cancer such as use of ozone, chemo-therapies, antibiotics, hyperbaric chambers, heat therapies (Europe), herbs, Laetrile (B17), and alkaline baking soda therapies. However, these alternative "remedies" aim to kill millions or billions of cancer cells, producing a lot of collateral damage. But with the strategy described herein, activated MMS with DMSO can eliminate microbial-bacteria rapidly, safely, and for pennies per dose wherever they hide in the body WITHOUT KILLING BILLIONS OF CANCER CELLS. The cancer cells can revert back to their normal functions if the microbe is removed.

Cancer-inducing bacteria penetrate to the INSIDE of body cells. Once inside. a cell is tricked by the microbe to stop using oxygen as its source of energy and instead it begins to ingest sugars from the blood stream or from surrounding tissues. The wild rapid reproduction of cancer cells is based entirely on the availability of sugars. Each cancer cell ingesting sugar quickly initiates cell division. Rapid growth is the result. Tumors grow without restraint in many cases. In some cases cancer will even nibble away at surrounding flesh in an effort to extract sugars.

REDUCE SUGAR INTAKE- we can all agree on that. Cancer patients are advised to minimize sugar intake. Especially eliminate high fructose corn syrups - and even those carbohydrate foods that end up supplying sugar to the blood. Goodbye to candy bars, french fries, and potato chips.

Sugar doesn't cause cancer, but once you have cancerous cells they are fed entirely and only by sugar. By definition cancer cells are anaerobic, meaning they have stopped using oxygen and now maintain themselves with sugar. Cancer would die and go away if sugar could be totally denied to it - but that can't be achieved or the patient would die also from "low blood sugar."

MMS Institute staff report instances where people called in, reporting they were at stage IV cancer - but had never been told by their doctors to reduce intake of sugar to the extent possible. All doctors know this fact so why wasn't the patient told - back at stage 1, or 2, or 3?

The normal use of MMS is doubtless a great cancer deterrent in the light of cancer being microbe-induced. Better yet, the ClO2 ions may be able to eliminate an established cancer by killing the cancer-causing microbes - even late in stage 3 or 4. To do this, the MMS ClO2 ions need to penetrate to the inside of cancerous body cells to kill the microbe wherever it may be present - inside or outside cell walls.

In general: To enhance the penetration of MMS, Jim Humble recommends activating 10 drops of MMS in the normal way, stir for only 15 seconds, and then immediately add one or two teaspoons of DMSO. Then add some water and rub it on skin where big muscles underlie the skin. The exact protocol can be referenced at this address: www.JimHumble.biz

DMSO is a special solvent because it can uniquely penetrate cells - like the skin (for example). It sinks right into body cells and flows harmlessly out the other side. Most drug stores have it in bottles similar to hydrogen peroxide. In a few states it has become a prescription drug.

When using MMS with DMSO, people with life-threatening diseases should at the same time continue to take MMS by mouth using normal activation methods. In addition, if there is a tumor on the outside of the body, spray activated MMS on the tumor every hour. See the exact spraying dosage suggestions at www.JimHumble.biz

When activating MMS in this skin-rubbing option, stir the mixture only 15 seconds, add the DMSO, and immediately rub it onto a large area of the body like a leg. This may get as much as 5 times more MMS through the skin and into the blood stream. And of course, using a larger area of the body can also get more MMS into the blood stream.

SPECIFIC SUGGESTONS: 1. Make a dose of MMS by activating 10 drops of MMS with 50 drops of lemon juice or 10% citric acid. Swirl or stir it for 15 seconds.

2. Add one teaspoon of DMSO and stir it for about 15 seconds, no longer.

3. Immediately rub it on to a leg or arm or belly. There's no harm in getting the mixture on your hands assuming you're applying it to yourself. Avoid rubber gloves. If you notice any burning sensation, you can add about ½ teaspoon of water, or you can rub olive oil and aloe vVerajuice on the skin after the application (not during the treatment because oils seal the skin and pores temporarily. Use a different part of the body each time until you have to start over.

Do this once every other hour the first day, and once every hour the second day and third day and then quit for 4 days and start the same thing the next week, but never stop taking the MMS by mouth.

If you didn't buy Jim's second volume, consider ordering both volumes in a single hardback book. Part Two digs deeply into the effectiveness of MMS related to the heart, liver, herpes, fungi, and considerable examples that resulted from five years of testing MMS on 75,000 human volunteers. Order it from this separate web site here if you wish: http://MiracleMineral.org/book.php.

See also the MMS knowledge base at http://MMSanswers.com

CONSIDERATIONS: If you are debating whether to use MMS against any life-threatening disease, you must consider that almost all cancer remedies DO LONG-LASTING HARM in that they aim to kill billions of cancer cells PLUS the killing of thousands of normal body cells PLUS disabling the immune system for six months or more. This results in long-term illness, high costs, and immune system damage which may never fully recover.

In contrast, MMS and its ClO2 ions circulating in your blood cannot harm normal living body cells. This suggested option (MMS with DMSO) targets only pathogens and does no damage to normal cells. The cost is pennies. This process aims to AVOID KILLING CANCER CELLS - but rather to restore them back to normal oxygen-breathing body cells.

No guarantees come with any of the alternate cancer treatments. AND, GUARANTEES DO NOT COME WITH THE THREE standard medical procedures which is why if you take standard treatments you will sign a lot of forms at the hospital, agreeing that no one will be held responsible for the outcome of surgery or radiation. You will even be told there is no known "cure" for cancer, indicating that the best options from standard medical practice are already declared to be ineffective and unpredictable. After their best shot at helping you, if your cancer reoccurs a year later, the medical industry will be rewarded doubly - if you have funds left to support them.

Your individual choice of attack against cancer must take those issues into consideration. However, if you are thinking about taking this MMS/DMSO information to your doctor to see if he or she will approve and bless it for your use, then you haven't understood why or how this MMS option works, nor how alternative options fly in the face of entrenched methods. Don't try to educate your doctor.

You need to maintain a valid working relationship with medical doctor(s) and professionals because in the future they may save your life where child birth is an issue, or broken bones, or emergency accidents, or blood transfusion services are suddenly needed. Don't harm the relationship with your doctor by asking or even telling a doctor that you are using MMS against cancer, or baking soda against cancer, or the use of cinnamon and honey against cancer, or Laetrile enemas, or the value of Apricot seeds against cancer. It's better to remain shy or silent about your private experimentation. If this puzzles you, consider reading Jim Humble's writings about world peace at his site: www.jimhumble.biz .

There are severe penalties for physicians who promote therapies that are not yet approved in the doctor's book of "best practices. Doctors know about the penalties, so why bring up your private health experiments? Doctors remember well those annoying patients who want to "play doctor" or who challenge their advice. If you choose to experiment privately with the option described in this article, be thoughtful about how you discuss it and await your own successful outcome. Then submit a success story to

Updated April 2009 by Institute staff.

Disclaimer, Terms of Use, and Privacy Statements:

The full "Disclaimer statement" is [ Here ] .
The "Terms of Use Statement" is [ Here ] .
The "Privacy Statement" is [ Here ] .

This page provides information about MMS (Miracle Mineral Solution) which is a well known mineral-salt in solution. This information is not a substitute for licensed professionals who can diagnose, treat, and give medical advice. This page informs people about an option that non-professional people sometimes use as experimental researchers. These MMS web sites and articles describe one well-known salt in solution for limited internal and external use. The wide use of chlorine dioxide and its descriptions do
nirvana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2010, 05:24 PM   #2
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: here now
Posts: 4,735
Likes: 1 (1 Post)

anyone tried dmso?
nirvana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 11-02-2010, 05:26 PM   #3
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: here now
Posts: 4,735
Likes: 1 (1 Post)

Background Literature
Printer Friendly Version
DMSO: Many Uses, Much Controversy
Maya Muir


Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO), a by-product of the wood industry, has been in use as a commercial solvent since 1953. It is also one of the most studied but least understood pharmaceutical agents of our time--at least in the United States. According to Stanley Jacob, MD, a former head of the organ transplant program at Oregon Health Sciences University in Portland, more than 40,000 articles on its chemistry have appeared in scientific journals, which, in conjunction with thousands of laboratory studies, provide strong evidence of a wide variety of properties. (See Major Properties Attributed to DMSO) Worldwide, some 11,000 articles have been written on its medical and clinical implications, and in 125 countries throughout the world, including Canada, Great Britain, Germany, and Japan, doctors prescribe it for a variety of ailments, including pain, inflammation, scleroderma, interstitial cystitis, and arthritis elevated intercranial pressure.

Yet in the United States, DMSO has Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval only for use as a preservative of organs for transplant and for interstitial cystitis, a bladder disease. It has fallen out of the limelight and out of the mainstream of medical discourse, leading some to believe that it was discredited. The truth is more complicated.

DMSO: A History of Controversy

The history of DMSO as a pharmaceutical began in 1961, when Dr. Jacob was head of the organ transplant program at Oregon Health Sciences University. It all started when he first picked up a bottle of the colorless liquid. While investigating its potential as a preservative for organs, he quickly discovered that it penetrated the skin quickly and deeply without damaging it. He was intrigued. Thus began his lifelong investigation of the drug.

The news media soon got word of his discovery, and it was not long before reporters, the pharmaceutical industry, and patients with a variety of medical complaints jumped on the news. Because it was available for industrial uses, patients could dose themselves. This early public interest interfered with the ability of Dr. Jacob--or, later, the FDA--to see that experimentation and use were safe and controlled and may have contributed to the souring of the mainstream medical community on it.

Why, if DMSO possesses half the capabilities claimed by Dr. Jacob and others, is it still on the sidelines of medicine in the United States today?

"It's a square peg being pushed into a round hole," says Dr. Jacob. "It doesn't follow the rifle approach of one agent against one disease entity. It's the aspirin of our era. If aspirin were to come along today, it would have the same problem. If someone gave you a little white pill and said take this and your headache will go away, your body temperature will go down, it will help prevent strokes and major heart problems--what would you think?"

Others cite DMSO's principal side effect: an odd odor, akin to that of garlic, that emanates from the mouth shortly after use, even if use is through the skin. Certainly, this odor has made double-blinded studies difficult. Such studies are based on the premise that no one, neither doctor nor patient, knows which patient receives the drug and which the placebo, but this drug announces its presence within minutes.

Others, such as Terry Bristol, a Ph.D. candidate from the University of London and president of the Institute for Science, Engineering and Public Policy in Portland, Oregon, who assisted Dr. Jacob with his research in the 1960s and 1970s, believe that the smell of DMSO may also have put off the drug companies, that feared it would be hard to market. Worse, however, for the pharmaceutical companies was the fact that no company could acquire an exclusive patent for DMSO, a major consideration when the clinical testing required to win FDA approval for a drug routinely runs into millions of dollars. In addition, says Mr. Bristol, DMSO, with its wide range of attributes, would compete with many drugs these companies already have on the market or in development.

The FDA and DMSO

In the first flush of enthusiasm over the drug, six pharmaceutical companies embarked on clinical studies. Then, in November 1965, a woman in Ireland died of an allergic reaction after taking DMSO and several other drugs. Although the precise cause of the woman's death was never determined, the press reported it to be DMSO. Two months later, the FDA closed down clinical trials in the United States, citing the woman's death and changes in the lenses of certain laboratory animals that had been given doses of the drug many times higher than would be given humans.

Some 20 years and hundreds of laboratory and human studies later, no other deaths have been reported, nor have changes in the eyes of humans been documented or claimed. Since then, however, the FDA has refused seven applications to conduct clinical studies, and approved only 1, for intersititial cystitis, which subsequently was approved for prescriptive use in 1978.

Dr. Jacob believes the FDA "blackballed" DMSO, actively trying to kill interest in a drug that could end much suffering. Jack de la Torre, MD, Ph.D., professor of neurosurgery and physiology at the University of New Mexico Medical School in Albuquerque, a pioneer in the use of DMSO and closed head injury, says, "Years ago the FDA had a sort of chip on its shoulder because it thought DMSO was some kind of snake oil medicine. There were people there who were openly biased against the compound even though they knew very little about it. With the new administration at that agency, it has changed a bit." The FDA recently granted permission to conduct clinical trials in Dr. de la Torre's field of closed head injury.

DMSO Penetrates Membranes and Eases Pain

The first quality that struck Dr. Jacob about the drug was its ability to pass through membranes, an ability that has been verified by numerous subsequent researchers.1 DMSO's ability to do this varies proportionally with its strength--up to a 90 percent solution. From 70 percent to 90 percent has been found to be the most effective strength across the skin, and, oddly, performance drops with concentrations higher than 90 percent. Lower concentrations are sufficient to cross other membranes. Thus, 15 percent DMSO will easily penetrate the bladder.2

In addition, DMSO can carry other drugs with it across membranes. It is more successful ferrying some drugs, such as morphine sulfate, penicillin, steroids, and cortisone, than others, such as insulin. What it will carry depends on the molecular weight, shape, and electrochemistry of the molecules. This property would enable DMSO to act as a new drug delivery system that would lower the risk of infection occurring whenever skin is penetrated.

DMSO perhaps has been used most widely as a topical analgesic, in a 70 percent DMSO, 30 percent water solution. Laboratory studies suggest that DMSO cuts pain by blocking peripheral nerve C fibers.3 Several clinical trials have demonstrated its effectiveness,4,5 although in one trial, no benefit was found.6 Burns, cuts, and sprains have been treated with DMSO. Relief is reported to be almost immediate, lasting up to 6 hours. A number of sports teams and Olympic athletes have used DMSO, although some have since moved on to other treatment modalities. When administration ceases, so do the effects of the drug.

Dr. Jacob said at a hearing of the U.S. Senate Subcommittee on Health in 1980, "DMSO is one of the few agents in which effectiveness can be demonstrated before the eyes of the observers....If we have patients appear before the Committee with edematous sprained ankles, the application of DMSO would be followed by objective diminution of swelling within an hour. No other therapeutic modality will do this."

Chronic pain patients often have to apply the substance for 6 weeks before a change occurs, but many report relief to a degree they had not been able to obtain from any other source.

DMSO and Inflammation

DMSO reduces inflammation by several mechanisms. It is an antioxidant, a scavenger of the free radicals that gather at the site of injury. This capability has been observed in experiments with laboratory animals7 and in 150 ulcerative colitis patients in a double-blinded randomized study in Baghdad, Iraq.8 DMSO also stabilizes membranes and slows or stops leakage from injured cells.

At the Cleveland Clinic Foundation in Cleveland, Ohio, in 1978, 213 patients with inflammatory genitourinary disorders were studied. Researchers concluded that DMSO brought significant relief to the majority of patients. They recommended the drug for all inflammatory conditions not caused by infection or tumor in which symptoms were severe or patients failed to respond to conventional therapy.9

Stephen Edelson, MD, F.A.A.F.P., F.A.A.E.M., who practices medicine at the Environmental and Preventive Health Center of Atlanta, has used DMSO extensively for 4 years. "We use it intravenously as well as locally," he says. "We use it for all sorts of inflammatory conditions, from people with rheumatoid arthritis to people with chronic low back inflammatory-type symptoms, silicon immune toxicity syndromes, any kind of autoimmune process.

"DMSO is not a cure," he continues. "It is a symptomatic approach used while you try to figure out why the individual has the process going on. When patients come in with rheumatoid arthritis, we put them on IV DMSO, maybe three times a week, while we are evaluating the causes of the disease, and it is amazing how free they get. It really is a dramatic treatment."

As for side effects, Dr. Edelson says: "Occasionally, a patient will develop a headache from it, when used intravenously--and it is dose related." He continues: "If you give a large dose, [the patient] will get a headache. And we use large doses. I have used as much as 30ÝmlÝIV over a couple of hours. The odor is a problem. Some men have to move out of the room [shared] with their wives and into separate bedrooms. That is basically the only problem."

DMSO was the first nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory discovered since aspirin. Mr. Bristol believes that it was that discovery that spurred pharmaceutical companies on to the development on other varieties of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatories. "Pharmaceutical companies were saying that if DMSO can do this, so can other compounds," says Mr. Bristol. "The shame is that DMSO is less toxic and has less int he way of side effects than any of them."

Collagen and Scleroderma

Scleroderma is a rare, disabling, and sometimes fatal disease, resulting form an abnormal buildup of collagen in the body. The body swells, the skin--particularly on hands and face--becomes dense and leathery, and calcium deposits in joints cause difficulty of movement. Fatigue and difficulty in breathing may ensue. Amputation of affected digits may be necessary. The cause of scleroderma is unknown, and, until DMSO arrived, there was no known effective treatment.

Arthur Scherbel, MD, of the department of rheumatic diseases and pathology at the Cleveland Clinic Foundation, conducted a study using DMSO with 42 scleroderma patients who had already exhausted all other possible therapies without relief. Dr. Scherbel and his coworkers concluded 26 of the 42 showed good or excellent improvement. Histotoxic changes were observed together with healing of ischemic ulcers on fingertips, relief from pain and stiffness, and an increase in strength. The investigators noted, "It should be emphasized that these have never been observed with any other mode of therapy."10 Researchers in other studies have since come to similar conclusions.11

Does DMSO Help Arthritis?

It was inevitable that DMSO, with its pain-relieving, collagen-softening, and anti-inflammatory characteristics, would be employed against arthritis, and its use has been linked to arthritis as much as to any condition. Yet the FDA has never given approval for this indication and has, in fact, turned down three Investigational New Drug (IND) applications to conduct extensive clinical trials.

Moreover, its use for arthritis remains controversial. Robert Bennett, MD, F.R.C.P., F.A.C.R., F.A.C.P., professor of medicine and chief, division of arthritis and rheumatic disease at Oregon Health Sciences University (Dr. Jacob's university), says other drugs work better. Dava Sobel and Arthur Klein conducted their own informal study of 47 arthritis patients using DMSO in preparation for writing their book, Arthritis: What Works, and came to the same conclusion.12

Yet laboratory studies have indicated that DMSO's capacity as a free-radical scavenger suggests an important role for it in arthritis.13 The Committee of Clinical Drug Trials of the Japanese Rheumatism Association conducted a trial with 318 patients at several clinics using 90 percent DMSO and concluded that DMSO relieved joint pain and increased range of joint motion and grip strength, although performing better in more recent cases of the disease.14 It is employed widely in the former Soviet Union for all the different types of arthritis, as it is in other countries around the world.

Dr. Jacob remains convinced that it can play a significant role in the treatment of arthritis. "You talk to veterinarians associated with any race track, and you'll find there's hardly an animal there that hasn't been treated with DMSO. No veterinarian is going to give his patient something that does not work. There's no placebo effect on a horse."

DMSO and Central Nervous System Trauma

Since 1971, Dr. de la Torre, then at the University of Chicago, has experimented using DMSO with injury to the central nervous system. Working with laboratory animals, he discovered that DMSO lowered intracranial pressure faster and more effectively than any other drug. DMSO also stabilized blood pressure, improved respiration, and increased urine output by five times and increased blood flow through the spinal cord to areas of injury.15-17 Since then, DMSO has been employed with human patients suffering severe head trauma, initially those whose intracranial pressure remained high despite the administration of mannitol, steroids, and barbiturates. In humans, as well as animals, it has proven the first drug to significantly lower intracranial pressure, the number one problem with severe head trauma.

"We believe that DMSO may be a very good product for stroke," says Dr. de la Torre, "and that is a devastating illness which affects many more people than head injury. We have done some preliminary clinical trials, and there's a lot of animal data showing that it is a very good agent in dissolving clots."

Other Possible Applications for DMSO

Many other uses for DMSO have been hypothesized from its known qualities hand have been tested in the laboratory or in small clinical trials. Mr. Bristol speaks with frustration about important findings that have never been followed up on because of the difficulty in finding funding and because "to have on your resume these days that you've worked on DMSO is the kiss of death." It is simply too controversial. A sampling of some other possible applications for this drug follows.

DMSO as long been used to promote healing. People who have it on hand often use it for minor cuts and burns and report that recovery is speedy. Several studies have documented DMSO use with soft tissue damage, local tissue death, skin ulcers, and burns.18-21

In relation to cancer, several properties of DMSO have gained attention. In one study with rats, DMSO was found to delay the spread of one cancer and prolong survival rates with another.22 In other studies, it has been found to protect noncancer cells while potentiating the chemotherapeutic agent.

Much has been written recently about the worldwide crisis in antibiotic resistance among bacteria (see Alternative & Complementary Therapies, Volume 2, Number 3, 1996, pages 140-144) Here, too, DMSO may be able to play a role. Researcher as early as 1975 discovered that it could break down the resistance certain bacteria have developed.23

In addition to its ability to lower intracranial pressure following closed head injury, Dr. de la Torre's work suggests that the drug may actually have the ability to prevent paralysis, given its ability to speedily clean out cellular debris and stop the inflammation that prevents blood from reaching muscle, leading to the death of muscle tissue.

With its great antioxidant powers, DMSO could be used to mitigate some of the effects of aging, but little work has been done to investigate this possibility. Toxic shock, radiation sickness, and septicemia have all been postulated as responsive to DMSO, as have other conditions too numerous to mention here.

DMSO in the Future

Will DMSO ever sit on the shelves of pharmacies in this country as a legal prescriptive for many of the conditions it may be able to address? Will the studies we need to discover when this drug is most appropriate ever be done? Given the difficulties the drug has run into so far and the recent development of new drugs that perform some of the same functions, Mr. Bristol is doubtful. Others, however, such as Dr. Jacob and Dr. de la Torre, see the FDA approval of DMSO for interstitial cystitis and the more recent FDA go-ahead for DMSO trials with closed head injury as new indications of hope. The cystitis approval means that physicians may use it at their discretion for other uses, giving DMSO a new legitimacy.

Dr. Jacob continues to believe that DMSO should not even be called a drug but is more correctly a new therapeutic principle, with an effect on medicine that will be profound in many areas. Whether that is true cannot be known without extensive a publicly reported trials, which are dependent on the willingness of researchers to undertake rigorous studies in this still-unfashionable tack and of pharmaceutical companies and other investors to back them up. That this is a live issue is proved by the difficulty the investigators with approval to test DMSO for closed head injury clinically are having finding funds to conduct the trials.

In 1980, testifying before the Select Committee on Agin of the U.S. House of Representatives, Dr. Scherbel said, "The controversy that exists over the clinical effectiveness of DMSO is not well-founded--clinical effectiveness may be variable in different patients. If toxicity is consistently minimal, the drug should not be restricted from practice. The clinical effectiveness of DMSO can be decided with complete satisfaction if the drug is made available to the practicing physician. The number of patient complaints about pain and the number of phone calls to the doctor's office will decide quickly whether or not the drug is effective."

It may be premature to call for the full rehabilitation of DMSO, but it is time to call for a full investigation of its true range of capabilities.


Kolb, K.H., Jaenicke, G., Kramer, M., Schulze, P.E. Absorption, distribution, and elimination of labeled dimethyl sulfoxide in man and animals. Ann NY Acad Sci 141:85-95, 1967.
Herschler, R., Jacob, S.W. The case of dimethyl sulfoxide. In: Lasagna, L. (Ed.), Controversies in Therapeutics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1980.
Evans, M.S., Reid, K.H., Sharp, J.B. Dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) blocks conduction in peripheral nerve C fibers: A possible mechanism of analgesia. Neurosci Lett 150:145-148, 1993.
Demos, C.H., Beckloff, G.L., Donin, M.N., Oliver, P.M. Dimethyl sulfoxide in musculoskeletal disorders. Ann NY Acad Sci 141:517-523, 1967.
Lockie, L.M., Norcross, B. A clinical study on the effects of dimethyl sulfoxide in 103 patients with acute and chronic musculoskeletal injures and inflammation. Ann NY Acad Sci 141:599-602, 1967.
Percy, E.C., Carson, J.D. The use of DMSO in tennis elbow and rotator cuff tendinitis: A double-blind study. Med Sci Sports Exercise 13:215-219, 1981.
Itoh, M., Guth, P. Role of oxygen-derived free radicals in hemorrhagic shock-induced gastric lesions in the rat. Gastroenterology 88:1126-1167, 1985.
Salim, A.S., Role of oxygen-derived free radical scavengers in the management of recurrent attacks of ulcerative colitis: A new approach. J. Lab Clin Med 119:740-747, 1992.
Shirley, S.W., Stewart, B.H., Mirelman, S. Dimethyl sulfoxide in treatment of inflammatory genitourinary disorders. Urology 11:215-220, 1978.
Scherbel, A.L., McCormack, L.J., Layle, J.K. Further observations on the effect of dimethyl sulfoxide in patients with generalized scleroderma (progressive systemic sclerosis). Ann NY Acad Sci 141:613-629, 1967.
Engel, M.F., Dimethyl sulfoxide in the treatment of scleroderma. South Med J 65:71, 1972.
Sobel, D., Klein, A.C. Arthritis: What Works. New York: St. Martins Press, 1989.
Santos, L., Tipping, P.G. Attenuation of adjuvant arthritis in rats by treatment with oxygen radical scavengers. Immunol Cell Biol 72:406-414, 1994.
Matsumoto, J. Clinical trials of dimethyl sulfoxide in rheumatoid arthritis patients in Japan. Ann NY Acad Sci 141:560-568, 1967.
de la Torre, J.C., et al. Modifications of experimental spinal cord injuries using dimethyl sulfoxide. Trans Am Neurol Assoc 97:230, 1971.
de la Torre, J.C., et al. Dimethyl sulfoxide in the treatment of experimental brain compression. J Neurosurg 38:343, 1972.
de la Torre, J.C., et al. Dimethyl sulfoxide in the central nervous system trauma. Ann NY Acad Sci 243:362, 1975.
Lawrence, H.H., Goodnight, S.H. Dimethyl sulfoxide and extravasion of anthracycline agents. Ann Inter Med 98:1025, 1983.
Lubredo, L., Barrie, M.S., Woltering, E.A. DMSO protects against adriamycin-induced skin necrosis. J. Surg Res 53:62-65, 1992.
Alberts, D.S., Dorr, R.T. Case report: Topical DMSO for mitomycin-C-induced skin ulceration. Oncol Nurs Forum 18:693-695, 1991.
Cruse, C.W., Daniels, S. Minor burns: Treatment using a new drug deliver system with silver sulfadiazine. South Med J 82:1135-1137, 1989.
Miller, L., Hansbrough, J., Slater, H., et al. Sildimac: A new deliver system for silver sulfadiazine in the treatment of full-thickness burn injuries. J Burn Care Rehab 11:35-41, 1990
Salim, A. Removing oxygen-derived free radicals delays hepatic metastases and prolongs survival in colonic cancer. Oncology 49:58-62, 1992.
Feldman, W.E., Punch, J.D., Holden, P. In vivo and in vitro effects of dimethyl sulfoxide on streptomycin-sensitive and resistant Escherichia coli. Ann Acad Sci 141:231, 1967.
Source: Alternative & Complementary Therapies, July/August 1996, pages 230-235. DMSO Organization would like to thank the publisher for permission to place this fine article on the World Wide Web. The Publisher retains all copyright. To order reprints of this article, write to or call: Karen Ballen, Alternative & Complementary Therapies, Mary Ann Liebert, Inc., 2 Madison Avenue, Larchmont, NY 10538, (914) 834-3100.

© 2001-2007 All rights reserved
nirvana is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23-02-2010, 11:48 AM   #4
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: here now
Posts: 4,735
Likes: 1 (1 Post)

nirvana is offline   Reply With Quote


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 09:19 PM.

Shoutbox provided by vBShout (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.