Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cheap, safe drug kills most cancers
New Scientist ^ | 1/17/06 | Andy Coghlan

Posted on 01/17/2007 5:28:53 PM PST by LibWhacker

It sounds almost too good to be true: a cheap and simple drug that kills almost all cancers by switching off their “immortality”. The drug, dichloroacetate (DCA), has already been used for years to treat rare metabolic disorders and so is known to be relatively safe.

It also has no patent, meaning it could be manufactured for a fraction of the cost of newly developed drugs.

Evangelos Michelakis of the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, and his colleagues tested DCA on human cells cultured outside the body and found that it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells, but not healthy cells. Tumours in rats deliberately infected with human cancer also shrank drastically when they were fed DCA-laced water for several weeks.

(Excerpt) Read more at newscientist.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: cancerdrug; cancers; cheap; dca; dichloroacetate; drug; health; healthcare; kills; prescriptiondrugs; wonderdrugs
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last

1 posted on 01/17/2007 5:28:57 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Maybe we will be lucky, and cancer will go the way of many other diseases......

brought low by a shot in the butt.


2 posted on 01/17/2007 5:30:57 PM PST by Dreagon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker


Another cure for cancer - where are my smokes!


3 posted on 01/17/2007 5:31:03 PM PST by spanalot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Bookmark.


4 posted on 01/17/2007 5:33:38 PM PST by Kevmo (Darn, if only I had signed up 4 days earlier, I'd have a 3-digit Freeper #)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spanalot
I don't think it works with emphysema or heart disease, both also side effects of smoking.
5 posted on 01/17/2007 5:34:33 PM PST by MHGinTN (If you can read this, you've had life support. Promote life support for others.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: spanalot

Kick em now, while you've got the muscle.


6 posted on 01/17/2007 5:35:00 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (BTUs are my Beat.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

I hope it turns out.


7 posted on 01/17/2007 5:35:10 PM PST by Eagles6 (Dig deeper, more ammo.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: spanalot

Good heavens! A cheap and effective anti-cancer drug without a patent? ZOIKS! Drug company executives must be fainting by the dozens.


8 posted on 01/17/2007 5:35:10 PM PST by Enterprise (Drop pork bombs on the Islamofascist wankers. Praise the Lord and pass the hammunition.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Interesting.


9 posted on 01/17/2007 5:35:52 PM PST by aculeus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: aculeus

Interesting....and many internet links to real scientists and clinical studies (not snake oil BS)....


10 posted on 01/17/2007 5:39:33 PM PST by xcamel (Press to Test, Release to Detonate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
This was also posted: Small molecule offers hope for cancer treatment

Technically; you're a dupe.

11 posted on 01/17/2007 5:39:59 PM PST by AFreeBird (If American "cowboy diplomacy" did not exist, it would be necessary to invent it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Unless the FDA fast-tracks it, it will be years before US patients see it...
12 posted on 01/17/2007 5:41:48 PM PST by GoldCountryRedneck ("Idiocy - Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large numbers" - despair.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Yawn. Bird flu and third world cancer cures suppressed by the evil military industrial complex.

Heard it all in the 70s when it was swine flu and apricot pit extract.
13 posted on 01/17/2007 5:43:54 PM PST by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Wow, this is incredible.

Sure hope it proves true.


14 posted on 01/17/2007 5:44:35 PM PST by upchuck (The American coup de grâce is well under way. Thus far, the Donks haven't had to fire a shot.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

He is not a dupe, but his post may be.

I'll give him a pass.


15 posted on 01/17/2007 5:44:44 PM PST by Blueflag (Res ipsa loquitor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: AFreeBird

Technically, not; different article and author.


16 posted on 01/17/2007 5:47:23 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

22 years too late in my husband's case.


17 posted on 01/17/2007 5:48:59 PM PST by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

No Patent?

Nobody will ever credibly promote it, because if a company can't protect it's profitablity, they'd rather undermine it.
And the Doctor's will join the drug companies in undermining it for the same reason.

Do you have any idea how HUGE the cancer treatment industry is???
I only truly learned after going through radiation at one facility and chemo at another, during combined treatment.
It's amazing how many patients they crank through there in any given week!


18 posted on 01/17/2007 5:49:30 PM PST by G Larry (Only strict constructionists on the Supreme Court!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: bill1952

I suspect it's more junk science from our friends up north.


19 posted on 01/17/2007 5:50:03 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Since the drug is already used to treat a disease (I assume with FDA approval), why should any drug company that wants to sell it need to re-prove its safety, at least at approved dosage? The risks should already be documented. Drug companies can't market the drug as a 'cancer killer', but doctors can prescribe a drug for anything they want.


20 posted on 01/17/2007 5:51:04 PM PST by KingKenrod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Blueflag

Thank you! :-)


21 posted on 01/17/2007 5:52:10 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dreagon
Maybe we will be lucky, and cancer will go the way of many other diseases......

That would truly be wonderful. Cancer is just awful.

Advances in its treatment make me proud I work in research.
22 posted on 01/17/2007 5:53:07 PM PST by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Salvation

I'm sorry about your husband.


23 posted on 01/17/2007 5:53:33 PM PST by LibWhacker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Here's a related article and summary by the same group of Canadian researchers cited in the journal Cancer Cell (complete article requires purchase).

A Mitochondria-K+ Channel Axis Is Suppressed in Cancer and Its Normalization Promotes Apoptosis and Inhibits Cancer Growth

Summary

The unique metabolic profile of cancer (aerobic glycolysis) might confer apoptosis resistance and be therapeutically targeted. Compared to normal cells, several human cancers have high mitochondrial membrane potential (ΔΨm) and low expression of the K+ channel Kv1.5, both contributing to apoptosis resistance. Dichloroacetate (DCA) inhibits mitochondrial pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase (PDK), shifts metabolism from glycolysis to glucose oxidation, decreases ΔΨm, increases mitochondrial H2O2, and activates Kv channels in all cancer, but not normal, cells; DCA upregulates Kv1.5 by an NFAT1-dependent mechanism. DCA induces apoptosis, decreases proliferation, and inhibits tumor growth, without apparent toxicity. Molecular inhibition of PDK2 by siRNA mimics DCA. The mitochondria-NFAT-Kv axis and PDK are important therapeutic targets in cancer; the orally available DCA is a promising selective anticancer agent.
24 posted on 01/17/2007 5:59:02 PM PST by SpaceBar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KingKenrod

why should any drug company that wants to sell it need to re-prove its safety, at least at approved dosage

FDA approval, unless I am wrong, is by use.


25 posted on 01/17/2007 6:04:06 PM PST by Chickensoup (If you don't go to the holy war, the holy war will come to you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Reportedly the Acai berry from the Amazon kills cancer cells and is the number 1 antioxidant in the world by ten fold.


26 posted on 01/17/2007 6:06:16 PM PST by DainBramage
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

You have FReepmail.


27 posted on 01/17/2007 6:06:29 PM PST by Salvation (†With God all things are possible.†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker
Could this be true?


28 posted on 01/17/2007 6:07:34 PM PST by BenLurkin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Running On Empty

Marking


29 posted on 01/17/2007 6:10:47 PM PST by Running On Empty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dreagon

Excellent. bttt


30 posted on 01/17/2007 6:18:17 PM PST by txhurl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Bookmark to read later


31 posted on 01/17/2007 6:19:01 PM PST by DocRock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

bump for later read


32 posted on 01/17/2007 6:23:43 PM PST by Bender2 ("Come back with your shield, or on it." Later on, this custom declined. So did Rome. So may we...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Ping, Read Later


33 posted on 01/17/2007 6:32:19 PM PST by Rumplemeyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GoldCountryRedneck
Unless the FDA fast-tracks it, it will be years before US patients see it

Yes but that's why US pharmaceuticals do lots and lots of human testing overseas.

34 posted on 01/17/2007 6:38:26 PM PST by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

bttt


35 posted on 01/17/2007 7:40:25 PM PST by Graybeard58 (Remember and pray for SSgt. Matt Maupin - MIA/POW- Iraq since 04/09/04)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MHGinTN

Nothing works for emphysema. The lungs ability to function is simply destroyed.

Forget cancer, all smokers suffer decreased lung capacity, the difference is only in degree. That's why I quit 29 years ago. Not from fear of cancer, but because I couldn't breathe.


36 posted on 01/17/2007 7:49:28 PM PST by ChildOfThe60s (If you can remember the 60s......you weren't really there)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Bookmark.


37 posted on 01/17/2007 8:31:10 PM PST by Sergio (If a tree fell on a mime in the forest, would he make a sound?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

I think somewhere back in to cobweb section of my brain I remember the American medical industry makes $20 billion a year off cancer. Now, can they afford to have a cheap cure?
Chemo, radiation, and surgery would dwindle.


38 posted on 01/17/2007 8:39:01 PM PST by biff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GoldCountryRedneck
"Unless the FDA fast-tracks it, it will be years before US patients see it..."

The FDA and it's rules are for the drug companies. They have the money for the several 100 million it takes to get their approval.

No small company can afford to get their drugs or alternatives certified by the FDA. Even so yearly we here of FDA "approved" and "certified" drugs being taken off the market because of all those who the kill and maim.

The FDA is a tool of drug companies and basically run by them.
39 posted on 01/17/2007 9:35:21 PM PST by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

About a jillion things cure cancer in rats that don't do squat in humans. I think rats were created to taunt know-it-all scientists.


40 posted on 01/17/2007 9:37:20 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: biff
Now, can they afford to have a cheap cure?

The smart money says yes yes yes, because aging takes its toll in one way if it doesn't in another.

41 posted on 01/17/2007 9:39:04 PM PST by HiTech RedNeck
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

"Do you have any idea how HUGE the cancer treatment industry is??? "

Exactly! What industry wants to put itself out of business? NONE.

The tough rules of the FDA support the cancer industry in NOT finding alternatives. Do you know how EXPENSIVE it is for drugs, and TREATMENTS to get approved by the FDA.

No one but the drug companies can afford it.


42 posted on 01/17/2007 9:42:42 PM PST by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: bill1952
"Heard it all in the 70s when it was swine flu and apricot pit extract."

Gee, I never heard that the bird flu was a cancer cure... Can you supply some supporting documentation?
43 posted on 01/17/2007 9:45:01 PM PST by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: bill1952

laetrile


44 posted on 01/17/2007 9:54:17 PM PST by Minutemen ("It's a Religion of Peace")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Bttt...


45 posted on 01/17/2007 10:12:11 PM PST by tubebender ( Everything east of the San Andreas fault will eventually plunge into the Atlantic Ocean...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

Personally, I think broccoli will kill you. Raw broccoli will kill you even faster.

Unless, of course, it has some bacon and cheese with it.

Then it's real good for you, especially if it's accompanied by a large glass of a good red wine.


46 posted on 01/17/2007 10:26:01 PM PST by garyhope (It's World War IV, right here, right now courtesy of Islam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JSteff
The FDA is a tool of drug companies and basically run by them.

Too simplistic.

While snake-oil, impure drugs, sloppy research, poor testing may have been the "good intentions" of it's founding, the FDA stands today as an example of bureaucratic excess

Know that it came about as an add-on to an agricultural act in the 1930's?

Like unions, I think that the FDA stifles personal research creativity and prevents the competitive delivery of promising drugs to the consumer.

Drug companies, if public, report to the stockholders. Of what benefit is it to BigPharm to curtail the introduction of new therapeutics?

Bayer aspirin, under todays' FDA, would have never make it to market.

JMO - YMMV

47 posted on 01/18/2007 12:15:02 AM PST by GoldCountryRedneck ("Idiocy - Never under estimate the power of stupid people in large numbers" - despair.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: LibWhacker

bttt


48 posted on 01/18/2007 12:56:07 AM PST by TigersEye (If you don't understand the 2nd Amendment you don't understand America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JSteff

>Gee, I never heard that the bird flu was a cancer cure... Can you supply some supporting documentation?

No need to be deliberately obtuse, J.

Now: Bird flu & new cheap unknown cancer cure.

Then, swine flu & new cheap unknown cancer cure.
Stay real.


49 posted on 01/18/2007 2:12:25 PM PST by bill1952 ("All that we do is done with an eye towards something else.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GoldCountryRedneck
"Of what benefit is it to BigPharm to curtail the introduction of new therapeutics?"

The benefit to the drug companies is that nothing that is not patentable, that can not be afforded to be tested under FDA rules will make it to FDA approval, will not make it to the market.

"Nothing" means drugs and treatment protocols. No one other than the drug companies has the money to undertake the process to gain FDA approval.

"Bayer aspirin, under todays' FDA, would have never make it to market."

Which actually supports my statements. Bayer aspirin has it uses and deserves to be allowed on the market. So the question based on that becomes; how many similar effective drugs can not afford to get FDA approval, and do not make it to the market?

So how many are not on the market today because of this? How many effective treatment protocols are not offered because they can not afford to make it to the market?

Remember, if it is not patentable, no drug company will offer it. If it is not patentable, and can not gain FDA approval insurers will not be pay for it, so smaller market and alternative treatments will never make it to the market.

Who can afford to get it approved? Only drug companies. I promise you if a drug companies board found one of their labs had found a way to get a cancer fighting drug from a non-patentable substance, they would never even agree to spend the money to get FDA approval.

That is why the push in this country and the European countries to consider making supplements fall under the FDA approval process.

FDA is good for the drug companies, and the drug companies by their complex products needing complex approval process is good for the FDA.

Hence the statement I made.

Remember, the true goal of any government agency becomes to keep itself in business. Drug companies do that for the FDA.

No FDA approval means that insurance (the major pay-or of treatments) will not pay for it. Few can afford the price of approved drugs and treatment protocols.

I will share a TRUE story with you but that I will send by Freep Mail.
50 posted on 01/18/2007 10:18:14 PM PST by JSteff
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-66 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson