I'm a quite skeptical about how effective this will be, but I look forward to the trial results, and hopefully it will turn out well.
Posted on 02/02/2007 7:33:20 PM PST by alnick
New Scientist has received an unprecedented amount of interest in this story from readers. If you would like up-to-date information on any plans for clinical trials of DCA in patients with cancer, or would like to donate towards a fund for such trials, please visit the site set up by the University of Alberta and the Alberta Cancer Board. We will also follow events closely and will report any progress as it happens.
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.
DCA attacks a unique feature of cancer cells: the fact that they make their energy throughout the main body of the cell, rather than in distinct organelles called mitochondria. This process, called glycolysis, is inefficient and uses up vast amounts of sugar.
(Excerpt) Read more at newscientist.com ...
LOL!
Neurotoxicity at 25 mg/kg/day:
OH MY GOD! It's got CHLORINE on it!!! (I know a bunch of folks here in CA who'd respond exactly that way...)
Probably not - no potential lawsuits there.
I'm a quite skeptical about how effective this will be, but I look forward to the trial results, and hopefully it will turn out well.
Very interesting. Thanks for the post.
Is this an infomercial?
= = = marker = = =
(hugeheadism)(caca-poopoo-mia) & (dropdeadism) all sound terrible. I know I am going to have bad dreams tonight.
read tomorrow ... ;-)
So sorry to hear that. I do pray he stays well for you longer.
This kind of logic has always escaped me. The people that need this kind of drug are already dieing. What do they have to loose? Get them to sign off on it and use it!
As opposed to an excruciatingly painful death from cancer. Hmmm...
To read later.
The problem is your logic is illegal according to the FDA and these companies are open to false lawsuits as it is.
I agree, let some dying folks try it if they wish, but they don't like to let them do that in the governing regulating bodies. That is the big problem for many IMO.
Some may be on cancer drugs already and it could be they do not know yet the way this interacts with those issues for starters and that is another avenue to get sued over.
When someone dies, there is always these days a relative looking for a lottery sized pay day in court.
Chemo drugs generally aren't judged by their side effects.
"For decades, researchers largely assumed that a poison's effects increase as the dose rises and diminish as it falls. However, scientists are increasingly documenting unexpected effects—sometimes disproportionately adverse, sometimes beneficial—at extremely low doses of radiation and toxic chemicals."
Read it at Counterintuitive Toxicity .
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.