Jump to content

Canada found a cancer cure?


Recommended Posts

I just heard about this....anyone else have info on it?

Canadian researchers find a simple cure for cancer, but major pharmaceutical companies are not interested.

Researchers at the University of Alberta, in Edmonton, Canada have cured cancer last week, yet there is a little ripple in the news or in TV. It is a simple technique using very basic drug. The method employs dichloroacetate, which is currently used to treat metabolic disorders. So, there is no concern of side effects or about their long term effects.

This drug doesn't require a patent, so anyone can employ it widely and cheaply compared to the costly cancer drugs produced by major pharmaceutical companies.

Canadian scientists tested this dichloroacetate (DCA) on human's cells; it killed lung, breast and brain cancer cells and left the healthy cells alone. It was tested on Rats inflicted with severe tumors; their cells shrank when they were fed with water supplemented with DCA. The drug is widely available and the technique is easy to use, why the major drug companies are not involved? Or the Media interested in this find?

In human bodies there is a natural cancer fighting human cell, the mitochondria, but they need to be triggered to be effective. Scientists used to think that these mitochondria cells were damaged and thus ineffective against cancer. So they used to focus on glycolysis, which is less effective in curing cancer and more wasteful. The drug manufacturers focused on this glycolysis method to fight cancer. This DCA on the other hand doesn't rely on glycolysis instead on mitochondria; it triggers the mitochondria which in turn fights the cancer cells.

The side effect of this is it also reactivates a process called apoptosis. You see, mitochondria contain an all-too-important self-destruct button that can't be pressed in cancer cells. Without it, tumors grow larger as cells refuse to be extinguished. Fully functioning mitochondria, thanks to DCA, can once again die.

With glycolysis turned off, the body produces less lactic acid, so the bad tissue around cancer cells doesn't break down and seed new tumors.

Pharmaceutical companies are not investing in this research because DCA method cannot be patented, without a patent they can't make money, like they are doing now with their AIDS Patent. Since the pharmaceutical companies won't develop this, the article says other independent laboratories should start producing this drug and do more research to confirm all the above findings and produce drugs. All the groundwork can be done in collaboration with the Universities, who will be glad to assist in such research and can develop an effective drug for curing cancer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

DCA goes back a few years and so is this story as well...

DCA is non-patentable as a compound, though a patent has been filed for its use in cancer treatment.[20] Research by Evangelos Michelakis has received no support from the pharmaceutical industry.[21] Concerns have been raised that without strong intellectual property protection, the financial incentive for drug development is reduced, and therefore obtaining sufficient funds to conduct clinical trials presents difficulty.[12][14][15][22] However, other sources of funding exist; previous studies of DCA have been funded by government organizations such as the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and by private charities (e.g. the Muscular Dystrophy Association). Recognizing anticipated funding challenges, Michelakis's lab took the unorthodox step of directly soliciting online donations to fund the research.[23] After 6 months, his lab had raised over $800,000, enough to fund a small Clinical Phase 2 study. Michelakis and Archer have applied for a patent on the use of DCA in the treatment of cancer.[20][24]

On 24 September 2007, the University of Alberta's Department of Medicine reported that after the trial funding was secured, both the Alberta local ethics committee and Health Canada approved the first DCA clinical trial for cancer.[25] This initial trial was relatively small with enrollment of up to 50 patients. The trial was completed in August 2009.[26] In May 2010 the team published a press release[27] stating no conclusions could be drawn as a result of the trial. A paper describing the results was published[28] but not linked from the press release. Only five patients had been treated with the drug during the trial.

In May 2011, online reports[29] suggested that the Alberta group had released new data which the media "had not reported". However, this appeared to be caused by confusion between dates (the previous update was May 2010[30]) and cancer charities moved quickly to counter these rumours,[31][32] which were subsequently covered in New Scientist magazine.[33]

The use of this compound as an anti-cancer agent has been patented.[34]

Cancer cells generally express increased glycolysis, because they rely on anaerobic respiration that occurs in the cytosol (lactic acid fermentation) rather than oxidative phosphorylation in the mitochondria for energy (the Warburg effect), as a result of hypoxia that exists in tumors and malfunctioning mitochondria.[10][11] Usually dangerously damaged cells kill themselves via apoptosis, a mechanism of self-destruction that involves mitochondria, but this mechanism fails in cancer cells.

A phase I study published in January 2007 by researchers at the University of Alberta, who had tested DCA on human[12] cancer cells grown in mice, found that DCA restored mitochondrial function, thus restoring apoptosis, allowing cancer cells to self-destruct and shrink the tumor.[13]

These results received extensive media attention, beginning with an article in New Scientist titled "Cheap, ‘safe’ drug kills most cancers".[12] Subsequently, the American Cancer Society and other medical organizations have received a large volume of public interest and questions regarding DCA.[14] Clinical trials in humans with cancer have not been conducted in the USA and are not yet final in Canada, emphasizing the need for caution in interpreting the preliminary results.[14][15]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some Trivia: Mitochondria are cell components (cell organelles) rather than a cell type. Mitochondria are more like nuclei (cell component) than erythrocyte (red blood cell). Most cancer cells has dysfunctional mitochondria.

Test tube and animal studies are encouraging. However, they do not always directly translate to human treatments. There is always questions of absorption, elimination, and changes to the chemical/substance within the body.

It is always preferable to wait for "clinical proof", when that is possible. Unfortunately, many patients (including myself) time has run out. The path the medical community has me/us on is short and painful. So who would blame me (and patients like me) for clutching at straws? Rick.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.