Health & Wellness

Flashback Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

Hubpages.com
Sun, 15 May 2011 17:05 UTC

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.

You can access the original research for this cancer here.

This article wants to raise awareness for this study, hope some independent companies and small startup will pick up this idea and produce these drugs, because the big companies won't touch it for a long time.

Comment: A more recently published paper can be found here.

See also:

New Scientist, February 26th, 2013: Cheap, 'safe' drug kills most cancers

Comment: It seems clear at this point that the medical industry will never find a cure for cancer. Why? Because there's just too much money being made in the cancer industry! And unfortunately its existing "best" treatments like chemotherapy don't work, and may even make cancer worse.

However, all is not lost! While cancer is a complicated disease and there are likely multiple factors at play and no silver bullet, understanding the root causes of cancer is a key to being able to cure it.

Emotional aspect of Cancer

First, it's likely that in every incidence of cancer, there are unhealed emotional wounds that need to be addressed. Long term chronic stress and an inability to say no can play significant factors in cancer development due to prolonged oxidative stress on cells from stress and compromised immunity due to the link between emotional well-being and the immune system, the nervous system and the hormonal apparatus. Dr. Gabor Maté covers this connection in his book When the Body Says No: Exploring the Stress-Disease Connection. From our article Dr. Gabor Maté: "When the Body Says No: Understanding the Stress-Disease Connection":

The Vancouver-based Dr. Gabor Maté argues too many doctors seem to have forgotten what was once a commonplace assumption, that emotions are deeply implicated in both the development of illness and in the restoration of health. Based on medical studies and his own experience with chronically ill patients at the Palliative Care Unit at Vancouver Hospital, where he was the medical coordinator for seven years, Dr. Gabor Maté makes the case there are important links between the mind and the immune system. He finds stress and individual emotional makeup play critical roles in an array of diseases, including cancer, heart disease, diabetes, irritable bowel syndrome, multiple sclerosis and arthritis.

So saying "no" and taking the time and energy to heal past emotional trauma, whether through therapy, writing to heal, body work, stress reduction techniques, and/or other methods for addressing and healing trauma could both help to cure the cancer and also help a person make different life choices that will remove them from toxic situations that contribute to cancer, while putting them into more healthy situations.

Breathing techniques for stress relief and emotional release can also help significantly, like Éiriú Eolas.

Environmental toxicity and Cancer

Next, related to toxic situations, toxic people, and toxic emotions, are environmental toxins. Due to industrialization and numerous mega corporations with a psychopathic mentality and no concern for polluting the planet, the world has become quite significantly toxic. There are a wide array of environmental toxins, ranging from synthetic chemicals, artificial sweeteners, flavors, and fats, radioactive elements (from nuclear waste and nuclear explosions), heavy metals, natural toxins that are released from energy and manufacturing industries, along with natural toxins due to parasitic microorganisms that are in our bodies, and even our own waste from metabolic processes in the body. These toxins put a stress load on the body and cause organ dysfunction and even damage, so reducing and eliminating the introduction of toxins into the body is a key to healing the body.

Avoiding toxic foods would be the first step in the process of reducing one's exposure to toxins. This includes ALL fast foods, the vast majority of prepackaged foods (check the ingredients), and foods that contain anti-nutrients (the biggest offenders being wheat especially, but all grains in general, dairy except butter and ghee, soy, legumes, and nightshades). Fast foods are loaded with agricultural toxins (primarily produced by Monsanto) and heavy metals, so this introduces a significant toxic burden on the body. As well, fast foods are inflammatory and lack nutrition, so in addition to putting stress on the body they don't provide the nutrition that the body needs to be able to heal. As well, reducing the toxins within your immediate environment (household cleaners, personal care products, soaps, shampoos, perfumes, non-stick cooking pans, etc.) - anything you use in your house, car, office, and especially put on your skin, will also help reduce the toxic burden on your body. Detoxing and improving organ function (especially the liver and kidneys) will likely be essential as part of healing from cancer.

Cancer feeds on sugar

The link between cancer and sugar consumption is very strong. For just a quick overview of some of the articles that we have on the topic:

and so on.

Sugar does a number of things that are significantly detrimental to the human body. It increases oxidative stress and since Cancer is the end state of oxidative stress and inflammation, it needs to be avoided, possibly entirely for some. Considering the huge amounts of sugar that the average person consumes, which is far, far more than our ancestors would have ever even dreamed of consuming, it should come as no surprise that we're seeing higher and higher rates of cancer in the world, and especially in America where consuming vast amounts of sugar is the norm. Reducing or eliminating sugar reduces the oxidative stress on the body and reduces inflammation, which improves organ function and deprives cancer of its food source, which limits its ability to grow.

EMF pollution linked to increase in cancer

EMF (Electromagnetic Frequency) pollution has also been consistently linked to cancer increases. The body has its own electromagnetic field and as the body is continually exposed to Wifi, cell phones, dirty AC power, and other sources of electromagnetic radiation, it disrupts the homeostasis of the body's electromagnetic field in negative ways, which can cause a variety of health problems. It's best to avoid electromagnetic radiation whenever possible, through using wired internet connections instead of Wifi, limiting cell phone usage and using a wired hands-free device (since wireless ones also broadcast electromagnetic radiation) to limit the exposure of the brain to EMF radiation, being as far away from the wireless "smart meters" as possible, and reducing any dirty power in the house as possible (consider an EMF detector to find any dirty power). This can also improve sleep, which is necessary for repairing and rejuvenating the body. Grounding yourself (also known as "earthing") can also help. For more information on EMF radiation and its link to cancer:

The link between Cancer and fungal/yeast overgrowths

Considering the sugar-craving nature of both cancer and fungal overgrowths in the body, it seems logical to suspect that there may be a link between the two in some cases. There is some evidence to support this:

At the very least, a fungal overgrowth is quite likely to accompany cancer, so testing for and treating one would improve the overall function of the body. Considering that fungi can produce some of the most toxic compounds to the human body ever observed, it would benefit the body's ability to detox by removing the fungal overgrowth. Furthermore, other pathogens (parasites, bacteria, and viruses) could also be present and reducing the body's ability to function properly and heal itself, so such issues should be considered.

Some alternative treatment options: The Ketogenic diet, Vitamin C, and Iodine

Putting it all together, the ketogenic diet, a high fat, low carbohydrate diet that focuses on meats and healthy animal fats, is a comprehensive approach to treating cancer. It reduces toxic burden on the body by cutting out the biggest contributors to toxic load (junk pseudo-foods, sugar, and inflammatory foods) on the body. It reduces oxidative stress through the reduction of toxins and sugar consumption. It also starves cancer of the sugar that it needs for its hyper-active metabolism.

It also nourishes the body by providing it with the nutrients it needs, both micro-nutrients (ie vitamins and minerals) and macro-nutrients (fat and protein). As well, despite the mainstream's demonization of meat and fat and the claims that they cause cancer, nothing could be further from the truth:

For more information on the ketogenic diet, as well as how it can be used to treat cancer, see:

In addition to the ketogenic diet, there's evidence that Vitamin C (ascorbic acid) can reduce or eliminate cancer as well. Considering the information above regarding oxidative stress and the potency of Vitamin C to reduce oxidative stress, there is a logical connection to the anti-cancerous effects of Vitamin C. The doses for Vitamin C would likely have to be quite high to have anti-cancerous effects (in the 10s or 100s of GRAMS, not milligrams), so intravenous administration may be necessary. As an alternative, it may be possible to use liposomal Vitamin C, which causes the Vitamin C to be wrapped in liposomes (fat), causing it to be absorbed by the liver and entered directly into the blood stream that way, thereby improving absorption and increasing bowel tolerance. For more information on Vitamin C as an alternative cancer treatment:

Last, but certainly not least, is iodine. Iodine is one of the most misunderstood nutrients today and we're also experiencing an epidemic of iodine deficiency due to the increase of toxic halogens (bromine, chlorine, and fluoride) that displace iodine in the body, along with the reduction of iodine availability in foods due to depleted soil and also reduced fish and seaweed consumption. As we covered in our article Iodine - Suppressed knowledge that can change your life:

Iodine is an essential micro-nutrient. This means every single cell of every single person needs it. Evolutionary biologists reckon that seafood consumption, and thus iodine absorption, played an important role in human brain development and evolution. Iodine also has excellent antibacterial, anticancer, antiparasitic, antifungal, and antiviral properties.

Unfortunately, iodine deficiency in the general population is of pandemic proportions in our modern world due to iodine's displacement in our bodies by environmental toxins such as bromide, pesticides, and food additives. Modern farming techniques have also led to deficiencies of iodine and other minerals in the soil. Thus, crops grown in iodine-deficient soil are deficient in iodine.

Certain diets and lifestyles can also predispose a person to develop iodine deficiency. Those who eat a lot of bakery products (breads, pasta, etc), which contain high amounts of bromide, are at risk. So are vegetarians and those who don't like sea food, sea vegetables or salt.

According to Dr. Brownstein, author of Iodine: Why You Need It, Why You Can't Live Without It, about one-third of the global populations live in a region of iodine deficiency. He and other iodine researchers have tested thousands of people, and found consistent results: approximately 96% of patients test low for iodine. The World Health Organization has recognized that iodine deficiency is the world's greatest single cause of preventable mental retardation. Iodine deficiency has been identified as a significant public health problem in 129 countries and up to 72% of the world's population is affected by an iodine deficiency disorder.

Iodine is generally needed in milligram doses, rather than the microgram (1/100 milligram) doses that are recommended to prevent goiter, especially due to the prevalence of the toxic halogens discussed above. Since every cell needs iodine to function properly and since it has anti-cancer and anti-pathogenic properties, in addition to being a fairly potent detoxifier and stimulating metabolism, it should be an essential tool for any type of anti-cancer treatment. For additional information on the role iodine plays in combating cancer:

For even more information on cancer:

Reader Comments

l_e_cox · 2011-05-15T21:44:06Z

Some links to related material

The university of Alberta has a page on DCA. But it dates from 2007.

[Link]
With the help of wikipedia, here's a 2010 update that is encouraging.

[Link]
This Canadian research team seems to be the only one anywhere working on this particular alternative therapy.

Good Optics · 2014-02-15T02:42:29Z

And here's the abstract from the paper [Link] -ed to in the article text above:

Abstract

Solid tumors, including the aggressive primary brain cancer glioblastoma multiforme, develop resistance to cell death, in part as a result of a switch from mitochondrial oxidative phosphorylation to cytoplasmic glycolysis. This metabolic remodeling is accompanied by mitochondrial hyperpolarization. We tested whether the small-molecule and orphan drug dichloroacetate (DCA) can reverse this cancer-specific metabolic and mitochondrial remodeling in glioblastoma. Freshly isolated glioblastomas from 49 patients showed mitochondrial hyperpolarization, which was rapidly reversed by DCA. In a separate experiment with five patients who had glioblastoma, we prospectively secured baseline and serial tumor tissue, developed patient-specific cell lines of glioblastoma and putative glioblastoma stem cells (CD133+, nestin+ cells), and treated each patient with oral DCA for up to 15 months. DCA depolarized mitochondria, increased mitochondrial reactive oxygen species, and induced apoptosis in GBM cells, as well as in putative GBM stem cells, both in vitro and in vivo. DCA therapy also inhibited the hypoxia-inducible factor–1α, promoted p53 activation, and suppressed angiogenesis both in vivo and in vitro. The dose-limiting toxicity was a dose-dependent, reversible peripheral neuropathy, and there was no hematologic, hepatic, renal, or cardiac toxicity. Indications of clinical efficacy were present at a dose that did not cause peripheral neuropathy and at serum concentrations of DCA sufficient to inhibit the target enzyme of DCA, pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase II, which was highly expressed in all glioblastomas. Metabolic modulation may be a viable therapeutic approach in the treatment of glioblastoma.

Good Optics · 2014-02-15T02:44:01Z

The links above . . .

. . . ask for a password ? ?

psychegram · 2011-05-15T22:13:58Z

Interesting

This appears to have gone viral ... popped up on FB this morning, too.

Here's the U of A web page relating to this:

[Link]
And the New Scientist story:

[Link]

Rabelais · 2011-05-16T02:05:56Z

The media

Pharmaceutical advertising is the biggest spender in media advertising. I doubt that the mainstream media will give this story the tailwind it deserves. Hopefully the internet will provide the exposure that this discovery should receive. It is an incredible medical breakthrough. I wonder if supplementary DCA would provide protection from developing cancer?

StrictlyGenteel · 2011-05-16T07:36:54Z

Another DMSO?

Remember the dimethyl sufoxide business? It featured recently in Sott Focus: [Link]
DMSO is in the same situation. Unpatentable but very useful medicine, increasingly hard to obtain as it gets outlawed around the world, simply because there's no money in it and it presents competition.

Sadly, I guess DCA will go the same way.

jubazo · 2011-05-17T18:00:05Z

Another excellent article

Bravo Sott, but what a shame for media industry, big pharma and science to put this kind of research under the carpet!!!!

lilylavida · 2011-05-18T02:17:21Z

There are many Cancer cures out there...

Yes, if it doesn't make money and could potentially make people better then we'll ignore it. That is what Big Pharma does. We need to start questioning our Doctors more and asking for alternatives that is the ONLY way we will bring Big Pharma to a realisation - they can't dictate to us. Read Ty Bollinger's book "Cancer - Think Outside the Box". Very well researched, easy to read and FULL of Cancer cures. We just have to be brave and know that that toxic medicines being forced on us as cures aren't our answer. Here is Ty's link [Link]

daraddishman · 2011-05-22T15:39:48Z

Do read the literature first...

There is some serious controversy over this DCA stuff. Mostly a lack of larger scale trials. Even the researchers themselves levy some serious cautions about what they are finding, saying that it is VERY preliminary and that many more trials need to be done to understand what is going on here. The specific trial(s) being sited in this article are from 2007 ( animal tests ) and 2010 ( very small scale human tests on brain tumors only ).

From the research update on the University of Alberta website:

"No conclusions can be made on whether the drug is safe or effective in patients with this form of brain cancer, due to the limited number of patients tested by the study's leads Drs Michelakis and Petruk. Researchers emphasize that use of DCA by patients or physicians, supplied from for-profit sources or without close clinical observation by experienced medical teams in the setting of research trials, is not only inappropriate but may also be dangerous." ( [Link])

Original research is found here: [Link]
Free abstract is found here: [Link]

Baybars · 2015-08-31T20:07:03Z

You will not get 'larger scale trials' unless somebody is willing to spend the money and since the results of these trials, even if successful will not generate anyone an income, nobody is stepping up to the plate. Are you going to fund the trials my dear?

This is where things like returning the bank of Canada to the people of Canada [Link] and getting rid of the corporate mentality that dominates Canadian politics [Link] become important. If Canadians could borrow money from Canada and not the World Bank then there would be funds available for testing. Canadians also need to control the influence of the GlaxoSmithKlines and the Baxters of the world before the mandatory vaccination law arrives or they impose a fine for selling echinacea like Australia tried [Link]

System · 2011-05-22T20:12:32Z

Cures for Cancer? Been there, done that.

Previous "cures for cancer" ran into a lot of road blocks...
Gaston Naessens 714x/714x; Dr. Livingston-Wheeler [deceased](cancer is a virus); Dr. Royal Rife [deceased] (cancer is a virus); Dr. Kurt Donsbach (Ozone Therapy, and other therapies); and many other researchers.

Not to mention that a couple of these researchers made the most powerful microscopes of their day.

Road blocks, road blocks.

grifcha · 2011-12-28T16:46:39Z

Mitochondria

Just for the sake of accuracy, mitochondria are not "cells", as the author states. They are organelle - subsections that act as the 'organs' of certain cells. Mitochondrial organelle are found in all but the most basic cells and serve a variety of functions.

I don't have the appropriate background to elaborate further, but the Wikipedia article is well developed, for starters.

Aside from that, I look forward to following this treatment as it develops.

I recommend the article be amended to reflect this small but important point. Cheers.

Rexx · 2016-02-08T02:01:04Z

done any research into this?

[Link]

Rexx · 2016-02-08T02:02:54Z

oopps - sorry hit wrong reply button, my question,

done any research into this?
[Link]

was meant for the Preposterous Whatever cancer researcher.

Whatever · 2011-12-30T14:50:12Z

Preposterous!

I was forwarded this article on facebook and feel highly compelled to comment. I would like to point out that I am not a regular reader of this website (which upon further inspection seems to be full of highly erroneous information about cancer research). Nevertheless, here is my response:

This article is a ridiculous embellishment, and factually flawed. I'm not a fan of pharma either, but i am a cancer researcher. The original manuscript referenced describes tissue based work and a one arm non randomized administration of DCA to 5 people with a rare type of treatment resistant brain cancer. There is absolutely no data to support efficacy (is is simply a safety study) and certainly no evidence that this treatment is a "cure for cancer", just that it worked well in petri dishes and it didn't appear to make five people sicker than they already were (but there was no control group for comparison). That the pharmaceutical industry might not pursue this particular compound due to patent issues does not change the fact that cell metabolism pathways are the most important areas for drug development in solid tumor therapy and it is highly erroneous to imply that these pathways are not being explored
in attempt to kill cancer (via reactivation of apoptosis, anti-angiogenesis, etc), because this is the basis for most modern targeted cancer therapy. Finally, why is this being viewed as another opportunity to rip on pharma? It should be seen as a victory over pharma that a drug that is inexpensive and highly available *might* have the same properties as the most expensive therapies in the pipeline. Clinical trials are not limited to the pharmaceutical industry, any researcher can conduct them given appropriate ethical approval. If the research continues to be positive, the lack of involvement by pharma could be one of the best things to happen for accessible treatment options in solid tumor patients...

Baybars · 2015-08-31T20:13:27Z

I am very glad to hear that you are pursuing new pathways to a cure but sad that you don't control the purse strings that determine which pathway gets the most attention.

It would seem that ethical approval must come from the same people who determine which treatments to use on the patients but those people wont budge on their dogmatic approach to cancer treatment until clinical trials are completed but the trials wont be completed because ethical approval has not been given...You see, without somebody coming up with the money the merry-go-round will continue ad nausium until people forget about the discovery.

Ruth · 2016-08-07T06:25:08Z

I wonder if you are familiar with the work of Dr Nick Gonzales? His experience with the way 'mainstream science' actively sabotages research which doesn't further their often undeclared aims is rather interesting.
[Link]

(World War One trench warfare, he calls it.)

GeorgeVulcouhn · 2011-12-30T15:27:31Z

Cancer has been cured a long time ago

I don't know if this is a cure for cancer but the previous poster is oblivious. His knowledge of anything is limited by what he is taught by a corrupt system of money and deceit. Big pharma are so powerful, there is so much money involved they think they can do whatever they want. There's so much money involved in the horrific fraud that is modern cancer treatment that these psychopathic people think they can do whatever they want.

There's many cures for cancers. Marijuana is a cure for cancer. Has the previous poster, being a cancer researcher bothered to look into the data regarding marijuana use and cancer? Let me guess. There is none or it's inconclusive or blah blah, etc, etc. Absolutely pathetic. Or how about the vitamin b-17? Of course that's also b.s. right?

Listen you fools. There's billions, not millions, billions, of dollars spent on P.R. in this world. Dollars spent on keeping you all lazy and stupid. If there's data out there that proves that something a huge multinational does or sells is not so good you bet your fat ass there's going to be P.R. to say otherwise. And usually that is what wins out. People are like rats scurrying around in a maze. That is how these "elite" view us. Are they wrong? Think about that. Really.

People keep asking, why don't big pharma do this, why doesn't government do that? Stop asking that question. It's a joke. Even if you knew why they're doing it, which is obvious, because they're psychopathic pigs who just care about money and are seemingly completely removed from the objective truth of our oneness with the universe and unlimited love, would it really matter? The fact is they are doing it. Big pharma is completely messing up everything. Just like big oil, big everything. That's what they do. They're insane. End of conversation.

What we're supposed to be doing is looking for alternatives. If someone is doing something really insane, the proper thing to do isn't to ask them to stop and do the right thing. You can ask them and maybe they'll change maybe not but that's not the point. All we've been doing, as a collective society, is "asking" these large corporate structures to change. Forget that. Ignore them and DO IT YOURSELF.

IGNORE THE INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE OF INSANITY AND DO THINGS YOURSELVES! Organize with people who are doing the right things and do it! Just shut up and do it.

gore · 2011-12-30T15:54:32Z

Very well said. Thank you.

ligero · 2014-02-14T10:39:30Z

Exactly. My husband was diagnosed with "cancer" 16 years ago. He "cured" himself. That is how we met. I was on a similar tour with a diagnosis of diabetes. Interestingly enough, we used the same "cure" for both.

There was a point when we had a health forum to share info about what we did to reverse our diagnosis. What we found was that there is a relentless and dedicated network of people who sniff out any public claim or discussion on the internet (no matter how small) of alternate treatment to cancer. It is clear that the medical authorities already know the cure (which they don't use or even tell you about) and they know that other people have figured it out. They just don't want that info spreading around. Their approach varies but their message is always the same. Their message is that I am a dangerous paranoid delusional kook for everything I just said in this comment and that you are too if you believe me.

HLove10 · 2015-02-23T09:32:14Z

Please Send A Cure

I think a lot of people will cure their cancers by the help from others. Some people have found successful ways and are willing to help others and won't ask for a fee or donation. But I am sure if someone uses the method to cure their cancer they will be willing to give the person something in return. If anyone wants to share their methods with me please do. I am on the fight as well.
ligero if you don't mind please send me your forum info. Thanks

jonathan2020 · 2011-12-30T16:27:54Z

Here we go again....

"I would like to point out that I am not a regular reader of this website (which upon further inspection seems to be full of highly erroneous information about cancer research)...." from "Whatever"

First off for someone who wants to be taken seriously they call themselves Whatever...second such a chronic "plant" and nay sayer we have yet to hear.... Let's play this game in 2012 - Hunt the Shill or Big Corp "plant" - Most may find it easier than than the card game Snap but much more invigorating.... have a good one one and all....and as for those that hang to the tail coats of Big Pharma, Fat Footsie, Crappy Corps and Flawed Flatulent One Percenters.... bye bye ol' buggers... go meet the dinosaurs who were far more intelligent as they stayed the course millions of years longer than you.

RecklessAtBest · 2011-12-30T16:43:24Z

Sorry Guys, this thing's BOGUS:

After just taking a molecular pathogenesis of cancer class this past semester, it makes me sad to say the writers of this paper do not know much about the function of the apoptotic pathway in cancer cells. The intrinsic (self) and extrinsic(from the outside) pathways of cell suicide are activated by mitochondrial cytochrome C release, which cascade with other enzymes activating the caspase 8, 9 pathways which cleave all the cells protein, killing it. However, a cancer cell, being a cancer cell, will have this pathway cut off--irreversibly--simply because it otherwise it would have been killed before it became cancer. The extrinsic pathway will be cut off due to faulty receptors or cascading proteins, and the intrinsic pathway--even if the mitochondria are "activated" and cytochrome C is released, will be to no avail because the cell either wont listen to the death signal, has an amplification of repressors to the apoptotic signal (BCL2, BCL XL), or the DNA coding for the proteins necessary to carry out the caspase activity of cleaving proteins has been mutated/deleted/rendered non-functional. Unfortunately, the first step toward cancer is an immortalizing event. Later, come proto-oncogene mutations leading to uncontrolled division. This means, the mitochondrial apoptotic pathway is destroyed. It isn't simply dormant, waiting to be turned on. Its like being asked to drive a car when its missing nearly all its parts, and has other parts that are deformed and beyond functional.

The Laughing Man · 2012-01-23T01:04:42Z

Fine. What do you have to say about THIS then, or the fact that it is in New Scientist?
[Link][Link]

Lipophiliac · 2014-10-29T00:26:49Z

I'm sorry, but here's where you're deluded and ignorant (and, if unintentionally, arrogant), regarding the supposed 'truth' you're asserting with your view here:

With all due respect (to the study you've done): you're just a robot. A little robot, in a big army, who's been told a certain static, and (by virtue of the nature of scientific research), inevitably outdated, body of scientific information (and observation).

Bravo - you've summarised the information you've been taught, and admirably proven your ability to learn, memorise and regurgitate said information like a good, (confirming) A-grade student. That's all you've proven in your comment above.

But do you HONESTLY think, what you've learned, is necessarily the END OF THE CONVERSATION forevermore, as if new research can't bring new possibilities or even reversals or previously-held assumptions due to things being studied now simply not having been studied before???

Have you actually DONE any first-hand lab RESEARCH (on the topic of this article's study - apoptosis) yourself??? I'm guessing, no. So then, ALL you've learnt, is existing information observed BEFORE the study here published by Bonnet et al. and, foolishly - simply asserting - that 'just because x new research defies what y existing body of accepted knowledge says', it must be, by definition, therefore wrong.

THAT'S ALL YOU'RE SAYING!!!

And this is what the hordes of unthinking scientific sheep (or, again, robots), ALWAYS cry out with EVERY TIME some new, brilliant, (but textbook-changing) discovery is made in the world of science. and it is PATHETIC.

They smugly think they know it all, (when, all they know is what they've been taught!), they've been told from day one at college that they're the elite scientists and everyone else are ignorant 'non-scientists' beneath them, and it is actually disabling to science's progress itself.

I don't know why most scientists seem to LOVE things to be 'set in stone' but for whatever reason the modern world of factory-manufactured scientific pursuit seems to attract people who love to conform, and almost just plug re-arrange like early telephone switchboard operators or early computers punching 1's and 0's, and to most of them, frankly it's just another job alongside engineering or programming and everything's black and white and stable and oh-so-left-brain friendly, now. Everything's set and certain, and it's so comforting to rest in that stability of how apparently the universe works around you.

The whole culture is that 'what you learn is gospel', and for whatever reasons that has come about, (nefariously or just unfortunately/foolishly), its effect is that of UTTER UNSCIENTIFICNESS.

It is the greatest deception within the world of science that it itself is immune from human bias, nature, emotion, and corruption.

Scientists who merely want to learn - and not discover - are the ones who science serves but do not serve science.

RecklessAtBest · 2011-12-30T16:47:54Z

Furthermore:

It is not the DCA that's missing in starting an apoptotic response. It actually has no play in the pathway whatsoever. It is other, real, parts of the mitochondrial cytochrome C pathway that are messed up in cancer. And in cancer, those things are missing/deformed, that's why the cancer cell is immortal and cannot die. Maybe you should look up what that pathway entails/looks like.

nb198130 · 2011-12-30T19:42:05Z

Of course

Thats great, but of course these big pharmaceuticals aren't going to give it recognition because then that makes them lose money. It isn't about saving a life, its about a paycheck for them, fattening they're bank account. If it was they're loved one, then they would no doubt give that person a cheaper guaranteed medicine so they dont go through the hell of the more expensive procedures and medicines. Its all about the money for them, everything is, and the thing is, the people here are getting more and more lazier and stupid, they just believe whatever they tell them. Everything is making people lazier, they improve on something then find a way to make it lazier. Then when your overweight and have these health problems you get to spend money on medicine to make you "feel better". It's a load of crap.

RecklessAtBest · 2011-12-30T22:27:20Z

Your labeling of a whole industry of people you know nothing about but make assumptions on falls not much shorter than racism.

ligero · 2014-02-14T10:42:20Z

RecklessAtBeast, you have given away the game with this comment and you really need to look up and understand the word racism.

System · 2011-12-31T00:14:31Z

RE: Sorry Guys, this thinsg BOGUS

You just were taught this and you know so much about it? man what a laugh

jenosauraus · 2014-02-18T16:13:18Z

How else do you propose people gain information? Is there a specified amout of time between when you learn something before you can say it?!

shiver · 2011-12-31T21:00:47Z

Some truth, but lots of bad info

Knowing about what a school book tells you about cancer does not mean you know cancer. There's reality, and then there's the story about reality. You need to be very careful about what you accept as your truth. Do you accept that there are electrons? Can you show me one? All this BS about scientists wanting double blind placebo controls and "there's just not enough evidence". Show me a picture of an electron! Why no controversy there? If a theory is repeated enough, it starts to get treated as fact. Like I say, be careful what you accept as your truth, as it will affect all subsequent judgements and assessments further down the line. If it wasn't a double blind study, why not use the rest of the population of the planet as your control group? Not enough people for statistical significance?

I wouldn't call DCA a cancer cure, but it's been around for a long time and it certainly can help in a lot of cases. I think the most likely way it is helping most is that it blocks the lactic acid (waste product from glucose fermentation) which has to go back to the liver to be converted (at great energetic expense to the body) back to glucose. This is why cachexia in late stage cancer is so fast. The person literally wastes away in the last couple of week as the process accelerates, as anyone who has observed someone die of cancer will be all too aware of (even if they've never read the school book explanation, and don't claim to be an expert or have letters after their name).

There are many more mitochondria in a cancerous cell (about 20 times), on account of its huge need for sugar (since it's not burning it with oxygen as normal, but fermenting it which is very inefficient).

For anyone that's reading this hoping for a cure for a cancer condition for them or someone they care about now, explore DCA for sure, but also explore Cesium Chloride, Budwig diet (please don't dismiss that one just because it's a 'diet', it's extremely effective), Gerson, Oleander, herb robert etc. There's many more.

There are many weaknesses in a cancer cell, and it's not insurmountable the way popular medicine would have us believe. There are several distinctions between a cancerous cell and a normal one, such as the mitochondrial angle mentioned above, or the enzyme P450 1B1 (from Cytochrome CYP1B1). There's stuff in the skins of natural fruit that will target this. Yeah that stuff, *Food*, remember that? Well it's not there now, because the way the fruit/veg develops the salvesterols in its skin that are so useful to the animal that eats them, is part of it's own immune system, when insects or fungi attack the fruit it develops this immune system. Us smart humans want fruit without flaws in its appearance and we spray it with chemicals. This keeps the insects/fugus away, but it also takes away the challenge to the fruit to develop its own immune system, so when the human eats it, (s)he's not getting that benefit. That's just one of a thousand ways we're spiralling down the plug hole.

As for it all being driven by money, I disagree. For the average person on the street where a million is a lot of money, they're controlled by money. They'll work for hundreds a week doing something they don't enjoy, just so they can comply with the system and use that money to buy said useless fruit. For those that are running this show (not government, big pharma, countries (which are corporations technically), but families that are behind all that). To them money is a joke. It's like a piece of tinsel to a kitten. Their power/control motivation is far more insidious than just owning numbers in a computer. In fact I'll gift you some numbers in a computer right now. 1234567890. Happy new year.

The Laughing Man · 2012-01-23T01:11:02Z

I've already posted several comments basically the same to attract more attention to the real root of the issue here. I hope you will take a look and get back to me

cgsarebeast · 2012-01-01T04:40:51Z

There are many cures & preventions

Cancer is a VERY hyped up misunderstood disease, Im gunna look into this this is very interesting, but cannabis, mdma, turmeric, milk thistle, and many other natural herbs & super foods, a diet rich in real nutrition & super foods will prevent it, so will using cannabis, our endocannabinoids are our natural defense ageist caner also which is why cannabis cures cancer, cannabis supplements our endocannabinoids with its own the only 2 sources found naturally with a system tied into just about every system in our body's

Vikki · 2012-01-02T04:28:38Z

NOT ACCURATE AT ALL

There are many things in that article that are just plain WRONG. Mitochondia are repeatedly referred to as cells. They are in no way cells, they are organelles - parts of a cell. That's like saying a liver or a lung is a whole human!

In fact this whole paragraph is CONFUSED!:

"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" ????

What you mean is cancer cells make their energy by glycolysis instead of making it in the mitochondria. If you swich them to using the mitochondria, they kill themselves (apoptosis). Why this long confused para?

Basically even if a drug is going to come out of this, it's going to have to go through years and years of health and safety legal stuff. Then, as with many treatments today, you find the cancer becomes resistant to the apoptosis signal and, having shrunk initially, starts getting bigger again.
This article is misleading.

The Laughing Man · 2012-01-23T01:06:18Z

Well here is the REAL sources, second-hand and first hand:
[Link][Link]
Now come back and tell me something is wrong

Preemo · 2012-01-02T09:38:37Z

It's Mostly B-S

I was glad to read "whatever" and "recklessatbest's" comments on this, as they highlighted some of the poor science used to construct this story. I think the other major flaw is based on the assumptions about the way Pharma companies conduct their business.

At the top level, Pharma companies are motivated by profits, and their controlling officers make the majority of their decisions based on achieving the growth of their business. So yes, in this most basic sense it may be easy to call them "evil" because their industry is one where human wellness should take priority over profits.

However, in the labs of these companies, we find dedicated and passionate scientists and medical professionals who are committed to finding cures and helping people live healthier lives.

Pharma companies are not organizations that exist in their own little bubbles, and they very rarely work alone. Much of their research is done in collaboration with smaller companies or academic institutions. They often share molecules and research with independent labs to enable them to carry out trials that would be to costly otherwise.

The patent issue described in this story is not really an issue at all. In this case, the "ownership" of the drug wouldn't necessarily come from the compound itself, but rather the delivery method that the company would develop to administer the treatment. But again, if a scientist working at one of Pfizer's Centers for Therapeutic Innovation completed clinical trials on a compound that actually cured cancer there is nothing that would stop them from delivering it to the market. Even if Merck, Eli Lilly, BMS, and Johnson & Johnson all released clones of the same compound, they would still make a fortune. The PR value would be reason enough to do it.

As an occupy protester, I was fully ashamed to read someone bringing the rhetoric of the occupy movement into this poorly written and researched article.

jrosales89 · 2012-01-02T17:14:11Z

Scarcity vs. Abundance

any scarcity mentality now is going to be, what I call 'the age of the bypass' - it's going to get bypassed by the cooperative abundant framework of 'sharing is having more' ... that's just where it's going to go

pharma companies are in scarcity. they fund and control the medical journals and medical schools.
new cancer cure research has intention of 'getting out there - let's share it'.
the age of the bypass - in time, the systems that aren't working will be obsolete and the new cooperative network will emerge.

mosaicvic · 2012-01-02T19:02:56Z

The Moral Question

The problem I have with cancer is that we have no choice now. Cancer Prevention is impossible and if a cure is being held back because of the lack of capital gains then, we have to reconsider how medicine and economics operate. In order for us to pursue Prosperity and Liberty we must remain healthy. Are Alzheimer victims being denied better treatment? Diabetes? Are we being Guinea Pigs to the medical industry? Who came up with this plan? If this is the case then we need a major War to end this system as we know it. My sister quit The American Cancer Society when she realized donations were paying for her gas, her hotel rooms, her lunches, and expenses as well as the thousands of other employees hotels, lunches, gas, and expenses. Where was the rest of the money going?

jrosales89 · 2012-01-02T23:07:16Z

I see where you're coming from...
The current medical/pharma system will continue the way it is, and will only be shifted by design revolution - not political or social revolution... We cannot fight a dysfunctional system, we can only create a new one... It will happen, there is just a lag (gestation rate) on this... Us being individuals can change communities, communities change nations, nations change the world - be a trimtab.
What happened in Egypt is classic - through our networks, we can bypass the scarcity mentality of corporations and politics, and cooperate and converge in support of a system that works for 100% of humanity.

jrosales89 · 2012-01-02T23:13:57Z

Cancer: the Forbidden Cures - Full Documentary

[Link]
this documentary points out a lot re cancer cures which have been supressed...

Jerry Simon · 2012-01-03T09:16:02Z

Cannabis cures cancer?

"Cancer is a VERY hyped up misunderstood disease, Im gunna look into this this is very interesting, but cannabis, mdma, turmeric, milk thistle, and many other natural herbs & super foods, a diet rich in real nutrition & super foods will prevent it, so will using cannabis, our endocannabinoids are our natural defense ageist caner also which is why cannabis cures cancer, cannabis supplements our endocannabinoids with its own the only 2 sources found naturally with a system tied into just about every system in our body's"

It's not very easy to understand this very long and badly-written sentence, but I THINK you're saying that cannabis cures cancer.
Uh huh...
- so Bob Marley just didn't smoke enough then?

Boboren · 2012-01-03T20:19:07Z

Rick Simpson's Run From The Cure

Whether this article is true or not, there are other cures out that are being ignored by the pharmaceutical companies.

If you haven't already seen this video, please take the time to watch "Rick Simpson's Run From The Cure"

[Link]

vodkahabit · 2012-01-04T19:42:58Z

TPV research

I have been reading about other Cancer research that came out of UBC, and the patents were bought by a US firm, a bunch of researchers I think. They formed a company called Tampimmune website Tapimmune.com if you want to know more.

The whole idea - and are going into Phase I clinical trials with the MAYO clinic on HER2 breast cancer research, but more importantly the idea is applicable to any cancer or even immunotherapy in general, i.e. aiding immune responses to anything really.

The basic simple concept? Cancer cells receptors are not found by our immune system, so our body cannot fight it properly. The idea they have tested in preclinical work, already has shown a 100-1000 increase in the ability of our body to find and respond to cancerous cells, or possibly in fighting many viral infections.

It is so simple. Raise the immune response by many multiples, and let our body be able to win the battle against foreign entities. I am hoping they prove the efficacy through their trials, and squash cancer and other ailments from killing us before we reach a ripe old age.

Cheers

ThisIsAJoke · 2012-01-05T01:31:49Z

The Problem Is

Now I don't no much about cancer but from the sounds of things this article is complete B.S. It just quickly states something that obviously is going to get attention from people. Everyone wants a cure for cancer, even the big pharm companies if they could make one they would they would find a way to make money out of it or if big pharm couldn't smaller companies would be able to. The fact is this article is a cool sounding story but full of holes and misinformation but with such a controversial message if it gets out on Facebook millions will come here and buy the t-shirts this site sells, buy the hundreds of different conspiracy books this site sells subscribe to all their paid stuff and probably go to other similar sites that do the same thing. These sites that are supposidly all about exposing corruption are actually just as corrupt as the big pharm and all the other companies. They are just trying to get your money sure its not going to make as much money as selling drugs but its still an easy way to learn a substantial living.
Like curing cancer is HUGE if these guys new that It was possible and it was being repressed and they actually had a solid case for it and also had a desire better then any other money making company to cure it they would dedicate all their time just to that but instead you gotta find out about kennedy, 911, we never landed on the moon. Like come on why are all these "Conspiracy sites" So similar and how many people that have no education on what they are learning take it all from these places that tell you that whatever you learned in University or College is totally cooked information to send you on a wild goosechase but somehow these guys behind the letters know it all. Its just a joke sorry guys maybe this will help cure cancer maybe it won't but sites like these will do nothing but take your money. I bet they'll even delete this comment

wytebear · 2012-01-07T01:37:14Z

SOTT's not in the habit of deleting comments, no matter how misguided, unless they violate a legality or are offensive in some way.

The Laughing Man · 2012-01-23T01:08:21Z

Regardless of the terribility (fake word XD ) of this article, there are the New Scientist article and the REAL paper on the subject. These should have been the original sources for the post, but alas. Some of us just have better google fu i suppose *shrug*
[Link][Link]
Now come back and tell me something is wrong

Omnitank · 2012-01-06T18:17:41Z

Lack of Factual Veracity

This article could use a looking over by someone who actually knows a bit more about science and the functional mechanisms of dichloroacetate. Just basic revision I would like to point out: The mitochondria is not a cell. It is an organelle. It certainly cannot be accurately characterized as a cancer fighting cell, since its primary function is to provide nucleoside triphosphates such as ATP for the cell. The theme of the article, that an effective cancer treatment is largely overlooked by pharmaceutical companies due to its lack of profit potential, is accurate. However, the article itself is mostly biased and sensationalized.

JustSayin · 2012-01-10T08:23:57Z

Let's be real...

I'm not a huge fan of Pharma, but this is just bad journalism. If you want to be taken seriously, you can't just run on hype and sensationalism. We are at a stage in our societal development where it's become fashionable to blame "them" (pharma, government, religion, bankers, whoever). It takes very little evidence to create a frenzy and we aren't particularly analytical in our opinions. Our education has been so watered down that many don't have the slightest idea how to evaluate information. So, let's take just a little time to consider a few things...

1. When you say "Pharma", you are actually talking about human beings. They have families. They have children with leukemia, wives and daughters with breast cancer, husbands and sons with lung and colon cancer. They have parents w/ Alzheimer's. If they are men over 60, they probably have prostate cancer. It's illogical to think that they care more about "profits" than cures.

2. A great deal of research is funded by NIH, not Pharma. NIH is part of a federal government. They make no profits from chemo treatments. AND... they get cancer too. You really think they are turning a blind eye?

3. The federal government is going broke. From a financial perspective, they NEED cures. The politician who presides over the curing of cancer will be a powerful person. And remember, only a very small fraction of government employees are "elected" (and potentially gaming the system). The rest are average Joe's and Joanne's... who get cancer and/or care for those with cancer.

4. This study is about as basic as it gets. My middle school son could have done a better job. No control group. VERY limited numbers. Oooohhh... I killed cells in a petri dish. What? Tumors shrunk. Wow. Did they actually disappear? Forever? Or did they start growing again 3 months later (as is often the case). It hasn't been repeated anywhere else, meaning it's not a 'validated' study.

5. It doesn't take much investigation to discover that Pharma actually IS looking at the same pathways to curing disease. It's one of the most promising approaches. Triggering the body to identify and kill cancer cells has been the goal for YEARS.

6. There is an assumption that the only money to be made is by Pharma. Listen, if someone (or some hospital) comes up with a "cure" for breast cancer or some other cancer... they money will POOR in.

7. There is also an assumption that ALL hospitals stand to lose money with cures. But MANY hospitals don't make their revenue on treating cancer. They have little to lose by curing cancer. Why wouldn't THEY want to go down in history as the place that cured breast cancer.

8. We hear about JAMA and New England Journal. They have a great deal of say in what gets published and what doesn't. They also influence (albeit indirectly) where the research goes. One could argue that they are part of the conspiracy, but "why"? And even if they were, there are countless other very solid medical journals that would love to scoop the study that cures cancer.

We've become a very cynical country (myself included). But I've decided to be a little more thoughtful and analytical in my cynicism. This article fails the sniff test. That said, I would be THRILLED to find out that they are really on to something... I'm getting older myself and would love to know there are cures out there!

And no, I'm not a "plant". Just a dad home w/ a sick kid who had a little time to kill.

PEACE

The Laughing Man · 2012-01-23T01:21:56Z

FIRST of all, it's POUR.
Well here is the REAL sources, second-hand and first hand:
[Link][Link]
Now come back and tell me something is wrong

bionerd · 2012-01-27T13:26:11Z

Relax, people

It's hard for me to understand why these conspiracy theories continue. I have a PhD in biology and have studied cancer biology for almost 10 years. I promise you that there's no cure for cancer anywhere on the horizon. We just don't understand cancer well enough yet. In fact, I doubt there will never be one drug that cures all >100 different types of cancers. Lung cancer and breast cancer, for example, are totally different diseases.

Also, I can tell you about a LOT of drugs that have shown to kill cancer cells in a petri dish or in lab animals. Until they can work in a human being, you can't get too excited.

Lastly, it's simply not true that pharma wouldn't be interested in something that actually helps cancer patients, patent or not. As a commenter noted above, the PR benefit alone would be invaluable. Additionally, many pharma companies have divisions that produce generic drugs now. So if people are willing to pay for it, (even if forced to sell it cheap due to competition) there's no question that at least a few of them would make it. But given how large the cancer patient pool is (>12 million in the US alone), they'd be all over it.

Regardless, even if it were true that pharma isn't interested, there would be dozens of labs and hospitals around the world running small clinical trials in humans to see if it works. It's not that difficult to convince a doc to try something "off label" in a terminally ill patient. They're obviously desperate for anything that will prolong their life. A quick check of clinicaltrials.gov (a database of nearly every clinical trial that is happening) shows that it is indeed being studied in human trials by a number of institutions (none are pharma, though). Expect them to swoop in if the results are good.

alex · 2015-08-07T07:52:57Z

I am curious to know what are your opinions on the research done by Dr. June at Penn, involving genetically modified T-cells of the patient acquired by transfusion. The research was initially by grants, but is now, slowly, starting to get financing from the likes of Novartis; however, it remains to be seen if this private input will expedite or slow down the therapy's accessibility to cancer patients.

More frankly,
Why is it that a dying person, and we all know someone, cannot even try such a therapy when it could easily and quickly be made available through any descent clinical lab in the world.

bionerd · 2012-01-27T13:48:13Z

Hmmm..

Now what I find suspicious is that this group from Canada completed a clinical trial (in people with brain cancer [glioblastoma multiforme]) in August 2009 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00540176?term=dichloroacetate&rank=5) and there's still no published article anywhere in the medical/scientific literature. That usually means that the study findings were negative (ie. DCA didn't work). Trust me, a group that can publish its preclinical work in a prestigious science journal like Cancer Cell, will find a journal to publish their work--or they'd just post it on their website for the world to see. That doesn't mean that it won't work in other cancer types, but again, I wouldn't get too excited until we see results in humans.

harneet · 2012-01-28T06:54:45Z

What do you have to lose

Of course there is a lot of controversy surrounding DCA. There is a lot of controversy surrounding just about everything. If I was dying of cancer and the doctors said there is nothing they can do for me I would be more than willing to try something like DCA.

Here is one persons experience with it, this is from a medical journal, not some quack site. It is well worth reading
[Link]

dimichsdg · 2012-04-05T21:47:45Z

This article is summary ...

and may look unrealistic to self-called "I have studied this for 10 year" or "I just finished a course of being told everything about cell in university and now know everything".
But thanks to their comments, The Laughing Man responded to with really nice two links that shows ignorance of the above mentioned people.
Thanks, The Laughing Man!

FreakingNutz · 2012-04-30T04:04:14Z

i know nothing. but at least i act like it.

"I promise you that there's no cure for cancer anywhere on the horizon. We just don't understand cancer well enough yet. In fact, I doubt there will never be one drug that cures all >100 different types of cancers. Lung cancer and breast cancer, for example, are totally different diseases."-bionerd.

1) "i doubt there will never be one drug that cures all..." means that you think that there will be.

2) "i promise you...we just dont understand cancer well enough yet." means that you know almost nothing about it; therefore, cannot affirmatively say that a cure cannot currently exist or possibly might exist in the near future

3) a cure means that you eventually stop treatment. they would make more off of 1000 people not getting cured using ridiculously overpriced treatments than 12 million people paying fair prices for generic medicine

4) you quoted a .gov and the government wants us to pay our taxes and die as soon as possible when we are not. so saving millions of lives is not likely on their agenda.

FreakingNutz · 2012-04-30T04:12:52Z

ps: not to mention big pharma lobbyists and such for number 4.

Rush · 2012-08-10T01:19:43Z

Can stage 4 - bone marrow cancer be cured???

My couzin brother has been diagnosed with stage 4 bone marrow cancer, can you please please tell me whether can it be cured by DCA???

NO GMO · 2012-10-10T00:51:18Z

cures for cancer

you folks that don't believe that cures for cancer have been snuffed out by big money...need to do your research...cures for cancer have always been around, but there is way too much money to be made in the cancer industry to allow cancer to be cured. check out documentaries: "Thrive" and "Healing Cancer From Inside Out"...for starters (and Run From the Cure is a good one too)...it's time to wake up folks.

patilistan · 2012-11-16T17:57:52Z

DCA as a viable cure -

Rush, DCA is available very cheaply, from commercial vendors like Sigma Aldrich (1gm pure drug for~ $16). I have actually worked with this drug in a lab setting. I cannot verify if it has any clinical advantage. The way it works is simple - it inhibits an enzyme called pyruvate dehydrogenase kinase (PDK) which is responsible in reducing the activity of the enzyme (group) pyruvate dehydrogenase (PDH). The activity of PDH is drastically reduced in some (~20 - 30%) type of cancers (eg. neck and squamous cell cancer). In these cases, DCA will restore the activity of PDH - restore the metabolism of the mitochondria - ultimately allowing the cancer cell to undergo apoptosis, or cell death. If I had cancer, I would buy this for myself and administer it no matter what. Keep in mind any (every) drug/chemical has a threshold, which if crossed will make the drug toxic. From the company (Sigma) website: LD50 Oral - rat - 2,820 mg/kg - meaning about 3 grams of DCA per Kilogram of body mass can kill 50 rats out of a sample of 100. Humans will have a different tolerance. Compared to some drugs out there that are either expensive as diamonds or have side effects like heck, this is definitely worth a shot. Why companies won't touch it is pretty obvious, why you and me shouldn't try it doesn't make sense. Some other side effects are skin irritation and a potential damage to mucosal layer in the mouth, nose and gut (you've been warned).

One last thing - there are some legit researchers sounding off here, and I agree with them. They ARE voices of reason and statistics. For those who vehemently attack them, get a life, there are some over here seeking actual answers and not some ideological argument material. The author of this article did a poor job of conveying the message, but the message may have some truth.

fdsaevad · 2013-02-10T00:25:27Z

Either or

Is the cure kept from us because cancer is used as a controlled form of mass oppression and financial gain by the elite and their corporations? Or are we just subject to the innate fear of unexplained death, similar to what caused us to burn people alive for 300 years during witch hunts.

... I will say this though. If it's found that there has been a cure denied to us for any length of time, I won't be hesitant in seeing those responsible suffer horribly until their existence is complete, as I'm sure you'll agree. Might be of some benefit to keep important issues like this separate from the hindering influence of 'economy'.

I found this site researching symptoms of throat cancer. If I have it, I'll take DCA. If I survive, I'll let you know.

bkg · 2013-07-05T06:14:19Z

Cure for cancer:

The cancer industry is worth 200 billion a year and its the biggest scam going they suppress cures to extract money and tell you a cure is just around the corner. Here is a an actual cure for cancer:
[Link]

Cancerkiller · 2013-11-02T05:03:56Z

Devastating Weapon Against Cancers

Everybody can rest assured - The war on cancer can be won very easy - Nature has provided us the unlimited power of being as healthy as Gods, we just gotta activate it.

Any cancers on Earth can be erased from the face of the planet, once everybody (kids and adults) start doing my discovery - the PCK - The Personal Cancer Killer - the complete prevention and cure (for those now sick) for kids and adults of any diseases - from the common cold to cancer - just an exercise for a minute a day for prevention and for 2 - 3 minutes a day for the cure - for max. 30 days - no metastases or recurrences of any cancers are at all possible. Cancer Killer is by far more powerful than the immune system itself, keeps it intact all the time. No killer viruses, bacteria, germs and cancers on Earth got any chance against the tremendous power of the Cancer Killer - they just die the moment they touch you.

All the above may sound like too good to be true, but is quite real - I do the Cancer Killer for a minute a day and I can say I am the healthiest person on the planet - I cannot catch cold, flu, HIV/AIDS, malaria, any other infectious diseases, or any forms of cancer - that is simply impossible.

The price of the Cancer Killer for the whole world is $90 Billion. I accept checks of $50 Million to disclose it personally. Everybody will stay absolutely healthy all the time, all life long - never getting sick of any diseases, regardless of age, lifestyle, etc., even for a second.

So that our world without cancer is within reach - just a Personal Cancer Killer away.

IncenDiary · 2013-11-02T06:10:07Z

Ketogenic Diet

Simple solution, starve the cancer cells of the sugar they so desperately require to spread.

ligero · 2014-02-14T11:07:32Z

Worked for me!

redrock12 · 2014-02-14T08:39:03Z

Re: Ketogenic Diet

This is probably the most accurate comment.

descender · 2014-02-14T11:00:45Z

Who knew!

There sure are an abundance of cancer experts around here.

Do the rest of us a favor, cite your own research and work in your comments. PROVIDE SOURCES. Otherwise, not a single person will believe what you say.

"That guy in the comments" has never taught anyone anything.

ligero · 2014-02-14T11:57:50Z

There are none so blind...

Anyone who doesn't believe that there is something sketchy going on with the medical authorities really need to put their thinking cap back on and consider....really... consider the amount of effort and money going in to stop people from smoking and eating meat/animal fat supposedly for their health, and yet no concern at all is shown for sugar consumption. There is certainly far more convincing evidence for the detrimental effects of sugar consumption. None. It is in fact, heavily promoted. Sugar/starch is actually added to most medications and supplements which is not at all necessary. I won't even get into the other factors such as radiation, chemical pollution, and microwaves. Exposure to these is pushed and even mandated by the same authorities with nowhere near the show of concern that is shown for smoking. Not fishy? Nothing to see there? It's a logic disconnect and red flag to me.

It is an accepted scientific fact that sugar/starch (all forms) feed cancer cells, fungus, viruses, etc. No one argues that what they call Type 2 diabetes is not connected to sugar. Where is the outrage about sugar? Where is the multi-billion dollar sugar control lobby with the cult following? Where are the nanny state taxaholics on the subject of sugar? Not a peep. Where is the self righteous announcement from CVS that they will not sell any kind of sugar (which would eliminate at least at least 1/4 of the store) because it's bad for health. Not a peep. Look at that food pyramid. Is that a lot of sugar? Yes. The old FP was upside down. This one. You can't even flip it or spin it.

When I tell people that I never had to have surgery or chemo (diagnosis of stomach cancer 16 years ago) or that I don't need to take medication for diabetes (diagnosis 20+ years ago) because I just don't eat any form of sugar at all, they laugh at me. It's usually kind of a nervous laugh. From the truly ignorant, it's more of a snigger. It never occurs to them that I am 50 and look and function more like 30, weigh 125 lbs, have none of the "age related" complaints of my peers. They ignore it. People seem to want so desperately to believe the authorities that they just blank out or dismiss any information that the authorities could be lying to them on such a scale. Even if the information is logical and the evidence is there, I think it's just too frightening to consider. We see that clearly in many of the comments on sott articles and the overuse of the lazy dismissal of "conspiracy theory" flung at any suggestion that the medical establishment does not have our best interests in mind.

Cancer is either a lie to begin with or the effective solutions and true causes are known and then buried. The established and sanctioned solutions and causes for our diseases all seem to be reversed. It's easy to see if you let go of fear and look at the situation logically. break it down. Fear is the mind killer.

princess · 2014-02-15T22:49:51Z

hello,can u tell me how your husband is cured from cancer?we also have very dear friend who has a
diabetes for many years…can u explain how ua re cured yourself from it?My husband is diagnosed last week with prostate cancer and I would like to help him as much as I can.
Also I would like to find info of where I could buy DCA if anyone knows.I live in Edmonton,Canada and heard of this cancer cure -DCA in 2007 August in USA conference .Thank you very much.
P.S I have heard that drowning person would even hold on the straw in the water in order to save own life(European saying),
so this DCA may be my husband's straw...

Mars · 2014-02-14T19:03:22Z

Ligero

I would like to know how stringent your diet is concerning sugar intake. Do you rule out honey for instance? There aren't very many foods available where sugar in some form is absent. How do you avoid it?

In regards to sugar, I met Elaine Gottschall over thirty five years ago. She wrote the book, "Breaking the Vicious Cycle: Intestinal Health through Diet". You can access information at the following addresses: [Link] and [Link]
It's a travesty how truly helpful individuals like her and their remarkably easy solutions to the growing panoply of health problems are IGNORED.

At the time I was young and healthy but ten years later I wound up in the hospital with advanced peritonitis from what the doctors diagnosed as a burst appendix. I pointed out the pain was on the wrong side. They ignored me. What would I know about my own pain? During my surgery they discovered a perfectly healthy appendix but a serious case of diverticulitis in the opposite side of my abdomen.

Following surgery I struggled for months on massive doses of antibiotics and doctors poor advice like "avoid tomatoes!" Not recovering my well being at all I decided to read Elaine's book after recalling my conversations with her. The negative comments she made about gluten and sugar should've been heard by everyone! She referred to both as POISON! So I read her book, took the advice, actually went vegan for a year, lost forty pounds and finally got healthy enough to exercise my way back to better physical condition than prior to my illness.

Today I'm alive at sixty-five, smoke lightly, eat and drink what I want in moderation (total gluten intake amounts to less than two slices of bread a day) can paddle my canoe faster than the local ferry, climb trails and drive my motorcycle like I stole it! Thank you Elaine where ever you are!

Forgoing everything on the grocery shelf to live longer and better these days is a small death in itself. It can be taken to irrational lengths and deny your right to find what's right for you.

Considering all the things in our modern day environment that can harm you, it's better to take a good long look at yourself and discover what you can tolerate and to what degree (I'm good for two shots and beers then I'm under the table), and what you can't. Develope avoidance or rationing instincts. Our bodies are to a certain degree resilient to many things, some of us more so than others and to different things. I can eat peanuts 'til the cows come home but just tasting to some is fatal!

Sorry for the long post but it's important. If you have any gluten or sugar related issues, start your journey to better health by reading her book!

Fabrizio · 2014-04-24T04:36:57Z

u said tha u cured diabetes .. mt aunt have diabetes and ive already read a lot about but nothing seems to be true
can u explain to me how u cure your diabetes?
u can answer me trough here and trough my email fabriziodearaujo@hotmail.com
send the answer to my email too in case you took to long to answer here
but please tell me how!

Mariama · 2014-02-15T03:38:59Z

Mars, ligero wrote that she/he doesn't "eat any form of sugar at all", which is possible if you have a paleo or ketogenic lifestyle. You can't do that when you are vegan, as sugar also equals glucose, which is to be found in rice, potatoes, vegetables and so on. This lifestyle also means no alcohol... No dairy either, except perhaps for butter and clotted cream if you tolerate it.

I would suggest reading the following article, which was written by a medical doctor and heart surgeon and who has seen the devastation, caused by glucose and a lack of healthy animal fat.

[Link]

Mars · 2014-02-15T12:11:25Z

Thanks for providing the link Mariama, I appreciate it.

kilo on rappahannock · 2014-02-26T14:25:22Z

"side effects" of DCA

From what I can find to read on the subject, the side effects from taking DCA are all the symptoms of chronic fatigue syndrome and other related mitochondrial diseases. This makes sense because DCA completely kills off the malfunctioning mitochondria of cancer cells, thus killing the cells. It also damages the mitochondria of all the healthy cells, leaving the cancer patient chronically ill, utterly debilitated but "alive." What no one seems to be looking for is the cause of the malfunction of the mitochondria in the cells that became cancerous in the first place. I suspect it's the same as the cause of all the adult onset mitochondrial diseases - bacteriastatic antibiotics, statins, and other pharmaceuticals.

Muchuchubacca · 2014-10-03T01:42:52Z

Not as good as it sounds

[Link]

dante · 2014-10-04T16:48:55Z

CURE YOUR CANCER

My name is Dante D Watson. I am a Pharmacist, Certified Homeopath, Naturopath, Orthomolecular Nutritionist and Bach Flower Practitioner. I have a great deal of experience treating adults as well as children with Cancer ( Oncology ). I received my Pharmacy degree 1992. I worked in the Hospital General of Alicante and later moved to the United States of America where I worked in Walgreens Pharmacy in Las Vegas, NV. I gained a great deal of knowledge and insight studying homeopathy courses from CEDH in Barcelona, Spain (Center to Learn and Develop Homeopathy) and later Naturopathy and Acupuncture degrees in Estena in Mallorca, Spain (School of Natural Therapies)

Contact me via Email: pharmacistdwatson@gmail.com

Dante D Watson

longdraw · 2015-04-12T01:12:50Z

Back in 1984,they were curing cancers, check out this pubmed page....
The high pH therapy for cancer tests on mice and humans.
[Link]

kenburns · 2015-04-14T12:16:22Z

Cure for cancer

Cure for cancer like a global war of people, for view full video The Emperor of All Maladies please visit here:
[Link]

dgermanos · 2015-08-31T19:11:31Z

Cancer Cure

- WHY the dominant medicine loses the war on cancer - each and every time?
- WHY the dominant medicine and all those thousands YouTube “methods” cannot cure cancer (any type) even theoretically, even more – they only will even more worsen the patient's condition?
AND
- WHY the Methodology of Shevchenko WINS?

Answer FIRST: Because this method (surgery) is reductionistic.
But cancer is not a reductionistic phenomenon – it is a holistic phenomenon!
So - every attempt to apply reductionistic methods
to a holistic phenomenon is doomed to failure!
This happens each and every time -
it is impossible to achieve success
even theoretically!
To state it more simply – cancer is not a disease of a particular part of the body – not a localized disease.
It is a disease of the body as a whole – at a genetic level. And this is a common point that applies to all types of cancer.
It is impossible to clean up the whole body by cutting pieces of it and carcinoms. They are many of them – and most of them are invisible!

Baybars · 2015-08-31T20:22:27Z

I'm sick of this

I'm going to get cancer just by reading all the screaming and arguing going on here. Whos bright idea was it to post this article in the first place!?! It is four years old already and the fact that everyone is still arguing means that in four years nobody has cured cancer. That is the point isn't it? To cure cancer and not support parasitic business and medical practices?

Maybe everyone should post their own cures and everyone gets to pick the one they want. If you live through cancer by using one or two of the cures, great, if not then others won't be picking your cure. End of story.

Stay healthy, don't eat junk food, don't worry about every little thing and you will reduce your chances of having to take the above advice.

Winston Smith · 2016-02-08T00:07:53Z

Amen, Baybars.....

You nailed it buddy. Share what you can, and take care of yourself and those you love. Right on.

harneet · 2015-12-11T13:43:17Z

Google is your friend

If you google the word 'dichloroacetate' you can find places to buy DCA.

Do not google 'dca' because then you get all these results related to some airport and you will just be wasting your time.

tabunend · 2016-05-23T12:29:59Z

[Link]

I will say this though. If it's found that there has been a cure denied to us for any length of time, I won't be hesitant in seeing those responsible suffer horribly until their existence is complete, as I'm sure you'll agree. Might be of some benefit to keep important issues like this separate from the hindering influence of 'economy'.

Berinholtz · 2017-05-14T07:00:48Z

Hello,

If anyone is looking where to buy dichloroacetate go to [Link]

smashcancer · 2017-06-26T03:40:04Z

Regardless of whether you believe DCA is an effective treatment for cancer or not, there are numerous other substances that are many times more effective than chemotherapy, radiation and immunology. Unfortunately, there is too much money being made from cancer and other diseases.

It's just a big money parade for Big Pharma and all of the other companies and industries that are making money from the status quo for them to ever allow any cheap, readily available, highly effective treatment for cancer, or any other major disease for that matter.

But this subject is much too huge to cover in one little comment. But the bottom line is that if you're waiting for the Medical Establishment to release information about any cheap cures for any disease, you'll be waiting for a looooooong time...

For instance, why do you think that they're not blasting all over the mainstream media that you can reduce your chances of a cancer diagnosis by over 65% by taking supplemental vitamin D? Or selenium? But there's never any shortage of pink ribbons and all sorts of cancer fundraising in your face and all over the media.

If you believe the propaganda that is put out by mainstream media, you're just going to be another statistic suffering through treatments with poisons masquerading as medicine. For more information, study the articles at http://www.smashcancer.com

DermatologyGodess · 2017-09-14T12:49:50Z

I can tell from my experience that DCA can be helpful for two thirds of the people who have cancer.

Ofc, it depends on what cancer you have, what stage, what other therapies you're using but could anyone debate me with legitimate evidence that DCA is unuseful ?

It has minimal side effects [Link] and it's cheap.

It can be combined with other drugs or substances [Link] and surgery or radiotherapy. It approaches the cancer cells in a different way, not just drowining the body in poison and hoping that the tumours die before the patient dies.

I mean look at the price [Link] . 150 $ ? That's for how long ? Two months ? Go check the pricecheck of oncological surgery, radio or chemo therapy.

You can't go wrong with DCA, at the worse scenario - you stop drinking it or doing I/V and try something else. I don't know if DCA helped my wife's mother, was it just a miracle, was it what the doctors did? I'll never know, nor will I say that DCA is a wonder drug but I think that it has some serious potential and it is a shame that no one wants to research it because of the fact that it is incredibly cheap... Makes you wonder why the drug prices are so ultra high in USA, eh ?

P.S. DMSO is a fantastic material... I use it to make antibiotic solutions. The stuff goes through anything. Great for someone who has occasional boils or stye treatment.

DermatologyGodess · 2017-09-14T12:51:46Z

It was Stage III Large Cell Lung cancer btw

By accident · 2017-11-12T19:44:17Z

A platform at last......I am a house painter that happens to have thoughts and ideas about other things including stopping cancer.........years ago while doing research at the library because my Father had a massive stroke,through the course of my studies I believe I have found a simple cure for not only cancer but just about everything else that ails the human race.And just this morning I also realized it should also super charge healing and recovery times.I contacted the AMA maybe about a year ago and was ignored.....now reading the article today I know why.I now intend soon to publish my findings.

smashcancer · 2018-01-24T03:22:47Z

This isn't new stuff. Big Pharma and the Medical Establishment are never interested in anything that might actually be a cure for cancer, or any other diseases. They claim to be so scientific, but do not want to even entertain the mere possibility that something outside of their control just might be more effective than what they're selling. Such bias!

Clark · 2018-04-05T13:31:25Z

GcMAF is the body's way of curing cancer without side effects. It a human protein and a human right. 250 scientists have written research papers on it, and 8,000 have been treated. See the American National Library of medicine, or pubmed, and key GcMAF or DBPMAF into the search field. The FDA has closed GcMAF down, and many other successful cancer treatments.

Yes lifttveil, nature.al fertilizer vs fake & contaminated. Quelle réalité! We made it back down to -2°C overnight.

LindaMay

Dot Connector video [Link]

Starview

Only 2 countries resist, and will not stop. Russia and China...

uniduo

T42 our society, so very well articulated.

LindaMay

Good thing the Globalists solved the battery recycling waste problem. Now that we are recovering battery waste and turning it into "Black Mass" ,...

3.1415926535

Health & Wellness

Flashback Scientists cure cancer, but no one takes notice

Reader Comments

Latest News

Picture of the Day

Quote of the Day

Recent Comments

Quantum Quirk