Jan
13
2018

Immune Support For Cancer Patients

By | Cancer, immune system

Immune support for cancer patients is necessary when their platelets are decreasing from chemotherapy. Dr. John L. Hall gave a talk at the 25th Annual World Congress on Anti-Aging Medicine in Las Vegas, Dec. 14-16, 2017. He pointed out that when cancer patients receive chemotherapy their platelet counts in the blood decline. Dr. Hall participated in a 2010 study that investigated the use of RNA fragments to protect stem cells in the bone marrow from chemotherapy. The study showed how  fragments coming from E.coli protected patients’ bone marrow cells. This immune support for cancer patients allowed physicians to carry on with regular dosing of chemotherapy treatments for the patients’ cancer. There was no dosage reduction necessary and no interruption of the treatment schedule. The optimal dose was 80mg sublingually of RNA derived from E. coli, and patients self-administered the dosage every other day.

Low platelets mean bleeding

Normally patients would bleed or bruise easily when they received chemotherapy without protection by RNA fragments. There would be frequent nosebleeds, bleeding in the gums or in the mouth. Patients would also have blood in urine and get petechia on their skin.

Consequences of low platelet count on cancer patients

There are several consequences for cancer patients, when their platelets are low with chemotherapy.

  • Patients with low platelets have fatigue
  • They experience limitations with regard to physical function
  • When platelets are low, patients need platelet perfusions
  • There is compromise of their cancer treatment because chemotherapy needs adjustment of  or the dosage, or the therapist needs to postpone further treatment.
  • Their survival rates are lower due to cancellation of chemotherapy treatments
  • More medical resources are necessary because of platelet transfusions

How do RNA fragments work?

RNA fragments act as primers triggering DNA synthesis in bone marrow stem cells. Fragmented RNA is also protective of bone marrow cells when the patient receives chemotherapy. In animal experiments, where toxic chemotherapy was given, fragmented RNA allowed these animals to survive. This prompted oncologists to introduce this treatment modality into end stage cancer patients who are receiving chemotherapy. Results were stunning. The patients from age 18 to 80 tolerated the RNA fragments well. They were able under the influence of the RNA fragments to continue with their regular chemotherapy to completion of the therapeutic course. When laboratory tests measured platelets, the results were normal. The investigators concluded that the RNA fragments protected the bone marrow stem cells of platelets.

The tumors in this trial involved pancreatic cancer, head and neck cancer and cancer of the breast. In addition physicians also treated colon cancer, esophageal cancer and lung cancer .

More details about RNA fragment therapy in cancer patients requiring chemotherapy

Cancer patients who had no protection by RNA fragments had platelet levels that became lower and lower with every chemotherapy treatment cycle. Some patients never returned to normal platelet levels even once the chemotherapy stopped. Other cancer patients’ platelets took month before they returned to normal. Patients in this group either needed to either reduce  their chemotherapy dosage or put treatments on hold. Alternatively their treatment stopped prematurely.

In contrast patients whose bone marrow received protection by RNA fragment therapy had stable platelet levels. Their platelet levels recovered quickly to normal after each cycle of chemotherapy. No unplanned chemotherapy reduction was necessary and no platelet transfusions were required. All the patients were able to complete the treatment plan.

The physicians also observed that with RNA fragment therapy the peak platelet counts were still in the normal range despite chemotherapy. When patients recovered from the chemotherapy effect the platelets stayed in the normal range.

Insulin potentiation therapy

Research has shown that cancer cells have more insulin receptors than normal cells. Physicians used this fact  with a form of chemotherapy where the patient receives small doses of insulin first. Following that the patient can receive lower doses of chemotherapy. Dr. Donato Perez Garcia MD is the inventor of the insulin potentiation therapy (IPT). With this treatment the patient can receive lower than normal chemotherapeutic agents , which reduces the toxic side effects of chemotherapy. Unfortunately the side effect of the lower dose of chemotherapy still hits the bone marrow. As a result the platelets are dangerously low. Dr. Hall mentioned that RNA fragments are also effective with insulin potentiation therapy. This keeps the platelets in the normal range and patients can complete the course of insulin potentiation therapy.

More background about the insulin potentiation therapy

Dr. Robert Baratz has reviewed the merits of IPT thoroughly. He came to the conclusion that the so-called research about the effectiveness regarding IPT has not been done properly. In his opinion it is not proven that less chemotherapy is required when pretreatment with insulin has been done. There are also dangers that connect with insulin therapy. If the insulin dosage is too high blood sugar will go into dangerously low levels. The FDA has never accepted that the IPT procedure would be superior to standard chemotherapy. However, regardless of the chemotherapy dosage these chemicals are bone marrow toxic. Particularly the toxic effect on stem cells of platelets will cause diminished platelet counts in the blood with both procedures. In both cases RNA fragment therapy will overcome the toxic effect on the bone marrow stem cells.

Immune Support For Cancer Patients

Immune Support For Cancer Patients

Conclusion

Bone marrow suppression by chemotherapy has been a limiting factor for many years prior to the detection of RNA fragment therapy (RFT). RNA for RFT is derived from E. coli cultures. RNA fragments act as primers triggering DNA synthesis in bone marrow stem cells. This leads to the production of platelets that protect the patients from the toxic effects of chemotherapy on bone marrow. RFT allows the patient to receive treatment with chemotherapy without having to worry about bone marrow toxicity. No chemotherapy dose reduction is necessary and no platelet transfusions are needed. RFT should be a regular accompaniment to chemotherapy treatments for any cancer patient.

Jun
11
2014

Multiple Myeloma Cured With Measles Vaccine

By | Cancer

Introduction

This article is about “multiple myeloma cured with measles vaccine”. For example, Mayo Clinic physicians were desperate when two patients with end stage multiple myeloma, a vicious bone tumor, did not respond to chemotherapy. With this in mind they tried something unconventional: high doses of the measles vaccine in an attempt to stimulate the immune system.

Canadian researchers had reported in 2011 that oncolytic viruses created by genetically modifying smallpox vaccine viruses would enter tumor cells of patients, but not damage normal cells. A high percentage of the end stage patients responded with tumor regression.

Use of modified measles vaccine

Now the Mayo Clinic clinicians used high doses of a modified measles vaccine. That is to say that this attacked the multiple myeloma cells of two end stage patients. It worked on at least one patient who was cancer free after a recheck of the bone marrow 6 months later. In addition, the other patient experienced a significant remission, something not heard of in an incurable end-stage condition. Here is the story as reported recently in the press. By all means, this research is a new beginning for cancer researchers as in the past the general thinking was that physicians must fight something as bad as cancer with something strong and toxic to get rid of the cancer cells. Chiefly, the emphasis was on “fighting the cancer cell”.

Stimulation of the immune system

Now the emphasis is to stimulate the immune system, which will fight the cancer much better. As a past cancer researcher I would say that it is about time to take this new approach as the old approach of attacking the cancer cell like an enemy with radiation and chemotherapy did not work well. The new thinking is: why not stimulate the immune system to such an extend that it becomes newly activated, but to such a degree that there is no chance for the cancer cells to fight back. I searched the recent literature on PubMed regarding this topic and came across several other interesting human clinical trials. They are all smaller, but very encouraging. Here is a brief summary of what I found:

Multiple Myeloma Cured With Measles Vaccine

Multiple Myeloma Cured With Measles Vaccine

Various cancer types

1. Prostate cancer vaccines

In this article a review of the use of various vaccines with dendritic cells, viruses, or DNA are described directed against the prostate-specific antigen on the surface of prostate cancer cells. 

2. Pancreatic cancer

This cancer is very difficult to detect in the early stages and as a result the outlook for chemotherapy or radiotherapy is extremely poor. Doctors have tried several approaches as an alternative. Immunotherapy is an option and the Mayo clinic researchers have already announced that the measles vaccine approach will likely be applicable to pancreatic cancer treatment as well in the near future. However, other clinical trials are on the way to use other vaccination procedures.

3. Cervical cancer

The HPV (human papilloma virus) vaccine is targeting patients exposed to the high-risk HPV16 strain most often causing cervical cancer. However, researchers have noticed that in some cases a phenomenon called the “HPV immune escape” has allowed in some vaccinated women to still develop cervical cancer. A group of researchers investigated how improvements of the vaccine can trick the immune system to attack the HPV virus.

4. Brain tumors (glioblastoma multiforme)

This deadly brain tumor has a survival rate of only 15 months with conventional combination therapy. However, new anti-tumor vaccines are being tested in clinical trials, which already have shown much less toxicity than conventional therapies and they have longer survival times.

5. Melanoma treated with special vaccine

In the early 1970’s the anti tuberculosis vaccine BCG was used to find that about 25% of patients had long-term survival advantages with this adjuvant treatment. Recently several smaller clinical trials involving end stage melanoma patients utilizing various vaccines showed encouraging results with tumor regressions. Melanoma is a particularly vicious dark skin tumor. And yet, when messenger RNA (mRNA) was combined with dendritic cells and made into a vaccine, the antigen presenting T-cells that previously did not react against the melanoma tumor suddenly became very active destroying the tumors. This line of immune treatment is very promising and clinical trials continue to go on.

6. Another multiple myeloma treatment approach

Apart from the measles vaccine approach mentioned at the beginning of this blog, there is another approach that is being pursued at the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center where immune cells of patients with multiple myeloma are being modified in tissue culture to be more aggressive against a CS1 marker that is expressed on the surface of 95% of multiple myeloma cells in patients with this deadly cancer.  Researchers modified T cells and grew them in culture. Subsequently physicians injected them back into patients. In mice this research team found that 100% of animals with these CS1 activated T lymphocytes were alive at 44 days after the start of this treatment. This compares favorably with 29% and 17% of two control groups. Researchers are starting a phase I clinical trial on patients with this method.

Conclusion

Several of the clinical trials on humans seem to be showing breakthroughs with better survivals than in the past. In addition it is also encouraging to see that these new treatment modalities are non-toxic treatments. They compare very favorably with traditional chemotherapy and radiotherapy methods. Mouse or other animal species may be a good first screening method. But there is a recognition among cancer researchers that the ultimate goal is to treat human patients. This means that cancer researchers need to concentrate on human cell lines and work with cancer patients. It will be interesting to see the outcome all of these trials and new approaches; hopefully we will see better survival rates for these patients in the near future.

More information on multiple myeloma: http://nethealthbook.com/cancer-overview/bone-cancer/multiple-myeloma/

Last edited Nov. 8, 2014

Apr
01
2013

My Experience With Cancer Research

By | Cancer, Health, Nutrition, Prevention, Vitamins and supplements

This article is about my experience with cancer research. April is cancer awareness and fundraising month. I thought it would be interesting to analyze what’s going on behind the scenes of cancer research. I was a cancer researcher for over 3 years at the Ontario Cancer Institute (OCI) from 1972 to 1975 and I will share some insider experiences here.

1. Publish or perish

Our supervisors said: “publish or perish”. In other words all the experiments we did needed to fit into the larger picture the group was working on. And the results should be different, interesting and most of all publishable. There had to be significant differences between experimental groups and controls. This was a requirement by publishers of medical journals would accept them for publication. There were often two or three manuscript revisions where the content was “massaged”.  I had to pay attention to proper wording and comparing or opposing the results with other publications. This way the publisher deemed the manuscript “publishable”.

2. Fund raising awareness

One of the major fund sources for cancer research in Canada was the MRC (Medical Research Council of Canada), which has been replaced by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) in 2000. Without money there is no cancer research, so everybody was aware of the policies and expectations of the fund source.

3. Mouse model versus human tissue based research

My work was in the immunology section of the biophysics department, where researchers perform basic medical research at the OCI. In this department much research had already been performed separating cell populations in a mouse model to determine what cell types were needed to initiate an immune response. The B cells in mammals are antibody-producing cells of the immune system that protect from viruses. T cells are lymphocytes, which the body processed in the thymus. They turn into killer cells, which can attack parasites and also cancer cells. I was working in this area.

Cell separation experiments and doubts about mouse research

We did cell separation experiments. With this method I was able to separate cells according to cell size and collect them in vials. Subsequently I did remix experiments. The purpose was to find out which cell types were able to mount an immune response. My supervisor suggested the use of a mouse tumor cell line as targets. I started questioning whether a mouse model would be the appropriate model to study human cancer biology. But my superiors were not in agreement. The “holy grail” was that to work in a mouse model (mouse mammalian cells).  The assumption that this should also work in the human situation (human mammalian cells).

My Experience With Cancer Research

My Experience With Cancer Research

4. Non-medical researchers in cancer research

This is a thorny issue, but a reality. My immediate supervisor in cancer research had a PHD in physics. His physics degree was perfect for sorting out density issues for cell separation experiments. The co-chair of the immunology department had a PHD in biology. His qualification was good for conducting mouse experiments. Both of them felt somewhat insecure when I asked questions. I wanted to know how relevant mouse experiments were for the examination of human cancer conditions. As I needed to publish my experiments, I had to quiet down and concentrate on the mouse model the team was working on. For a while this could even be exciting as we were studying the cell interaction between macrophages and T cells to mount a cell-mediated immune response.

5. Regulation of the cancer research industry

After playing with cell cultures for 2 ½ years it was time for me to reach out to get a job in the cancer research field or else go back to medicine. In1975 there was no equal opportunity legislation in place that would have protected me as a landed immigrant from discrimination. The reality in 1975 was that only Canadian born physicians who attended a Medical School in Canada could become a director of a cancer research facility in Canada. The rules for me (I had left Germany right after my rotating internship) were that I had to go through further medical training and pass the Canadian licensing exam (LMCC), which I did eventually at McMaster University in Hamilton, Ontario.

Interview with Dr. McCulloch

One final attempt to shed light on my options was an interview with the “big boss” at the Ontario Cancer Institute at the time, a physician cancer researcher, Dr. Ernest A. McCulloch, for whom I had great respect. He was a sharp thinker and had vision, and he was a fellow physician. I asked him what he would do on the long-term, if he was in my place. He said that in the long-term with my medical background it would be a lot more satisfying for me to get back into medicine and practice medicine. However, he wanted me to go on for another 1 or 2 years and publish more papers together with my supervisors.

My decision to leave cancer research

I decided for myself right there that I would leave cancer research and I prepared quietly for my exit. Within a short time I got a position to work as an intern at a hospital at McMaster University and in the spring of 1978 I passed the LMCC (licensing) exam. As a fully licensed physician in Canada, I was no longer interested in “slave work” in cancer research. I also left the cold winters of Ontario behind and went to the west, to British Columbia.

6. Future vision of medical cancer research

Research has come a long way. Recently I came across a new breast cancer protocol, which is non-toxic, without chemotherapy and without radiation. It is so unconventional that the US research team, aware of the politics in the US, decided to do the initial trials in the Caribbean. I wrote a blog about this new breast cancer treatment protocol, which I believe will become the future standard for breast cancer therapy and perhaps even for other cancers.

Alternative breast cancer treatment

In Germany and Switzerland an alternative breast cancer treatment consists of with mistletoe extracts. This is a non-toxic plant chemotherapy, which slows down tumor growth. It has a dual action, namely a chemotherapeutic effect, but at the same time an immune system stimulating effect. Here is a study going back to 2001, which is still relevant. There was a 40% long-term survival benefit in the Iscador group when compared to a control group without treatment. Normally, oncologists jump at such an excellent chemotherapeutic agent as they even consider chemotherapeutic agents that with a 25% beneficial survival effect a good treatment option. However, as the medication is a simple mistletoe extract and cannot be patented, Big Pharma is not interested in marketing this. As a result cancer treatment protocols in Europe are significantly different from those in North America.

The future of cancer treatments

In the future I would expect that non-toxic treatment methods for any type of cancer will be more successful than any chemotherapeutic or radiation treatment approaches as both interfere with the immune function, which is what will kill the patient at the end. Cancer is a disease where the immune system fails. So, cancer patients need teaching how to stimulate their immune system. This is the only thing that controls cancer on the long-term.

You will hear more about epigenetic switches as often a cancer producing substance will turn off a gene (epigenetic switch) and this causes cancer.  Remove what throws that switch into the off position or introduce a healing agent that resets the switch and the cancer will get eliminated.

7. Prevention of cancer

Researchers noticed that herbs, spices, vitamins and minerals contain the most powerful cancer preventatives. Did you know that curcumin, derived from the Indian spice turmeric, prevents a number of cancers? Similarly, vitamin D3 at high enough doses (4000 to 5000 IU per day) has been shown to prevent cancers. Linus Pauling showed long time ago that vitamin C at high enough dose would be an antioxidant and would stimulate the immune system and thereby be a cancer preventative. It works together with a detoxifying antioxidant, glutathione in the liver to neutralize any free radicals, which are aggressive chemicals that cause cancer.

Learning from risk factors for cancer

There are many other vitamins and minerals that I have explained elsewhere, which are needed together with organic food to give you the building blocks for a stable cell metabolism. This in turn will strengthen the immune system to defend you from toxins of the environment. A simple step like a daily exercise routine can cut your cancer risk down to 50% compared to those who elect to not exercise. Did I mention the importance of quitting smoking and cutting out alcohol? The “quit smoking” part has been known for some time.

Alcohol is a cell poison and can cause cancer

At the Anti-Aging conference in Las Vegas in December 2011 I learnt about the importance of alcohol exposure that causes cancer. Even smaller doses of alcoholic beverages over a long period of time can cause cancer. First I thought it would be a big deal to quit alcohol entirely. But since I have quit the modest few drinks per month, I actually have not missed them at all! I strongly believe in cancer prevention, so quitting alcohol completely was only one small step in this overall objective. In view of the recent statement by the WHO that 70% of all deaths are caused by smoking and drinking of alcoholic beverages, it behooves us to change our lifestyles, if we are at all interested in a healthy long life.

Conclusion

Nothing has changed in cancer research circles since the time when I was part of it. Basic cancer research involving animal experiments is necessary. But in my opinion cancer research should be more human-centered using human cell lines in culture and using clinical trials. Ultimately cancer research needs to invent and develop new non-toxic cancer therapies to cure cancer patients.

More on cancer in general and on specific cancers: http://nethealthbook.com/cancer-overview/

Last edited Nov. 6, 2014

Incoming search terms:

Oct
01
2004

Hamburger Disease – A Sizzling Problem

By | Infectious Disease, Nutrition, Prevention

One of the many strains of the bacterium E. coli (type 0157:H7) became famous after a 1982 outbreak of bloody diarrhea across the U.S. The infection could be traced back to contaminated hamburgers sold by a fast food chain. Canada also had some smaller food-related outbreaks, but a large disastrous outbreak occurred in Walkerton, Ontario. In this case the culprit was cow manure that was washed into surface water. The water was not optimally treated at the local water works and then consumed by the local community. It is important to know, that infection with E. coli bacteria can be spread in various ways as shown in this table.

Hamburger Disease – A Sizzling Problem

Hamburger Disease – A Sizzling Problem

The symptoms of infection usually present themselves after an incubation period of 3 to 8 days in the form of abdominal cramps, diarrhea that can also be bloody, and vomiting. Unfortunately, a more severe form can occur in 2 to 10% of patients due to the toxic substances of the bacterium. The dreaded form of “hamburger disease”, is medically known as hemolytic uremic syndrome, and children are at the highest risk, along with older adults or those with immune suppression (AIDS patients, cancer patients). The disease is life threatening, requires blood transfusions, dialysis and life-support therapy in an intensive-care unit setting.

Hamburger disease is caused by:
Contact with livestock (or feces)
Human-to-human contact
Consumption of non-chlorinated contaminated water
Consumption of insufficiently cooked ground beef, salami, unpasteurized milk, even vegetables like
lettuce or alfalfa sprouts that have not been washed.

Prevention is of utmost importance, and fortunately a lot of it is common sense about food safety and safe food-handling practices:

Hints to prevent Hamburger disease:
Wash your hands after handling animal and livestock after using the washroom and after changing diapers.
Wash your hands before and after preparing or eating food and handling raw meat.
Never put raw meat in contact with cooked meat and disinfect areas of meat preparation like
counters or cutting boards.
Make sure all the pink color is gone from cooked meats, and juices after cooking should never
be bloody!
Drink only pasteurized milk, fruit juices or ciders.
Never drink water from untreated sources (creeks, ponds).
Practice strict hand hygiene when dealing with persons who have diarrhea, especially when changing diapers of children with diarrhea.

Besides prevention, vigilance is important: if any case of E. coli infection has been found, the local health units have to be notified, so the source of infection can be found and further spread can be prevented.

More info on food safety: http://nethealthbook.com/health-nutrition-and-fitness/nutrition/food-safety/

Reference: The Canadian Journal of Continuing Medical Education, September 2004, Vol.16, Nr.9, pg.49.

Last edited January 4, 2015

Incoming search terms: